I’ve heard that he was and or is an advocate for socialized medicine and penalizing people for paying to see a doctor, I have also heard that this a policy that Canada preaches put doesn’t really enforce.

worthless, along with all of nobama nominees, totally worthless

WORTHLESS

I can’t imagine any liberal being good for U.S. health care policy. Here’s why: regardless of how their proposals are pitched, spun, or otherwise disguised by the media, they all have one thing in common: single payer system (government run). Hillarycare tried to get there in one big pill, and America gulped and spat it out. Obama is a man of subtlety and patience. He and Daschle will get us there much the same way a frog is boiled —- by slowly turning up the temp until the frog is cooked and doesn’t even realize it.

People who constantly complain about their healthcare under traditional employer provided coverage have absolutely no idea what benefits they will be giving up if we go single payer. How about second opinions? Gone. How about choice of physicians? Gone. How about rationed care: Here, in spades.

No, I do not think a socialized medicine advocate like Dr. Gupta is good for U.S. healthcare.

A while back there there was a report of a case of Bubonic Plague in the western US. Dr. Gupta, actig as an “expert” for CNN, reported that the disease was transmitted by rat bites. He apparently either failed or missed his basic infectious disease class. As everyone who has ever taken history, infectious disease, parasitology, microbiology or any related class knows full well, this disease is transmitted by the RAT FLEA, not the rat. Even after being notified of the error, he continued to insist in his reports that the disease is transmitted primarily by rat bites. I think it is rather frightening that someone with no knowledge of such basics is considered for the highest position for setting medical policy.

I’m more concerned over who the FDA head is going to be – who is the Health and Human Services going to be, and who is he/she going to name? We’ve seen pro-pharma ha.cks named, and the disastrous consequences of those pharmaceutical accomplices – are we going to see someone who thinks every vaccine is a good vaccine? Are we going to see someone who believes everything the pharm.aceutical lobbyists pay them to believe?

It’s time to end the corrup.tion now. While a good Surgeon General – unbeholden to special interests – would be a good thing, decent leadership in the FDA would be better.

I’m more concerned over who the FDA head is going to be? We’ve seen pro-pharma ha.cks named, and the disastrous consequences of those pharmaceutical acc.omplices – are we going to see someone who thinks every vaccine is a good vaccine? Are we going to see someone who believes everything the pharm.aceutical lobbyists pay them to believe?

It’s time to end the corrup.tion now. While a good Surgeon General – unbeholden to special interests – would be a good thing, decent leadership in the FDA would be better.

I think the question we should be asking is do we really need a surgeon general? After all do we really need a highly paid government official preaching to us to stop smoking, eat better and exercise more?

Another example of waste in our supersized central government.

I think Dr Manny misses the logical question here which is do we really even need a surgeon general? Can anyone even name the current SG? Do we really need another highly paid government bureaucrat telling us what we all already know (stop smoking, eat fruits and vegetables and exercise more)? If anyone ever looked closely at these government recommendations most healthy lifestyle people consider these reco’s to be a joke. Surely we don’t need to pay someone to give us politically correct advice.

What a waste . . .

I think Dr Manny misses the logical question here which is do we really even need a surgeon general? Can anyone even name the current SG? Do we really need another highly paid government bureaucrat telling us what we all already know (stop smoking, eat fruits and vegetables and exercise more)? If anyone ever looked closely at these government recommendations most healthy lifestyle people consider these reco’s to be a joke. Surely we don’t need to pay someone and their huge staff of bureaucrats to give us poor, politically correct advice.

What a waste . . .

I couldn’t disagree more with his consideration for nomination as Surgeon General. While I believe that Dr. Gupta is a gifted neurosurgeon, he has no credentials to serve as Surgeon General.

Dr. Gupta does not have the credentials to serve as Surgeon General.

It should come as no surprise that socialized medicine would be a part of Gupta’s platform. There is a signficant difference between someone who practices medicine and someone that creates policy though. As a physician in a clinic, I understand what it means to be in the trenches and to deal with the constant time crunch and ever dwindling reimbursement. The problem is, however, that health care administration from a leadership and preventive medicine perspective may end up on the short end for lack of experience with Dr. Gupta. Hospital administrators are those involved in seeing the big picture–including costs and effectiveness. Dr. Gupta’s young age in this case makes no difference to me. I have to disagree with Dr. Manney on this one.

Dr. Gupta has succeeded in rigorous advanced medical training, practice and certification as a neurological surgeon. His combined media experience with general and global medicine make him a uniquely well qualified candidate for surgeon general. His role should focus on optimal medical care; and not on the political interests that corrupt ethical delivery of health care. Congratulations Sanjay on your earned recognition.
Timothy Wiebe

Obviously, Obama chose Sanjay so that he could utilize him as a familiar and friendly face to promote Obama’s ill-fated governmental health care plan. This is a smart move by Obama as so many people, I’m afraid, will simply listen to whatever the celebrity says w/out reviewing and understanding all the real pros and cons of the issue, as we move deeper and deeper towards pure socialism.

Great choice…this guy is smart, has a wide range of experiences, and has built a great reputation on CNN by being passionate, easy to understand, and informed on major medical issues.

I don’t know why the right-wing doesn’t like him….after all, he took on Michael Moore!

we all know that when a rightie uses the words “i’ve heard” that it means they are just making it up.

Lol…..some of these comments are from real whinney folks. I’ll give Dr. Gupta a chance befor I judge him….Obama won by a lanslide because Americans want an end to right wing drivel. Have any of you been to Canada……? Or are we just parroting what were told?

He must want the gig REALLY bad…he’s weighed in on the continued prohibition of Marijuana/Hemp. The old school paper, cloth, bio-fuel, plastic manufacturers, and drug cartels will be dancing in the street.

He’s just what the American left-wingers want. He’s good looking, smart, black, can talk just like a politician(whatever the public wants to hear), and the media love him. But just listen to what he actually says, it’s usually nothing that makes sense, or what any other human being would say, he just adds a couple of big words. He just reminds me of an empty vessel, or a talking head. It’s a major shame if he is picked

I think Sanjay Gupta is a very bad choice for the important position of US surgeon general. Gupta showed his lack of integrity and fortitude during the Terri Schiavo situation. Being a neurosurgeon and a public figure, Gupta was in a unique position to educate the public about the science and medicine of various levels of consciousness. At this, he failed miserably. Instead of providing clear, unbiased information to educate the public, Gupta spouted muddled, confusing, incomplete pseudo-information. After this disgraceful display, I stopped watching him and CNN.

We need a surgeon general who has a command of the underlying science of medicine and who is willing and able to communicate the truth.

As a practicing MD, he probably is in a better position to identify the problems facing both the medical profession and the patients. He is also in a better position to weigh the problems of the Canadian and English systems which involve extended weights for medical care. Our medical care is very expensive for several reasons. First, we demand the best care possible and are ready to sue if not given. Imagine everyone demanding the most expensive car and not being able to get it. Second, we demand that all efforts be given to prolong life. It has been estimated that 75% of all medical expense occurs during the last 1-2 months of life. How do we determine when “to pull the plug”? Thirdly, doctor fees need to be reevaluated and more closely associated with the true expense. Unfortunately, much of the expenses of the doctor’s offices, ie nurses,rent, insurance,etc.can not be controlled by the doctor. At this time Medicare and Medicaid pays only about 75% of the doctor’s overhead. For this reason primary doctors must work much harder than specialists whose fees are much higher. Dr. Gupta’s worst problem is how to change medical care and not have 30% or more of the doctors deciding to retire. He will also need to find a way to direct more medical students into primary care areas.

Dr. Gupta has all the intelligence, all the charisma, and all the following needed to be a star. What he fails in is backbone. He is as spineless as President Elect Barack Obama. By being spineless, I mean he has no principals to base his judgments on. He basically uses opinion polls like his soon to be boss, to give him the talking points for the points he believes people want to hear. Watch the interview with Michael Moore and Dr. Gupta to see his non-backbone, it surfaces at the end. He is nothing like C Everett Koop.

To name Dr. Gupta and Dr. Koop as the same, is to say Mickey Mouse and Jerry Seinfeld are the same in respect to entertaining people. Both of these men are Doctors, and both seem to know their stuff, but one cared for people the other pretends to, in order to have a bigger career. I think we are seeing how a new wave of intelligent, ambitious people are driving the people by contrived talking points. Talking points that only benefit them, not normal people.

Within these people, starting with the President Elect and his Vice President, Secretary of State, and now down to his Surgeon General, we see men and women who really could care less for the public. They care more about their own place in the world, and use whatever means to get to the places they feel they belong.

They say they have heart on one subject, until that subject means nothing then they are back to the opinion poll to see where they can stand next to be front and center.