Even more interesting is that 3 former Surgeon Generals (Surgeons General?) of the US appeared at a hearing yesterday stating that they were TOLD while in office not to contradict White House policy on various issues...like abortion and stem-cell research. They were flatly prevented from offering medical advice to the country if it differed from Bush's position.


Statement for the Congressional Record From
Richard H. Carmona, M.D., M.P.H., FACS
th
17 Surgeon General of the United States (2002-2006)
Commander of the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps (2002-2006)
Distinguished Professor of Public Health, The University of Arizona Mel and Enid
Zuckerman College of Public Health
Vice Chairman, Canyon Ranch
CEO, Canyon Ranch Health
President, Canyon Ranch Institute


"During my first year as Surgeon General, I was still quite politically naïve in the ways of
the Beltway. As I witnessed partisanship and political manipulation, I was astounded but
also unsure of what I was witnessing — for I had no reference point. I asked myself
whether this was just happening to me as the new Surgeon General, or whether this was
the norm for all Surgeons General.   

I turned to my fellow Surgeons General, the men and women who came before me and
had made tremendous positive contributions to the science and practice of public health,
who had saved and improved millions of lives through their work and dedication. They
became my mentors. They said that they had all been challenged and had to fight
political battles in order to do their job as "the doctor of the nation." But each agreed that
never had they seen Washington, D.C. so partisan or a new Surgeon General so
politically challenged and marginalized as during my tenure.

They told me that although most Americans believe that their Surgeon General has the
ability to impact the course of public health as "the nation's doctor," the reality is that
nation's doctor has been marginalized and relegated to a position with no independent
budget, and with supervisors who are political appointees with partisan agendas.
Anything that doesn't fit into the political appointees' ideological, theological, or
political agenda is ignored, marginalized, or simply buried.   

The problem with this approach is that in public health, as in a democracy, there is
nothing worse than ignoring science, or marginalizing the voice of science for reasons
driven by changing political winds. The job of Surgeon General is to be "the doctor of
the nation"— not "the doctor of a political party."