Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMehmet Oz's medical research was rejected in 2003, resulting in 2-year ban
https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/2022/11/01/oz-senate-doctor-research/https://archive.ph/60E8g
Mehmet Ozs medical research was rejected in 2003, resulting in 2-year ban
At issue were questions about the strength of the data used by Oz to reach an important medical conclusion, according to several of those who recalled the events
By Lenny Bernstein and Colby Itkowitz
November 1, 2022 at 6:00 a.m. EDT
In May 2003, Mehmet Oz was the senior author on a study that explored a hot topic at the time: Whether heart bypass surgery conducted with the aid of a heart-lung machine impaired a patients cognitive function more than surgery conducted without the machine.
Ozs research was scheduled to lead off the scientific session of the 83rd annual American Association for Thoracic Surgery (AATS) conference, according to a program from the event, where physicians in that specialty convene to discuss developments in their field. But Oz was forced to withdraw his work and was banned from presenting research to the organization for the next two years, according to seven people familiar with the events, whose account of his ban was confirmed by the Oz campaign. Oz is now the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania.
He was also prohibited from publishing his work in the societys medical journal for the same period of time, according to the people familiar with the events, four of whom recalled details of the controversy on the record. Three others spoke on the condition of anonymity to more openly discuss a sensitive subject that reflects on Ozs reputation. Some of Ozs 15 co-authors on the abstract did not respond to requests for comment. The Oz campaign did not respond to questions about the journal.
At issue were questions about the strength of the data used by Oz, a cardiothoracic surgeon, to reach an important medical conclusion, according to several of those who recalled the events. The penalty he experienced in 2003 was a significant one, according to an expert who was not involved in the dispute, Ivan Oransky, co-founder of Retraction Watch, a website that monitors honesty in academic research.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 727 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (7)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Mehmet Oz's medical research was rejected in 2003, resulting in 2-year ban (Original Post)
dalton99a
Nov 2022
OP
bronxiteforever
(9,287 posts)1. Kick
Stuart G
(38,439 posts)2. K and R...Thanks for posting..
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)3. Most of his voters think that medical research is a hoax anyway
LetMyPeopleVote
(145,491 posts)4. Who is surprised by this?
Dr. Oz is a puppy killer
Link to tweet
https://jezebel.com/dr-oz-s-scientific-experiments-killed-over-300-dogs-e-1849609272?rev=1664818228391
In a scandal that will surely make Mitt Romneywho famously strapped his family dog atop the roof of his car for a road triplook like a PETA activist, a review of 75 studies published by Mehmet Oz between 1989 and 2010 reveals the Republican Senate candidates research killed over 300 dogs and inflicted significant suffering on them and the other animals used in experiments.
Oz, the New Jersey resident whos currently running for U.S. Senate from Pennsylvania, was a principal investigator at the Columbia University Institute of Comparative Medicine labs for years and assumed full scientific, administrative, and fiscal responsibility for the conduct of his studies. Over the course of 75 studies published in academic journals reviewed by Jezebel, Ozs team conducted experiments on at least 1,027 live animal subjects that included dogs, pigs, calves, rabbits, and small rodents. Thirty-four of these experiments resulted in the deaths of at least 329 dogs, while two of his experiments killed 31 pigs, and 38 experiments killed 661 rabbits and rodents.
In the early 2000s, testimony from a whistleblower and veterinarian named Catherine DellOrto about Ozs research detailed extensive suffering inflicted on his teams canine test subjects, including multiple violations of the Animal Welfare Act, which sets minimum standards of care for dogs, cats, primates, rabbits, and other animals in the possession of animal dealers and laboratories. The law specifically requires researchers and breeders to use pain-relieving drugs or euthanasia on the animals, and not use paralytics without anesthesia, or experiment multiple times on the same animal.
DellOrto testified that a dog experimented on by Ozs team experienced lethargy, vomiting, paralysis, and kidney failure, but wasnt euthanized for a full two days. She alleged other truly horrifying examples of gratuitously cruel treatment of dogs, including at least one dog who was kept alive for a month for continued experimentation despite her unstable, painful condition, despite how data from her continued experimentation was deemed unusable. According to DellOrto, one Oz-led study resulted in a litter of puppies being killed by intracardiac injection with syringes of expired drugs inserted in their hearts without any sedation. Upon being killed, the puppies were allegedly left in a garbage bag with living puppies who were their littermates. DellOrtos allegations, made in 2003 and 2004, are detailed in letters from PETA to the university and USDA. In an interview with Billy Penn last month, she acknowledged PETA is not a reliable source of information, but said the organizations letters honestly reflected what she told the organization and provided documentation for.
In May 2004, Columbia University was ordered by the USDA to pay a $2,000 penalty for violations of the Animal Welfare Act. The fine paid by Columbia was the result of a settlement between the university and the USDA, based on the findings of Columbias internal investigation of Ozs research. The USDA accepted these findings, but according to DellOrto, the review was faulty, and had investigators on the committee that were also complicit in this type of poorly designed, cruel animal experimentation. DellOrto also noted that while Oz wasnt the one who euthanized the dogs and puppies himself, When your name is on the experiment, and the way the experiment is designed inflicts such cruelty to these animals, by design, theres a problem.
Oz, the New Jersey resident whos currently running for U.S. Senate from Pennsylvania, was a principal investigator at the Columbia University Institute of Comparative Medicine labs for years and assumed full scientific, administrative, and fiscal responsibility for the conduct of his studies. Over the course of 75 studies published in academic journals reviewed by Jezebel, Ozs team conducted experiments on at least 1,027 live animal subjects that included dogs, pigs, calves, rabbits, and small rodents. Thirty-four of these experiments resulted in the deaths of at least 329 dogs, while two of his experiments killed 31 pigs, and 38 experiments killed 661 rabbits and rodents.
In the early 2000s, testimony from a whistleblower and veterinarian named Catherine DellOrto about Ozs research detailed extensive suffering inflicted on his teams canine test subjects, including multiple violations of the Animal Welfare Act, which sets minimum standards of care for dogs, cats, primates, rabbits, and other animals in the possession of animal dealers and laboratories. The law specifically requires researchers and breeders to use pain-relieving drugs or euthanasia on the animals, and not use paralytics without anesthesia, or experiment multiple times on the same animal.
DellOrto testified that a dog experimented on by Ozs team experienced lethargy, vomiting, paralysis, and kidney failure, but wasnt euthanized for a full two days. She alleged other truly horrifying examples of gratuitously cruel treatment of dogs, including at least one dog who was kept alive for a month for continued experimentation despite her unstable, painful condition, despite how data from her continued experimentation was deemed unusable. According to DellOrto, one Oz-led study resulted in a litter of puppies being killed by intracardiac injection with syringes of expired drugs inserted in their hearts without any sedation. Upon being killed, the puppies were allegedly left in a garbage bag with living puppies who were their littermates. DellOrtos allegations, made in 2003 and 2004, are detailed in letters from PETA to the university and USDA. In an interview with Billy Penn last month, she acknowledged PETA is not a reliable source of information, but said the organizations letters honestly reflected what she told the organization and provided documentation for.
In May 2004, Columbia University was ordered by the USDA to pay a $2,000 penalty for violations of the Animal Welfare Act. The fine paid by Columbia was the result of a settlement between the university and the USDA, based on the findings of Columbias internal investigation of Ozs research. The USDA accepted these findings, but according to DellOrto, the review was faulty, and had investigators on the committee that were also complicit in this type of poorly designed, cruel animal experimentation. DellOrto also noted that while Oz wasnt the one who euthanized the dogs and puppies himself, When your name is on the experiment, and the way the experiment is designed inflicts such cruelty to these animals, by design, theres a problem.