I'm a psychiatrist. I attended the APA meeting once--and never again--because it was abundantly clear that the whole thing is irretrievably corrupted by its pharma and medical device sponsors. At that time (2001) the message was that Oxycontin was wonderful and non-addictive--and that there was an "epidemic of untreated pain in this country"--- and that we were bad doctors if we let even the slightest pain go untreated with this wonderful new drug. I'm embarrassed to say that I brought home a lovely (free) flashlight with the Oxycontin logo on it, though I'm happy to say that I never once prescribed the drug.
It doesn't surprise me that they wouldn't let you in the exhibit hall. You might upset the people paying the bills and that, sadly, is what the APA cares about. Well, that and the ubiquitous virtue-signalling which all organizations now seem to feel the need to do.
I was a medical Internal Medicine and Pediatrics resident when OxyContin hit the market. I don’t recall any pharm reps saying that it wasn’t addictive, but I am learning that medical professionals were told this. It’s frightening to me how many believed an opioid drug didn’t have addictive properties. I also trained at a place where we were allowed to question everyone, even our attendings. It’s so frightening that so many medical professionals believe the word of pharmaceutical reps and companies. I am heartened to know that people like you are around for patients.
So very frightening for children and adults alike. I do hope that FAIR will send this article far and wide so that the country will know what this organization has become.
I’m just floored every time I read about the refusal in engage in honest debate r/t medical decision-making by these medical organizations. It is against everything that I have ever learned or experienced as a healthcare provider and attendee of many medical conferences over my career.
Kudos to you for not bowing to the cancellation attempt. It speaks volumes that one side attempts to shut down debate before it even begins. They must know deep down that they are wrong.
They had no moral right to cancel your booth, I'd suggest filing a complaint with the APA. Who knows, maybe someone took action without authorization and they'll get in some trouble.
These zealots are very aggressive, defeating them will require an aggressive strategy in turn.
They have the ability to cancel any exhibit, but if they value evidence-based medical practice, they should be willing to allow all of the evidence to be presented. It’s obvious that they are selective in what they believe is evidence. It’s really disappointing to see medical professionals behave this way.
I understand. Just remember, the zealots have succeeded thus far not on the strength of evidence, but because they are loud and persistent and know how to push people's buttons.
I hope you plan to have a presence at social work conferences. For over 10 years, I've been trying to raise consciousness with social workers, and about 5-6 years ago finally resigned in protest from National Association of Social Workers. (The only time they acknowledged my protests!) I think social workers are a big part of the problem here, perhaps the biggest part. They believe that the "client-centered" approach dictates blind adherence to captured LGBT+ organizations.
I wholeheartedly agree. I served on the NASW National Committee for LGBT Issues for eight years and was selected as the NASW Social Worker of the Year in 2020. I resigned the following year. It is disheartening what's happened to our profession.
Thank you for having the courage and the tenacity to do this and to actively engage. I was v heartened to read about the person who openly disagreed and ended up changing their mind.
As I am sure you are aware one of the last acts of the UK parliament was for PB including private prescriptions to be banned. The private prescriptions is initially for 3 months, during which time there will a consultation. The Labour (the party most likely to form the next government in the UK) welcomed the move. The Labour party has embraced Cass and are determined to see it implemented.
The one person everyone should be grateful to is Kemi Badenoch who pushed for this after she met with Kiera Bell.
Kemi Badenoch, Minister for Women and Equalities has been absolutely wonderful and tireless in her support of women.
Victoria Atkins Secretary of State for Health also has been great as she now understands what is at stake. It was her sheer determination which got the ban through.
Wes Streeting (the shadow Health spokesperson) has definitely read both Cass and Time to Think but he has also had to apologise for the monstering of various women including Rosie Duffield before he understood what was going on. He does support the Cass Review.
Hopefully there will be a full audit of the adult services commissioned by the next government. Ideology seems have to have been put the hard evidence in this branch of medicine...
Appalling that you were censored and that people like Jack Turban—whose self-serving attitude reminds me of John Money’s—still hold sway. Thank you for persevering!
I watched the webinar last night, and just want to say Nikki Johnson is my new hero. It’s absolutely terrifying how corrupt/brainwashed/dogmatic this topic has become. Off to donate.
I’m just doing what I believe is the right thing to do and trying to save people from harm. I pray that I help save children and families from medical harm. When that happens, I will put on the cape. Lol! Thank you for your donation.
Jun 1·edited Jun 1Liked by Nikki M. Johnson, MD, DNBPAS
Evidence-based analysis rests on a truth-seeking mindset. And a truth-seekinjg mindset requires humility in the face of uncertainty. If we don't establish a truth-seeking mindset, there's not much point in discussing evidence.
Thanks for your courage and perseverance. What a stressful situation to be blocked and interrupted at a professional meeting.
I'm a psychiatrist. I attended the APA meeting once--and never again--because it was abundantly clear that the whole thing is irretrievably corrupted by its pharma and medical device sponsors. At that time (2001) the message was that Oxycontin was wonderful and non-addictive--and that there was an "epidemic of untreated pain in this country"--- and that we were bad doctors if we let even the slightest pain go untreated with this wonderful new drug. I'm embarrassed to say that I brought home a lovely (free) flashlight with the Oxycontin logo on it, though I'm happy to say that I never once prescribed the drug.
It doesn't surprise me that they wouldn't let you in the exhibit hall. You might upset the people paying the bills and that, sadly, is what the APA cares about. Well, that and the ubiquitous virtue-signalling which all organizations now seem to feel the need to do.
I wrote about my experiences at the APA meeting on our Substack: https://pairodocs.substack.com/p/he-who-pays-the-piper-part-2
I was a medical Internal Medicine and Pediatrics resident when OxyContin hit the market. I don’t recall any pharm reps saying that it wasn’t addictive, but I am learning that medical professionals were told this. It’s frightening to me how many believed an opioid drug didn’t have addictive properties. I also trained at a place where we were allowed to question everyone, even our attendings. It’s so frightening that so many medical professionals believe the word of pharmaceutical reps and companies. I am heartened to know that people like you are around for patients.
I remember the pro-opioid days. They taught me not to swallow my misgivings, but to trust them instead.
We have become what was the Soviet Union. Show trials, suppressed dissent, anti-science science.
So very frightening for children and adults alike. I do hope that FAIR will send this article far and wide so that the country will know what this organization has become.
I’m just floored every time I read about the refusal in engage in honest debate r/t medical decision-making by these medical organizations. It is against everything that I have ever learned or experienced as a healthcare provider and attendee of many medical conferences over my career.
Kudos to you for not bowing to the cancellation attempt. It speaks volumes that one side attempts to shut down debate before it even begins. They must know deep down that they are wrong.
All very concerning. Thank you for representing reason and dialogue, even if it was unwelcome.
Keep fighting. The kids are depending on you.
They had no moral right to cancel your booth, I'd suggest filing a complaint with the APA. Who knows, maybe someone took action without authorization and they'll get in some trouble.
These zealots are very aggressive, defeating them will require an aggressive strategy in turn.
They have the ability to cancel any exhibit, but if they value evidence-based medical practice, they should be willing to allow all of the evidence to be presented. It’s obvious that they are selective in what they believe is evidence. It’s really disappointing to see medical professionals behave this way.
I understand. Just remember, the zealots have succeeded thus far not on the strength of evidence, but because they are loud and persistent and know how to push people's buttons.
Anyone can do that 😉
I hope you plan to have a presence at social work conferences. For over 10 years, I've been trying to raise consciousness with social workers, and about 5-6 years ago finally resigned in protest from National Association of Social Workers. (The only time they acknowledged my protests!) I think social workers are a big part of the problem here, perhaps the biggest part. They believe that the "client-centered" approach dictates blind adherence to captured LGBT+ organizations.
I would love to have a presence and will look into this.
I wholeheartedly agree. I served on the NASW National Committee for LGBT Issues for eight years and was selected as the NASW Social Worker of the Year in 2020. I resigned the following year. It is disheartening what's happened to our profession.
Thank you for having the courage and the tenacity to do this and to actively engage. I was v heartened to read about the person who openly disagreed and ended up changing their mind.
As I am sure you are aware one of the last acts of the UK parliament was for PB including private prescriptions to be banned. The private prescriptions is initially for 3 months, during which time there will a consultation. The Labour (the party most likely to form the next government in the UK) welcomed the move. The Labour party has embraced Cass and are determined to see it implemented.
We’re so grateful to the NHS for commissioning this work in good faith effort to look at the evidence.
The one person everyone should be grateful to is Kemi Badenoch who pushed for this after she met with Kiera Bell.
Kemi Badenoch, Minister for Women and Equalities has been absolutely wonderful and tireless in her support of women.
Victoria Atkins Secretary of State for Health also has been great as she now understands what is at stake. It was her sheer determination which got the ban through.
Wes Streeting (the shadow Health spokesperson) has definitely read both Cass and Time to Think but he has also had to apologise for the monstering of various women including Rosie Duffield before he understood what was going on. He does support the Cass Review.
Hopefully there will be a full audit of the adult services commissioned by the next government. Ideology seems have to have been put the hard evidence in this branch of medicine...
Appalling that you were censored and that people like Jack Turban—whose self-serving attitude reminds me of John Money’s—still hold sway. Thank you for persevering!
Thank you.
I watched the webinar last night, and just want to say Nikki Johnson is my new hero. It’s absolutely terrifying how corrupt/brainwashed/dogmatic this topic has become. Off to donate.
I’m just doing what I believe is the right thing to do and trying to save people from harm. I pray that I help save children and families from medical harm. When that happens, I will put on the cape. Lol! Thank you for your donation.
Evidence-based analysis rests on a truth-seeking mindset. And a truth-seekinjg mindset requires humility in the face of uncertainty. If we don't establish a truth-seeking mindset, there's not much point in discussing evidence.
Why does jack turban who was a psych resident like yesterday have so much power?