Here's what Chat GPT made of it:
Do No Harm is a physician-led advocacy organization that opposes DEI initiatives and certain gender-related policies in medicine. It operates primarily through public commentary, research reports, litigation, and policy advocacy. Dr. Kurt Miceli, its chief medical officer, is trained in internal medicine and psychiatry. (Do No Harm)
In his Wall Street Journal op-ed, Miceli combines criticism of the AMA’s policy positions with a structural argument about its role in medical coding. The AMA receives substantial licensing revenue and institutional influence from CPT, while the RUC gives organized medicine an important role in physician-payment recommendations. Miceli argues that this position makes the AMA less dependent on physician membership and therefore less accountable to the views of practicing doctors.
His implied theory is that reducing the government’s reliance on CPT or the RUC would diminish the AMA’s revenue and influence, forcing it to rely more heavily on membership support. Because he believes practicing physicians are generally more conservative than the AMA’s leadership on DEI and gender policy, he expects greater member dependence to moderate the organization’s positions.
That outcome is not automatic: changing CPT or RUC arrangements would directly affect coding, payment policy, revenue, and the size (budget) of AMA, but any resulting change in the AMA’s political orientation would be indirect and uncertain.
BQ: I would argue, contra Miceli, that some white papers somewhere on the AMA website about DEI or an Op Ed on the same in JAMA -- don't necessarily affect the national dialog on DEI very much, or even effect the AMA itself, that much. AMA will still oppose expansion of N.P. capabilities, oppose reducing physician work via AI, insist urgently on raising RVU dollar rates, and so on.
I would also argue it's less "Trump" (in Miceli's WSJ headline) but RFK Jr who tracks this.
See Peter Sweson's 2021 book, Disorder: A history of reform, reaction, and money in American medicine; about decades of left-wing and right-wing swings at AMA.
in 2021, I wrote about AMA's report on the burden on AMA of too many white men - here.
In 2021, I relayed news about a JAMA issue on DEi that was quickly criticized for not having BIPOS authors - here.
In 2020, TMI? You couldn't apply for a small genomic payment (pricing) group, without submitting documentation explaining your (or the candidate's) gender psychology and racial background. Here.
BTW - Chat GPT identified articles on my blog on [AMA+DEI] faster and better than I could.
