Fixing Healthcare Podcast

Over the past two weeks, high-profile leaders in the worlds of business, politics and health have put forth plans to reopen the country, mitigate further damage from the coronavirus and “crush the curve” rather than just flatten it. Will any of these recommendations work? “To be very blunt, I think they are a bit of fantasy and unlikely to be successful,” says Dr. Robert Pearl, who points to the major logistical flaws of any plan that relies too heavily on COVID-19 testing as a solution. Added Pearl: “People are trying to find a way forward that is relatively painless. And the truth, when it comes to coronavirus, is that there are no fully painless solutions.” Episode 5 of Coronavirus: The Truth offers answers to the following questions: [01:03] How did Dr. Pearl and others predict the current number of deaths so accurately? [04:45] Will it be safe to ease social distancing measures in the coming months? [05:48] A new projection of 60,000 total U.S. deaths is going around. What’s the catch? [07:29] Will there be a second wave of the virus in New York or elsewhere? [08:47] Is it possible to crush the curve rather than just flatten it? [11:49] What should we make of Siddartha Mukherjee’s intriguing research on “dose exposure”? [14:51] What can the U.S. learn from China, Singapore, Italy and Germany? [16:49] Are Americans becoming more or less optimistic about the future? [21:08] Do we know for sure that scientists can produce an effective vaccine for COVID-19? [23:24] Is Sweden’s “low-scale lockdown” something the U.S. can mimic? [26:55] What’s wrong with the COVID-19 recommendations of Joe Biden and Bill Gates? [32:23] What are the biggest unknowns that remain about the coronavirus? This episode is available on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, Spotify and other podcast platforms. To submit a question or comment to the hosts, visit the contact page or send a message on Twitter or LinkedIn. *To ensure the credibility of this program, Coronavirus: The Truth refuses to accept sponsorship, outside funding sources or guests with any financial or personal conflicts of interest. The post #5: Can we ‘crush the curve’ of this pandemic? appeared first on Fixing Healthcare.

Welcome to the first episode of season 4. This season of the Fixing Healthcare podcast focuses on finding big ideas and the people behind them. The journey begins with Dr. Siddhartha Mukherjee. He is a physician, virologist, oncologist and Pulitzer Prize-winning author of The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer. In 2016, he published the New York Times bestseller, The Gene: An Intimate History. And this month, PBS released a Ken Burns two-part documentary based on Mukherjee’s work. In this interview, Dr. Mukherjee discusses the ethics of gene therapy, his hopes for an effective coronavirus medication, why doctors are struggling, and how he’d grade Trump’s response to COVID-19. Dr. Mukherjee’s highlights from episode 20 On the role of physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic Our job as doctors is to tip the equilibrium towards the host, towards the human, and tip the equilibrium away from the virus. And there are various ways one can do this. Vaccination is essentially one way that we tip the equilibrium towards the host, right? … Another strategy is to limit the amount, the dose, or the exposure to the virus, which is by wearing protective equipment. On the real purpose of social distancing The most important thing to do—and the reason that we’re saying that we should be distancing during this time—is to buy us time. And I’m going to repeat that again and again: We need to buy time. We need to buy time so that the hospitals are not overwhelmed and the healthcare workers can be adequately protected and adequately supplied with the equipment that they need to deal with the sickest patients. On hopes for an effective COVID-19 medication I’m confident that there are going to be antibodies that will decrease the effects of this severe disease in patients, they will just take time to make. Chloroquine is a completely different story. Chloroquine is a repurposed drug, it has probably some mild effect against the entry of the virus and the evidence that it changes the course of disease is pretty mild. On the U.S. government’s response to the pandemic I would give the administration a D- grade in the preparation for this pandemic. We knew about this in December, in a globalized world, it is a travesty that medical workers in the frontline, in the wealthiest nation of the world, don’t have the equipment that they need to handle patients. It is a travesty. On the ethics of gene therapy Gene therapy is alive again. There were mistakes made, ethical mistakes, medical mistakes made in the 1990s and 2000s, when we tried to use gene therapy in humans, replacing genes, altering genes in cells, such as blood cells, a little too quickly. And that froze the field for about 10 years, 15 years, but it is alive again. And for diseases such as sickle cell anemia, such as hemophilia, these gene therapies have turned out to be transformational. On the mission-driven spirit of doctors during a pandemic I’m moved to tears every time I hear of a doctor or a nurse on the front lines without protective equipment, who has been infected and is dying because they put the lives of others in front of their lives. A society which does that is fundamentally wrong. There’s something wrong with us. And there will be an autopsy, there will be a dissection, a biopsy, of what has gone wrong, what went wrong with us as human beings, as a society, once the storm blows over. And I hope that one of the elements of that autopsy reminds us that medicine is an occupation that demands a level of sacrifice. And these men and women perform that sacrifice for you, for us, for our parents, for our children, for our loved ones. They did it during the HIV pandemic, they’ve done it during this pandemic. We need to restore their spirits. We need to respect them. On learning from our nation’s failed COVID-19 response Every system that was supposed to work broke in the early days of the pandemic. We need to figure out, as we recover, how to fix those. And only if we fix those, can we become the superpower and the global leader of economy that we once were, and we hope to be again? All I can say is that, this pandemic has been an X-ray or an MRI that we performed on the American medical system. And all the silent aneurysms and the hidden malignancies that were hidden for some people have become apparent. READ: Full transcript of our discussion with Siddhartha Mukherjee * * * Fixing Healthcare is a co-production of Dr. Robert Pearl and Jeremy Corr. Subscribe to the show via Apple Podcasts or wherever you find podcasts. Join the conversation or suggest a guest by following the show on Twitter and LinkedIn. The post Episode 20: Siddhartha Mukherjee on COVID-19, genes and physician sacrifice appeared first on Fixing Healthcare.

Physician and bestselling author Dr. Robert Pearl fears the nation is in denial about the trajectory of the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic: “Many people I speak with and nearly all of the news outlets describe this as a back and forth battle with an implication that we will turn the tide, that we’ll win the war, that we’ll defeat COVID-19. These phrases may make sense in a traditional war with a human enemy, but they are non sequiturs when your enemy is a virus.” In this episode of Coronavirus: The Truth, hosts Dr. Robert Pearl and Jeremy Corr compare the nation’s hopes and expectations against the biological and mathematical realities of the pandemic. Here are the questions covered in episode 4 of Coronavirus: The Truth … [01:03] Is this the week we peak in the United States? [01:47] What three solutions could end the COVID-19 pandemic? [04:19] What will social distancing actually accomplish? [06:50] Will the United States experience a “second wave”? [07:49] Are current mortality (death) estimates accurate? [11:12] Have we already made “the cure worse than the disease”? [15:24] If this is a war, what’s our long-term strategy? *read Dr. Pearl’s COVID-19 plan* [21:22] Should we be wearing masks? What kind? Why? [28:04] What is the C.A.R.E.S. bill? What are its four key parts? [32:14] What parts of the country will see the coronavirus peak sooner vs. later? [37:17] How long is too long before we reopen the U.S. economy? This episode is available on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, Spotify and other podcast platforms. To submit a question or comment to the hosts, visit the contact page or send a message on Twitter or LinkedIn. *To ensure the credibility of this program, Coronavirus: The Truth refuses to accept sponsorship, outside funding sources or guests with any financial or personal conflicts of interest. The post #4: Is this the week the pandemic peaks? appeared first on Fixing Healthcare.

In this episode of Coronavirus: The Truth, hosts Dr. Robert Pearl and Jeremy Corr delve into a “surprising” topic. That is, why do the news media and public seem so surprised by Dr. Anthony Fauci’s projection that 100,000 to 200,000 Americans will die from the coronavirus? Why are we so surprised by the rising slope of confirmed cases, which recently eclipsed 140,000 in the United States? Or by President Trump’s decision to extend the social-distancing guidelines through April 30? As Dr. Pearl explains, public health experts were telling us this information with great accuracy least two weeks ago. And yet, very few people seem eager to listen to the scientific, biological and mathematical facts concerning this pandemic. So, which coronavirus “surprises” aren’t surprises at all? Are any real surprises in store and, if so, which unpleasant surprises can we get ahead of now? Get the answers on this week’s episode, which focuses on the “surprising” facts surrounding the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic. Here are the questions covered in episode 3 of Coronavirus: The Truth … [01:34] How did health experts know two weeks ago what the U.S. death rate would be today? [02:45] Why isn’t Dr. Anthony Fauci’s prediction of 100,000 to 200,000 deaths not surprising at all? [04:31] Why does New Orleans now have one of the highest coronavirus death rates in the world? [06:03] Is it likely that President Trump will lift social-distancing measures on April 30? [09:10] What will happen when we reopen schools, workplaces and restaurants too soon? [10:59] In 30 days, where will our country stand in terms of slowing or stopping the coronavirus? [15:12] What are the likeliest social and economic consequences we’re not yet talking about? [19:11] How do we predict the next phases of this pandemic? What should we be preparing for? [21:34] Why isn’t the $2.2 trillion emergency relief bill an “economic stimulus package”? [24:54] Will this pandemic have a long-term impact on the mental health of Americans? [29:45] Which would be worse: A serious, short-term pandemic or a devastating long-term recession? [30:12] Should we be doing antibody (serologic) testing on people who recover from coronavirus? [34:20] Why is there so much disagreement about how many respirators and ventilators we actually need? This episode is available on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, Spotify and other podcast platforms. To submit a question or comment to the hosts, visit the contact page or send a message on Twitter or LinkedIn. *To ensure the credibility of this program, Coronavirus: The Truth refuses to accept sponsorship, outside funding sources or guests with any financial or personal conflicts of interest. The post #3: Why can’t we accept the painful truth about COVID-19? appeared first on Fixing Healthcare.

In the second episode of Coronavirus: The Truth, hosts Dr. Robert Pearl and Jeremy Corr examine several difficult but important questions surrounding the future of the coronavirus pandemic in the United States. For listeners who are new to the show, this podcast offers science-based updates on the COVID-19, insights from public health officials and clinicians, along with an unbiased look at how the day’s news and opinion are impacting American life. Here are the questions covered in episode 2 of Coronavirus: The Truth … [01:03] What are the most recent updates on the virus? What are the most significant changes over the past week? [04:38] What’s important to understand about the latest mortality figures? Why are U.S. deaths still doubling every two to three days? [06:20] Can we prevent more coronavirus deaths in the near future? [10:20] What advice would Dr. Pearl offer people who may be panicking? [13:40] How realistic is it that Americans will return to work, school and life as normal within a month? [16:20] What are the three pieces of information needed to understand the pandemic’s future? [21:02] What does exponential growth of a viral disease look like? [22:23] Why are politicians more optimistic about the COVID-19 timeline than public health officials? [24:04] What should we make of this recent tweet from President Donald Trump? WE CANNOT LET THE CURE BE WORSE THAN THE PROBLEM ITSELF. AT THE END OF THE 15 DAY PERIOD, WE WILL MAKE A DECISION AS TO WHICH WAY WE WANT TO GO! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 23, 2020 [26:57] What about the possibility of medications to treat coronavirus? Why are scientists skeptical? [29:06] Beyond our current reality, are there any “rays of hope” coming from this crisis? [32:19] Is the coronavirus a “Black Swan” (unpredictable/unforeseen) event? [33:11] What’s the mood in middle America over the coronavirus? [34:32] Listener questions: Is food delivery safe? Is grocery-store shopping safe? Should we be wearing masks? This episode is available on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, Spotify and other podcast platforms. To submit a question or comment to the hosts, visit the contact page or send a message on Twitter or LinkedIn. *To ensure the credibility of this program, Coronavirus: The Truth refuses to accept sponsorship, outside funding sources or guests with any financial or personal conflicts of interest. The post #2: When will the coronavirus pandemic end? appeared first on Fixing Healthcare.

From the hosts of the Fixing Healthcare podcast comes a new and necessary show that focuses on the facts surrounding the coronavirus (COVID-19). This podcast offers science-based updates on the coronavirus, insights from public health officials and clinicians, along with an unbiased look at how the day’s news and opinion are impacting American life. Here are the questions Dr. Robert Pearl and Jeremy Corr tackled in episode 1 of Coronavirus: The Truth … [02:01] What qualifies these hosts to educate listeners about the coronavirus? [04:18] What is coronavirus? How does it spread? Who’s at greatest risk? [07:34] Are all these event cancellations and restaurant closures appropriate or overkill? Will these actions make a difference? [11:58] How dangerous is COVID-19 compared to seasonal influenza (the flu)? [13:47] How does this pandemic compare to other outbreaks like Spanish Flu, MERS, SARS and Ebola? [16:27] What do we know about immunity, recovery and seasonality with respect to coronavirus in the United States? [19:08] Should we be scared when scientists say, “We don’t know…”? [20:15] Viral spread, economic strain, public panic and an overwhelmed healthcare system: Which are legit threats at this time? [25:07] What should people with COVID-19 symptoms do? What immediate steps should they take? [28:26] What are the psychological factors at play? Why are we so afraid? Why are people engaged in hoarding behaviors? [34:16] When can we expect a return to normalcy in American life? This episode is available on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, Spotify and other podcast platforms. To submit a question or comment to the hosts, visit the contact page or send a message on Twitter or LinkedIn. *To ensure the credibility of this program, Coronavirus: The Truth refuses to accept sponsorship, outside funding sources or guests with any financial or personal conflicts of interest. Check in regularly for the latest episodes of this show.  The post #1: Why are we afraid of the coronavirus? appeared first on Fixing Healthcare.

In the final episode of season three, we welcome Dr. David Shulkin, the ninth U.S. Secretary of Veterans Affairs. For most of his career, David was a physician and then a private-sector leader who earned a reputation for turning around struggling hospitals. In 2015, President Obama asked him to help turn around the scandal-ridden Department of Veterans Affairs. Two years later, President Trump appointed him VA Secretary—making David the only Obama-administration holdover to serve in Trump’s cabinet. Lessons from his experiences in government fill the pages of his new book “It Shouldn’t Be This Hard to Serve Your Country: Our Broken Government and the Plight of Veterans” (Public Affairs). In this interview, David talks about the difference between serving President Obama and President Trump, the “wait time” crisis that lured him to the VA and how the culture of government is a good match for improving patient care. Here are some of the highlights from Episode 19: On the differences serving Trump vs. Obama I think most of the listeners understand that there’s a big difference in style between President Obama and President Trump. Interestingly, I experienced them in very different ways. Both cared very deeply about veterans and making sure that we are doing the right things, but they had different approaches. President Obama was very thoughtful, analytic and careful in policy making and decision making where President Trump was much more willing to move quickly and take risks. On politicizing the healthcare of veterans For me, the issue of veterans should be a bipartisan issue. It should be outside of the traditional political divisions that we see so much in this country. I was very proud that I worked both as Under Secretary and as Secretary in a bipartisan fashion. And in fact, most senators and congressmen that worked with me had no idea if was a Republican or Democrat and that was exactly the way I wanted it. When you’re dealing with improving the lives of veterans, that really should not be a Democratic or Republican issue. On dealing with scandal in the VA The reason why I came to government in the first place was because of the wait-time crisis that was receiving national attention, where veterans were being alleged to have been harmed, some of them dying because they weren’t able to get access to care. So, when I entered government, I had a mandate to fix that and I certainly was committed that-that was going to be my top priority to make sure that every veteran that needed healthcare was getting it in a timely fashion. On mental healthcare and suicide prevention for veterans The single top priority that I had as secretary that I established … for the Department of Veteran Affairs was to reduced veteran suicide. With 20 veterans a day taking their life, it was and still is an epidemic in the veteran population, as well as the greater American public health issue that we see today. I think that the Department of Veteran Affairs has really been a leader in trying to reintegrate physical care with behavioral health care. On the over-reach of Trump’s political appointees What we’re seeing is the power of political appointees throughout the administration to influence decisions that are really somewhat more political in nature rather than necessarily what is good public policy. And when it comes to the Department of Veteran Affairs, I experienced many of these political appointees trying to influence what I would call their ideology of how government should work rather than necessarily what was the right thing to do for the veterans that we served. READ: Full transcript of our discussion with David Shulkin * * * Fixing Healthcare is a co-production of Dr. Robert Pearl and Jeremy Corr. Subscribe to the show via Apple Podcasts or wherever you find podcasts. Join the conversation or suggest a guest by following the show on Twitter and LinkedIn. The post Episode 19: Former VA Sec. explains why it’s so hard to serve your country appeared first on Fixing Healthcare.

In this episode, we welcome Representative Eric Swalwell, from California’s 15th Congressional District. A former presidential candidate and a rising star in the democratic party, Eric serves on several House committees, including the high-profile Judiciary and Intelligence committees. He’s now in his fourth term and joins the Fixing Healthcare podcast to offer his thoughts on the role of government in advancing our nation’s healthcare agenda. Here are some of Eric Swalwell’s highlights from Episode 18: On his top 3 healthcare priorities for America First and foremost, I would make sure that every family in America has access to healthcare. And healthcare to me includes prescription drugs … The second, I think it’s really about the future of medicine, in that we need to be a country of curers again, and investing in cures in our lifetime … And then third would be to just make sure that our children, at the earliest of ages, are educated about diet and exercise. On getting bipartisan support to lower drug prices We recently passed prescription drug reform in the House (H.R.3) but … we’ve not seen enough bipartisan progress. I would like to see more Republicans, especially with a president who has talked about prescription drug reform, show more seriousness … The president has talked about it, and I’ll take him at his word that he wants to do something on prescription drugs, but we’re going to need leadership to get the prescription drug bill that we passed in the House to get a vote, or some sort of reform in the Senate … I think medicine has to be bipartisan, any legislation in that area, and that’s where I’ve tried to lead. On how we can become a ‘country of cures’ again I think when it comes to cures, the private sector, that’s where you find the ingenuity and the people, but it’s really going to take public funding to get there. On whether ‘Medicare for all’ is the best option I’m a big supporter of Medicare for anyone who wants it. Essentially, a hybrid system, where the Federal government would dramatically increase what it contributes to healthcare, to have a public option. Not to eliminate private insurance, but with a robust public option, to make private insurance more competitive, and frankly, more accountable on their costs, and who is covered. On the role of parents in promoting proper diet and exercise I think Michelle Obama was the biggest person to try and make strides on this, and she was ridiculed, and it was politicized, sadly. But I think really making sure that our kids, and what they eat at school, and their preschools, really set them on a course for a healthy lifestyle, so that you can head off some of the costlier issues that they would take on later in life. READ: Full transcript of our discussion with Eric Swalwell * * * Fixing Healthcare is a co-production of Dr. Robert Pearl and Jeremy Corr. Subscribe to the show via Apple Podcasts or wherever you find podcasts. Join the conversation or suggest a guest by following the show on Twitter and LinkedIn. The post Episode 18: Eric Swalwell on whether Congress can pass a bipartisan healthcare bill appeared first on Fixing Healthcare.

In this episode, we welcome James Carville, one of the most recognizable figures in American politics. Carville came to fame as the lead strategist on Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign run, coining the now-ubiquitous phrase, “It’s the economy, stupid.” He has worked as a political commentator for both CNN and Fox News, and remains a powerful voice in politics today. Carville hosts now the “2020 Politics War Room” podcast alongside political insider Al Hunt. He joins us now, in season three of the “Fixing Healthcare” podcast, to talk about the 2020 elections, the possibility of legislating major healthcare changes and the effects of climate change on public health. Here are some James Carville highlights from Episode 17: On the dangers of trying to reform healthcare as president Traditionally, politically, anybody that moves on this issue tends to lose. So, we moved on it in ‘93, didn’t get it through. We lost politically. President Obama moved on it in 2009, was able to get it through and suffered politically. On drug prices and research funding I think it’s a terrible thing in a country of this enormous wealth where we have people that are priced out of getting the kind of pharmaceutical help they need … One of the things that the pharmaceuticals say, “Well, we need this [funding] because we need to do ongoing research.” I think there’s a compelling case to make, a public case to make, is let the federal government fund the research. You apply for grants like you do for anything else and you have a board of physicians that determine what’s meritorious research or not. And then you say, “Okay, we’ll pick up the research costs for you.” If that’s what standing between people living and dying, the amount of money, like I said, they can do the research. On hospital consolidation and monopolistic pricing I live in New Orleans and maybe there’s something here that Ochsner [Health System] hadn’t bought, but it’s kind of hard to find. And I just have to believe, based on just everyday experience, that the reason that they’re gobbling all the people up, becoming consolidated, is because they want some price power … As you have consolidation, you have increased political might. So, they’re going to be more formidable now than they were five years ago. That’s just a fact.” On the political unlikelihood of ‘Medicare for all’ Look if we were going to start from scratch, we’d do a lot of stuff different. All right, I wish I could start from scratch. I’m 75 … You going to tell an Alameda County firefighter in California that you don’t have your health insurance anymore? That you’re in Medicare? I don’t think that’s going to work … The problem with Medicare for all is you have to un-ring a bell. On climate change and public health I mean the public health ramifications of climate change are beyond comprehension. And of course, as you would expect, as always the case, is disproportionately going to affect poor people. And this, I can tell you, we have so much water and it’s coming our way in Louisiana. It’s horrific. And I am very depressed and skeptical about the ability of the world to deal with this issue. On what a democratic Congress and president could achieve in four years First of all, you would have real strengthening, deep strengthening of Obamacare. You’d have a pretty significant expansion of the number of people that actually had health insurance … And I don’t think there’s any doubt, they would have a hard time not dealing with the prescription drug issue. READ: Full transcript of our discussion with James Carville * * * Fixing Healthcare is a co-production of Dr. Robert Pearl and Jeremy Corr. Subscribe to the show via Apple Podcasts or wherever you find podcasts. Join the conversation or suggest a guest by following the show on Twitter and LinkedIn. The post Episode 17: Talking healthcare politics with James Carville appeared first on Fixing Healthcare.

Stephen Bergman, who goes by the pseudonym Samuel Shem, took the medical and literary worlds by storm in 1978 when he published his provocative satire “The House of God,” based on his clinical internship at the Beth Israel Hospital, a teaching facility associated with Harvard Medical School in Boston. The cult novel, which the New York Times described as “raunchy, troubling and hilarious,” sold over 2 million copies and served as the backdrop for Shem’s latest work “Man’s Fourth Best Hospital.” Set in a nearby institution, Massachusetts General Hospital, now 40 years later, Shem pulls us into the present, taking a critical look at the failures of American medicine today. In this episode of Fixing Healthcare with Dr. Robert Pearl and Jeremy Corr, Shem reflects on why “The House of God” remains relevant, why the doctor-patient relationship is faltering and what can be done to combat the “abuse” of doctors. Here are some interview highlights from Episode 16: On what’s different about medicine today The biggest difference that has caused all the trouble … are the computer screens that are linked, that link data to payment, that link code to cash. As you know but the public doesn’t know, it’s mainly, in a lot of ways, a billing machine or a cash register (and) that we doctors are at these machines from 60 to 70, 80% a day because we are tasked with the job of fighting for the highest payment of our diagnosis that we’re putting down. On the other side of the war of the screens, the insurance drones are trying to pay the least for each of the codes we click. Like all wars, it’s about money. On what’s still the same Well, at best, the same is the same. I’m a writer of resistance to injustice, and the injustice, both in “The House of God” and in “Man’s Fourth Best Hospital,” is the doctor-patient relationship. The injustice of being forced in a system where you can’t really do what you want to do and, as you know, what we docs came into it for, which was to help people, to make contact and guide them through their suffering, and be there at the worst times in their life to help them through. On the high hopes of treating patients Well, “The House of God” is a story sort of one step off real of my internship where it’s really going through the internship with five other interns as major characters. This character called the Fat Man, who is their resident that teaches them, who’s the hero of the book, of both books, and who is this marvelous kind of huge-in-every-way, wise, foolish-in-a-way, expert teacher and doctor. The book is about how the sort of innocent interns, including the narrator, Roy Bash, enter this system with all high hopes of being humane doctors and treating patients well, and, alas, this big hierarchal system does not allow them to do what they think is in the best interest of their patients. On the treatment of women in his books There were criticisms, valid criticisms, by nurses especially, who are mostly women, that oh, the way you portray women in this book, this is really not very good, blah, blah, blah. I plead that that’s the way it was. That’s the only defense I had. I write not only real, I wrote one step off real, my editor said, which brings out the humor. I write from real. What I’ve done consciously in “Man’s Fourth Best Hospital,” because it’s such a different era, that you will be pleased to hear, and everybody will be pleased to hear, that when the Fat Man founds this clinic leaning up against man’s fourth best hospital, this public clinic, by the end of the novel, we have achieved parity with women. There’s as many women as men, which really makes me feel good because that’s the way it is now. On physician suicide and burnout Yeah, the thing that the students are most riveted by in the book is when we come to the chapter with the suicide. That’s because, here’s linking it to your question, that’s because there is an increased rate of suicide not just in doctors, which is big now. That’s because of “burnout,” which I would much rather call abuse because burnout makes it feel like we’re not up to it. Abuse makes it, I think, clearer. Anyway, there are suicides, and suicides are up in medical schools, too, which I find incredibly moving. These kids who have just worked and worked and worked to get into medical school and then, often, on the edge of leaving medical school or first-year, that’s when suicides happen, the transition. It’s because they get isolated. READ: Full transcript of our discussion with Samuel Shem * * * Fixing Healthcare is a co-production of Dr. Robert Pearl and Jeremy Corr. Subscribe to the show via Apple Podcasts or wherever you find podcasts. Join the conversation or suggest a guest by following the show on Twitter and LinkedIn. The post Episode 16: ‘The House of God’ author Samuel Shem appeared first on Fixing Healthcare.