NEW REPORT: Oz’s Medical Research Was Rejected In 2003, Resulting In 2-Year Ban

Oz asked Columbia’s Chief of Cardiac Surgery to refute reports of puppy abuse, “Rose said he declined Oz’s request.”

New, bombshell reporting from The Washington Post today revealed that “Oz’s medical research was rejected in 2003,” resulting in a “significant” two year ban from presenting research – and that Oz asked the chief of cardiac surgery at Columbia University to refute reports that Oz was involved in puppy abuse, but “Rose said he declined Oz’s request.”

Read the report for yourself:

The Washington Post: Mehmet Oz’s 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

Key Points:

• In May 2003… Oz’s research was scheduled to lead off the scientific session of the 83rd annual American Association for Thoracic Surgery (AATS) conference.

• 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.

• He was also prohibited from publishing his work in the society’s 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.

• 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.

• Medical experts and the campaign of his Democratic opponent, Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, have hammered Oz over fringe ideas and unsupported health recommendations made on his popular television show, “The Dr. Oz Show,” over 13 seasons.

• Bruce W. Lytle, an AATS official involved in the decision to impose the two-year ban, said its severity reflected questions about the presentation’s methodology.

• Oransky said medical societies are reluctant to sanction members, especially those given prominent positions at conferences… “It’s something they take very seriously and reserve for fairly significant issues, whether they’re behavioral or issues of scientific integrity,” Oransky said.

• Eric Rose, chief of cardiac surgery at Columbia University’s medical program and Oz’s superior in 2003, also confirmed the incident. Rose, who was a co-author on Oz’s abstract because he was chairman of the department, said he and Oz had been close, but their relationship soured about three years ago.

• About three weeks ago, Rose said, Oz asked him to say publicly that Oz did not bear responsibility for alleged inhumane treatment of puppies that occurred as part of medical research Oz oversaw as a principal investigator at Columbia dating back to at least the early 2000s, claims that had surfaced in an online report… Rose said he declined Oz’s request.

See Also:

• Associated Press: Dr. Oz made reputation as a surgeon, a fortune as a salesman. “Several of the companies he has promoted…are structured as multilevel marketing businesses whose practices have repeatedly drawn the attention of federal regulators.”

• The Washington Post: As TV doctor, Mehmet Oz provided platform for questionable products and views. “Oz provided a platform for potentially dangerous products and fringe viewpoints, aimed at millions of viewers, according to medical experts, public health organizations and federal health guidance.”

• The New York Times: ‘Magic’ Weight-Loss Pills and Covid Cures: Dr. Oz Under the Microscope. “The celebrity physician… has a long history of dispensing dubious medical advice on his daytime show and on Fox News.”

• WHYY: ‘Very serious stakes’: Why Pa.’s doctors are rallying against Oz’s Senate bid. “Collectively known as the Real Doctors Against Oz, a growing number of physicians across Pennsylvania are speaking out against Oz’s political ambitions. Their reasoning is simple: Oz’s history as a television physician undermines the trust of their profession, subsequently threatening the health of their patients. They believe if Oz is elected, he would exploit his constituents just as he’s done to his viewers.”

###