I Might Be Running A Risk By Commenting On This!

This appeared last week:

AHPRA's made a serious mistake in trying to silence Dr David Berger

Dr Andrew Miller

Dr Miller is an anaesthetist in Perth and president of AMA WA.

15th July 2022

Dr David Berger has been told to pull his head in by the Medical Board of Australia who wants him to undergo a re-education course "in relation to behaving professionally and courteously to colleagues and other practitioners".

His offence, according to the board, was his passionate Tweets, sometimes containing the odd expletive, critiquing public health measures, dopey commentators and the politics of the pandemic.

This was the end result of an anonymous notification — or at least one where the 'name withheld from the registrant' — made to AHPRA

Doctors’ freedom to speak out on fundamental issues on public health, patient safety, ethical medical care should be sacrosanct.

Is Dr Berger a medical renegade influencer with a big mouth? Or is he the embodiment of the public health advocacy provisions in the medical board’s own Good Medical Practice — code of conduct, which states, under sections 7.3 and 7.4, that we must use our influence to promote health through disease prevention and control?

Is AHPRA functioning as a responsible regulator, protecting community confidence in public health. Or is it overstepping the mark into a grey area of censorship of political views that do not align with government policy based on a unidimensional, outdated view of what it means to be a medical professional?

It says something that, even as I type out these words, I’m wondering whether I can safely pose these questions.

I guess we'll find out.

By way of declaration of interest, Dr Berger became a friend of mine in 2020 when he approached me in my role as AMA WA president to assist with advocacy for healthcare worker protections from airborne COVID-19.

This was an obvious problem to aerosol scientists, as well as those with experience of SARS-1.

It was less obvious to the (ironically) titled Infection Control Experts Group and the many officials who pushed the 'droplet dogma' down the line uncritically.

Deep cleans, hand hygiene and 1.5m gaps in theatre while the virus blows right past. In short, the expert group was spectacularly wrong; Dr Berger and the rest of us listening to a diverse range of experts around the world were, unfortunately, right.

But people in aged care facilities died without airborne-disease protections in place.

Could we have expressed our views on the science more courteously? We tried and were ignored.

Was it disrespectful of me to call for the Infection Control Experts Group to be disbanded in late 2020? You bet.

But is being courteous effective when trying to be heard in the context of a command-and-control pandemic?

As someone with plenty of experience in the media and medical politics, I can attest that sending a polite letter is as useful as bringing scones, jam and cream to a knife fight.

Government officials suggested we "take our conversation offline".

I was once contacted by several intermediaries asking if I could "tone it down". I also got texts from politicians asking me to come in for a quiet chat.

One bureaucrat posted on twitter suggesting that, if I had something to say, I should call them rather than use a social media megaphone. He didn't make his number public though; probably wise.

As reported in Australian Doctor last week, the sections of the AHPRA sanction make troubling reading.

It stated: "Dr Berger has made comments that disagree with politicians, government bodies and public health organisations, pharmaceutical companies and other medical professionals. He has done so using emotive and pejorative language."

"The terms used by Dr Berger often imply that the persons or organisations at issue are acting either deceptively or coercively and for motives other than the public health interest.”

It added: "When referred to in this manner, it would be reasonable for the reader to doubt the integrity of the persons and organisations targeted by the practitioner and to lose confidence in the public health pronouncements and programs promoted by them."

Politicians and their employees acting deceptively or coercively for motives that benefit themselves rather than the public? Say it isn't so!

…..

F**k cancer. Offended? F**k heart disease too.

To silence certain doctors in the name of professional courtesy and force false displays of respect for mediocre authorities because of some 20th century notion of 'professionalism' and the fallacy that governments always act on 'the best medical advice' would be a backwards step for health.

With respect, bugger that.

---

More information: Medical Board of Australia: Good medical practice: a code of conduct for doctors in Australia.

More here:

https://www.ausdoc.com.au/opinion/ahpras-made-serious-mistake-trying-silence-dr-david-berger

I have had a look at the last few days of posts and I have to say that by Twitter standards they are pretty mild and pretty typical of what can be found there.

I also have to say that the posts are clearly not directed at patients as best I can tell!

Given what we have all been through with COVID over the last few years most of the posts show remarkable equanimity!

It is really find it hard to understand just what the Medical Board is on about – feels a little heavy handed to me! You can see for yourself at @YouAreLobbyLud.

Interested to know what people think!

David.