Sanjay Gupta is a doctor on TV, but should he be surgeon general?(Scott Gries/Getty Images)The news that the television doctor and neurosurgeon Sanjay Gupta is being considered for the post of U.S. surgeon general has prompted a mixed reaction on health and science blogs and other sites. Here’s a sampling:
KevinMD.com: The doctor blogger calls it a “bold pick” but asks whether “this a case of style over substance.”
THDblog: The Technology, Health and Development blog says, “Public health needs a rock star.”
Terra Sigillata: Science blogger Abel notes that “literally millions of Americans already trust him for health care information,” adding that “Gupta has also been on-site for several of the most challenging medical emergencies the U.S. has faced in recent years, most significantly the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans.” But fellow blogger Jake at Pure Pedantry says Dr. Gupta has waffled on issues like vaccines and autism under the guise of journalistic fairness — something he can’t do as surgeon general.
Center for Science in the Public Interest: Director Michael Jacobson says: “It has been a long time since we’ve had a surgeon general who had a major national impact, such as Dr. C. Everett Koop, who took on the tobacco industry. Certainly no one could accuse any surgeon general in the last eight years of tackling tough health problems.”
GetBetterHealth.com: Dr. Val says, “I don’t think he has the gravitas or appropriate experience for the role of Surgeon General of the United States.” She cites an unidentified source close to the nomination proceedings who says, “It will be difficult for Gupta to be taken seriously by peers at the Pentagon and State Department.”
Gawker.com: The gossip site points out that Dr. Gupta was voted one of People Magazine’s Sexiest Men Alive in 2003. “Obviously Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman, is the big loser here,” says Gawker.
According to Dr. Gupta’s bio provided by CNN, he regularly performs surgery at Emory University Hospital and Grady Memorial Hospital, where he serves as associate chief of neurosurgery. Before joining CNN, Gupta was a fellow in neurosurgery at the University of Tennessee’s Semmes-Murphy clinic, and before that, the University of Michigan Medical Center. In 1997, he was chosen as a White House Fellow — one of only 15 fellows appointed.
What do you think of Dr. Gupta’s credentials to become surgeon general?
Healthy living doesn't happen at the doctor's office. The road to better health is paved with the small decisions we make every day. It's about the choices we make when we buy groceries, drive our cars and hang out with our kids. Join columnist Tara Parker-Pope as she sifts through medical research and expert opinions for practical advice to help readers take control of their health and live well every day. You can reach Ms. Parker-Pope at 
The easiest and most pleasurable way to eat well is to cook. Recipes for Health offers recipes with an eye towards empowering you to cook healthy meals every day. 
From 1 to 25 of 504 Comments
Neither Tara’s post nor the Times article in her link makes an attempt to chronicle his accomplishments, publications, or positions he has held (his CV). How is one to tell? He should not be dismissed out of hand just for being a TV reporter.
The larger concern I have is that we’d have a much greater talent pool if we changed the title and opened up the position to all physicians, not just surgeons.
FROM TPP — I agree the original post should have included more info about his credentials. Some of it is covered in the linked Times story, but I have added a link to his bio from the CNN website, which goes into far more detail.
— jackOf course, it’s a case of style over substance. It’s not like he will see patients, though–so whatev.
— StarHow many Americans–just off the top of their heads–name the current surgeon general? Or for that matter the surgeon general before him? Clearly, the surgeon’s general’s office has a PR problem.
— ElizabethThis statement is enough to make me worry about Dr. Gupta:
“Dr. Gupta has waffled on issues like vaccines and autism under the guise of journalistic fairness — something he can’t do as surgeon general.”
I would be deeply worried to have a surgeon general that always felt that he had to be popular, rather than making sound medical advice. The popular view isn’t always right, after all.
— ShanaWe should have an actor in the White House before we have a TV doctor as a Surgeon General. Oh, never mind.
— Adam HerbstHe is a neurosurgeon…not just a tv personality. And his name recognition will help him should he choose to actually DO something from the office
— mikeI hate this guy,and I don’t have a good reason. All I know is that I switch channels every time he comes on.
Where are you C .Everett Koop? (Oh yeah. You’ve fallen down and can”t get up.)
— William MaddenWhat, precisely, is the job of the surgeon general? If it is simply to act as a persuasive spokesperson for medical issues, then sure, he would be a great selection. If, on the other hand, the person needs to make sound epidemiological decisions, then I would say, no to Dr. Gupta. I would prefer someone with actual and significant public health experience, not an attractive mouthpiece.
— Michael S.Adam,
He’s also a professor of neurosurgery at Emory University, and has been published in academic journals for his research in the field. When he was in Iraq as a journalist, he ended up performing a complex operation at the military’s request because none of their doctors on the ground had the expertise to do it. Try googling him.
So I’d say he’s a doctor who’s on TV, not a TV doctor.
— mdhIn what way is Dr. Gupta lacking substance? I think that raising the question is itself lacking in substance and integrity. How about a dumb blond joke instead?
FROM TPP — It’s not about his looks. Asking about a nominee’s credentials is part of the process. Dr. Gupta is known more as a media personality than a physician, so he’s going to get the style vs. substance question — that just comes with the territory. At the same time, he is a practicing brain surgeon and was embedded in Iraq for a while and as the blogger points out, has probably been on the ground faster than many public health officials during some major crises like Katrina. (And who are you calling blonde? :)
— MichaelWell, why not? Dr. Gupta has provided many hours of airtime to alert viewers to various medical problems. Of course, he has been constrained by CNN’s (and others’) policies on avoiding charges of bias, but he seems to give full coverage on most topics. As Surgeon General, he would be constrained only by Obama’s priorities, and maybe not at all.
BTW, poster #1, the Surgeon General doesn’t have to be a surgeon. AFAIK, Dr. Koop was not a surgeon, but a pediatrician.
— ShirleyWhy not just dress Paris Hilton up as a nurse. She can do a report on the importance of safe sex and the effects of alcohol and drug abuse. Lets just hope the general population fares better than her pets.
FROM TPP — Hmmmm. I’m thinking Paris probably didn’t go to medical school.
— BobBill Frist was an MD although it was never very clear that his doctorship gave him any senatorial wisdom. But he was a darned good doctor — recall how he diagnosed Terry Schiavo’s condition without even examining her personally.
So there are doctors and there are doctors. (After all, the person who graduates last from medical school is also called ‘doctor’.)
So, what is really needed is a good bio of Gupta. It is not fair to assume he is a lightweight just because he spoke on CNN. What else has he done? And how does he compare to previous apointees like Everett Koop and Jocelyn Elders? Come on NYT, do your homework.
FROM TPP — His bio is provided by CNN. Here it is. I’m going to add it to the post as well.
— AGSanyaj Gupta is an excellent choice. Not only does he have excellent medical credentials but he fits what Obama wants in someone who has the ability to “actuate” change.
The surgeon general has no role in the policy of the President but has a role as the nations doctor to reach out to Americans and convince people to get immunizations, checkups, etc..
The fact that he has been a media star will be effective in convincing tens of millions of more Americans to get tested for HIV/AIDS. He also will be a great asset to Obama in helping Obama figure out how to best use the media to improve our nations health.
When Barack Obama went to Africa in 2006, he wasn’t (and still isn’t) a medical doctor. However, Obama’s and Michelle’s getting an HIV/AIDS test in front of the cameras convinced an additional 50,000 people in that region to get tested that week.
Gupta is respected for his celebrity, but his understanding of these issues. If on top of his great recommendations he can get media attention for these things, great. He is also young (under 40) and will reach the younger generation which is needed.
— JackWe shouldn’t prejudge Dr. Gupta on the basis of his public image but rather eventually upon his accomplishments.
However, as a physician, I personally believe that a primary care doctor would have been a better choice since the medical issues facing our nation, now and in the future, have more to do with national wellness and the combatting of acute and chronic illnesses, than with good communications and a neurosurgical skill-set.
We must address the epidemic issues of obesiity, neonatal healthcare, and diseases of an enlarging elderly population.
Despite my misgivings, I wish Dr. Gupta well and hope that he can muster the collaboration necessary to deal with some very daunting issues.
— s.a.borgThis is a GREAT choice should it be made. A doctor who can communicate is very important now that we have a president who really belives in public health initiatives. You people who are commenting about this appointment as not being important have no vision.
— ClevelanderNo way, no how. A post like that should come with actual medical experience.
— AndreaWhy is he even being considered????
Saying he’s a “television doctor” may be technically accurate, but the connotation is negative and unfair, like he’s just plays a doctor on TV. Or repairs televisions. He’s a doctor who is also a journalist. Doctor-journalist is more appropriate.
— KatieI got a dose of respect, when I saw a TV piece a while back, in which Dr. Gupta did emergency brain surgery on a soldier in Iraq or Afghanistan (can’t remember which).
With little hope for the patient, and with a makeshift operating “room,” the soldier was saved.
The man is gifted in many ways. He’s a communicator as well as an accomplished medical professional. He deserves open minded consideration by the public, rather than the skepticism being expressed, just because he has a job in television.
— WesleyThe guy has an BS and MD from the University of Michigan, did his neurosurgery residency at Michigan, was a White House fellow during the Clinton Administration (where he was discovered by a CNN executive), and has traveled around the world when he worked for CNN to cover medical issues. He is VERY well qualified.
— John Saunders MDI’m more worried about the neuorsurgeon part than the TV personality part..!
— RhettSeems a bit gimmicky for my tastes. I hope he can hold his ground on tough issues, as we are facing more public health concerns then we ever have before.
— StephanieI’ve been under the impression that Surgeon General is a communications position not a policy position. This guy clearly seems to have the communications chops (as well as the nuts-and-bolts neurosurgery chops). What’s the problem? (other than the financial grasping)
— HardyWAll of the medical establishment will rejoice. He is a defender of the status quo in medicine and an indication that Obama will never bring a single payer system like the rest of the developed world has. Only in America can medical problems cause bankruptcy.
— c. perryRe #11 I do agree that a GP type doc would be a better more useful person as a reference than a neurosurgeon rockstar (who is also a media rockstar)
— HardyW