"In plain English? If your doctor feels that your blood tests do not suggest a “severe” thyroid dysfunction, and yet you have persistent, troublesome symptoms, you should be referred for mental health evaluation and treatment."
And perhaps even more problematic is a point I missed. It is going to be a war against effective treatment and those doctors that get us well.
"The ATA Task Force Guidelines warns that doctors who prescribe T3 and natural desiccated thyroid drugs could face legal consequences or revocation of their medical licenses. This is likely to discourage open-minded physicians from prescribing T3 and/or natural desiccated thyroid, fearing legal or professional censure or even loss of their medical licenses."
Written by
PR4NOW
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
Exactly!!! If I hadn't read Dr. Bianco's 2013 draft copy I would have thought that this is in response to all the webinars this year. Apparently there is enough ruckus going on that the ATA feels threatened. I thought we had turned the corner against medical review boards attacking doctors for effective thyroid treatment here in the USA but it looks like I was wrong. I think we may see a new chapter in the battle for effective treatment. PR
I hope so, PR. Not least because what creeps into the USA guidelines appears to be enthusiastically adopted in the UK too. Doctor on doctor persecution/bullying seems to be an acceptable blood sport and never mind the patient!
Ignorance, it would seem to me, by the Medical Profession as a whole about the treatment of patients with thyroid hormone problems (and the patients are the only ones who can tell whether or not it is working) is absolutely appalling. I would really like to know the amount of 'incentives' pharmaceutical companies give for persuading the medical profession to use their 'products'.
A 'guide' is someone who leads the way to safety or:-
The term can also be applied to a person who leads others to more abstract goals such as knowledge or wisdom.
So much for the ATA's and BTA's guidelines. If a doctor uses his initiative or prescribes other than synthetic hormones, their licence to practice is withdrawn. I could probably get an illegal drug more easily than a thyroid hormone.
I think these people who pronounce these 'verdicts' should have their thyroid gland removed. Then let's see what they propose for their own recovery. The insistence for them would be levo alone but we, the public, should have choice.
I'd be grateful if you could point out where it says 'TSH 0.5 to 2.0 is the desirable range' as I can't find it.
A couple of questions:
1) is this the desired range after hypothyroidism has been diagnosed treatment has begun, or when hypothyroid is suspected given the range of symptoms presented by the patient?
2) If these ranges were implemented, won't that deal with the problems of those who have hypothyroid symptoms but currently have 'within-range' TFTs? It is the fact that the TSH upper range is completely unreasonable that we fnd ourselves in this mess in the first place. If find it reprehensible that we are considered to have mental health issues - then again, I have encountered this over the past thirty years ever since I was diagnosed with ME so I'm pretty used to it.
aDoctor, I couldn't agree more. We were so hopeful that Dr. Bianco's 2013 Spring Symposium would actually show some intelligence but then they brought Dr. AP Weetman over and gave him an award. Somatoform disorder is now codified into the guidelines, frightening. I never have found any science to support '10' as the magic number. It is a left over artifact from the 1st gen tests. PR
aDoctor, regarding ethics in the guidelines on page 78, last sentence towards the bottom, which is 79 of 207 it says, " Offering patients formulations of thyroid hormones or other preparations that are known to be inferior to the standard of care, potentially futile, or even harmful, contravenes the Principles of Beneficence and Non-Maleficence." In the next paragraph, "Most practitioners are taught that patient autonomy means that they should cater to
patient preferences. However, if patients are requesting inappropriate therapies this is a
misinterpretation." And further, "Goals of care should be guided by autonomous patients’ preferences, but there are limits to what practitioners may offer if patients are demanding therapies that are outside the standard of care, or potentially harmful." Then on page 80 which is 81 of 207 they say, "When Beneficence and Non-Maleficence are violated, there may be legal
consequences and licensure revocation, as these ethical violations constitute medical negligence." So this basically says if you don't follow our standards you can be in trouble. Almost no room for individual clinical judgment on the part of the doctor. What a bunch of hooey. And then there is this swipe at MDs who has transitioned to functional or integrative medicine and non-allopathic doctors, "Practitioners who state they are experts in
treating hypothyroidism when they have no demonstrable accredited training or board
certification (e.g. “integrated medicine”) violate professional ethical standards of practice, as it
overtly deceives patients." Obviously they are aware that patients are abandoning standard allopathic medicine in droves because of a failure to return them to good health and they are trying to close the gate. My personal opinion is it is too late but it will probably be an ugly battle. Hopefully you are near retirement. PR
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
Thyroid Federation International. Are you awareOf World Thyroid Awareness day last May?......
A Canadian take on the recent BMJ paper on SCH
I found this off another site.
Looking at Past, Questioning Present; need for studies of hypothyroidism treatments
