Wednesday, August 6, 2008

PCRM Not What They Seem

Media Needs to Check Background of Pseudo-Medical Animal Rights Group


The following is a statement by AMI Foundation President Randy Huffman, Ph.D.:
"A factually inaccurate, alarmist and exploitive new campaign aimed at scaring parents and school systems out of feeding children processed meats is just what those of us who know the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) have come to expect from this pro-vegetarian animal rights group in doctors' clothing.

After all, it is this group's actions that prompted the American Medical Association in 1991 to issue a news release stating that, 'The AMA finds the recommendations of PCRM irresponsible and potentially dangerous to the health and welfare of Americans. [PRCM is] blatantly misleading Americans on a health matter and concealing its true purpose as an animal 'rights' organization.' The California Medical Association also has criticized PCRM for 'lies and misrepresentation.' Read More

Amazingly, PCRM continues to fool the media into believing that they are a legitimate group of doctors. In reality they have very few doctors that belong to the group, and mostly use the name to give the impression that they have medical expertise. This group continually touts an anti-animal agriculture message under the disguise of legitimate medical advice.

2 comments:

Tracy H. said...

Your information is a bit old and dishonest. Here's the truth:

CCF mistakenly charges that the American Medical Association (AMA) has “censured” PCRM: This is patently untrue. PCRM did have disagreements with the AMA in the early 1990s (the AMA supported animal testing, while PCRM promotes alternatives; PCRM favors vegetarian diets, while the AMA was initially skeptical), but the AMA’s censure process was never applied to PCRM. In fact, PCRM president Neal Barnard, M.D., is a lifetime AMA member. In February 2004, the AMA released a statement saying that its previous criticisms of PCRM’s stance on vegetarianism do not represent current AMA opinion or policy (http://www.pcrm.org/news/statement040218.html). In 2006, the AMA rescinded a 1990 criticism of PCRM’s work for alternatives to animal research. There is no longer any acrimony between the groups. Many PCRM members are also AMA members.

Troy & Stacy Hadrick said...

Here are some things to consider Tracy.

Newsweek magazine had this to say about PCRM in 2004 "[PCRM president Neal] Barnard has co-signed letters, on PCRM letterhead, with the leader of Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, an animal-rights group the Department of Justice calls a “domestic terrorist threat.” PCRM also has ties to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. An agency called the Foundation to Support Animal Protection has distributed money from PETA to PCRM in the past and, until very recently, did both groups’ books. Barnard and PETA head Ingrid Newkirk are both on the foundation’s board."

Also Barnard is trained as a psyciatrist, yet he continues to give out nutrition information, mostly that of becoming a vegetarian, rather than eating a balanced diet. And he even petitioned the government to put a biohazard label on meat and poultry products.

With only 5% of their membership being actual medical doctors and their ties to radical animal rights organizations, one can only conclude that they are only interested in promoting their own agenda of vegetarianism and animal rights, rather than the welfare of the human race.