A weak ass conspiracy it is if it doesn't represen

A weak ass conspiracy it is if it doesn't represent anywhere near a majority of it's profession, and therefore wields not much weight with the medical industry or anyone else for that matter.

My doctor gives me sound nutritional advice based upon current info, much of it in synch with what several of us have posted here.

Again, because 'conspiracy theory' is your 'go to' mode, you likely overlooked the following.

All I had to do was copy and paste your query....without your answer...that's MY 'go to' mode.....into Google.

Quote:

---

A faithful reader emails to ask: “I remember reading recently that a shockingly low number of doctors are members of the AMA. So what is it exactly?”

Membership numbers, it turns out, are not a secret, exactly, but neither does the AMA go out of its way to make them easy to find. Their current membership is about 235,000, but you have to adjust this number to remove students, retired doctors, and so forth.


Based on publicly available data, and guesstimating that about one-fifth of its members aren’t practicing physicians, the chart above shows what the AMA’s membership looks like. They were indeed a powerhouse in the 50s, but not so much anymore:

Keep this in mind whenever you hear that “the AMA” endorses a political position—regardless of whether it’s one you approve of or not. They represent only about a sixth of all the physicians in the country. The rest may have very different opinions indeed.

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/12...l-doctors/

---