Medical training is very individual. Students, residents and fellows spend a lot of time with attendings both individually and in very small groups. As a result, there are a tremendous number of people involved in medical education. Many of those experienced or retired physicians are also donating their time, rath…
Medical training is very individual. Students, residents and fellows spend a lot of time with attendings both individually and in very small groups. As a result, there are a tremendous number of people involved in medical education. Many of those experienced or retired physicians are also donating their time, rather than holding a paid position. Some are given an "adjunct" title in exchange for their time. There are definitely a few quacks who spread misinformation, but they don't really represent the medical school or the training hospital with which they are very loosely affiliated. The two Stanford doctors you may be thinking about actually belong to the Hoover Institute, not the medical school or hospital. There's also an MD at UCSF who's a contrarian adjunct claiming expertise in multiple fields unrelated to his formal training.
I'm a retired physician.
Medical training is very individual. Students, residents and fellows spend a lot of time with attendings both individually and in very small groups. As a result, there are a tremendous number of people involved in medical education. Many of those experienced or retired physicians are also donating their time, rather than holding a paid position. Some are given an "adjunct" title in exchange for their time. There are definitely a few quacks who spread misinformation, but they don't really represent the medical school or the training hospital with which they are very loosely affiliated. The two Stanford doctors you may be thinking about actually belong to the Hoover Institute, not the medical school or hospital. There's also an MD at UCSF who's a contrarian adjunct claiming expertise in multiple fields unrelated to his formal training.