Will Flanary, known online as Dr. Glaucomflecken, is a unique figure in the medical world. He’s a real ophthalmologist who uses his sharp wit and comedic talent to tackle serious issues in healthcare, making him social media’s most famous “comedian slash doctor.” Interviewed by Torie Bosch, the editor of STAT’s “First Opinion,” Flanary dives into a range of topics, from advocating for local healthcare to navigating the ethical minefield of social media for medical professionals. His approach is simple yet powerful: use humor to highlight inconvenient truths and spark vital conversations. This isn’t just about sharing funny skits; it’s about leveraging his platform to challenge corporate overreach in medicine, educate the public about misinformation, and champion the integrity of the medical profession, all while keeping a refreshing sense of honesty and self-awareness.
Flanary’s commitment to advocacy shines through in his impassioned discussion about a developing situation in Eugene, Oregon. He relays the story of PeaceHealth, a large hospital system, closing a vital downtown hospital and its emergency department, despite widespread concerns from local medical staff. Predictably, this closure led to skyrocketing wait times, decreased patient satisfaction, and a general state of chaos at the single remaining hospital, RiverBend. The situation escalated when RiverBend’s CEO decided to cut ties with the long-standing, physician-owned Eugene Emergency Physicians group, opting instead for a corporate management group based out of Atlanta, ApolloMD. Flanary highlights the absurdity of this decision, especially given that Oregon has a new law designed to prevent corporate entities without licensed physicians in the state from practicing there. His involvement stems from a deep belief that healthcare should remain local, run by professionals who understand and are invested in their communities. He also reveals a more sinister layer: emails suggesting the RiverBend CEO, who lacks an active medical license to practice, was attempting to influence clinical decisions. This raises serious ethical questions and implies potential retaliation against the local doctors who dared to challenge him, leading to the current push to replace them with a corporate entity. Flanary, using his online presence, is committed to shining a spotlight on these issues, understanding that public awareness is the first step toward systemic change.
The power of social media, particularly when it comes to healthcare, is a recurring theme in Flanary’s conversation. He emphasizes that corporate entities in healthcare often operate under a veil of secrecy, hoping their controversial decisions will go unnoticed. For Flanary, making “a big stink” on social media is a powerful tool to expose these practices. He cites past successes, like Aetna reversing a decision to require prior authorizations for all cataract surgeries after widespread public outcry. His strategy is to inform and mobilize, explaining that when the public and lawmakers become aware of issues, pressure mounts for accountability. This advocacy, however, is not without its challenges. While he receives immense support for “punching up” at insurance companies and hospital systems, he acknowledges the inevitable criticism that comes with any public stance. Yet, he maintains a core principle: if you believe you are unequivocally right and have done your research, you must stand by your convictions, regardless of the noise. This unwavering commitment to truth, even in the face of pushback, defines his approach to online advocacy.
Beyond direct advocacy, Flanary also delves into the complex ethics of doctors’ conduct on social media. He acknowledges a growing trend of medical students and physicians becoming “influencers,” often with significant financial motivations due to the immense debt incurred in medical education. He points to recent controversies where medical professionals have faced backlash for content perceived as insulting or unethical, particularly instances of shaming patients. Flanary strongly condemns such behavior, emphasizing that maintaining patient trust is paramount. He explains his own “ethical guardrails”: never making fun of patients, avoiding HIPAA violations, and always “punching up,” meaning he targets powerful entities rather than individuals or less privileged groups within the medical community. He recognizes the pressure to constantly push boundaries for engagement, but stresses the importance of self-imposed limits to maintain integrity. This discussion highlights the evolving landscape of professionalism in the digital age and the critical need for ethical guidelines as medical professionals increasingly share their lives and work online.
One of the more alarming topics Flanary addresses is the proliferation of medical misinformation and potentially dangerous cosmetic procedures. He expresses his strong disapproval of “eye color change surgery,” which involves implanting a colored disc over the iris of healthy eyes for purely cosmetic reasons. He explains that such procedures lack the safety data of other cosmetic surgeries like LASIK and are an unethical abuse of medical technology designed for legitimate medical uses, such as repairing irises after injury. The idea that ophthalmologists are acting as “influencers” to promote these procedures infuriates him, as it prioritizes profit and aesthetics over patient safety. Flanary argues that ethical physicians have a responsibility to actively debunk such harmful trends and misinformation. He also shares common misconceptions he encounters, like the belief that wearing glasses can worsen vision, a notion that can lead to irreversible vision loss in children if parents are swayed by alternative “wellness” narratives. His frustration is palpable, underscoring the urgent need for evidence-based voices to counter the deluge of unverified health claims online.
Ultimately, Flanary reveals that his use of humor in medicine is a multifaceted coping mechanism that has evolved into a powerful tool for change. Initially, it was a way to navigate the inherent stresses of the medical field. Now, he intentionally “hides” important messages within comedy, understanding that entertainment is the most effective way to capture attention in the digital age. He finds joy in the challenge of making complex healthcare systemic issues, like pharmacy benefit managers, both funny and informative. During the pandemic, his humor offered solace to overwhelmed healthcare workers, reminding him of the profound impact even a small laugh can have. As long as his work remains enjoyable for him and continues to help people, he intends to keep going. Dr. Glaucomflecken’s journey is a testament to the idea that humor, when wielded responsibly and strategically, can be a potent force for good in addressing the serious challenges facing modern healthcare, making complex issues accessible and inspiring action.