Sunday, April 27, 2014

Rude Things Said About Patient While Anesthetized

I've been telling you that medical people are verbally abusing patients after they give Versed.  A reader sent me this article about abuse from the "courthousenews" website;

Here's the transcript from the site.  How do you like it?  KNOW that this is standard procedure for these people.  Too many people with recall have expressed their disgust and disdain for the comments and conversation FROM MEDICAL PEOPLE after receiving Versed.  Now we have it on audio.  They can't claim this guy was "hallucinating" or "can't possibly remember" what happened.  I think surveillance might be the key to reining in patient abuse.  We patients don't deserve this kind of treatment.  Thanks "Ken" for sending this jewel to me.

Unconscious Patient Says Doctors Mocked Him
     FAIRFAX, Va. (CN) - Doctors mocked an unconscious colonoscopy patient, joking that he has syphilis and talking about firing a gun up his rectum, says a man whose cellphone allegedly captured audio of the entire affair.
     Plaintiff D.B. sued Safe Sedation LLC and Safe Sedation Management in Fairfax County Court, alleging defamation and infliction of emotional distress.
     "On April 18, 2013, during a colonoscopy, plaintiff was verbally brutalized and defamed by the very doctors to whom he entrusted his life while under anesthesia," the complaint states.
     D.B. claims that Drs. Tiffany Ingham and Soloman Shah, who are not named as defendants, mocked him from the second the anesthesia kicked in.
     D.B. claims he had inadvertently left his phone in the room, set to record, having neglected to turn it off after recording instructions for post-operative care.
     "The moment that plaintiff became unconscious, Tiffany Ingham, M.D. commented to all of the others in the operating room 'Oh - Oscar Mike Goss.' That is a thinly disguised substitute for the expression 'OMG', which is an expression of both exasperation and mockery, and is a well-known abbreviation for 'Oh my God,'" the complaint states.
     It adds: "Tiffany Ingham, M.D. started to mock, and then continued to mock, the amount of medicine required to anesthetize plaintiffs.
     "Referring to plaintiff, Soloman Shah, M.D. commented that a teaching physician known to both him and Tiffany Ingham, M.D. 'would eat him for lunch.'
     "Tiffany Ingham, M.D. agreed that plaintiff would be 'eaten alive' and also jokingly discussed a hypothetical of firing a gun up a rectum."
     D.B. claims his phone caught Ingham talking to his unconscious self, saying, "And really, after five minutes of talking to you in pre-op I wanted to punch you in the face and man you up a little bit."
     The tape allegedly caught the doctors discussing D.B.'s prescription medication and an irritation on his penis.
     "A medical assistant at GMA touched plaintiff's penis during the colonoscopy," the complaint states. "Although plaintiff's penis is not involved in a colonoscopy, the medical assistant noted there was not 'much of a penile rash.' Tiffany Ingham, M.D. responded, 'No, you'll accidentally rub up against it. Some syphilis on your arm or something.' Solomon Shah, M.D. responded, 'That would be bad. That would be real bad.'"
     The complaint adds: "Tiffany Ingham, M.D. then stated to all present in the operating suite that, 'It's probably tuberculosis in the penis, so you'll be all right.'"
     D.B. says he doesn't have either disease.
     The complaint states that the doctors talked about "misleading and avoiding" him after he woke up.
     "A female medical assistant at GMA recalled that plaintiff had earlier warned that he passes out when looking at the placement of an IV, to which Tiffany Ingham, M.D. asked 'Well, why are you looking then, retard?' the man claims. "Tiffany Ingham, M.D. also described plaintiff as a 'big wimp.'"
     He claims the doctors continued to discuss how to avoid him after he woke up, and mocked him for going to Mary Washington College, suggesting that "it was unsurprising that plaintiff attended a college that at one time was a 'women's college,' a 'girl's school,' and wondered if plaintiff was gay."
     The complaint states: "Tiffany Ingham, M.D. stated, 'Are you implying that he's gay? Because I know gay men that have more manliness than' the plaintiff. 'And I'm sure I know gay men in the military who just haven't let it be known that they're gay who are manly.'"
     In a final remark caught on tape, Ingham allegedly said she would make a note on the man's file that he had hemorrhoids even though he didn't.
     D.B. claims that he and his wife discovered that the procedure had been recorded on their ride home, listening in disgust.
     "Plaintiff has suffered distress, including embarrassment, loss of sleep, and mental anguish, as a direct and proximate result of the conduct of defendant's agent Tiffany Ingham, M.D.," he says.
     He seeks $1 million in compensatory damages and $350,000 in punitive damages for defamation, infliction of emotional distress and illegally disclosing his health records.
     He is represented by Mikhael Charnoff with Perry Charnoff in Arlington. 

Tuesday, April 1, 2014

Irony and Cognitive Screening

Today I got a survey from Medpage today about screening for "cognitive decline".  I find it rich that a medical website would worry about "screening" for cognitive decline when they themselves are doing their level best to CAUSE AND CREATE cognitive decline.  How many drugs besides their favorite, Versed, cause cognitive decline?  Statins spring to mind.

Exactly how is "cognitive screening" helpful to a patient?  What are they going to do with subjective and arbitrary results?  Is there a CURE for cognitive decline such that early prevention might help?  Can they treat the "disease"?  So the point of having a mandatory cognitive screening at age 60 is beneficial for...?    I see where it would be helpful for the estate lawyers, errant children determined to wrest control of the family assets from their parent and insurance industry people looking for ways to exclude people from coverage.  For them this "screening" might be most beneficial.  Not to mention the medical behemoth being able to have yet one more "routine screening" with a cost in the thousands to be run on their hapless patients. Maybe medical people should try testing some of their Versed patients for "cognitive decline" after they deliberately and maliciously create the same problem they now want to test for.  Let's see how responsible they are about using the drug after the test results show how harmful Versed is on cognitive function.

The next step would be to deny anybody whose "screening" appears abnormal (subjective) a drivers license?  Will they revoke say, a plastic surgeon's license or are the medical professionals going to be exempt?  Is the government prepared to pay disability on these poor people who have been "diagnosed" as inferior?  Who will pay for the lawyers that will inevitably be involved after a diagnosis of "cognitive decline".  Are physicians ready for a spike in their malpractice insurance due to (mis)diagnosis of "cognitive decline"?  I don't like the turn that medical care has

Sure, let's give all our patients a drug(s) that are known to cause cognitive dysfunction and then "diagnose" them with same and ruin their life.  There is no cure for the new "disease" so none of this is for patient benefit.