Medical Cartel and Rape

Here is the latest post I've found extolling the virtues of Versed.  This is the most ill thought out, outrageous idea yet.  All of us are going to be put at risk because medical minions and big pharma love their Versed.  SHAME ON YOU MEDICAL PEOPLE!

Midazolam Nasal Spray May Reduce Seizures | Medpage Today

Notice even the declaration includes the word MAY.  This monumentally stupid idea hasn't even been proven effective and yet they want to put this dangerous drug out on the street in aerosol form.  Absolutely unconscionable.  So now rapists and robbers can simply spray their victim to get instant compliance coupled with amnesia.  For something that MAY help with seizures?  OMG.  This drug needs to be banned entirely not have new ways dreamed up that MAY or may not help with some off label use.

Record Those Surgeries!

I am absolutely in favor of recording surgery WITH audio.  I want everybody to see how they were treated by their health care workers.  The medical minions want to hide behind the amnesia drug Versed/Midazolam and *I* for one want a stop put to the abuse of patients with Versed.   I would want a recording of my treatment especially if I were still awake and aware with Versed.  I would want to see myself screaming in pain and the laughing, mocking nurses.  I would want to hear the unconscionable remarks made about me by these same "professionals".  *I* heard them and they started the MINUTE they thought I had amnesia.  I think it is vital to be aware of what happens in these torture chambers when your brain is disconnected, either with "conscious sedation" or when general anesthesia is used.  Transparency is the only way to stop the abuse of patients.  After all these same people want to video your procedure for their own purposes, why shouldn't we have a copy?


This article is from a medmal attorney in New York. Recorded Surgeries Could be Future of Medical Malpractice | The Law Office Of Gerald Oginski, LLC

"Researchers at the University of Toronto have developed a surgical “black box” that would track a surgeon’s actions during surgery and record any errors.

The purpose of the device is to collect data during surgery which could later be used to shed light on why a patient had a poor surgical outcome. The device would also allow researchers to analyze why surgical errors occur in an effort to prevent future mistakes.

Wisconsin Rep. Christine Sinicki has also introduced legislation that would allow patients to have their surgeries audiovisually recorded. If this bill is passed, it would require healthcare facilities to give surgical patients the option of having their surgery videotaped.

The proposed law would be named for Julie Ayer Ribenzer, a 38 year old woman who died after receiving too much of the anesthetic propofol during a breast implant surgery.

New York has a similar bill, “Raina’s Law,” which was named for 19 year old Raina Ferraro who went into cardiac and respiratory arrest due to negligent anesthesia administration during surgery, which sought to require cameras in all operating rooms.

Surgical errors are common and can lead to serious injuries and even death.

The surgical black box and the proposed Wisconsin and New York law reflect the growing public concern that surgical errors are not being disclosed and that there is no accountability for doctors or hospitals when errors occur.

Audiovisual recording in operating rooms would provide additional data to help medical providers, patients and their families understand why something went wrong. Unfortunately, doctors and hospitals don’t seem to agree.

The Wisconsin Hospital Association and Wisconsin Medical Society have asserted that they are opposed to Rep. Sinicki’s bill. Some doctors have also reasoned that bringing black boxes into operating rooms could later be used against them in a legal matter.

The topic of recording surgery is becoming more and more common. It is very possible that audiovisual recordings are the future of medical malpractice investigation and medical error prevention."

Endo Nurse Link

Here is what I got from a reader.  Thanks AJ.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


"I've been following your blog for many years.  I had a problem with Versed about 20 years ago before there was any information about the drug on the internet.  I don't recall seeing the link below on unsedated colonoscopy on your blog.  Of particular note is the comment.

  http://www.endonurse.com/news/2009/10/researchers-most-patients-tolerate-unsedated-colo.aspx

By the way, yesterday I had my second unsedated colonoscopy.  While I know that not everyone is the same, I felt no pain the entire procedure.

Keep up the good work with your blog."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

email reprinted with permission from the reader in its entirety without any changes.

5 years ago this study was published.  Has anybody heard about the findings?  Well, surprise, surprise!  Here is an eye-opener of a quote.  "The advantages of unsedated colonoscopy include the elimination of the risks associated with sedation, especially in patients with comorbidities; a reduction in the recovery time after the procedure; a decrease in the need for cardiopulmonary monitoring; and a significant reduction in cost."  "The elimination of the risks associated with sedation. "  According to our own esteemed anesthesia providers there are no "risks associated with sedation".  The KEY in this statement is found in the rest of the sentence..."reduction in recovery time" and "significant reduction of cost."  Our medical system is focused on making everything as expensive as humanly possible.  Recovery time is charged in increments of 15 minute intervals where I went.  So every 15 minutes the medical facility can keep you in the recovery room, it's that much more money they can extract from the patient and/or the patient's insurance company.  The expensive nurses for whom the patients are being charged EXTRA because he/she has to monitor the patient more closely adds to the cost as well.  This is a MAJOR disincentive for the medical minions to forego sedation.  "A significant reduction in cost" is the very last thing our medical cartel is interested in.

  How about this quote from the article? ". “We compared patients who underwent either unsedated colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy for primary colorectal cancer screening and found no significant differences in pain scores, patient acceptance, or need for sedation.”  By this statement we glean that there is no difference in patient satisfaction whether sedation is used or not.  I'll bet if this article went farther, they would find that many people did not like the after effects of sedation days or weeks post procedure.  Sedation is used in our country to maximize hospital profit among other purposes.  Is it the primary one?  Who knows because our medical minions will not admit to any of this.

Please do read the article and also the comment my reader speaks of.  If you haven't read anything else on this blog, it will surprise you.