Re: very long response to the anonymous A@#hole not her again
From: art fougner, md (evsono@pipeline.com)
Thu Apr 25 13:26:47 2002
and i for one think it is more than extreme to criticize conscientious
obstetricians caring for their patients - following protocols which
apparently passed the muster of more than a few institutional review
boards. and doing so from behind the proverbial cloak of invisibility
seems an exercise in cowardice.
as always merely my opinion - i could be wrong
art
At Thu, 25 Apr 2002, Griffiths Malcolm wrote:
>
>No I think this was too much - just my opinion I could be wrong!
>
>I think posting anonymously is out of order in this group. What she said was
>not 100% informed and correct. But that bit at the end of Kevin's post was a
>bit extreme.
>
>Malcolm Griffiths
>Clinical director & consultant - obstetrics & gynaecology
>Luton & Dunstable Hospital NHS Trust, Luton, LU4 0DZ, UK
>Tel:+(44) 1582 497533 Fax: +(44) 1582 497376
>
> -----Original Message-----
>From: evsono@pipeline.com [mailto:evsono@pipeline.com]
>Sent: 25 April 2002 14:42
>To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L
>Subject: Re: very long response to the anonymous A@#hole not her
>again
>
>c'mon Kevin don't hold back - tell us how you really feel!
>
>art
>
>At Thu, 25 Apr 2002, Kevin D. Dew, MD wrote:
>>
>>Heavily snipped, but in response to "not her again" My comments are
>>preceded by ?????
>>
>>I am a long time lurker to this list, never post as I am not a med pro,
>>but I'd venture to say my credentials are as good as a doula's,
>>
>>?????Boy, are we impressed that you are as qualified as a doula. If you
>are
>>a lurker, you are aware that Doulas aren't considered as professional by
>>most list members, (myself NOT included, although I'd argue the
>>"professional" label)
>>
>>True enough, based on the existing literature. But how were the
>>protocols for appropriate use determined? Through experimentation.
>>
>>?????? And how else, other than experimentation are we to learn anything?
>>That
>>means a lot of women and babies were treated inappropriately in the
>>quest for the appropriate protocol. In the process of that
>>experimentation, some women had ruptured uteri, and some babies died.
>>
>>??????Ynfortunate, yes, but an indication of a heartless, cruel approach, I
>>doubt it.
>>A
>>while ago, an article about Cytotec was discussed on this list. The
>>article included the story of a woman (primip) who was induced with
>>Cytotec and had a uterine rupture, her baby died, and she had a
>>hysterectomy. Not one member of this list expressed compassion for this
>>woman's multiple losses. Instead, everyone jumped to defend Cytotec.
>>
>>???????A caring health care professional such as yourself knows that we all
>>start from a position of concern for our patients and dismay over bad
>>outcomes. For the entire list to write "poor pitiful woman" is redundant
>>
>>Why can't physicians admit that people are sometimes harmed by
>>medicine's quest for new technologies and new treatments?
>>
>>??????? And how many people are harmed by NOT seeking new treatments?
>>
>>I know, I
>>know, it's those circling sharks that make you afraid to stick your toes
>>in the water...but still.
>>
>>?????? Yes, and those people without the intestinal fortitude (read balls)
>>to sign their own name instead of the bullshit hiding you are doing.
>>
>>>This research suggests that one should not use it if the patient has had
>>major uterine surgery or a prior cesarean delivery, >
>>?????? And one should use pitocin with caution in similar cases
>>
>>Again, the recommendation that it not be used when there has been prior
>>uterine surgery was arrived at only after the fact...after thousands of
>>women with prior scars were given Cytotec experimentally, increasing
>>their risk of rupture.
>>?????and we are supposed to inherently know that this medication would be a
>>problem. I suppose you are a proponent of using only computer models for
>>medical research. Where do you think the data that gets fed into the
>>programs is derived?
>>
>> Furthermore, I haven't yet seen studies documenting the potential long
>term
>>effects (or
>>lack thereof) of Cytotec. If anyone can point me to a study that has
>>looked at the impact on the subsequent pregnancy of a previous Cytotec
>>induction, I'd appreciate it.
>>
>>????? Okay, lets publish a long term followup on a medication that's been
>>used for 4 years. What rubbish And how are we to know the long term
>effects
>>if we don't continue to use the medication and various protocols of
>>administration?
>>
>>Anyway, sorry to intrude upon your professionals-only forum, but I think
>>that this list suffers from a bit of groupthink at times, and perhaps an
>>outside perspective is needed when no one in the group seems able to be
>>objective. I'll remain anonymous since some of you know me or know of
>>me.
>> ?????? And you are a coward, not a health care professional, and certainly
>>untrained and unknowledgeable in the workings of medical research.
>>
>> I think I can safely say for the group, AND GROUP, IF I'M WRONG
>>PLEASE FLAME ME, that for a spineless piece of refuse that you are,
>speaking
>>anonymously from a position of ALMOST being a professional you can kiss our
>>collective arses.
>>
>>--
>>Kevin D. Dew, MD
>>300 W. John Fitch, #200
>>Bardstown, KY 40004
>>502 348 9988
>>
>--
>art fougner, md
>ich bin ein New Yorker
>
--
art fougner, md
ich bin ein New Yorker
