Comments on: A physician expert witness is criminally charged for perjury http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/01/physician-expert-witness-is-criminally.html medical blog Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:47:15 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: WilliamManginoMD http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/01/physician-expert-witness-is-criminally.html/comment-page-1#comment-70329 WilliamManginoMD Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:26:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/01/a-physician-expert-witness-is-criminally-charged-for-perjury.html#comment-70329 Subject: Your article on the Miami heart surgeon the government doesn't like <br/><br/>To: jdorschner@MiamiHerald.com <br/> <br/> Dear Mr. Dorschner:<br/><br/> This is a complex situation. However; allow me to add some <br/>perspective to this issue.<br/><br/> It is noteworthy that it is the federal govt. who is doing the <br/>'screaming' here.<br/><br/> They weren't too concerned when THEIR expert witness - Dr. Michael <br/>Ashburn - testified<br/>favorably to their agenda in United States v. William Hurwitz [ <br/>reversed on appeal-new trial<br/>pending , when Dr. ashburn, an expert in chronic pain, completely <br/>contradicted nearly everything<br/>he had stood for - in his position as editor of a major textbook on <br/>this subject.<br/><br/> Ashburn, during the Hurwitz trial, apparently suffered a temporal <br/>lobe seizure, and decided<br/>on the witness stand to completely contravene all consensus opinion on <br/>what causes pain and how<br/>opioids are helpful; in his attempt to make Uncle Sam look good - and <br/>Hurwitz look bad.<br/><br/> So egregious was his behavior- in the name of what The U.S. <br/>Attorney General felt was<br/>'justice," that it prompted a letter from three past presidents of The <br/>American Pain Society;<br/>scolding his behavior in an attempt to set the record straight-with <br/>regard to what consensus<br/>opinion really was on this subject [ certainly not what Ashburn said it <br/>was. ]<br/><br/> When it comes to dealing with state and federal prosecutors we <br/>begin to see that what is often<br/>"Good for the goose" is not "Good for the gander."<br/><br/> In prosecutions against doctors for alleged overprescribing of pain <br/>medications the government<br/>has a long and nasty habit of trying to interject "Civil standards" to <br/>gain "Criminal standard "<br/>convictions.<br/><br/> I reviewed your article. The cardiac surgeon in question was <br/>qualified enough-regardless of how<br/>many cases he currently does. The specious argument on behalf of <br/>federal prosecutors is a sad<br/>attempt at skirting the issue. If a master carpenter built 1000 homes <br/>in 2005 - and took a one<br/>year vacation in 2006 - do you think he forgot where the nails should <br/>go? When is the last time<br/>our new Secretary Of Defense shot an Al Quaida terrorist in combat? <br/>Does that make him not<br/>qualified?<br/><br/> Give me a break !!<br/><br/> Cry Baby tactics on the part of the federal government. Pure and <br/>simple.<br/><br/>William Mangino II, M.D. <br/> <br/>____________________________________________________________________________________ Subject: Your article on the Miami heart surgeon the government doesn’t like

To: jdorschner@MiamiHerald.com

Dear Mr. Dorschner:

This is a complex situation. However; allow me to add some
perspective to this issue.

It is noteworthy that it is the federal govt. who is doing the
’screaming’ here.

They weren’t too concerned when THEIR expert witness – Dr. Michael
Ashburn – testified
favorably to their agenda in United States v. William Hurwitz [
reversed on appeal-new trial
pending , when Dr. ashburn, an expert in chronic pain, completely
contradicted nearly everything
he had stood for - in his position as editor of a major textbook on
this subject.

Ashburn, during the Hurwitz trial, apparently suffered a temporal
lobe seizure, and decided
on the witness stand to completely contravene all consensus opinion on
what causes pain and how
opioids are helpful; in his attempt to make Uncle Sam look good - and
Hurwitz look bad.

So egregious was his behavior- in the name of what The U.S.
Attorney General felt was
'justice," that it prompted a letter from three past presidents of The
American Pain Society;
scolding his behavior in an attempt to set the record straight-with
regard to what consensus
opinion really was on this subject [ certainly not what Ashburn said it
was. ]

When it comes to dealing with state and federal prosecutors we
begin to see that what is often
“Good for the goose” is not “Good for the gander.”

In prosecutions against doctors for alleged overprescribing of pain
medications the government
has a long and nasty habit of trying to interject “Civil standards” to
gain “Criminal standard “
convictions.

I reviewed your article. The cardiac surgeon in question was
qualified enough-regardless of how
many cases he currently does. The specious argument on behalf of
federal prosecutors is a sad
attempt at skirting the issue. If a master carpenter built 1000 homes
in 2005 – and took a one
year vacation in 2006 – do you think he forgot where the nails should
go? When is the last time
our new Secretary Of Defense shot an Al Quaida terrorist in combat?
Does that make him not
qualified?

Give me a break !!

Cry Baby tactics on the part of the federal government. Pure and
simple.

William Mangino II, M.D.

____________________________________________________________________________________

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/01/physician-expert-witness-is-criminally.html/comment-page-1#comment-70275 Anonymous Wed, 10 Jan 2007 04:03:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/01/a-physician-expert-witness-is-criminally-charged-for-perjury.html#comment-70275 So if they found that there was carotid blockage, the next step to fix it would be .... oh right, cardiac clearance which in this pt's case would be a CABG. Then he would get his CEA. Sure there may be some modifications of the CABG, but not a whole lot and certainly not enough to be breach in the standard of care. The only arguement you may have would be that it would change your risk vs benefits discusion w/ the pt (ie higher risk of cva/death). So if they found that there was carotid blockage, the next step to fix it would be …. oh right, cardiac clearance which in this pt’s case would be a CABG. Then he would get his CEA. Sure there may be some modifications of the CABG, but not a whole lot and certainly not enough to be breach in the standard of care. The only arguement you may have would be that it would change your risk vs benefits discusion w/ the pt (ie higher risk of cva/death).

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/01/physician-expert-witness-is-criminally.html/comment-page-1#comment-70257 Anonymous Tue, 09 Jan 2007 15:12:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/01/a-physician-expert-witness-is-criminally-charged-for-perjury.html#comment-70257 I wouldn't let a CT surgeon who only performed <i>10 to 12 such operations a year</i> (CABG) do surgery on a research dog, much less a family member. <br/><br/>And the plaintiff presented this guy as an expert to testify re: pre-op evaluation of a CT patient? Ha!<br/><br/><br/>CardioNP I wouldn’t let a CT surgeon who only performed 10 to 12 such operations a year (CABG) do surgery on a research dog, much less a family member.

And the plaintiff presented this guy as an expert to testify re: pre-op evaluation of a CT patient? Ha!

CardioNP

]]>