Friday, July 28, 2017

Whistleblowers: United Healthcare Hid Complaints About Medicare Advantage

Whistleblowers: United Healthcare Hid Complaints About Medicare Advantage
By Fred Schulte
Kaiser Health News
July 28, 2017

United Healthcare Services Inc., which runs the nation’s largest private Medicare Advantage insurance plan, concealed hundreds of complaints of enrollment fraud and other misconduct from federal officials as part of a scheme to collect bonus payments it didn’t deserve, a newly unsealed whistleblower lawsuit alleges.

The suit, filed by United Healthcare sales agents in Wisconsin, accuses the giant insurer of keeping a “dual set of books” to hide serious complaints about its services and of being “intentionally ineffective” at investigating misconduct by its sales staff. A federal judge unsealed the lawsuit, first filed in October 2016, on Tuesday.

The company knew of accusations that at least one sales agent forged signatures on enrollment forms and had been the subject of dozens of other misconduct complaints, according to the suit. In another case, a sales agent allegedly engaged in a “brazen kickback scheme” in which she promised iPads to people who agreed to sign up and stay with the health plan for six months, according to the suit.

Though it fired the female sales agent, United Healthcare concluded the kickback allegations against her were “inconclusive” and did not report the incident to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, according to the suit.

Asked for comment on the allegations in the suit, United Healthcare spokesman Matt Burns said: “We reject them.”...

Use Our Content
This KHN story can be republished for free (details).

Tuesday, July 25, 2017

Obamacare Isn’t The Problem…It’s The Insurance Companies

Primary Care Doctor Explains: “Obamacare Isn’t The Problem…It’s The Insurance Companies”
Posts by cpowell
Blue Dot Daily
July 15, 2017

With premiums increasing for those with coverage through the ACA marketplace, a lot of people are criticizing Obamacare. But many doctors and healthcare professionals are saying that isn’t really the problem. Cathleen London is a primary care physician in Milbridge, a rural town in Maine. She claims the problem isn’t Obamacare itself, but rather, the entire health insurance system and insurance companies are to blame.
Writing for the Portland Press Herald, London explains she is a a primary care physician who is on the front lines every single day, as  her town is very remote, which means it takes 30 to 40 minutes to get to the emergency room, which is why her office operates as an urgent care facility as well as a family medical practice.
It’s takes an ambulance about 20 minutes to get to her clinic and specialist care about 2 hours away, so Dr. London is trained to handle about 90 percent of medical problems.

Dr. London explains the following, which will show you exactly what’s wrong with health care:

One evening I was almost home after a full day’s work. Around 7:30, I got a call on the emergency line regarding an 82-year-old man who had fallen and split his head open. His wife wanted to know if I could see him, even though he was not a patient of mine.
Instead of sending them to the ER, I went back to the office. I spent 90 minutes evaluating him, suturing his wound and making sure that nothing more sinister had occurred than a loss of footing by a man who has mild dementia. When I was sure that the man would be safe, I let them go.
I billed a total of $789 for the visit, repair, after-hours and emergency care costs. Stating that the after-hours and emergency services had been billed incorrectly, Martin’s Point Health Care threw out the claims and reimbursed me $105, which does not even cover the suture and other materials I used.
I called them about their decision, said that it was not right and let them know they’d lose me if they reimbursed this as a routine patient visit. They replied, “Go ahead and send your termination letter” – which I did.
The same day, Anthem Blue Cross kept me on the phone for 45 minutes regarding a breast MRI recommended by radiologists on a woman whose mother and sister had died of breast cancer. She’d had five months of breast discharge that wasn’t traceable to anything benign (and it turns out the MRI is highly suspicious for cancer).
Anthem did not want to approve the MRI unless it was to localize a lesion for biopsy, even though the mammogram had been inconclusive! This should have been a slam-dunk fast track to approval; instead, dealing with Anthem wasted a good part of my day.
Then Aetna told me there is no way to negotiate fees in Maine. I was somewhat flabbergasted. I do more here than I did in either Brookline, Massachusetts, or New York. The rates should be higher given the level of care I am providing. I have chosen not to participate with them. This only hurts patients; however, I cannot keep losing money on visits.
I do lose money on MaineCare – their reimbursement is below what it costs me to see a patient. For now, that is a decision that I am living with.
I had thought those losses would be offset by private insurance companies, but their cost shifting to patients is obscene. I pay half of my employees’ health insurance, though I’m not required to by law – I just think it is the right thing to do.
My personal policy costs close to $900 a month for me and my sons (all healthy), and each of us has a $6,000 deductible. This means I am paying rack rate for a policy that provides only bare-bones coverage.
Something is wrong with the system. In one day, I encountered everything wrong with insurance. I am not trying to scam the system. I am literally trying to survive. I am trying to give care in an underserved area.
This is not the fault of Obamacare, which stopped the most egregious problems with insurance companies. Remember lifetime caps? Remember denials for pre-existing conditions? Remember the retroactive cancellation of insurance policies? Returning to that is not an option.
Indeed it is not an option, Dr. London.  If Republicans get their way eventually by repealing Obamacare, it may be where we end up again. If Republicans really get their way, it’ll be even worse than it was before.

Sunday, May 28, 2017

What your doctor won’t disclose

What happened when Dr. Leana Wen started a website where doctors could reveal their conflicts of interest? Dr. Wen tells us in a TED Talk.


What your doctor won’t disclose
Leana Wen
TED Talk
Nov 2014

They told me that I'm a traitor to my own profession, that I should be fired, have my medical license taken away, that I should go back to my own country. My email got hacked. In a discussion forum for other doctors, someone took credit for "Twitter-bombing" my account. Now, I didn't know if this was a good or bad thing, but then came the response: "Too bad it wasn't a real bomb."...

Read more (or watch video): What your doctor won’t disclose

Thursday, April 27, 2017

Partners, Brigham pay $10M to settle research fraud probe


Partners, Brigham pay $10M to settle research fraud probe

Partners Healthcare and Brigham and Women’s have agreed to pay $10 million to settle allegations by the federal government that a group of former stem cell researchers at the hospital falsified data to win grant funding from the NIH.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Boston announced the settlement, which stems from grant applications submitted by a stem cell research lab run by former Harvard Medical School professor Piero Anversa.

According to the government, Anversa and two other researchers, Annarosa Leri and Jan Kajstura, used “manipulated and falsified information” to obtain funding to study whether stem cells can repair cardiovascular damage. The data was published in a 2012 issue of the journal Circulation, but the study was later withdrawn amid allegations that it had been partially fabricated.

Anversa and Leri sued Brigham in 2014, saying the hospital's investigation into their alleged conduct was flawed and marred by conflicts of interest. A judge dismissed that case in 2015.

On Thursday, prosecutors credited Brigham with voluntarily disclosing the possible fraud to the government, and noted that the scientists are no longer affiliated with the hospital.

“Individuals and institutions that receive research funding from NIH have an obligation to conduct their research honestly and not to alter results to conform with unproven hypotheses,” Acting U.S. Attorney William Weinreb said in a statement. “Medical research fraud not only wastes scarce government resources but also undermines the scientific process and the search for better treatments for serious diseases.”

In a statement, a Brigham spokesperson said the hospital ceased drawing funds implicated in the alleged fraud when the claims came to light, and also closed the lab.

"BWH is committed to ensuring that research conducted at the institution is done under the most rigorous scientific standards, and has made significant enhancements to research integrity compliance protocols as a result of this event," the spokesperson said.

Friday, October 14, 2016

Why does the Health Care Industry give so much money to Brian Maienschein?

Sacramento Report: Maienschein’s Mammoth Campaign Cash Haul 
By Sara Libby
VOSD
Oct 14, 2016

 Assemblyman Brian Maienschein has more campaign cash for his re-election bid than almost any other state lawmaker in California. He’s racked up 441 donations adding up to $692,002, according to recent filings, and has a whopping $1.22 million cash on hand – second only to the speaker of the Assembly.

Todd Gloria, for comparison, is running to represent the Assembly district next door and reported $277,617 on hand.

 Maienschein’s robust fundraising is made all the more unusual because the district he represents, which encompasses Poway, Rancho Santa Fe and the northeastern communities of San Diego, is not considered especially competitive.

Mainschein has defeated his challenger in the last two general elections by over 40 points. He finished first in the June primary by 15 points over Democrat Melinda Vasquez.

It’s possible that Maienschien is stockpiling funds for a run at higher office that requires a bigger spend. Candidates can roll over any excess money that they have at the end of the campaign into the next cycle, and 2020 will be a big year for down-ticket Republicans who usually see electoral gains in presidential election off-years. Perhaps most importantly, in 2020, Republican Sen. Joel Anderson has said he plans to vacate his seat to run for the County Board of Supervisors. Anderson’s district overlaps considerably with Maienschein’s, which would make it a natural target.

 Many of the campaign donations Maienschein’s received come from the health care industry. Of the companies that donated, $228,024.50 came from the health care industry (broadly defined to include insurance companies, pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers, and occupational political action committees.) In his time in the Assembly, Maienschein has championed legislation amenable to this cluster of industries, putting forward a number of measures related to health care and mental health facilities in the 2015-2016 legislative session. Health care and life sciences comprise a major portion of the regional economy, bringing more than $38 billion into the region 2014 in wages alone...

Monday, July 11, 2016

Will Kaiser Foundation Health Plan lawsuit against its own investigator reveal more than Kaiser would like?

I'm guessing Quinn told Kaiser what they wanted to hear so they didn't ask questions. I wonder how many Kaiser members were denied health care on the basis of this man's information? How much money did he save Kaiser? I imagine that what Quinn charged Kaiser was a small fraction of the large amount of money he helped Kaiser avoid paying. Will Kaiser reopen those cases and give back to members all such amounts?

Kaiser Foundation Health Plan is not a subsidiary. It's the heart and soul of Kaiser Permanente. It makes about 8 billion tax-free dollars a year. Denying care is a major part of its business plan.
OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) — A subsidiary of health care giant Kaiser Permanente has filed a lawsuit in California accusing an employee responsible for investigating insurance fraud claims of embezzling $7 million, a newspaper reported.

The suit by Kaiser Foundation Health Plan accuses Michael Albert Quinn of submitting invoices for investigative services that were not performed or were not justified over a 16-year span after he joined the company in 1998, the San Francisco Chronicle reported (http://bit.ly/29K2QoA) on Sunday.

Quinn, 45, was responsible for hiring investigators to conduct surveillance on people who were suspected of filing fraudulent claims, He was authorized to approve charges up to $50,000.
The newspaper said Quinn was fired in 2014. Kaiser filed the lawsuit last year...

See more HERE.

Tuesday, September 15, 2015

No lateral moves allowed between health systems: an illegal conspiracy in North Carolina--or the future of medicine that UCSD is aggressively seeking in California?

Is this the future in California if UCSD wins its poaching lawsuit against Dr. Paul Aisen regarding Aisen's decision to transfer his Alzheimer's study to USC? Is it unlawful restraint of trade? Science magazine reports on what happens when health systems collude to stop their employees from moving to other institutions.
“[L]ateral moves of faculty between Duke and UNC are not permitted.”
–UNC's chief of cardiothoracic imaging

An academic 'poaching' lawsuit from a scientist who didn’t move
By Beryl Lieff Benderly
Science
September 10, 2015

In August, we reported on the lawsuit brought by the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), against the University of Southern California (USC) in Los Angeles, in an effort to stop USC’s alleged attempt to bring a multimillion-dollar Alzheimer’s disease research project along with its new recruit, neuroscientist Paul Aisen, from UCSD to USC. We noted that though some observers view universities’ efforts to bring major researchers to their campuses from elsewhere as effective recruiting, others see it as harmful poaching.

In North Carolina, meanwhile, another scientist’s effort to move from Duke University in Durham to the University of North Carolina (UNC), Chapel Hill, has also resulted in a lawsuit, but for an entirely different reason. Danielle Seaman, an assistant professor of radiology at Duke, claims that “an illegal conspiracy” among Duke, UNC, and the two universities’ health systems not to raid each other’s talent barred her from consideration for an advertised opening at UNC, according to the complaint filed with the court.

Allegedly, the institutions’ goal was to “suppress the compensation of their employees,” according to the complaint. “Without the knowledge or consent of their employees, [Duke’s] senior administrators and deans entered into express agreements [with UNC] to eliminate or reduce competition … for skilled medical labor” by not “hir[ing] or attempt[ing] to hire” from each other. This deal, the complaint argues, constitutes an unlawful restraint of trade...

Read more here.

Wednesday, March 25, 2015

Director of Oregon health care group arrested for sexual assault of dog

Director of Oregon health care group arrested for sexual assault of dog


John Williams Ryan
Yamhillmugshots.com

The executive director of a Bend, Oregon health care organization was arrested on Monday on suspicion of sexual abuse in the first degree, sodomy in the first degree, and sexual assault of a dog.
The Bend Bulletin reported today that John Williams Ryan, 47, was arrested after police investigated a co-defendant, Casie Lynn Nelson, 29, who was arrested on Tuesday. According to investigators, the catalyst behind the arrests was the couple's (still unspecified) illegal computer activity.
Oregon State is particularly strong in its animal welfare laws. According to the Animal Legal Defense Fund, Oregon ranked #2 for cracking down on animal abuse in 2013.
In 2014, Oregon's Supreme Court ruled that nonhuman animals can be victims - just like humans can. The landmark ruling, which afforded animals the same basic protection as humans, should enable authorities to help animals in need without obtaining a warrant.
Under Oregon State Law 167.333, sexual assault of an animal is a Class A misdemeanor.
Ryan was placed on leave from his position after his arrest by McMinnville Police detectives. RyanThe organization that Ryan directed, which is comprised of 600 providers and physicians, is currently being helmed by interim executive director Stephen Mann, who stated simply:
Effective Monday, February 23rd, COIPA Executive Director, John Ryan, was placed on administrative leave due to events unrelated to Central Oregon IPA."
According to the Yamhill County jail, Ryan was being held in lieu of $517,000 bail yesterday. Nelson is also in Yamhill County jail, in lieu of $142,500 bail.
McMinnville Police Capt. Dennis Marks stated that the Oregon Department of Justice, McMinnville Police Department, and Bend Police Department are all investigating this case. Updates to this story will be posted as they occur.
...You can also follow along on Facebook and Twitter!

Friday, February 20, 2015

Kaiser forces delay for heart attack patients when every minute counts

Delays in Important Treatment?

Paramedics are supposed to take heart attack patients to the closest, medically appropriate, hospital. But, NBC7 Investigates found this is not always happening.


If you're having a heart attack, cardiologists say getting to the right hospital within 90 minutes is key for survival.
“If you are able to open that artery within 90 minutes, the chances of that patient having a good outcome is excellent,” interventional cardiologist Dr. Vimal Nanavati said.
If you're having the most serious kind of heart attack, called an ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), where your heart artery is completely blocked, getting to a STEMI receiving center is critical.
“Every minute counts,” said Nanavati.
Thirteen San Diego County hospitals have STEMI receiving centers with catheterization labs that can unclog the blocked arteries in a patient's heart.
Robert Quittner has been a paramedic for over 10 years with San Diego Rural/Metro. He said a contractual agreement between two local hospitals is making him question the profession he loves.
"We became paramedics to take care of people," he said. "We're delaying their care. We're causing more damage to the heart."
Quittner is referring to a 30-year cardiovascular partnership between Kaiser Hospital in Grantville and Scripps Memorial Hospital La Jolla.
Kaiser Hospital does not have a STEMI receiving center, so its STEMI patients are transported to Scripps Memorial Hospital La Jolla for treatment.
Seven of the county's 13 STEMI receiving centers are closer to Kaiser Hospital than Scripps La Jolla, including Scripps Mercy, Alvarado, Sharp Memorial and UCSD Medical Center. Naval Medical Center is also included in the 13 facilities and has a STEMI receiving center...

Source: http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Delays-in-Important-Treatment-292806231.html#ixzz3SLf9id4R
Follow us: @nbcsandiego on Twitter | NBCSanDiego on Facebook

Wednesday, January 21, 2015

Kaiser Cost a Man His Penis, He Claims


     NAPA, Calif. (CN) - An elderly patient's penis eroded because Kaiser would not let care providers remove his catheter, he claims in Napa County Superior Court.
     Rupert Collins sued Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. for elder abuse, negligence and unfair business practices.
     In his lawsuit, Collins says he was a patient at nonparty Napa Valley Care Center when he developed problems with his catheterized penis.
     On July 21, 2013, a nurse sent a fax to Collins' insurer, Kaiser, according to the complaint.
     "The fax stated that Rupert's penis was red and swollen with what was described as a cut. Rupert had a Foley catheter inserted into his penis. Monica's fax said: 'May we have a trial of no Foley to give the area a rest.' Despite this request, Kaiser denied the request to remove the Foley. Despite the fact that Kaiser was notified that Rupert's penis was red and swollen and cut, there is no documentation to show that any physician from Kaiser ever bothered to personally examine Rupert's penis," the complaint states.
     "As a direct result of this reckless neglect by Kaiser, the Foley was left in Rupert's red and swollen and cut penis, and his penis began to erode further and further each day," it continues.
     Two days later, there was a care conference about Rupert Collins' care, but no Kaiser representative showed up, according to the complaint.
     "As a direct result of Kaiser's failure to participate, there was no meaningful communication or ongoing assessment and the dire need to remove the catheter from Rupert's eroding penis continued to be ignored," the complaint states.
     On July 30, another nurse sent another fax to Kaiser requesting permission to remove the catheter, but the request was again denied, according to the complaint.
     The next day, Collins' daughter had a look, according to the complaint.
     "When Diana examined Rupert's penis, she was horrified at what she saw. Rupert's penis was split completely in half from the tip of his penis all the way down to the scrotum sac," the complaint states.
     Collins' daughter had a third nurse contact Kaiser, but Kaiser told the nurse, "The penis erosion is normal and will heal on its own," the complaint states.
     Collins' daughter pressed the issue and got him seen by a Kaiser urologist on Aug. 2. The doctor "stated that if Rupert had been treated earlier, the penis could have been saved but that the penile erosion was now complete, Rupert's penis would never heal and that reconstructive surgery was not a viable option," the complaint states.
     "Rupert's penis and urethra is permanently eroded away and Rupert has suffered permanent genital mutilation," it continues.
     Collins blames Kaiser's business practices for his injuries.
     "The conduct of defendants is part of a general business practice at Kaiser conceived and implemented by Kaiser and Does 1-10, inclusive. This practice exists in part because defendants unreasonably expect few adverse consequences will flow from their mistreatment of their elderly, demented, disabled and vulnerable clientele, and said defendants made a considered decision to promote profit at the expense of their moral, legal and ethical obligations to their resident-patients," the complaint states.
     Rupert Collins seeks general and special damages, treble damages, attorneys' fees and costs, restitution of all funds paid to Kaiser on his behalf and injunctive relief. He is represented by Rebecca J. Freeman of Freeman & Freeman in Santa Rosa. 

Thursday, January 8, 2015

Friday, December 19, 2014

Should you always trust an Ivy-Leage doctor? Will they sometimes lie to you for financial gain?

There's more than one way for doctors to make profits by concealing facts from patients.   Not all the products they promote are sold through the media, as seen in the story of Dr. William Taylor at UCSD.

Real-world doctors fact-check Dr. Oz, and the results aren't pretty
Only one-third of claims made on 'The Dr. Oz Show' can be backed by medical evidence, study says
11% of the recommendations made by Dr. Oz or his guests contradict medical facts, researchers say
Viewers of 'The Dr. Oz Show' should be skeptical about advice given on the program, experts conclude
What do real-world doctors have to say about the advice dispensed on “The Dr. Oz Show”? Less than one-third of it can be backed up by even modest medical evidence.
If that sounds alarming, consider this: Nearly 4 in 10 of the assertions made on the hit show appear to be made on the basis of no evidence at all.
The researchers who took it upon themselves to fact-check Dr. Oz and his on-air guests were able to find legitimate studies related to another 11% of the recommendations made on the show. However, in these cases, the recommendations ran counter to the medical literature.



“Consumers should be skeptical about any recommendations provided on television medical talk shows,” the researchers wrote in a study published this week in BMJ. “Viewers need to realize that the recommendations may not be supported by higher evidence or presented with enough balanced information to adequately inform decision making.”



Critics of Dr. Mehmet Oz, an accomplished cardiac surgeon with degrees from two Ivy League universities, complain that his show is little more than an hour-long infomercial for weight-loss fads like green coffee bean extract. (The Federal Trade Commission has sued the company that hawks this dubious product.) A spokesman for the Center for Inquiry accused him of selling “snake oil.” In June, a Senate subcommittee took him to task for telling his viewers (who number 2.9 million on any given day) things like: “I’ve got the No. 1 miracle in a bottle to burn your fat. It’s raspberry ketones.”

“I don’t get why you need to say this stuff because you know it’s not true," Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) said during the hearing...

Wednesday, November 19, 2014

Deep sedation for colonoscopy might not be safe
Consumer Reports
Nov. 19, 2014

Getting knocked out during a colonoscopy might seem like a good idea. After all, being awake as your doctor uses a long, flexible tube to get an inside view of your lower intestines doesn't sound very appealing. To avoid that problem, many doctors now routinely use the drug propofol (Diprivan) during colonoscopy to cause deep sedation in their patients.
But beware: That drug, which was reportedly given to Joan Rivers  soon before she died, might not be the healthiest choice and could put you at risk for some serious complications.
Don’t get the wrong idea: Colonoscopies are usually safe (about 3 out of every 1,000 people suffer a serious complication). And the procedure is proved to prevent colon cancer deaths. So if you’re ages 50 to 75, you should be screened (see our guide, "The Cancer Tests You Really Need," to find out how often you should be screened). 
But deep sedation isn't necessary. Colonoscopy can be done using conscious sedation or even none at all. “You should always try to aim for the lightest level of sedation that you need,” says Consumer Reports' medical adviser, Orly Avitzur, M.D. “The trend toward deep sedation is worrisome because it increases risk.”
For example, propofol increases your risk of aspiration pneumonia (caused by inhaling particles such as vomit, mucus, or saliva) by almost 50 percent, according to a study by Gregory Cooper, M.D., in the journal JAMA Internal Medicine. And it can cause a host of other side effects, including confusion, seizures, irregular heart beats, and potentially deadly allergic reactions.  
“For the general population there’s not a lot of good data saying patients have a better outcome with propofol when there’s not a medical indication,” says Cooper, a professor of medicine at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland. “It’s overkill.”
Instead, Cooper says he uses the narcotics fentanyl (Duragesic and others) or meperidine (Demerol) combined with midazolam (Versed) to induce light sedation during colonoscopies.  
And propofol is expensive. Colonoscopies using anesthesia cost about 20 percent more than those done without, according to Cooper. And a 2013 research letter in JAMA Internal Medicine titled, "Propofol for screening colonoscopy: Are we paying too much?" said that the use of propofol typically added $600 to $2,000 to the price tag.
Screening colonoscopies are covered by insurance plans, thanks to the Affordable Care Act, although you might have to pay for part of the anesthesiologist’s fees, bowel prep kit, pathology costs, and a facility fee. But even so, “Somebody’s got to pay for it, whether it’s the insurance company or the patients,” Cooper says, adding that the current system provides a financial motivation for using more anesthesia.
But the rising tide of propofol use could be about to ebb. Beginning Jan. 1, 2015, Medicare is changing how it pays anesthesia professionals for colonoscopy care. Gastroenterologists will be paid a set amount that will cover the anesthesia cost, even if an anesthesiologist, for example, administers it. Doctors will then have to decide whether to recommend expensive anesthesia, which could include hiring a nurse anesthetist or anesthesiologist and pay them out of the same pot, or choose a less pricey option. “There may be a financial disincentive for Medicare doctors to recommend deep sedation,” Avitzur says.
We’ll have to wait to find out if commercial insurers follow Medicare’s lead. If they do, says Cooper, “There will be less cost to the health care system since there won’t be another bill from the anesthesiologist.”
Until then, if you’re gearing up to have a colonoscopy, make sure you discuss your anesthesia options with your doctor before the procedure.

Tuesday, November 11, 2014

L.A. County Health Dept. Allegedly Falsified Nursing Home Records of Complaints


L.A. County Health Department Allegedly Falsified Nursing Home Probe Records




The Los Angeles County Public Health Department falsified the dates it received complaints about nursing homes as pressure rose to meet state deadlines for launching investigations, according to two employees.
In a letter last month to county, state and federal officials,  inspector Kimberly Nguyen cited 11 cases in which she said the dates typed into the computer system were later than the dates the complaints were actually received. The cases mentioned in the letter involve alleged abuse, falls and pressure sores, she said.
“In my belief, falsification is a serious matter and unlawful and our department should know better to not manipulate paperwork to mislead others and the public,” Nguyen wrote in the Oct. 7 letter.

...Meanwhile, the state, which directly oversees nursing homes in every district except Los Angeles County, has had its own history of problems with timely investigations. A lawsuit by California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform, or CANHR, resulted in a 2006 order by a Superior Court judge instructing public health officials to follow the law regarding investigation timelines.
Geraneo noted that order in her e-mail to administrators, referring to a case involving a non-working generator in which the complaint year had allegedly been changed from 2013 to 2014. “We cannot change the initiation dates of these complaints because of the CANHR lawsuit!”
Geraneo declined to be interviewed.
Since Kaiser Health News began writing about the department’s health facilities inspection division in March, administrators have sent e-mails to staff telling them not to speak to the media and to forward all requests. Reached by phone, several inspectors have declined to talk, saying they feared retaliation.
Nguyen said  she has been she has been targeted for retaliation as a result of raising questions since July 2013 about the quality of nursing home oversight.
In May 2014, Nguyen was suspended for five days without pay because she allegedly failed to renew her nursing license. A department letter said her license expired on November 30, 2013 and that she worked for six days without a valid license.
But as the Board of Nursing later confirmed in writing, her license actually had been renewed promptly. The Board simply hadn’t entered the renewal on its website.

 

 

 

L.A. County Health Dept. Allegedly Falsified Nursing Home Records


Two Los Angeles County Public Health Department employees allege that the department falsified the dates it received nursing home complaints in order to meet state deadlines for launching investigations, Kaiser Health News reports.

Background

Under state law, investigations must be launched within 10 days of receiving a nursing home complaint -- or within 24 hours if the complaint involves the threat of death or serious harm.
The California Public Health Department requires inspectors to enter dates based on when the complaint was first received by phone, fax, email or letter.

Details of Falsified Records

In a letter sent last month to county, state and federal officials, Inspector Kimberly Nguyen cited 11 cases in which she found records with falsified dates.
The dates entered were much later -- as much as 79 days --than the dates the allegations actually had been submitted.
The cases involved complaints about:
  • Abuse;
  • Falls; and
  • Pressure sores.
According to KHN, Nguyen said she believes the date manipulation was deliberate (Gorman, Kaiser Health News, 11/10).
Nguyen said her supervisor, Adewole Adegoke, has been aware of the record falsification since July but has made no effort to stop the practice (Nguyen Letter, 10/7). She wrote, "In my belief, falsification is a serious matter and unlawful, and our department should know better to not manipulate paperwork to mislead others and the public."
Meanwhile, Sharon Geraneo, an assistant supervisor at the department, sent a separate email in August about the department allegedly falsifying records.

Response to Allegations

The county Department of Public Health said it has "zero tolerance for intentional document falsification" and is not aware of any deliberate falsification.
Officials said that they had identified a data entry error by one individual that affected 35 cases but that "swift and appropriate corrective actions" were taken.
The California Department of Public Health said it is investigating the allegations (Kaiser Health News, 11/10).

Sunday, November 9, 2014

Power morcellation ban unlikely, but other FDA restrictions coming soon

Power morcellation ban unlikely, but other FDA restrictions coming soon
The doc spearheading the antimorcellation campaign says FDA is divided, as are gynecologists

Johnson & Johnson's Ethicon division's power morcellation device, which has been recalled since the controversy errupted--Courtesy of Johnson & Johnson
The doctor who brought the cancer risks posed by power morcellation to the attention of the public and the FDA protested what he described as "imminent plans to use legal mechanisms to functionally institute a 'registry of outcomes' or a 'probationary period' in order to avoid banning power morcellators from the marketplace," in an email to Commissioner Hamburg, various U.S. senators, White House officials and others obtained by FierceMedicalDevices.
Cardiac surgeon Hooman Noorchashm and wife, Amy Reed, an anesthesiologist, have led the charge against the controversial surgical technique performed using the drill-like power morcellator. Power morcellation can upstage preexisting uterine cancers like uterine sarcoma to fatal levels.
Noorchashm and Reed have sparked public outcry, an FDA safety notice and a recall of power morcellators by former market leader Johnson & Johnson ($JNJ) via efforts like a petition on Change.org. Now they are aiming to take the campaign to its logical conclusion by securing an FDA ban of the device. That does not appear likely, according to information Noorchashm has received from a source within the FDA, who he wouldn't name during an interview.

The Biotech Primer: An insider's guide to the science driving the biotech and pharma industries

This 200-page book takes an in-depth look at the biotech industry and the science that drives it. Although the industry itself is constantly changing, these fundamental concepts upon which it is built will remain important for years to come - and decision-makers who understand these fundamentals will be better able to evaluate and predict new trends. Click here to buy today!
Sign up for our FREE newsletter for more news like this sent to your inbox! Noorchashm described a power struggle within the FDA in the interview, saying, "My impression is that inside the FDA there are two groups of individuals: individuals who are more interested in advocating for industry interests and individuals who understand that the position of the FDA should be to protect patient safety and ensure patient safety. Those two groups of people are basically struggling."
The FDA's Office of Policy and Planning favors stricter action, but the agency's device arm, the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) is spearheading a plan to put the device on probation instead, he said.
"The imminent plan that the CDRH has is to sugarcoat this thing using a probationary mechanism. That would deflect any sort of criticism away from 510(k). It would deflect public criticism of anyone who says FDA didn't do anything. CDRH can comes out and says, 'Well we did something. We put out an FDA advisory and we put the device under probation.' That basically will give industry a chance to recover from an absolute medical atrocity," he said.
It is unclear what a probation would entail. During the FDA's public hearing on power morcellation, the agency discussed solutions such as enhanced informed consent requirements, the use of a surgical bag during morcellation and the need for improved testing of uterine sarcoma prior to surgery. A ban of power morcellators was also on the table, although agency officials didn't seem too intent on that option.
Central to the debate is the prevalence ratio of uterine sarcoma prior to power morcellation. The FDA estimates that the ratio is one women in 350.
A well-publicized paper in the Journal of the American Medical Association estimated that the rate of uterine cancer in women who underwent morcellation was one in 370. However, uterine sarcoma is a rare subset of uterine cancer that is more difficult to detect prior to surgery than other cancers of the uterus. Uterine sarcoma specifically is the main cause of concern among the FDA and other public health experts.
The paper's author, Dr. Jason Wright of the Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, said in an email to FierceMedicalDevices that he is unable to separate sarcomas or other subtypes of uterine cancer based on the insurance database. But he added, "I would assume that most cancers (in the sample) were not known preoperatively in women who underwent morcellation."
"Physicians who are defending this are saying the incidence (of uterine sarcoma in women undergoing morcellation) is one in 7,500," Noorchashm said, referring to research by obstetrician-gynecologist Elizabeth Pritts of the Wisconsin Fertility Institute.
Pritts spoke at the FDA public hearing and believes the agency is wildly overestimating the prevalence of uterine sarcoma because the agency used confirmation bias in its literature review used to arrive at its estimate of one in 350 women.
To add to the complexity, most experts assume that power morcellation poses a great chance of upstaging preexisting uterine sarcoma to fatal levels because it shreds and spreads the cancerous tissue to new parts of the body. However, in October Pritts and medical colleagues published a paper in the Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology concluding "there is no reliable evidence that morcellation (power or otherwise) significantly results in tumor upstaging."
"The new data by Dr. Pritts et al reveal that there is no proof that uterine morcellation upstages cancer. This is a critical discovery and changes the framework for discussion of how to care for the 31 million women with symptomatic fibroids," said gynecologic surgeon Antonio Pizarro in Shreveport, LA in an email. "Dr. Wright has issued a report of lapses in preoperative diagnosis for women with detectable cancers, not a report on sarcoma on women with fibroids."
Other members of the field favor strict action against power morcellators. "What you do about it is: you stop," said Robert Graebe, chairman and program director of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at NJ-based Monmouth Medical Center in a prior article in The Wall Street Journal, adding "it's not worth playing Russian roulette with the patient."
So far the FDA has only banned one device. In 1983 it outlawed prosthetic hair fibers.
"The FDA is considering a great deal of information, including the panel's input, all comments from the public docket, and all relevant available data, in determining any future regulatory action. If the FDA decides to take further action, we will issue communication to inform manufacturers and the public, including notice in the Federal Register," said an FDA spokeswoman in an email to FierceMedicalDevices.
Meanwhile, the Democrat & Chronicle reports that a third Rochester, NY, woman has recently died of an undetected cancer two years after undergoing power morcellation.
- here is the email
- here's the article in the Democrat & Chronicle
- here's Dr. Pritt's paper abstract
Related Articles:
Physicians defend power morcellator devices amid industry fallout
Johnson & Johnson pulls power morcellator devices amid industry and regulatory backlash
Upcoming study to dispute FDA's data on power morcellation risk
FDA panel recommends stronger labeling, limiting use of power morcellation--agency may go further
Power morcellator fallout continues after FDA advisory warning

Sunday, November 2, 2014

Drinking a lot of milk doubled the risk of death for women, and increased hip fractures by 60%

Milk causes osteoporosis? How many trillions to we pay for medical care in the US? Why did we need to wait for a tiny country like Sweden to give us this information?

For years doctors prescribed large doses of Vitamin D and calcium that turned out to be no help at all with osteoporosis. All that time, our doctors never warned us against milk.

And the medical establishment moans about its helplessness in the face of Alzheimer's, but forgot to mention that D-galactose was associated with memory loss in animals in research going back to 2006. Certainly, my doctors never mentioned it.

Is our health being held hostage to the profits of politically-powerful groups like the milk lobby? It seems like every month I am presented with a new reason for not trusting the CDC (Center for Disease Control). It seems that the research done by the government too often involves increasing or protecting profits for some powerful, wealthy group of people. New drugs, new devices, new procedures keep coming down the pipeline. But of course, the people who repair broken hips aren't going to make as much money now that women have this information from Sweden.


Drinking a lot of milk may be shortening women’s lives
October 30, 2014
By Karen O’Shea
Irish Examiner

Drinking three or more glasses of milk per day may be harmful to women’s health, a study suggests.
Women in the study who drank at least three glasses of milk a day were nearly twice as likely to die over the next 20 years compared with their peers who drank less than a glass daily, researchers in Sweden found. In addition, the study, published in the British Medical Journal found that women’s risk of bone fracture climbed steadily as their milk intake increased.

The reason could be galactose, a simple sugar found in milk, said Karl Michaelsson, a professor at Uppsala University in Sweden and one of the study’s authors. “That compound might induce oxidative stress and low-grade inflammation, and that type of inflammation can affect mortality and fractures,” Michaelsson said. 

Many health bodies recommend that adults get the equivalent of three cups of milk daily, based on the idea that dairy is good for the bones, and may reduce heart disease risk. But there’s actually little scientific evidence to support these recommendations, the study authors said.

The study included 61,433 women who were ages 39 to 74 at the study’s start, and 45,339 men ages 45 to 79. The women were followed for 20 years, on average. During that time, 15,541 died and 17,252 had fractures, including 4,259 hip fractures. After the researchers took into account factors like age, body mass index and alcohol consumption, they found that women who drank three or more glasses of milk daily were 1.93 times more likely to die during the follow-up period than those who drank less than a glass of milk daily. 

Among the men, who were followed for an average of 11 years, there was no association between mortality or fractures and milk consumption. 

But dairy lovers need not despair. The researchers found that fermented milk products, like cheese and yogurt, which contain little or no galactose, had the opposite effect: women who ate or drank the most fermented milk products were less likely to die or sustain fractures during the study.



 http://www.bmj.com/content/349/bmj.g6015

Milk intake and risk of mortality and fractures in women and men: cohort studies

  • Accepted 22 September 2014

Abstract

Objective To examine whether high milk consumption is associated with mortality and fractures in women and men.
Design Cohort studies.
Setting Three counties in central Sweden.
Participants Two large Swedish cohorts, one with 61 433 women (39-74 years at baseline 1987-90) and one with 45 339 men (45-79 years at baseline 1997), were administered food frequency questionnaires. The women responded to a second food frequency questionnaire in 1997.
Main outcome measure Multivariable survival models were applied to determine the association between milk consumption and time to mortality or fracture.
Results During a mean follow-up of 20.1 years, 15 541 women died and 17 252 had a fracture, of whom 4259 had a hip fracture. In the male cohort with a mean follow-up of 11.2 years, 10 112 men died and 5066 had a fracture, with 1166 hip fracture cases. In women the adjusted mortality hazard ratio for three or more glasses of milk a day compared with less than one glass a day was 1.93 (95% confidence interval 1.80 to 2.06). For every glass of milk, the adjusted hazard ratio of all cause mortality was 1.15 (1.13 to 1.17) in women and 1.03 (1.01 to 1.04) in men. For every glass of milk in women no reduction was observed in fracture risk with higher milk consumption for any fracture (1.02, 1.00 to 1.04) or for hip fracture (1.09, 1.05 to 1.13). The corresponding adjusted hazard ratios in men were 1.01 (0.99 to 1.03) and 1.03 (0.99 to 1.07). In subsamples of two additional cohorts, one in males and one in females, a positive association was seen between milk intake and both urine 8-iso-PGF2α (a biomarker of oxidative stress) and serum interleukin 6 (a main inflammatory biomarker).

Conclusions High milk intake was associated with higher mortality in one cohort of women and in another cohort of men, and with higher fracture incidence in women. Given the observational study designs with the inherent possibility of residual confounding and reverse causation phenomena, a cautious interpretation of the results is recommended.

Introduction

A diet rich in milk products is promoted to reduce the likelihood of osteoporotic fractures. Milk contains 18 of 22 essential nutrients, including calcium, phosphorus, and vitamin D of especial importance for the skeleton. Intestinal uptake of these nutrients is enhanced by the enzymatic capacity to digest lactose into D-glucose and D-galactose by mutation in the lactase gene, a variant common in those with northern European ancestry.1 2 An intake of dairy foods corresponding to three or four glasses of milk a day has been suggested to save at least 20% of healthcare costs related to osteoporosis.3

A high intake of milk might, however, have undesirable effects, because milk is the main dietary source of D-galactose. 

Experimental evidence in several animal species indicates that chronic exposure to D-galactose is deleterious to health and the addition of D-galactose by injections or in the diet is an established animal model of aging.4 5 6 7 Even a low dose of D-galactose induces changes that resemble natural aging in animals, including shortened life span caused by oxidative stress damage, chronic inflammation, neurodegeneration, decreased immune response, and gene transcriptional changes.5 7 A subcutaneous dose of 100 mg/kg D-galactose accelerates senescence in mice.5 This is equivalent to 6-10 g in humans, corresponding to 1-2 glasses of milk. Based on a concentration of lactose in cow’s milk of approximately 5%, one glass of milk comprises about 5 g of D-galactose. The increase of oxidative stress with aging and chronic low grade inflammation is not only a pathogenetic mechanism of cardiovascular disease and cancer in humans8 9 but also a mechanism of age related bone loss and sarcopenia.9 10 The high amount of lactose and therefore D-galactose in milk with theoretical influences on processes such as oxidative stress and inflammation makes the recommendations to increase milk intake for prevention of fractures a conceivable contradiction.


  1. Karl Michaëlsson, professor1,
  2. Alicja Wolk, professor2,
  3. Sophie Langenskiöld, senior lecturer3,
  4. Samar Basu, professor3,
  5. Eva Warensjö Lemming, researcher14,
  6. HÃ¥kan Melhus, professor5,
  7. Liisa Byberg, associate professor1
    Author affiliations
  1. Correspondence to: K Michaëlsson karl.michaelsson@surgsci.uu.se

Tuesday, October 28, 2014

The medical establishment values profits over patient lives, as seen in Morcellation procrastination

Husband grieves over "unnecessary" death

After George Leuzzi pays final respects to his wife on Tuesday at her funeral, he will turn his attention to caring for their young daughter and bringing an end to a procedure that claimed 44-year-old Brenda.
"Now that she's passed I will do my part to carry on what she started," he said. "I will help as much as I can to get this removed."
Brenda Leuzzi died 25 months after fibroid surgery through minimally invasive procedure that involved power morcellation. At the time, no one knew the fibroids, thought to be innocent growths, were cancerous. There is no definitive pre-surgery test to determine whether fibroids are benign. Power morcellation shreds tissue so that it can be removed through small incisions of minimally invasive surgery. In so doing, it can send bits of cancer to other parts of the abdomen, where they can "seed."
A grassroots effort to end power morcellation has been going on for just about a year, since the problem was brought to light by a physician whose wife had an undetected cancer worsened by the procedure.
The Food and Drug Administration has issued advisories against the procedure and the leading manufacturer, Johnson & Johnson, has asked providers to return the devices. But other manufacturers have them on the market. The FDA held hearings in July about the safety of the procedure.
The same day that George Leuzzi buried his wife, Morgan Liscinsky of the FDA press office answered a request for an update with, "I have no new information to share since you contacted me last month."
Sens. Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand wrote in August to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg. That letter was on behalf of Jim Leary of Greece, whose wife, Barbara, died last year after having undergone a procedure that involved morcellation.
Asked what the senators are doing to step up pressure, Gillibrand spokesman Jacob Fromer responded: "It is deeply frustrating to the Senator that while the FDA discourages the use of these very devices they won't take the necessary action to ban them. She will continue to communicate her concerns to the commissioner. Kirsten's thoughts and prayers are with the Leuzzi family, particularly their young daughter, Peyton."
Schumer spokesman Max Dworin said the office "followed up with the FDA (Monday), urging them again to call on manufacturers to voluntarily recall these devices, and we will continue to push."
Schumer's statement Monday read, ""The passing of Brenda Leuzzi is tragic and further underscores the urgency for all firms to voluntarily recall these devices until more thorough testing can be done. The FDA should act before another family has to experience what the Leuzzi family is going through right now. My thoughts and prayers go out to the entire Leuzzi family."
George Leuzzi is more adamant than Schumer. "I'm very disappointed in the FDA. They should have banned this by now. They're just stalling and finding some other way to convince themselves it's OK. If anybody saw Brenda and the way she died, it's pretty far from OK. I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy."
George Leuzzi said he's received an uncountable number of texts and emails since he posted on a leiomyosarcoma Facebook page news of Brenda's death.
"Cancer is the enemy, but any procedure that would enhance it and make it worse and put someone in a position to have no way of rebounding from it is criminal," he said.
As it was during Brenda's illness, her husband's focus is on his wife.
"I want her to be remembered. I don't want her to be forgotten, especially because what she died for was completely unnecessary."

Sunday, October 12, 2014

Are California doctors violating their Hippocratic oaths in California Prop 45 fight?


  Physician, Executive Chairman of the Courage Campaign, Healthcare Activist
Huffington Post 
An Open Letter to my fellow medical professionals about California's Proposition 45 and the primary obligation we have to protect the well being of our patients.

Like generations of doctors before us, when each of us graduated from medical school, we were asked to raise our hand and recite the Hippocratic Oath. This was a defining moment in many of our lives. Reciting the words carried great weight and purpose: "I will apply all measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I will keep them from harm and injustice."

It is through the prism of these words that I watch you appearing in advertisements against Proposition 45 and react in horror. Dr. Amy Nguyen Howell, Dr. Marshall Morgan, and Dr. John Maa, I believe you are betraying your Hippocratic Oaths, and Registered Nurse Candace Campbell, I believe you are betraying the Nightingale Pledge. In fact, in your roles advocating against Prop 45, you are spreading lies designed to mislead and scare the public -- our patients -- in order to protect the insurance industry. It is unconscionable.
The facts are that since 2002, health insurance premiums have increased 185%, while wages for the bottom 70% of our state have remained stagnant. During this same time, California health insurers have issued over 45.7 million denials of treatment, while making record profits which have translated into record cash reserves in the billions.

So let's take a real look at your arguments:

In advertisements paid for by the health insurance industry, you claim that we should keep the new "independent commission" and that special interests are sponsoring Proposition 45 to give "one politician" new power over our health care -- including what treatment options our health insurance covers.
First off, there is absolutely no conflict between this new "independent commission" -- Covered California -- and Prop 45. The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) was written to accommodate just this sort of rate regulation, and 35 other states already have some version of it.

Covered California is actually run by purely political appointees, some of who have a long cozy history with the private insurance industry. Unlike the State Insurance Commissioner, who is publicly elected to serve as the ultimate consumer protector, the citizens of California have no say in who is appointed to this "independent commission" whereas the Insurance Commissioner is publicly accountable and can be voted out of office.

As for giving the Insurance Commissioner new power over treatment options, this is false on so many levels. First and foremost, it is the private health insurance industry and their administrators, many of who have never cared for a patient, who are denying care, while telling doctors what treatment and drugs they can provide. Our Insurance Commissioner does not do this now and Prop 45 will not give him the authority to do so in the future.

In fact, Prop 45 would simply apply the same regulatory framework to health insurance which has proven so successful regulating auto, home, and medical malpractice insurance in California. Auto insurance rates have actually decreased in the 26 years since Prop 103, saving Californians billions of dollars in premiums. In 2012, our state Insurance Commissioner actually saved doctors like yourselves over $44 million in excessive malpractice premiums using the very same system proposed in Prop 45.

With regard to special interests funding Prop 45, it is actually Big Insurance -- Kaiser Permanente, Well Point, and Blue Shield -- that is spending $37 million of our patients' premium dollars to try and kill Prop 45.
For every dollar that is spent on this campaign trying to protect patients against excessive, unreasonable health insurance rate increases, Big Insurance is spending almost 40 times as much to protect their lucrative status quo.

So, I urge you to stop spreading these lies. I challenge each of you to publicly debate the facts in person. Our patients are suffering mentally and physically from outrageous rate increases, and as the Hippocratic Oath makes clear, we must "keep them from harm and injustice." I call on you to renounce your opposition to Prop 45 and remember the promise you once made to all of your future patients.

Thursday, October 9, 2014

Should we provide health care for all? Does this woman deserve it?




I’m the welfare mom with a Coach purse

I know you're judging me, asking: How can you own a fancy purse when you can't afford your baby? Let me explain



Friday, September 19, 2014

Daughter calls Utah doctor a monster at sentencing


Associated Press

A Utah doctor convicted of murdering his wife in a case that became a true-crime cable TV obsession was sentenced Friday to 17 years to life in prison at a hearing in which his daughter called him a monster.

The long-awaited sentence came seven years after prosecutors say Martin MacNeill knocked out his wife with drugs prescribed following cosmetic surgery and left her to die in a bathtub so he could begin a new life with his mistress.

"My father's facade has now crumbled," said Alexis Somers, who asked the judge to give MacNeill the maximum penalty. "My father is a monster. He has never shown remorse for any of his crimes. He must be held accountable for his actions."

Judge Derek Pullan gave the 58-year-old MacNeill the harshest term possible: at least 15 years and up to life on the murder charge, plus one to 15 years on an obstruction-of-justice charge. A third sentence in a separate sexual abuse case adds another one to 15 years.

Pullan said the sentences must run one after the other, not at the same time. The Utah parole board will decide later whether MacNeill can be released after 17 years or must serve a longer term.

The one-time doctor and lawyer with a family of eight did not address the court during the sentencing...

Michele MacNeill initially was ruled to have died of natural causes, possibly heart disease, but her family hounded authorities until charges were filed five years after her death...
 
The judge pointed to Martin MacNeill's careful planning, saying he'd orchestrated the killing so his 6-year-old daughter would find her mother dead...