Guest guest Posted July 10, 2000 Report Share Posted July 10, 2000 , He has everthing to gain. He sits on the ASBS board and cowtows with the good old boys. If the boys club is against this procedure, then he will be too. I had a conversation with T. the other day. Since she is writing a book on the various types of WLS I felt she might know. She explained it to me like this. Dr R. does not make a loop at all. The old procedure involved a loop of intestines taht produced two side-by-side sections of intestine at the anastomosis area and then an ulcer would develop between the loops. Have you read Dr. R's statistics lately? As far as peer review. How much do you think those other Docs will be loosing if this procedure became the " gold standard " $20,000 to 40,000 a surgery. Walter has a financial stake in this as he needs the endorsment of the surgeon in order to be able to work with them. Its a move for him to be politically correct. Dr. R has done something no other surgeon had done. Brought his group closer together. He has built a network which allows his clients and prospective clients to communicate and learn the pro's and con's of this surgery. The medical peer feel his statistics are tainted. How could they be so high? Dr. R has given us the vehicle to verify those statistics. We do this every day on the message board,e-mail or on the phone as he has given us the lists including names phone numbers and e-mail addresses for each and everyone of us. We are screened and have to fit a particular criteria to be approved. We are educated. He asks alot from us even before we are approved. That is why statistics are so high. We have the understanding and knowledge of the procedure and the post op care through the patient manual, the web site, and each other. Dr. R had done his homework on how to make this procedure the " gold standard " . I think he is well on his way. My vote is with Dr R. on Dr R's side In MiniGastricBypass (AT) egroups (DOT) com, srozycki@s... wrote: > Hi, I just got back from vacation and saw the notes regarding Walter. > He is currently representing me in my appeal to have the surgery with > Dr. R. Needless to say your posts concerned me, so I called him > directly. > Let me say that I have as much faith in Walter as an attorney who > cares about his obese clients as I do in Dr. Rutledge who cares about > his obese patients. Walter has made the decision not to take on any > more of Dr. R's patients. He was at the ASBS conference and saw Dr. > R's presentation. The decision he made was not based on hearsay. He > is very informed about the various surgeries out there and has grave > concerns about the long-term results of Dr. R.s surgery. After > seeing Dr. R's presentation and having the opportunity to ask > questions, he still feels this procedure is much like the one that > used to be done 20 years ago, and in good conscience no longer feels > comfortable representing/promoting Dr. R's clients. > > For the last six months I have been living and breathing MGB. All I > needed was the approval the rest of my packet is completed. I have > already fought and lost battles with my insurance company and now I > am ready to appeal to NC insurance commission to go to bat for me. I > have to be honest though, this has given me a time to pause and I > will probably research other types of surgeries as in depth as I have > researched the MGB. I don't know that I will find anyone who can > give me as much info as Dr. R personally has and that his website > does. My common sense tells me that all the other Dr.s at the ASBS > conference couldn't all be jealous of Dr. R's success. Walter > Lindstrom has no financial stake threatend by Dr. R's success. So > what don't they like that I am not seeing through my rose colored > glasses. I don't know anything about the surgery from 20 years ago > so I don't know what their concerns are. Can anyone explain to me > what the difference is between Dr. R MGB and the " old " one? I am > still not ready to give up. > > Thanks, Rozycki, MGB hopeful, since clinic on 2/19, Denver, NC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2000 Report Share Posted July 10, 2000 Hi, For more information about the MGB vs. other types of surgery and the concerns of other Drs see: http://clos.net/eotd/07-00/07-11.htm http://clos.net/eotd/07-00/07-09.htm http://clos.net/eotd/07-00/07-06.htm RR Rutledge, M.D., F.A.C.S. The Center for Laparoscopic Obesity Surgery 4301 Ben lin Blvd. Durham, N.C. 27704 Telephone #: Fax #: Email: DrR@... ************************************************ Please Visit our Web site: http://clos.net ************************************************ Durham Regional Hospital: Also, Please consider joining the Mini-Gastric Bypass Mailing List at http://www.onelist.com MiniGastricBypass is a general discussion of the Mini-Gastric Bypass ( http://www.onelist.com/community/MiniGastricBypass ) Talk with lots of other Pre and Post Op patients and friends. Keep up to date on the latest news about the Mini-Gastric Bypass. Walter Lindstrom > Hi, I just got back from vacation and saw the notes regarding Walter. > He is currently representing me in my appeal to have the surgery with > Dr. R. Needless to say your posts concerned me, so I called him > directly. > Let me say that I have as much faith in Walter as an attorney who > cares about his obese clients as I do in Dr. Rutledge who cares about > his obese patients. Walter has made the decision not to take on any > more of Dr. R's patients. He was at the ASBS conference and saw Dr. > R's presentation. The decision he made was not based on hearsay. He > is very informed about the various surgeries out there and has grave > concerns about the long-term results of Dr. R.s surgery. After > seeing Dr. R's presentation and having the opportunity to ask > questions, he still feels this procedure is much like the one that > used to be done 20 years ago, and in good conscience no longer feels > comfortable representing/promoting Dr. R's clients. > > For the last six months I have been living and breathing MGB. All I > needed was the approval the rest of my packet is completed. I have > already fought and lost battles with my insurance company and now I > am ready to appeal to NC insurance commission to go to bat for me. I > have to be honest though, this has given me a time to pause and I > will probably research other types of surgeries as in depth as I have > researched the MGB. I don't know that I will find anyone who can > give me as much info as Dr. R personally has and that his website > does. My common sense tells me that all the other Dr.s at the ASBS > conference couldn't all be jealous of Dr. R's success. Walter > Lindstrom has no financial stake threatend by Dr. R's success. So > what don't they like that I am not seeing through my rose colored > glasses. I don't know anything about the surgery from 20 years ago > so I don't know what their concerns are. Can anyone explain to me > what the difference is between Dr. R MGB and the " old " one? I am > still not ready to give up. > > Thanks, Rozycki, MGB hopeful, since clinic on 2/19, Denver, NC. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Need a credit card? > Instant Approval and 0% intro APR with Aria! > http://click.egroups.com/1/6034/3/_/453517/_/963266201/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > This message is from the Mini-Gastric Bypass Mailing List at Onelist.com > Please visit our web site at http://clos.net > Get the Patient Manual at http://clos.net/get_patient_manual.htm > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2000 Report Share Posted July 10, 2000 : It is necessary to clarify various ill-informed misconceptions contained in your email. This is a long message so bear with me. First, I sit on no ASBS " board " and I am not their counsel. Less than 10% of their surgeons actively refer patients to my practice. I am beholden to no one in that organization for the opinions that I develop. However, I am not a doctor and rely upon those who are to explain the issues to me so I can make a MY determination based on evidence and data. Bariatric surgery is a fascinating field. You will hear various points of view concerning a wide range of topics: gastric bypass versus restrictive procedures; how about the LapBand or Swedish Band; is the duodenal switch the same as or better than a biliopancreatic diversion; should one use a ring or no ring in a gastric bypass (ie, the " Fobi pouch " ); laparoscopic versus open. In short, there are a multitude of issues that surgeons debate all the time and there are two sides to these various interesting issues. My concern with the MGB is that there does not seem to be another side to the " debate " ; there is universal concern of varying degrees about this procedure and its short and long term ramifications. EVERY SURGEON I have spoken to all over the country (and there are dozens over the last year) are concerned about this procedure and its impact on those who get it. They are concerned because there appears to be a re-creation of old mistakes which led to many sick people. They are not concerned due to economics, for no matter how many procedures Dr. Rutledge does, there are plenty of patients who need caring and help. They are not concerned about his procedure being the new " gold standard " because, in all candor, they all agree it is easier to do - BUT NOT BETTER to do. They are concerned because they have been doing this a very long time, they have seen the progression of procedures from the jejunal ileal bypass and beyond, and because none of them have ever gotten an adequate medical explanation from Dr. Rutledge as to why his procedure is simply not a repeat of past mistakes. I have found that surgeons agree often on very little...however there is a universal agreement among them (surgeons who do lap or open; restrictive or malabsorptive procedures alike) that this is a " bad operation. " When there is such universal agreement between folks I know cannot agree on anything, as a layperson charged with helping people get medical treatment, I become very very concerned. I reached this decision to not handle MGB matters after much soul-searching and wondering how to " do the right thing. " My decision was finalized after the Memphis meeting; unlike most on this list, I WAS THERE for the presentation by Dr. Rutledge and the questions that followed. As an outsider looking in, there was reason to be concerned. Please understand I don't want to the power some patients try to give me when choose a procedure, but I do want to feel that I am helping them in the long-term. I am not therefore convinced of this in the case of the MGB and look for assistance. Lest you be actually swayed by " facts, " let me run a couple past you. First, my decision to decline these cases is completely against my financial best interests, for Dr. Rutledge was far more aggressive than most surgeons in referring patients to me and/or my site. This decision was made despite attorneys have the money-grubbing bottom-feeder reputation the rest of you bestow upon us. Second - I truly believe that Dr. Rutledge is a compassionate and caring surgeon with a wonderful bedside manner. He and I have exchanged emails on this topic and I believe he understands that this was a difficult decision and that it is not directed at him personally. Third - Dr. Rutledge has asked to explain this issue to me personally and I have accepted that invitation, but he has thus far declined to proceed further...I find the cites to his website just recently posted wholly unscientific and not very helpful. " Anectodal " evidence, I have learned, is not the stuff upon which such monumental decisions are made. Fourth - Dr. Rutledge carefully avoided any discussion of the technical aspects of his procedure during his ASBS talk and THAT was considered by his peers to be intellectually dishonest and purposefully evasive since the " loop " versus " roux " issue is the HEART of the universal concerns which have been raised. He knows that controversy so his conscious " hiding " of that critical issue in this important paper leads those of us to wonder why he chose not to address that issue - his evasive responses to questions from his peers is further evidence of his lack of comfort on this topic - which again leads me to act with caution. So in closing, don't attack me personally on this - YOU DON " T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT ME! Do not expect or project that I am doing anything other than struggling to do the right thing on this very important issue. Access to bariatric surgery is critical to all of us suffering with this deadly disease and bariatric surgery has enough black eyes in its history; we are in the midst of public and professional acceptance at a level never before seen. What bariatric surgery cannot afford, and what I am fearful of, is that this MAY be yet another black eye since it so closely resembles earlier problematic procedures. You are devoted to Dr. Rutledge. Your loyalty is to be commended. But I have devoted my entire life to this cause - not a single surgeon or procedure. I need to be sure and I'm not. Until I am reasonably sure, I cannot in good conscience (despite the economic hardship it causes my practice) work for people seeking this option if it may turn out to be dangerous to them. I would propose some type of debate or controlled open forum involving Dr. Rutledge and some of his peers at ASBS...perhaps at the next meeting in Washington, DC. Perhaps a cooperative educational process airing out the concerns and giving Dr. Rutledge ample time to educate his peers about why this procedure is truly different would be of value...I know it would be of value to me -- and I know I am not alone in that. I am pleased that you are having a good result and are happy with your choice. I wish that for all of us who seek surgical intervention of our disease. And I hope against hope that 10-15 years from now you will still be as excited and passionate about your choice and that I was proven to be very very wrong...but I choose to proceed with caution and reiterate my invitation that Dr. Rutledge follow through on his offer to provide me with " his side " of things. Thanks for hearing my side of the story...so let the " flames " begin.................. Walter Lindstrom, Esquire Obesity Law & Advocacy Center www.obesitylaw.com 2939 Alta View Drive - Suite O-360 San Diego, CA 92139 Tel: Fax: Re: Walter Lindstrom > , He has everthing to gain. He sits on the ASBS board and > cowtows with the good old boys. If the boys club is against this > procedure, then he will be too. > > I had a conversation with T. the other day. Since she is > writing a book on the various types of WLS I felt she might know. > She explained it to me like this. Dr R. does not make a loop at all. > The old procedure involved a loop of intestines taht produced two > side-by-side sections of intestine at the anastomosis area and then > an > ulcer would develop between the loops. > > Have you read Dr. R's statistics lately? > > As far as peer review. How much do you think those other Docs will > be > loosing if this procedure became the " gold standard " $20,000 to > 40,000 a surgery. > > Walter has a financial stake in this as he needs the endorsment of > the > surgeon in order to be able to work with them. Its a move for him to > be politically correct. > > Dr. R has done something no other surgeon had done. Brought his > group > closer together. He has built a network which allows his clients > and > prospective clients to communicate and learn the pro's and con's of > this surgery. The medical peer feel his statistics are tainted. How > could they be so high? Dr. R has given us the vehicle to verify > those > statistics. We do this every day on the message board,e-mail or on > the phone as he has given us the lists including names phone numbers > and e-mail addresses for each and everyone of us. We are screened > and > have to fit a particular criteria to be approved. We are educated. > He asks alot from us even before we are approved. That is why > statistics are so high. We have the understanding and knowledge of > the procedure and the post op care through the patient manual, the > web > site, and each other. Dr. R had done his homework on how to make > this > procedure the " gold standard " . I think he is well on his way. > My vote is with Dr R. > > on Dr R's side > > In MiniGastricBypass (AT) egroups (DOT) com, srozycki@s... wrote: > > Hi, I just got back from vacation and saw the notes regarding > Walter. > > He is currently representing me in my appeal to have the surgery > with > > Dr. R. Needless to say your posts concerned me, so I called him > > directly. > > Let me say that I have as much faith in Walter as an attorney who > > cares about his obese clients as I do in Dr. Rutledge who cares > about > > his obese patients. Walter has made the decision not to take on > any > > more of Dr. R's patients. He was at the ASBS conference and saw > Dr. > > R's presentation. The decision he made was not based on hearsay. > He > > is very informed about the various surgeries out there and has > grave > > concerns about the long-term results of Dr. R.s surgery. After > > seeing Dr. R's presentation and having the opportunity to ask > > questions, he still feels this procedure is much like the one that > > used to be done 20 years ago, and in good conscience no longer > feels > > comfortable representing/promoting Dr. R's clients. > > > > For the last six months I have been living and breathing MGB. All I > > needed was the approval the rest of my packet is completed. I > have > > already fought and lost battles with my insurance company and now I > > am ready to appeal to NC insurance commission to go to bat for me. > I > > have to be honest though, this has given me a time to pause and I > > will probably research other types of surgeries as in depth as I > have > > researched the MGB. I don't know that I will find anyone who can > > give me as much info as Dr. R personally has and that his website > > does. My common sense tells me that all the other Dr.s at the ASBS > > conference couldn't all be jealous of Dr. R's success. Walter > > Lindstrom has no financial stake threatend by Dr. R's success. So > > what don't they like that I am not seeing through my rose colored > > glasses. I don't know anything about the surgery from 20 years ago > > so I don't know what their concerns are. Can anyone explain to me > > what the difference is between Dr. R MGB and the " old " one? I am > > still not ready to give up. > > > > Thanks, Rozycki, MGB hopeful, since clinic on 2/19, Denver, > NC. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Wish you had something rad to add to your email? > We do at www.supersig.com. > http://click.egroups.com/1/6810/3/_/453517/_/963281093/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > This message is from the Mini-Gastric Bypass Mailing List at Onelist.com > Please visit our web site at http://clos.net > Get the Patient Manual at http://clos.net/get_patient_manual.htm > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2000 Report Share Posted July 10, 2000 Dear Mr. Lindstrom, Thank you for taking the time to give us your viewpoint of the MGB. I appreciate your concern and I would like to take a moment to tell you of my visit with another weight loss surgeon. My PCP is Dr. Dalton Rhea in Arlington, Texas.When I approached him about the possibility of having weight loss surgery he was very supportive and referred me to Dr. Dickerman in Dallas, Texas. I went to see Dr. Dickerman and I found out that he offered the open R-N-Y. I knew immediately that I did not want an open procedure and even though Dr. Dickerman was a transplant surgeon and often performed lap procedures he chose not to perform his R-N-Y by lap methods. He told me he didn't feel weight loss surgery warranted the additional time needed to do a lap. Prior to going to see Dr. Dickerman I printed a copy or Dr. Rutledge's Patient Information manual to take with me. When I realized that I would not be using Dr. Dickerman for my surgery, I decided I didn't have anything to lose so I gave him the manual. I asked him if he was familiar with the procedure and he informed me that he was. He said this is the same procedure that they are teaching at the medical school now. I didn't see the need to find out which medical school because I wanted a surgeon that was experienced with several hundred surgeries under his belt......not a rookie. I asked him what he thought of the MGB procedure and he told me it was a good surgery. He also told me as a transplant surgeon that he has done several kidney transplants on patients because of their weight loss surgeries. That really got my attention......I asked if the MGB would harm the kidneys and he told me NO!!!!! I was very relieved to hear that. My visit with Dr. Dickerman was all I needed to make my final decision to have the MGB with Dr. Rutledge. If there was a problem with the MGB, Dr. Dickerman had no reason to hold back with any negative comments, instead he supported the MGB procedure and he was well versed in the procedure itself. Dr. Dickerman's experience includes over 130 various weight loss surgeries throughout his career. He stopped performing weight loss surgery for a few years because of the lack of results and the patient attitudes he encountered when several patients " out ate " their surgeries. The only reason he started doing WLS again was because an insurance company he had contracted with for transplant surgeries had read one of his WLS publications and asked him to do WLS for their patients. I wish I had gotten more information from Dr. Dickerman but maybe you would like to give him a call. If they are teaching this same procedure at a medical school it would be interesting to find out why all the negative comments and lack of support are being experienced by Dr. Rutledge and the MGB procedure. I'm nearly 6 weeks post-op and my experience is limited, however I hope for everyone's sake this issue can be put to rest. I hope that you find just cause to support the MGB and Dr. Rutledge and once again legally support his patients in their fight with the insurance companies. Best Wishes, Genzel 700 Waters Edge Keller, Texas 76248 817/ 577-0919 Dr. Dalton Rhea 3148 Matlock Road Ste 501 Arlington, Texas 76015 817/ 419-0267 Dr. Dickerman 221 W Colorado Blvd Dallas, Texas 75208 214/ 943-8605 Walter Lindstrom wrote: > : It is necessary to clarify various ill-informed misconceptions > contained in your email. This is a long message so bear with me. > First, I sit on no ASBS " board " and I am not their counsel. Less than > 10% of their surgeons actively refer patients to my practice. I am beholden > to no one in that organization for the opinions that I develop. However, I > am not a doctor and rely upon those who are to explain the issues to me so I > can make a MY determination based on evidence and data. > Bariatric surgery is a fascinating field. You will hear various points > of view concerning a wide range of topics: gastric bypass versus > restrictive procedures; how about the LapBand or Swedish Band; is the > duodenal switch the same as or better than a biliopancreatic diversion; > should one use a ring or no ring in a gastric bypass (ie, the " Fobi pouch " ); > laparoscopic versus open. > In short, there are a multitude of issues that surgeons debate all the > time and there are two sides to these various interesting issues. My > concern with the MGB is that there does not seem to be another side to the > " debate " ; there is universal concern of varying degrees about this procedure > and its short and long term ramifications. EVERY SURGEON I have spoken to > all over the country (and there are dozens over the last year) are concerned > about this procedure and its impact on those who get it. They are concerned > because there appears to be a re-creation of old mistakes which led to many > sick people. They are not concerned due to economics, for no matter how > many procedures Dr. Rutledge does, there are plenty of patients who need > caring and help. They are not concerned about his procedure being the new > " gold standard " because, in all candor, they all agree it is easier to do - > BUT NOT BETTER to do. They are concerned because they have been doing this > a very long time, they have seen the progression of procedures from the > jejunal ileal bypass and beyond, and because none of them have ever gotten > an adequate medical explanation from Dr. Rutledge as to why his procedure is > simply not a repeat of past mistakes. > I have found that surgeons agree often on very little...however there is a > universal agreement among them (surgeons who do lap or open; restrictive or > malabsorptive procedures alike) that this is a " bad operation. " When there > is such universal agreement between folks I know cannot agree on anything, > as a layperson charged with helping people get medical treatment, I become > very very concerned. > I reached this decision to not handle MGB matters after much > soul-searching and wondering how to " do the right thing. " My decision was > finalized after the Memphis meeting; unlike most on this list, I WAS THERE > for the presentation by Dr. Rutledge and the questions that followed. As an > outsider looking in, there was reason to be concerned. > Please understand I don't want to the power some patients try to give me > when choose a procedure, but I do want to feel that I am helping them in the > long-term. I am not therefore convinced of this in the case of the MGB and > look for assistance. > Lest you be actually swayed by " facts, " let me run a couple past you. > First, my decision to decline these cases is completely against my financial > best interests, for Dr. Rutledge was far more aggressive than most surgeons > in referring patients to me and/or my site. This decision was made despite > attorneys have the money-grubbing bottom-feeder reputation the rest of you > bestow upon us. > Second - I truly believe that Dr. Rutledge is a compassionate and caring > surgeon with a wonderful bedside manner. He and I have exchanged emails on > this topic and I believe he understands that this was a difficult decision > and that it is not directed at him personally. > Third - Dr. Rutledge has asked to explain this issue to me personally and > I have accepted that invitation, but he has thus far declined to proceed > further...I find the cites to his website just recently posted wholly > unscientific and not very helpful. " Anectodal " evidence, I have learned, is > not the stuff upon which such monumental decisions are made. > Fourth - Dr. Rutledge carefully avoided any discussion of the technical > aspects of his procedure during his ASBS talk and THAT was considered by his > peers to be intellectually dishonest and purposefully evasive since the > " loop " versus " roux " issue is the HEART of the universal concerns which have > been raised. He knows that controversy so his conscious " hiding " of that > critical issue in this important paper leads those of us to wonder why he > chose not to address that issue - his evasive responses to questions from > his peers is further evidence of his lack of comfort on this topic - which > again leads me to act with caution. > So in closing, don't attack me personally on this - YOU DON " T KNOW > ANYTHING ABOUT ME! Do not expect or project that I am doing anything other > than struggling to do the right thing on this very important issue. Access > to bariatric surgery is critical to all of us suffering with this deadly > disease and bariatric surgery has enough black eyes in its history; we are > in the midst of public and professional acceptance at a level never before > seen. What bariatric surgery cannot afford, and what I am fearful of, is > that this MAY be yet another black eye since it so closely resembles earlier > problematic procedures. > You are devoted to Dr. Rutledge. Your loyalty is to be commended. But I > have devoted my entire life to this cause - not a single surgeon or > procedure. I need to be sure and I'm not. Until I am reasonably sure, I > cannot in good conscience (despite the economic hardship it causes my > practice) work for people seeking this option if it may turn out to be > dangerous to them. > I would propose some type of debate or controlled open forum involving Dr. > Rutledge and some of his peers at ASBS...perhaps at the next meeting in > Washington, DC. > Perhaps a cooperative educational process airing out the concerns and giving > Dr. Rutledge ample time to educate his peers about why this procedure is > truly different would be of value...I know it would be of value to me -- and > I know I am not alone in that. > I am pleased that you are having a good result and are happy with your > choice. I wish that for all of us who seek surgical intervention of our > disease. And I hope against hope that 10-15 years from now you will still > be as excited and passionate about your choice and that I was proven to be > very very wrong...but I choose to proceed with caution and reiterate my > invitation that Dr. Rutledge follow through on his offer to provide me with > " his side " of things. > Thanks for hearing my side of the story...so let the " flames " > begin.................. > Walter Lindstrom, Esquire > Obesity Law & Advocacy Center > www.obesitylaw.com > 2939 Alta View Drive - Suite O-360 > San Diego, CA 92139 > Tel: > Fax: > Re: Walter Lindstrom > > > , He has everthing to gain. He sits on the ASBS board and > > cowtows with the good old boys. If the boys club is against this > > procedure, then he will be too. > > > > I had a conversation with T. the other day. Since she is > > writing a book on the various types of WLS I felt she might know. > > She explained it to me like this. Dr R. does not make a loop at all. > > The old procedure involved a loop of intestines taht produced two > > side-by-side sections of intestine at the anastomosis area and then > > an > > ulcer would develop between the loops. > > > > Have you read Dr. R's statistics lately? > > > > As far as peer review. How much do you think those other Docs will > > be > > loosing if this procedure became the " gold standard " $20,000 to > > 40,000 a surgery. > > > > Walter has a financial stake in this as he needs the endorsment of > > the > > surgeon in order to be able to work with them. Its a move for him to > > be politically correct. > > > > Dr. R has done something no other surgeon had done. Brought his > > group > > closer together. He has built a network which allows his clients > > and > > prospective clients to communicate and learn the pro's and con's of > > this surgery. The medical peer feel his statistics are tainted. How > > could they be so high? Dr. R has given us the vehicle to verify > > those > > statistics. We do this every day on the message board,e-mail or on > > the phone as he has given us the lists including names phone numbers > > and e-mail addresses for each and everyone of us. We are screened > > and > > have to fit a particular criteria to be approved. We are educated. > > He asks alot from us even before we are approved. That is why > > statistics are so high. We have the understanding and knowledge of > > the procedure and the post op care through the patient manual, the > > web > > site, and each other. Dr. R had done his homework on how to make > > this > > procedure the " gold standard " . I think he is well on his way. > > My vote is with Dr R. > > > > on Dr R's side > > > > In MiniGastricBypass (AT) egroups (DOT) com, srozycki@s... wrote: > > > Hi, I just got back from vacation and saw the notes regarding > > Walter. > > > He is currently representing me in my appeal to have the surgery > > with > > > Dr. R. Needless to say your posts concerned me, so I called him > > > directly. > > > Let me say that I have as much faith in Walter as an attorney who > > > cares about his obese clients as I do in Dr. Rutledge who cares > > about > > > his obese patients. Walter has made the decision not to take on > > any > > > more of Dr. R's patients. He was at the ASBS conference and saw > > Dr. > > > R's presentation. The decision he made was not based on hearsay. > > He > > > is very informed about the various surgeries out there and has > > grave > > > concerns about the long-term results of Dr. R.s surgery. After > > > seeing Dr. R's presentation and having the opportunity to ask > > > questions, he still feels this procedure is much like the one that > > > used to be done 20 years ago, and in good conscience no longer > > feels > > > comfortable representing/promoting Dr. R's clients. > > > > > > For the last six months I have been living and breathing MGB. All I > > > needed was the approval the rest of my packet is completed. I > > have > > > already fought and lost battles with my insurance company and now I > > > am ready to appeal to NC insurance commission to go to bat for me. > > I > > > have to be honest though, this has given me a time to pause and I > > > will probably research other types of surgeries as in depth as I > > have > > > researched the MGB. I don't know that I will find anyone who can > > > give me as much info as Dr. R personally has and that his website > > > does. My common sense tells me that all the other Dr.s at the ASBS > > > conference couldn't all be jealous of Dr. R's success. Walter > > > Lindstrom has no financial stake threatend by Dr. R's success. So > > > what don't they like that I am not seeing through my rose colored > > > glasses. I don't know anything about the surgery from 20 years ago > > > so I don't know what their concerns are. Can anyone explain to me > > > what the difference is between Dr. R MGB and the " old " one? I am > > > still not ready to give up. > > > > > > Thanks, Rozycki, MGB hopeful, since clinic on 2/19, Denver, > > NC. > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Wish you had something rad to add to your email? > > We do at www.supersig.com. > > http://click.egroups.com/1/6810/3/_/453517/_/963281093/ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > This message is from the Mini-Gastric Bypass Mailing List at Onelist.com > > Please visit our web site at http://clos.net > > Get the Patient Manual at http://clos.net/get_patient_manual.htm > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds! > 1. Fill in the brief application > 2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds > 3. Get rates as low as 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR > http://click.egroups.com/1/6631/3/_/453517/_/963285617/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > This message is from the Mini-Gastric Bypass Mailing List at Onelist.com > Please visit our web site at http://clos.net > Get the Patient Manual at http://clos.net/get_patient_manual.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 Let me preface my response by saying I find it more than a little interesting that an attorney who refuses to assist Dr. Rutledge's potential patients and who has libelled Dr. Rutledge, is nonetheless lurking on this list. I personally know of five attorneys who have had Dr. Rutledge's procedure, including myself. I'm a federal litigation attorney, Walter, well-skilled at examining facts and evidence, and I know a scam when I see one. Now, out of all these attorneys, I'd hazard a guess that most of us are at least as intelligent and educated as you like to think yourself to be, yet we have all come to a different conclusion than you. > : It is necessary to clarify various ill-informed > misconceptions contained in your email. This is a long > message so bear with me. First, I sit on no ASBS " board " > and I am not their counsel. Less than 10% of their surgeons > actively refer patients to my practice. I am beholden > to no one in that organization for the opinions that I develop. Since the RNY and FOBI procedures are well-established (and all the cash-cow clinics are in California, where you are) when an insurance company turns an RNY down, it *usually* means either the patient didn't document the claim properly (a no-brainer that takes no effort to fix) or it means that obesity surgery is excluded in the person's policy and there is probably nothing you can do but take the person's $500 and offer to " help " them. Furthermore, the general educational/comprehensional level of the patients having those procedures appears to be much lower than the average patient of Dr. Rutledge. In fact, many of the patients (whose posts are plastered all over onelist) seem to lack even a rudimentary understanding of the procedure they will have or have had, much less a grasp of the options available to them. On the other hand, Dr. Rutledge's patients tend to be well-educated, computer-literate, and well-informed. Their insurance problems are often complex. You can't take the money and do little-of-nothing. So, Walter, it is *clearly* in your financial interests to polish the apples that bring in the easy money, while finding a way to endear yourself to those practitioners, by bad-mouthing Dr. Rutledge and his procedure, as you proclaim (several times) it is only " out of your concern " for those patients' well-being. > However, I am not a doctor and rely upon those who are > to explain the issues to me so I can make a MY determination > based on evidence and data. Too bad you have abandoned your usual procedure, then, to adopt opinions based on speculation, rather than examine hard facts and data. And since you are not a doctor, I find it astounding that you have taken it upon yourself to steer patients clear of Dr. Rutledge by offering your extremely negative opinion on his procedure, and in a way that clearly implicates your " professional advisor " capacity. > Bariatric surgery is a fascinating field. You will hear > various points of view concerning a wide range of topics: > gastric bypass versus restrictive procedures; how about > the LapBand or Swedish Band; is the duodenal switch the > same as or better than a biliopancreatic diversion; > should one use a ring or no ring in a gastric bypass >(ie, the " Fobi pouch " ); > laparoscopic versus open. > In short, there are a multitude of issues that surgeons > debate all the time and there are two sides to these various > interesting issues. Yawn. Are you going anywhere with this or did you just hope to impress all of us with terminology? > My concern with the MGB is that there does not seem to > be another side to the " debate " ; there is universal > concern of varying degrees about this procedure > and its short and long term ramifications. EVERY SURGEON > I have spoken to all over the country (and there are > dozens over the last year) are concerned > about this procedure and its impact on those who get it. > They are concerned because there appears to be a re-creation > of old mistakes which led to many > sick people. Your anecdotal accounts of surgeons with whom you have spoken, each of whom has a vested interest in making his own procedure the " standard, " does not translate to " Universal concern " about Dr. Rutledge's procedure, and that statement is false and defamatory on its face. Furthermore, only those who have not bothered to study either the " old procedure " that they profess to be concerned about versus Dr. Rutledge's procedure, make such patently ignorant and unsupported assertions. > They are not concerned due to economics, for no matter > how many procedures Dr. Rutledge does, there are plenty > of patients who need caring and help. However, when Dr. Rutledge's procedure is shown to be safer and have shorter recovery times and more effective weight loss, then all of those doctors, particularly the ones performing open procedures, will either have to learn the procedure or explain to their patients (and their malpractice insurance carriers) why they cannot offer them the safest, most effective procedure. > They are not concerned about his procedure being > the new " gold standard " because, in all candor, they > all agree it is easier to do - > BUT NOT BETTER to do. More claims to know what " all " the doctors in the universe think, Walter? Since some doctors have had the MGB, you are on very very shaky ground here. Secondly, those doctors who voice " concern " only do so because (1) They have never done it; and (2) They have not studied the procedure at all and seem to have it confused with an old loop procedure. > They are concerned because they have been doing this > a very long time, Translated: They are concerned because they have been doing *THEIR OWN* procedure a very long time -- a variant on the " we've always done it this way, " rant. Copernicus, Gallileo, Aristotle, Hippocrates, Newton, Edison, Tesla, Pasteur -- how many great men were ridiculed by their (very wrong) peers, Walter? And I might add, how many of the detractors had bootlicking counselors with their own interests at heart? > they have seen the progression of procedures from the > jejunal ileal bypass and beyond, and because none of them > have ever gotten an adequate medical explanation from > Dr. Rutledge as to why his procedure is simply not a > repeat of past mistakes. What " mistakes, " Walter? Why don't you ever come right out and say what you mean? Why all these insinuations, without substance? Anyone claiming Dr. Rutledge has not given an adequate medical explanation of his procedure must be deaf, dumb, blind, and stupid. On his website, there's a video of the procedure, and a copy of the ASBS paper which provides detailed information regarding his patient results for 657 cases. Further, his patients can be contacted directly. There is no other doctor who has documented his procedure so thoroughly and publicly as Dr. Rutledge. > I have found that surgeons agree often on very little... > however there is a universal agreement among them There you go with that " universal agreement " claim again. That is false and libellous on its face. You have *no* basis to proclaim knowledge of any so-called " universal agreement " by " all " the doctors. The fact that you make these kinds of nonsensical, obviously false, and overly-broad proclaimations betrays your underlying motives, Walter. Your wild claims of a " bad " procedure with " mistakes " are barren of any supporting facts, too. > (surgeons who do lap or open; restrictive or > malabsorptive procedures alike) that this is a " bad operation. " > When there is such universal agreement between folks I > know cannot agree on anything, as a layperson charged > with helping people get medical treatment, I become > very very concerned. > I reached this decision to not handle MGB matters after > much soul-searching and wondering how to " do the right > thing. " Recognizing you could get a lot more of the easy insurance cases if you suck up to this " overwhelming majority " of doctors in " universal agreement, " you mean. >My decision was finalized after the Memphis meeting; I'll bet it was! Indeed! All those doctors in one place that you could glad-hand and pass your card to, and ingratiate yourself! What a field day you must have had! > unlike most on this list, I WAS THERE > for the presentation by Dr. Rutledge and the questions that > followed. As an outsider looking in, there was reason to be > concerned. Since Dr. Rutledge was scheduled on Saturday, after the main conference was already over, those who stayed for his presen- tation can be said to have been " interested, " for whatever reason. And since they were a hostile group, one could esaily deduce that these were people who were interested for their own reasons, hostile to Dr. Rutledge's work. I can't imagine Doctors acting so unprofessionally, otherwise. With no scientific information, with no contrary data, out of hand proclaiming that Dr. Rutledge's statistics could not be correct, is nothing short of idiocy, or collusion. > Please understand I don't want to the power some > patients try to give me when choose a procedure, Is that written in English? > but I do want to feel that I am helping them in the > long-term. I am not therefore convinced of this in > the case of the MGB and look for assistance. > Lest you be actually swayed by " facts, " let me run a > couple past you. First, my decision to decline these > cases is completely against my financial > best interests, PFFFTTTT!!!!! Let me point out how you have already proclaimed that the " overwhelming majority " of doctors are against Dr. Rutledge's procedure. You were clearly impressed with the sheer numbers that you claim it to be a " universal " agreement of " all " the doctors. Now, if you want your bread to be buttered by this " overwhelming majority, " it is DECIDEDLY in your interests to climb on their bandwagon. How transparent!!! Maybe that's why you had to protest so much that you were doing it " out of concern for the patients. " > for Dr. Rutledge was far more aggressive than most surgeons > in referring patients to me and/or my site. This decision > was made despite attorneys have the money-grubbing > bottom-feeder reputation the rest of you bestow upon us. OOooooh, it's " the rest of you " vs. " us, " is it, Walter? Well, you've certainly done nothing to dispel any notions I may have held about you being a money-grubbing bottom-feeder, Walter. > Second - I truly believe that Dr. Rutledge is a > compassionate and caring surgeon with a wonderful > bedside manner. He and I have exchanged emails on > this topic and I believe he understands that this was > a difficult decision and that it is not directed at > him personally. Right, even though you have attacked his procedure, and attacked him, personally, by saying he has " declined to proceed, " (insinuating that he has something to hide) and by saying he wouldn't answer other doctors' questions, characterizing this as " evasive, " and " hiding, " etc. > Third - Dr. Rutledge has asked to explain this issue to me > personally and I have accepted that invitation, but he > has thus far declined to proceed further...I find the cites > to his website just recently posted wholly > unscientific and not very helpful. " Anectodal " evidence, > I have learned, is not the stuff upon which such monumental > decisions are made. You've rejected the scientifically presented cumulative data from 657 patients' procedures, so I'm not in the least surprised you aren't interested in further information. > Fourth - Dr. Rutledge carefully avoided any discussion of the > technical aspects of his procedure during his ASBS talk > and THAT was considered by his peers to be intellectually > dishonest and purposefully evasive since the > " loop " versus " roux " issue is the HEART of the universal > concerns which have been raised. That statement right there is the essence of the issue: Dr. Rutledge does not do the " old loop " procedure so he shouldn't be forced into a position of defending it. It is the preconceived and wrong notions by these doctors that Dr. Rutledge's procedure is the " old loop " that has resulted in their and your perpetuation of your own ignorant states. He makes information widely available on his website, including a video of the procedure he performs. Furthermore, there cannot be " universal agreement " that the procedure he performs is somehow " bad, " because the Billroth II is widely performed for ulcers, cancer, and congenital defects, all of which require a gastrectomy and all of which use the Billroth II procedure. The only distinction is that Dr. Rutledge is using it to treat obesity, rather than ulcers or cancer. The procedure itself, however, is the same and it's taught in every medical school in the country. A quick search on the web would have shown you this, Walter, so you have belied the carelessness of your efforts and your willingness to jump on the bandwagon of those who will be buttering your bread for you, rather than having made a rational decision based on facts. Try these: From: http://www.lapsurgery.com/overview.htm OVERVIEW OF LAPAROSCOPIC GASTRO-INTESTINAL SURGERY, CURRENT STATE OF THE ART Edited by M. Spiro, M.D., Professor of Medicine Yale University School of Medicine GARTH H. BALLANTYNE, M.D. F.A.C.S., F.A.S.C.R.S. BOARD CERTIFIED IN: GENERAL SURGERY & COLON AND RECTAL SURGERY IRVIN M. MODLIN MD PhD, DENNIS G. BEGOS MD, GARTH H. BALLANTYNE MD OFFICE: 50 EAST 69th STREET, NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10021 DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR ADVANCED LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY<br> CHIEF, DIVISION OF LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY ST. LUKE'S - ROOSEVELT HOSPITAL CENTER NEW YORK, NEW YORK PRACTICE LIMITED TO LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY References regarding the Billroth II: 51. Uddo JF Jr: Antrectomy with Billroth 11 Anastomosis, in Ballantyne GH, Leahy PF, Medlin IM (eds): Laparoscopic Surgery. Philadelphia, Saunders, 1994, pp 444-448. ===================================================================== http://www.transmed.net/lapnet/lapmenu.htm Online Laparoscopic Technical Manual From the book, INTERVENTIONAL LAPAROSCOPY The State of the Art for the New Millennium, Philippe J. Quilici, MD, FACS, demonstrates more than three dozen laparoscopic gastric procedures The Billroth II is covered at: http://www.transmed.net/lapnet/gasdis2.htm " LAPAROSCOPIC MANAGEMENT OF GASTRIC SECRETION DISORDERS " The laparoscopic treatment of morbid obesity, laparoscopically, uses the same techniques as Dr. Rutledge's procedure for the laparoscopic aspect, see: http://www.transmed.net/lapnet/morob.htm ===================================================================== http://my.webmd.com/content/dmk/dmk_article_1456759 " WEB MD HELP " World Book Rush-Presbyterian St. Luke's Medical Center Medical Encyclopedia. DEFINITION OF BILLROTH I & II: " Billroth I and II are gastrectomies, that is, surgical procedures used in the treatment of stomach cancer and peptic ulcers. Billroth I involves the removal of the lower portion of the stomach. The remaining stomach is then connected directly to the duodenum, the upper part of the small intestine. " Billroth II involves the removal of both the lower portion of the stomach and the duodenum. The remaining stomach is then connected directly to the jejunum, the middle portion of the small intestine. " ===================================================================== From: http://cancer.med.upenn.edu/cancernet/98/mar/703066.html#9 Billroth procedure used in treatment of gastric carcinoma ======================================================= http://www.vh.org/Providers/TeachingFiles/CAP/Case07/Case07.html Correlapaedia - a Correlative Encyclopedia of Pediatric Imaging, Surgery, and Pathology P. D'Alessandro, M.D., J. Fishman, M.D., Deborah E. Schofield, M.D. Billroth II procedure used on a newborn infant. ======================================================= http://www.ip.pt/~ip228619/atlasestoperado.htm Spanish Medical Reference also covering the Billroth II. I mention all these obvious references, such as the Encyclopedias and Atlas, because, contrary to your assertions, the Billroth II procedure has never been abandoned as " bad " and is currently taught worldwide. > He knows that controversy so his conscious " hiding " of > that critical issue in this important paper leads those > of us to wonder why he chose not to address that issue - > his evasive responses to questions from > his peers is further evidence of his lack of comfort > on this topic - which again leads me to act with caution. This is some more of that respect for Dr. Rutledge you claimed to have, right? Characterizing him as " hiding " and being " evasive. " Instead, it could well be that he was stunned by the ignorance of the people demanding he defend the " old loop, " which is not what he does, and assuming they were intelligent people, they would recognize their mistake. Doubtlessly he did not come there prepared to defend the old loop procedure. And even if he *did* do the " old loop " procedure, then one could deduce from the patient results he has had, that perhaps something he is doing differently is responsible for the extremely good record he has attained. The MGB is superior in every respect to any other procedure available: It requires less time under anesthesia and in surgery (35 min. as opposed to 2-7 HOURS), it has a rapid recovery time (24 hours as opposed to 2-6 weeks, and without the increased risk of wound herniation), and patient weight losses are greater. It is far safer, having no incidences of esophagitis and only 4 instances of marginal ulcer (in 657 cases). Most importantly, and something which should totally negate the arguments of the naysayers, is that the MGB is COMPLETELY REVERSIBLE, in a one hour laparoscopic procedure. It causes less adhesions, as well. If it truly turned out to be " bad, " well, it's easily rectified. Whereas the RNY, open or lap, must be performed near the aorta and is inherently more dangerous to begin with, causes more adhesions, and is quite dangerous and sometimes impossible, to reverse. The hess and scopinaro gastric bypass with d/s are not reversible. The banded gastroplasties are, of course, reversible, but they do not have good long-term results and the safety record during surgery is not as good as Dr. Rutledge's, either. > So in closing, don't attack me personally on this - > YOU DON " T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT ME! Do not expect or > project that I am doing anything other > than struggling to do the right thing > on this very important issue. Why on earth should anyone credit you with good intentions, when you have attacked Dr. Rutledge and his procedure, without foundation, and offered a lot of sanctimonious, self-serving pap about your reasons for doing it, when it is transparently obvious that you are not motivated by any lofty concern for the well-being of mankind whatsoever and your vicious attacks on Dr. Rutledge have been made without even a rudimentary understanding of his procedure? FIVE attorneys that I know of have come to a different conclusion than you, Walter, and there are probably more. Additionally, there are also doctors who have had this procedure themselves -- more proof that there is not " universal agreement " that the procedure is " bad, " and more proof that you are full of beans, Walter. And let's don't forget all the nurses who've had the procedure, too. > Access to bariatric surgery is critical to all of us > suffering with this deadly disease and bariatric > surgery has enough black eyes in its history; When did you have your surgery, Walter? What doctor? > we are in the midst of public and professional > acceptance at a level never before seen. What bariatric > surgery cannot afford, and what I am fearful of, is > that this MAY be yet another black eye since it so > closely resembles earlier problematic procedures. This is the typical propagandist's attack: Repeatedly allude to " problematic procedures " and never say what you mean. Specifically, Walter, WHAT problem? NAME IT. I know you can't. >You are devoted to Dr. Rutledge. Your loyalty is to > be commended. You lose, Walter. She has not had surgery with Dr. Rutledge, but she is intelligent enough to have studied the various procedures and compared them, including Dr. Rutledge's. And, oh, by the way, Walter, she's a nurse. There are more than a half-dozen nurses on this list right now. > But I have devoted my entire life to this cause - > not a single surgeon or procedure. I need to be sure > and I'm not. Until I am reasonably sure, I > cannot in good conscience (despite the economic > hardship it causes my practice) Oh, get out the violins and flowers and play Walter a sad song. What a crock, Walter, what a load of self-serving, garbage! > work for people seeking this option if it may turn out to > be dangerous to them. Walter, nobody can make you work for anyone you don't want to, and you didn't need to go on this little crusade, attacking Dr. Rutledge, both openly and in private emails, to simply turn down work, but you have. I have received copies of several emails you have sent to individuals, in which you don't simply decline representation, you go out of your way to try to convince the people not to go to Dr. Rutledge. That, Walter, is not only libel, it is tortious interference with contract. In some states, it's also a deceptive consumer practice. And it is clearly a matter outside your field of expertise, so it could well be considered practicing medicine -- giving medical advice -- without a license. > I would propose some type of debate or controlled open > forum involving Dr. Rutledge and some of his peers at > ASBS...perhaps at the next meeting in Washington, DC. > Perhaps a cooperative educational process airing out > the concerns and giving Dr. Rutledge ample time to > educate his peers about why this procedure is > truly different would be of value...I know it would be > of value to me -- and I know I am not alone in that. Oh, aren't you ever-so-pious sounding now, after you've attacked Dr. Rutledge with base innuendo and false, unsupported claims! You make me ashamed to be in the same profession as you. > I am pleased that you are having a good result and are > happy with your choice. I wish that for all of us who > seek surgical intervention of our disease. And I hope > against hope that 10-15 years from now you will > still be as excited and passionate about your choice > and that I was proven to be very very wrong...but I > choose to proceed with caution and reiterate > my invitation that Dr. Rutledge follow through > on his offer to provide me with " his side " of things. Which sets it up as Dr. Rutledge having to defend himself against scurrilous and slanderous claims, from the outset. Why on earth would he indulge you? Your mind, such as it is, is clearly set. > Thanks for hearing my side of the story...so let the " flames " > begin.................. > Walter Lindstrom, Esquire > Obesity Law & Advocacy Center > www.obesitylaw.com > 2939 Alta View Drive - Suite O-360 > San Diego, CA 92139 > Tel: > Fax: Walter, I think in the future, it would be a very good idea for you to simply decline work that you don't want and keep your misinformed, ill-advised medical opinions to yourself. , J.D. Attorney at Law Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 Hello, : I read every line of your explanation twice............I do have a question for you and anyone else out there. My daughter has the MGB in April and I am scheduled 7/26. We discussed these postings in great length this week. In laymen's terms, are we correct in conluding.........that the old loop left very little " stomach " and the bile backup did effect the esophagus....it so seen to effect the cells of the esophagus, changed some of the cells to a pre- cancerous condition and in some cases cancer was the end result................ In the MGB.........due to the placement and angle of the stomach (larger than the old loop), there is no bile backup to do the damage that the old loop did.........Am I correct in this over simplification ??????? Anyone, please feel free to email me with their feelings too. Thank you all, Jane JANEWOJO@... PreOp 7/26/00 BMI 40 248 lbs Insurance denied as an exclusion Self-Pay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 Bravo This is better then L.A Law on T.V . I wanted to be an Attorney but after reading such well written words I'll stick to being a Jeweler and Instructor. I say he's guilty, guilty , guilty. To the Electric chair for a little shock treatment. Love from Fla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 , Ditto what Genz said. Plus I wish I was there to see you. How long are you staying? Trisha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 Hi, I am just back from vacation and would ask that we all continue our efforts to be kind and thoughtful in all of our messages to one another. I very much welcome Mr. Lindstrom's participating in out list, as he can give us his thoughtful comments and opinions about surgery for obesity in general and about the Mini-Gastric Bypass in particular. Please do not " flame " each other. Be nice. I am just off to clinic this morning but I will try to do a better job of going over the advantages of the MGB again and the concerns expressed by other physicians and my answers to their concerns in a further email and web page later tonight after I get back from clinic. Once again let me please ask that all of us use kindness in all that we do and recognize that good people can have different opinions. Peace. ( and love, I was a child of the 60's :-) RR Rutledge, M.D., F.A.C.S. The Center for Laparoscopic Obesity Surgery 4301 Ben lin Blvd. Durham, N.C. 27704 Telephone #: Fax #: Email: DrR@... ************************************************ Please Visit our Web site: http://clos.net ************************************************ Durham Regional Hospital: Also, Please consider joining the Mini-Gastric Bypass Mailing List at http://www.onelist.com MiniGastricBypass is a general discussion of the Mini-Gastric Bypass ( http://www.onelist.com/community/MiniGastricBypass ) Talk with lots of other Pre and Post Op patients and friends. Keep up to date on the latest news about the Mini-Gastric Bypass. Re: Walter Lindstrom > > > > , He has everthing to gain. He sits on the ASBS board and > > cowtows with the good old boys. If the boys club is against this > > procedure, then he will be too. > > > > I had a conversation with T. the other day. Since she is > > writing a book on the various types of WLS I felt she might know. > > She explained it to me like this. Dr R. does not make a loop at all. > > The old procedure involved a loop of intestines taht produced two > > side-by-side sections of intestine at the anastomosis area and then > > an > > ulcer would develop between the loops. > > > > Have you read Dr. R's statistics lately? > > > > As far as peer review. How much do you think those other Docs will > > be > > loosing if this procedure became the " gold standard " $20,000 to > > 40,000 a surgery. > > > > Walter has a financial stake in this as he needs the endorsment of > > the > > surgeon in order to be able to work with them. Its a move for him to > > be politically correct. > > > > Dr. R has done something no other surgeon had done. Brought his > > group > > closer together. He has built a network which allows his clients > > and > > prospective clients to communicate and learn the pro's and con's of > > this surgery. The medical peer feel his statistics are tainted. How > > could they be so high? Dr. R has given us the vehicle to verify > > those > > statistics. We do this every day on the message board,e-mail or on > > the phone as he has given us the lists including names phone numbers > > and e-mail addresses for each and everyone of us. We are screened > > and > > have to fit a particular criteria to be approved. We are educated. > > He asks alot from us even before we are approved. That is why > > statistics are so high. We have the understanding and knowledge of > > the procedure and the post op care through the patient manual, the > > web > > site, and each other. Dr. R had done his homework on how to make > > this > > procedure the " gold standard " . I think he is well on his way. > > My vote is with Dr R. > > > > on Dr R's side > > > > In MiniGastricBypass (AT) egroups (DOT) com, srozycki@s... wrote: > > > Hi, I just got back from vacation and saw the notes regarding > > Walter. > > > He is currently representing me in my appeal to have the surgery > > with > > > Dr. R. Needless to say your posts concerned me, so I called him > > > directly. > > > Let me say that I have as much faith in Walter as an attorney who > > > cares about his obese clients as I do in Dr. Rutledge who cares > > about > > > his obese patients. Walter has made the decision not to take on > > any > > > more of Dr. R's patients. He was at the ASBS conference and saw > > Dr. > > > R's presentation. The decision he made was not based on hearsay. > > He > > > is very informed about the various surgeries out there and has > > grave > > > concerns about the long-term results of Dr. R.s surgery. After > > > seeing Dr. R's presentation and having the opportunity to ask > > > questions, he still feels this procedure is much like the one that > > > used to be done 20 years ago, and in good conscience no longer > > feels > > > comfortable representing/promoting Dr. R's clients. > > > > > > For the last six months I have been living and breathing MGB. All I > > > needed was the approval the rest of my packet is completed. I > > have > > > already fought and lost battles with my insurance company and now I > > > am ready to appeal to NC insurance commission to go to bat for me. > > I > > > have to be honest though, this has given me a time to pause and I > > > will probably research other types of surgeries as in depth as I > > have > > > researched the MGB. I don't know that I will find anyone who can > > > give me as much info as Dr. R personally has and that his website > > > does. My common sense tells me that all the other Dr.s at the ASBS > > > conference couldn't all be jealous of Dr. R's success. Walter > > > Lindstrom has no financial stake threatend by Dr. R's success. So > > > what don't they like that I am not seeing through my rose colored > > > glasses. I don't know anything about the surgery from 20 years ago > > > so I don't know what their concerns are. Can anyone explain to me > > > what the difference is between Dr. R MGB and the " old " one? I am > > > still not ready to give up. > > > > > > Thanks, Rozycki, MGB hopeful, since clinic on 2/19, Denver, > > NC. > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Wish you had something rad to add to your email? > > We do at www.supersig.com. > > http://click.egroups.com/1/6810/3/_/453517/_/963281093/ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > This message is from the Mini-Gastric Bypass Mailing List at Onelist.com > > Please visit our web site at http://clos.net > > Get the Patient Manual at http://clos.net/get_patient_manual.htm > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds! > 1. Fill in the brief application > 2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds > 3. Get rates as low as 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR > http://click.egroups.com/1/6631/3/_/453517/_/963285617/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > This message is from the Mini-Gastric Bypass Mailing List at Onelist.com > Please visit our web site at http://clos.net > Get the Patient Manual at http://clos.net/get_patient_manual.htm > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 --- wrote: > Let me preface my response by saying I find it more > than a > little interesting that an attorney who refuses to > assist > Dr. Rutledge's potential patients and who has > libelled > Dr. Rutledge, is nonetheless lurking on this list. > > I personally know of five attorneys who have had Dr. > > Rutledge's procedure, including myself. I'm a > federal > litigation attorney, Walter, well-skilled at > examining > facts and evidence, and I know a scam when I see > one. > > Now, out of all these attorneys, I'd hazard a guess > that > most of us are at least as intelligent and educated > as you > like to think yourself to be, yet we have all come > to a > different conclusion than you. > > > > > : It is necessary to clarify various > ill-informed > > misconceptions contained in your email. This is a > long > > message so bear with me. First, I sit on no ASBS > " board " > > and I am not their counsel. Less than 10% of > their surgeons > > actively refer patients to my practice. I am > beholden > > to no one in that organization for the opinions > that I develop. > > Since the RNY and FOBI procedures are > well-established (and all > the cash-cow clinics are in California, where you > are) > when an insurance company turns an RNY down, it > *usually* > means either the patient didn't document the claim > properly (a no-brainer that takes no effort to fix) > or it > means that obesity surgery is excluded in the > person's > policy and there is probably nothing you can do but > take > the person's $500 and offer to " help " them. > > Furthermore, the general educational/comprehensional > level > of the patients having those procedures appears to > be much > lower than the average patient of Dr. Rutledge. In > fact, > many of the patients (whose posts are plastered all > over > onelist) seem to lack even a rudimentary > understanding of the > procedure they will have or have had, much less a > grasp > of the options available to them. > > On the other hand, Dr. Rutledge's patients tend to > be > well-educated, computer-literate, and well-informed. > > Their insurance problems are often complex. You > can't take the > money and do little-of-nothing. > > So, Walter, it is *clearly* in your financial > interests to > polish the apples that bring in the easy money, > while finding a way to endear yourself to those > practitioners, > by bad-mouthing Dr. Rutledge and his procedure, as > you > proclaim (several times) it is only " out of your > concern " > for those patients' well-being. > > > > However, I am not a doctor and rely upon those who > are > > to explain the issues to me so I can make a MY > determination > > based on evidence and data. > > Too bad you have abandoned your usual procedure, > then, to > adopt opinions based on speculation, rather than > examine hard facts and data. > > And since you are not a doctor, I find it astounding > that > you have taken it upon yourself to steer patients > clear > of Dr. Rutledge by offering your extremely negative > opinion on his procedure, and in a way that clearly > implicates your " professional advisor " capacity. > > > Bariatric surgery is a fascinating field. You > will hear > > various points of view concerning a wide range of > topics: > > gastric bypass versus restrictive procedures; how > about > > the LapBand or Swedish Band; is the duodenal > switch the > > same as or better than a biliopancreatic > diversion; > > should one use a ring or no ring in a gastric > bypass > >(ie, the " Fobi pouch " ); > > laparoscopic versus open. > > In short, there are a multitude of issues that > surgeons > > debate all the time and there are two sides to > these various > > interesting issues. > > Yawn. Are you going anywhere with this or did you > just hope > to impress all of us with terminology? > > > My concern with the MGB is that there does not > seem to > > be another side to the " debate " ; there is > universal > > concern of varying degrees about this procedure > > and its short and long term ramifications. EVERY > SURGEON > > I have spoken to all over the country (and there > are > > dozens over the last year) are concerned > > about this procedure and its impact on those who > get it. > > They are concerned because there appears to be a > re-creation > > of old mistakes which led to many > > sick people. > > Your anecdotal accounts of surgeons with whom you > have > spoken, each of whom has a vested interest in making > his own procedure the " standard, " does not translate > to " Universal concern " about Dr. Rutledge's > procedure, > and that statement is false and defamatory on its > face. > > Furthermore, only those who have not bothered to > study either > the " old procedure " that they profess to be > concerned about > versus Dr. Rutledge's procedure, make such patently > ignorant > and unsupported assertions. > > > They are not concerned due to economics, for no > matter > > how many procedures Dr. Rutledge does, there are > plenty > > of patients who need caring and help. > > However, when Dr. Rutledge's procedure is shown to > be safer > and have shorter recovery times and more effective > weight loss, > then all of those doctors, particularly the ones > performing > open procedures, will either have to learn the > procedure or > explain to their patients (and their malpractice > insurance > carriers) why they cannot offer them the safest, > most > effective procedure. > > > They are not concerned about his procedure being > > the new " gold standard " because, in all candor, > they > > all agree it is easier to do - > > BUT NOT BETTER to do. > > More claims to know what " all " the doctors in the > universe think, > Walter? Since some doctors have had the MGB, you > are on > very very shaky ground here. > > Secondly, those doctors who voice " concern " only do > so === message truncated === , you go girl..........that was great....kecia,rn __________________________________________________ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 Walter, Everyone is welcome on this list. I applaud you for your work in helping people like me get insurance approval for a life saving operation. I pray that you will meet with DR Ruttledge and find peace in what has been a miracle for me. There are many patients who need Both Dr. Ruttledge and You. Im sure I will get flamed for this. I had to pay cash because time was not on my side. I now can go back and fight my insurance company. To everyone on this list we need everyone we can get to help us in this fight. Walter Im sure if you were to thoroughly understand the difference between the MGB and the old loop, you would have a change of heart. So for the sake of all Make it a PRIORTY! Now a good dat to all! And may God bless all in this journey for a healthy life. Trisha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 In a message dated 7/11/2000 3:31:50 AM Eastern Daylight Time, lindat@... writes: << Let me preface my response by saying I find it more than a little interesting that an attorney who refuses to assist Dr. Rutledge's potential patients and who has libelled Dr. Rutledge, is nonetheless lurking on this list. >> , I just wanted to say that this post was wonderful!! I know that Dr. R wants us all to play nice and be kind and in most all situations I would agree with him, but I also believe that there are times to stand up and be heard even if it has to be screamed from the rooftops or seem to get a little nasty. I am not a highly educated person and I learn from all of you and what research that I'm able to do and I feel that Mr. Lindstrom was totally wrong to post what he did, all he had to do was say he had stopped representing for the MGB for his own personal reasons and then drop it. He had no reason to get into all of the why's and whatfor's. I saw that as nothing but a scare tactic to all wanting this surgery and to me that is NOT ETHICAL.. Anyway I just wanted to tell you how great I thought your response was!!! Cathy in Lenoir, NC Pre-op BMI 42 A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 And when that " large " female attorney won an award, she stated " This is for all the fat girls. " Griffitts, MICP NREMT-P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 Hi , You are going to do fine next week. I'm so proud of you. I've watched your journey and prayed for you. Just think how beautiful you will be with your new slim body onstage singing with all the glitz and glitter you want. Maybe you and Tenneil can get together and sing for me...... I try to keep my posts grounded with what I find is MY experience. I don't want to present my experience as absolute fact because everyone is an individual and all experiences will be different. Each pre-op out there is probably looking for some comfort and reassurance from the post-ops. I know I did.........the thing to remember is to keep a positive attitude even though it may be difficult at times. The recovery period will have some interesting periods of reeducating yourself and lots of trial and error. Listen to your body and Dr. R...... Dr. R is the EXPERT in this surgery and he knows what he is doing. I thank God everyday for leading me to the MGB website. I can't predict the future but I know I would much rather take my chances with a normal weight body than fight disease with a morbidly obese body. If I had had any open procedure I would still be trying to recover from a horrendous wound almost the length of my torso.......as it is, I have 5 tiny one inch puncture wounds that have given me no pain or trouble since my surgery almost 6 weeks ago. I feel good and I'm smart enough to be able to care for myself as time goes by. If, God forbid, anything happens to Dr. R he has been wise enough to leave behind a wealth of knowledge that is readily available to ANYONE in this entire world. I find comfort in that fact and if the need arises I hope I can find another surgeon just as wise as Dr. R.........I do expect to grow old with Dr. R being readily accessible somewhere within a short flight or car trip. I can see him now in the year 2050 doing his MGBs from his walker.............what a sight!!!!!!! I wish you well with your surgery. Have a great time and give Dr. R a kiss for me. Love, Genz Tedeschi wrote: > I don't know who to address this letter to because I have many > concerns and comments about this Walter Lindstrom matter. First, I > wish, as someone else has already posted, that I knew what happened > with the gastric bypass patients 20 years ago, that likens the MGB to > its end results. Secondly, Genz, your posting was VERY > informative. As an upcoming patient for the MGB next week, reading > Walter Lindstrom's letter was confusing as well as it cast many > doubts on my 'study' findings. I imagine that there will always be > people who do not approve of this surgery, and it is multiplied by > the factor of the people that I know that don't want me to have this > surgery. I have searched myself about this surgery, knowing within > the deepest reaches of my heart and soul that this is the option that > I CHOOSE to do. No one is making this decision for me. There are > many people that come to this list and choose to leave this site > because MGB is not the answer for them. This can be witnessed by the > many pleas for UNSUBCRIBE...LOL. (Bless their hearts. The would be > candidates get innundated with information that is overwhelming and > forget how to get off the e-group list.) > I am still having my surgery next week with Joyce, and > Kim. (I know, you too, L. and a and there are others > next week) I have not attended clinic yet as my appointment is for > July 18th at 9 a.m. So far nothing, not even a probably well thought > letter by Mr. Lindstrom has swayed me. So, if that doesn't do it I > don't know what will. Thanks to whomever read this long letter...LOL > I hope it was worth the effort. > > Love, > > MGB scheduled July 19th with my sisters: > Joyce, , and Kim > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Life's too short to send boring email. Let SuperSig come to the rescue. > http://click.egroups.com/1/6809/3/_/453517/_/963320877/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > This message is from the Mini-Gastric Bypass Mailing List at Onelist.com > Please visit our web site at http://clos.net > Get the Patient Manual at http://clos.net/get_patient_manual.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 Hi : Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I certainly will contact Dr. Dickerman to have him confirm and elaborate upon what you are telling me. He is not a very experienced bariatric surgeon but he may have an interesting point of view and information to share. Thanks. Walter Lindstrom, Esquire Obesity Law & Advocacy Center www.obesitylaw.com 2939 Alta View Drive - Suite O-360 San Diego, CA 92139 Tel: Fax: Re: Walter Lindstrom > > > > > , He has everthing to gain. He sits on the ASBS board and > > > cowtows with the good old boys. If the boys club is against this > > > procedure, then he will be too. > > > > > > I had a conversation with T. the other day. Since she is > > > writing a book on the various types of WLS I felt she might know. > > > She explained it to me like this. Dr R. does not make a loop at all. > > > The old procedure involved a loop of intestines taht produced two > > > side-by-side sections of intestine at the anastomosis area and then > > > an > > > ulcer would develop between the loops. > > > > > > Have you read Dr. R's statistics lately? > > > > > > As far as peer review. How much do you think those other Docs will > > > be > > > loosing if this procedure became the " gold standard " $20,000 to > > > 40,000 a surgery. > > > > > > Walter has a financial stake in this as he needs the endorsment of > > > the > > > surgeon in order to be able to work with them. Its a move for him to > > > be politically correct. > > > > > > Dr. R has done something no other surgeon had done. Brought his > > > group > > > closer together. He has built a network which allows his clients > > > and > > > prospective clients to communicate and learn the pro's and con's of > > > this surgery. The medical peer feel his statistics are tainted. How > > > could they be so high? Dr. R has given us the vehicle to verify > > > those > > > statistics. We do this every day on the message board,e-mail or on > > > the phone as he has given us the lists including names phone numbers > > > and e-mail addresses for each and everyone of us. We are screened > > > and > > > have to fit a particular criteria to be approved. We are educated. > > > He asks alot from us even before we are approved. That is why > > > statistics are so high. We have the understanding and knowledge of > > > the procedure and the post op care through the patient manual, the > > > web > > > site, and each other. Dr. R had done his homework on how to make > > > this > > > procedure the " gold standard " . I think he is well on his way. > > > My vote is with Dr R. > > > > > > on Dr R's side > > > > > > In MiniGastricBypass (AT) egroups (DOT) com, srozycki@s... wrote: > > > > Hi, I just got back from vacation and saw the notes regarding > > > Walter. > > > > He is currently representing me in my appeal to have the surgery > > > with > > > > Dr. R. Needless to say your posts concerned me, so I called him > > > > directly. > > > > Let me say that I have as much faith in Walter as an attorney who > > > > cares about his obese clients as I do in Dr. Rutledge who cares > > > about > > > > his obese patients. Walter has made the decision not to take on > > > any > > > > more of Dr. R's patients. He was at the ASBS conference and saw > > > Dr. > > > > R's presentation. The decision he made was not based on hearsay. > > > He > > > > is very informed about the various surgeries out there and has > > > grave > > > > concerns about the long-term results of Dr. R.s surgery. After > > > > seeing Dr. R's presentation and having the opportunity to ask > > > > questions, he still feels this procedure is much like the one that > > > > used to be done 20 years ago, and in good conscience no longer > > > feels > > > > comfortable representing/promoting Dr. R's clients. > > > > > > > > For the last six months I have been living and breathing MGB. All I > > > > needed was the approval the rest of my packet is completed. I > > > have > > > > already fought and lost battles with my insurance company and now I > > > > am ready to appeal to NC insurance commission to go to bat for me. > > > I > > > > have to be honest though, this has given me a time to pause and I > > > > will probably research other types of surgeries as in depth as I > > > have > > > > researched the MGB. I don't know that I will find anyone who can > > > > give me as much info as Dr. R personally has and that his website > > > > does. My common sense tells me that all the other Dr.s at the ASBS > > > > conference couldn't all be jealous of Dr. R's success. Walter > > > > Lindstrom has no financial stake threatend by Dr. R's success. So > > > > what don't they like that I am not seeing through my rose colored > > > > glasses. I don't know anything about the surgery from 20 years ago > > > > so I don't know what their concerns are. Can anyone explain to me > > > > what the difference is between Dr. R MGB and the " old " one? I am > > > > still not ready to give up. > > > > > > > > Thanks, Rozycki, MGB hopeful, since clinic on 2/19, Denver, > > > NC. > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Wish you had something rad to add to your email? > > > We do at www.supersig.com. > > > http://click.egroups.com/1/6810/3/_/453517/_/963281093/ > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > This message is from the Mini-Gastric Bypass Mailing List at Onelist.com > > > Please visit our web site at http://clos.net > > > Get the Patient Manual at http://clos.net/get_patient_manual.htm > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds! > > 1. Fill in the brief application > > 2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds > > 3. Get rates as low as 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR > > http://click.egroups.com/1/6631/3/_/453517/_/963285617/ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > This message is from the Mini-Gastric Bypass Mailing List at Onelist.com > > Please visit our web site at http://clos.net > > Get the Patient Manual at http://clos.net/get_patient_manual.htm > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds! > 1. Fill in the brief application > 2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds > 3. Get rates as low as 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR > http://click.egroups.com/1/6628/3/_/453517/_/963294528/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > This message is from the Mini-Gastric Bypass Mailing List at Onelist.com > Please visit our web site at http://clos.net > Get the Patient Manual at http://clos.net/get_patient_manual.htm > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 Good morning : Your lengthy post requires some time to digest and fashion a response. However I am not the demon you make me out to be...I'm just struggling to do the right thing and, if you are correct, the right thing will be to aggressively and confidently pursue insurers wrongfully denying access to this procedure...and I will do that once I feel confident about its safety and efficacy. You obviously do - and as a highly educated professional, your opinion (and passion) means a great deal to me and helps in my continuing investigation. But do not get personal; follow the teaching of Dr. Rutledge to " be nice. " As for " lurking " on this list - hate to tell you this but I was INVITED to be here by Dr. Rutledge! Walter Lindstrom, Esquire Obesity Law & Advocacy Center www.obesitylaw.com 2939 Alta View Drive - Suite O-360 San Diego, CA 92139 Tel: Fax: Re: Walter Lindstrom > Let me preface my response by saying I find it more than a > little interesting that an attorney who refuses to assist > Dr. Rutledge's potential patients and who has libelled > Dr. Rutledge, is nonetheless lurking on this list. > > I personally know of five attorneys who have had Dr. > Rutledge's procedure, including myself. I'm a federal > litigation attorney, Walter, well-skilled at examining > facts and evidence, and I know a scam when I see one. > > Now, out of all these attorneys, I'd hazard a guess that > most of us are at least as intelligent and educated as you > like to think yourself to be, yet we have all come to a > different conclusion than you. > > > > > : It is necessary to clarify various ill-informed > > misconceptions contained in your email. This is a long > > message so bear with me. First, I sit on no ASBS " board " > > and I am not their counsel. Less than 10% of their surgeons > > actively refer patients to my practice. I am beholden > > to no one in that organization for the opinions that I develop. > > Since the RNY and FOBI procedures are well-established (and all > the cash-cow clinics are in California, where you are) > when an insurance company turns an RNY down, it *usually* > means either the patient didn't document the claim > properly (a no-brainer that takes no effort to fix) or it > means that obesity surgery is excluded in the person's > policy and there is probably nothing you can do but take > the person's $500 and offer to " help " them. > > Furthermore, the general educational/comprehensional level > of the patients having those procedures appears to be much > lower than the average patient of Dr. Rutledge. In fact, > many of the patients (whose posts are plastered all over > onelist) seem to lack even a rudimentary understanding of the > procedure they will have or have had, much less a grasp > of the options available to them. > > On the other hand, Dr. Rutledge's patients tend to be > well-educated, computer-literate, and well-informed. > > Their insurance problems are often complex. You can't take the > money and do little-of-nothing. > > So, Walter, it is *clearly* in your financial interests to > polish the apples that bring in the easy money, > while finding a way to endear yourself to those practitioners, > by bad-mouthing Dr. Rutledge and his procedure, as you > proclaim (several times) it is only " out of your concern " > for those patients' well-being. > > > > However, I am not a doctor and rely upon those who are > > to explain the issues to me so I can make a MY determination > > based on evidence and data. > > Too bad you have abandoned your usual procedure, then, to > adopt opinions based on speculation, rather than > examine hard facts and data. > > And since you are not a doctor, I find it astounding that > you have taken it upon yourself to steer patients clear > of Dr. Rutledge by offering your extremely negative > opinion on his procedure, and in a way that clearly > implicates your " professional advisor " capacity. > > > Bariatric surgery is a fascinating field. You will hear > > various points of view concerning a wide range of topics: > > gastric bypass versus restrictive procedures; how about > > the LapBand or Swedish Band; is the duodenal switch the > > same as or better than a biliopancreatic diversion; > > should one use a ring or no ring in a gastric bypass > >(ie, the " Fobi pouch " ); > > laparoscopic versus open. > > In short, there are a multitude of issues that surgeons > > debate all the time and there are two sides to these various > > interesting issues. > > Yawn. Are you going anywhere with this or did you just hope > to impress all of us with terminology? > > > My concern with the MGB is that there does not seem to > > be another side to the " debate " ; there is universal > > concern of varying degrees about this procedure > > and its short and long term ramifications. EVERY SURGEON > > I have spoken to all over the country (and there are > > dozens over the last year) are concerned > > about this procedure and its impact on those who get it. > > They are concerned because there appears to be a re-creation > > of old mistakes which led to many > > sick people. > > Your anecdotal accounts of surgeons with whom you have > spoken, each of whom has a vested interest in making > his own procedure the " standard, " does not translate > to " Universal concern " about Dr. Rutledge's procedure, > and that statement is false and defamatory on its face. > > Furthermore, only those who have not bothered to study either > the " old procedure " that they profess to be concerned about > versus Dr. Rutledge's procedure, make such patently ignorant > and unsupported assertions. > > > They are not concerned due to economics, for no matter > > how many procedures Dr. Rutledge does, there are plenty > > of patients who need caring and help. > > However, when Dr. Rutledge's procedure is shown to be safer > and have shorter recovery times and more effective weight loss, > then all of those doctors, particularly the ones performing > open procedures, will either have to learn the procedure or > explain to their patients (and their malpractice insurance > carriers) why they cannot offer them the safest, most > effective procedure. > > > They are not concerned about his procedure being > > the new " gold standard " because, in all candor, they > > all agree it is easier to do - > > BUT NOT BETTER to do. > > More claims to know what " all " the doctors in the universe think, > Walter? Since some doctors have had the MGB, you are on > very very shaky ground here. > > Secondly, those doctors who voice " concern " only do so because > (1) They have never done it; and (2) They have not studied the > procedure at all and seem to have it confused with an old > loop procedure. > > > They are concerned because they have been doing this > > a very long time, > > Translated: They are concerned because they have been doing > *THEIR OWN* procedure a very long time -- a variant on the > " we've always done it this way, " rant. > > Copernicus, Gallileo, Aristotle, Hippocrates, Newton, Edison, > Tesla, Pasteur -- how many great men were ridiculed by their > (very wrong) peers, Walter? And I might add, how many of the > detractors had bootlicking counselors with their own interests > at heart? > > > > they have seen the progression of procedures from the > > jejunal ileal bypass and beyond, and because none of them > > have ever gotten an adequate medical explanation from > > Dr. Rutledge as to why his procedure is simply not a > > repeat of past mistakes. > > What " mistakes, " Walter? Why don't you ever come right > out and say what you mean? Why all these insinuations, > without substance? > > Anyone claiming Dr. Rutledge has not given an adequate > medical explanation of his procedure must be deaf, dumb, > blind, and stupid. On his website, there's a video of the > procedure, and a copy of the ASBS paper which provides > detailed information regarding his patient results for 657 > cases. Further, his patients can be contacted directly. > There is no other doctor who has documented his procedure > so thoroughly and publicly as Dr. Rutledge. > > > I have found that surgeons agree often on very little... > > however there is a universal agreement among them > > There you go with that " universal agreement " claim again. > That is false and libellous on its face. You have *no* basis to > proclaim knowledge of any so-called " universal agreement " by > " all " the doctors. > > The fact that you make these kinds of nonsensical, obviously > false, and overly-broad proclaimations betrays your underlying > motives, Walter. Your wild claims of a " bad " procedure with > " mistakes " are barren of any supporting facts, too. > > > (surgeons who do lap or open; restrictive or > > malabsorptive procedures alike) that this is a " bad operation. " > > When there is such universal agreement between folks I > > know cannot agree on anything, as a layperson charged > > with helping people get medical treatment, I become > > very very concerned. > > I reached this decision to not handle MGB matters after > > much soul-searching and wondering how to " do the right > > thing. " > > Recognizing you could get a lot more of the easy insurance > cases if you suck up to this " overwhelming majority " of > doctors in " universal agreement, " you mean. > > >My decision was finalized after the Memphis meeting; > > I'll bet it was! Indeed! All those doctors in one > place that you could glad-hand and pass your card > to, and ingratiate yourself! What a field day you must > have had! > > > unlike most on this list, I WAS THERE > > for the presentation by Dr. Rutledge and the questions that > > followed. As an outsider looking in, there was reason to be > > concerned. > > Since Dr. Rutledge was scheduled on Saturday, after the main > conference was already over, those who stayed for his presen- > tation can be said to have been " interested, " for whatever > reason. And since they were a hostile group, one could esaily > deduce that these were people who were interested for their > own reasons, hostile to Dr. Rutledge's work. I can't imagine > Doctors acting so unprofessionally, otherwise. > > With no scientific information, with no contrary data, > out of hand proclaiming that Dr. Rutledge's > statistics could not be correct, is nothing short of idiocy, > or collusion. > > > Please understand I don't want to the power some > > patients try to give me when choose a procedure, > > Is that written in English? > > > but I do want to feel that I am helping them in the > > long-term. I am not therefore convinced of this in > > the case of the MGB and look for assistance. > > Lest you be actually swayed by " facts, " let me run a > > couple past you. First, my decision to decline these > > cases is completely against my financial > > best interests, > > PFFFTTTT!!!!! Let me point out how you have already > proclaimed that the " overwhelming majority " of doctors > are against Dr. Rutledge's procedure. You were clearly > impressed with the sheer numbers that you claim it to > be a " universal " agreement of " all " the doctors. > Now, if you want your bread to be buttered by this > " overwhelming majority, " it is DECIDEDLY in your > interests to climb on their bandwagon. > > How transparent!!! Maybe that's why you had to protest so > much that you were doing it " out of concern for the patients. " > > > for Dr. Rutledge was far more aggressive than most surgeons > > in referring patients to me and/or my site. This decision > > was made despite attorneys have the money-grubbing > > bottom-feeder reputation the rest of you bestow upon us. > > OOooooh, it's " the rest of you " vs. " us, " is it, Walter? > > Well, you've certainly done nothing to dispel any notions I > may have held about you being a money-grubbing bottom-feeder, > Walter. > > > Second - I truly believe that Dr. Rutledge is a > > compassionate and caring surgeon with a wonderful > > bedside manner. He and I have exchanged emails on > > this topic and I believe he understands that this was > > a difficult decision and that it is not directed at > > him personally. > > Right, even though you have attacked his procedure, and > attacked him, personally, by saying he has " declined to > proceed, " (insinuating that he has something to hide) and > by saying he wouldn't answer other doctors' questions, > characterizing this as " evasive, " and " hiding, " etc. > > > Third - Dr. Rutledge has asked to explain this issue to me > > personally and I have accepted that invitation, but he > > has thus far declined to proceed further...I find the cites > > to his website just recently posted wholly > > unscientific and not very helpful. " Anectodal " evidence, > > I have learned, is not the stuff upon which such monumental > > decisions are made. > > You've rejected the scientifically presented cumulative data > from 657 patients' procedures, so I'm not in the least > surprised you aren't interested in further information. > > > Fourth - Dr. Rutledge carefully avoided any discussion of the > > technical aspects of his procedure during his ASBS talk > > and THAT was considered by his peers to be intellectually > > dishonest and purposefully evasive since the > > " loop " versus " roux " issue is the HEART of the universal > > concerns which have been raised. > > That statement right there is the essence of the issue: Dr. > Rutledge does not do the " old loop " procedure so he shouldn't > be forced into a position of defending it. It is the > preconceived and wrong notions by these doctors that Dr. > Rutledge's procedure is the " old loop " that has resulted in > their and your perpetuation of your own ignorant states. > > He makes information widely available on his website, including > a video of the procedure he performs. > > Furthermore, there cannot be " universal agreement " that the > procedure he performs is somehow " bad, " because the Billroth > II is widely performed for ulcers, cancer, and congenital > defects, all of which require a gastrectomy and all of which > use the Billroth II procedure. The only distinction is that > Dr. Rutledge is using it to treat obesity, rather than > ulcers or cancer. The procedure itself, however, is the > same and it's taught in every medical school in the country. > > A quick search on the web would have shown you this, Walter, > so you have belied the carelessness of your efforts and your > willingness to jump on the bandwagon of those who will be > buttering your bread for you, rather than having made a > rational decision based on facts. > > Try these: > > From: http://www.lapsurgery.com/overview.htm > > OVERVIEW OF LAPAROSCOPIC GASTRO-INTESTINAL SURGERY, CURRENT STATE OF > THE ART > > Edited by M. Spiro, M.D., Professor of Medicine > Yale University School of Medicine > GARTH H. BALLANTYNE, M.D. F.A.C.S., F.A.S.C.R.S. > BOARD CERTIFIED IN: GENERAL SURGERY & COLON AND RECTAL SURGERY > IRVIN M. MODLIN MD PhD, DENNIS G. BEGOS MD, GARTH H. BALLANTYNE MD > OFFICE: 50 EAST 69th STREET, NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10021 > DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR ADVANCED LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY<br> > CHIEF, DIVISION OF LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY > ST. LUKE'S - ROOSEVELT HOSPITAL CENTER > NEW YORK, NEW YORK > PRACTICE LIMITED TO LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY > > References regarding the Billroth II: 51. Uddo JF Jr: Antrectomy > with > Billroth 11 Anastomosis, in Ballantyne GH, Leahy PF, Medlin IM (eds): > Laparoscopic Surgery. Philadelphia, Saunders, 1994, pp 444-448. > > > ===================================================================== > > http://www.transmed.net/lapnet/lapmenu.htm > > Online Laparoscopic Technical Manual From the book, INTERVENTIONAL > LAPAROSCOPY The State of the Art for the New Millennium, Philippe J. > Quilici, MD, FACS, demonstrates more than three dozen laparoscopic > gastric procedures > > The Billroth II is covered at: > http://www.transmed.net/lapnet/gasdis2.htm > " LAPAROSCOPIC MANAGEMENT OF GASTRIC SECRETION DISORDERS " > > The laparoscopic treatment of morbid obesity, laparoscopically, uses > the same techniques as Dr. Rutledge's procedure for the laparoscopic > aspect, see: http://www.transmed.net/lapnet/morob.htm > > ===================================================================== > > http://my.webmd.com/content/dmk/dmk_article_1456759 > > " WEB MD HELP " > > World Book Rush-Presbyterian St. Luke's Medical Center > Medical Encyclopedia. > > DEFINITION OF BILLROTH I & II: " Billroth I and II are gastrectomies, > that is, surgical procedures used in the treatment of stomach cancer > and peptic ulcers. Billroth I involves the removal of the lower > portion of the stomach. The remaining stomach is then connected > directly to the duodenum, the upper part of the small intestine. > > " Billroth II involves the removal of both the lower portion of the > stomach and the duodenum. The remaining stomach is then connected > directly to the jejunum, the middle portion of the small intestine. " > > ===================================================================== > > From: http://cancer.med.upenn.edu/cancernet/98/mar/703066.html#9 > > Billroth procedure used in treatment of gastric carcinoma > ======================================================= > http://www.vh.org/Providers/TeachingFiles/CAP/Case07/Case07.html > > Correlapaedia - a Correlative Encyclopedia of Pediatric Imaging, > Surgery, and Pathology > > P. D'Alessandro, M.D., J. Fishman, M.D., Deborah E. > Schofield, M.D. > > Billroth II procedure used on a newborn infant. > > ======================================================= > http://www.ip.pt/~ip228619/atlasestoperado.htm > > Spanish Medical Reference also covering the Billroth II. > > > I mention all these obvious references, such as the > Encyclopedias and Atlas, because, contrary to your assertions, > the Billroth II procedure has never been abandoned as > " bad " and is currently taught worldwide. > > > > He knows that controversy so his conscious " hiding " of > > that critical issue in this important paper leads those > > of us to wonder why he chose not to address that issue - > > his evasive responses to questions from > > his peers is further evidence of his lack of comfort > > on this topic - which again leads me to act with caution. > > This is some more of that respect for Dr. Rutledge you claimed > to have, right? Characterizing him as " hiding " and being > " evasive. " > > Instead, it could well be that he was stunned by the ignorance > of the people demanding he defend the " old loop, " which is not > what he does, and assuming they were intelligent people, they > would recognize their mistake. Doubtlessly he did not come > there prepared to defend the old loop procedure. > > And even if he *did* do the " old loop " procedure, then > one could deduce from the patient results he has had, that > perhaps something he is doing differently is responsible for > the extremely good record he has attained. The MGB is superior > in every respect to any other procedure available: It > requires less time under anesthesia and in surgery (35 min. as > opposed to 2-7 HOURS), it has a rapid recovery time (24 hours > as opposed to 2-6 weeks, and without the increased risk of wound > herniation), and patient weight losses are greater. It is > far safer, having no incidences of esophagitis and only 4 > instances of marginal ulcer (in 657 cases). > > Most importantly, and something which should totally negate the > arguments of the naysayers, is that the MGB is COMPLETELY > REVERSIBLE, in a one hour laparoscopic procedure. It causes > less adhesions, as well. If it truly turned out to be " bad, " > well, it's easily rectified. > > Whereas the RNY, open or lap, must be performed near the > aorta and is inherently more dangerous to begin with, > causes more adhesions, and is quite dangerous > and sometimes impossible, to reverse. The hess and scopinaro > gastric bypass with d/s are not reversible. The banded > gastroplasties are, of course, reversible, but they do not > have good long-term results and the safety record during > surgery is not as good as Dr. Rutledge's, either. > > > So in closing, don't attack me personally on this - > > YOU DON " T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT ME! Do not expect or > > project that I am doing anything other > > than struggling to do the right thing > > on this very important issue. > > Why on earth should anyone credit you with good intentions, > when you have attacked Dr. Rutledge and his procedure, without > foundation, and offered a lot of sanctimonious, self-serving > pap about your reasons for doing it, when it is transparently > obvious that you are not motivated by any lofty concern for > the well-being of mankind whatsoever and your vicious attacks > on Dr. Rutledge have been made without even a rudimentary > understanding of his procedure? > > FIVE attorneys that I know of have come to a different > conclusion than you, Walter, and there are probably more. > > Additionally, there are also doctors who have had this > procedure themselves -- more proof that there is not > " universal agreement " that the procedure is " bad, " and > more proof that you are full of beans, Walter. > > And let's don't forget all the nurses who've had the > procedure, too. > > > > Access to bariatric surgery is critical to all of us > > suffering with this deadly disease and bariatric > > surgery has enough black eyes in its history; > > When did you have your surgery, Walter? What doctor? > > > we are in the midst of public and professional > > acceptance at a level never before seen. What bariatric > > surgery cannot afford, and what I am fearful of, is > > that this MAY be yet another black eye since it so > > closely resembles earlier problematic procedures. > > This is the typical propagandist's attack: Repeatedly allude > to " problematic procedures " and never say what you mean. > > Specifically, Walter, WHAT problem? NAME IT. I know > you can't. > > > >You are devoted to Dr. Rutledge. Your loyalty is to > > be commended. > > You lose, Walter. She has not had surgery with Dr. Rutledge, > but she is intelligent enough to have studied the various > procedures and compared them, including Dr. Rutledge's. And, > oh, by the way, Walter, she's a nurse. There are more than > a half-dozen nurses on this list right now. > > > > But I have devoted my entire life to this cause - > > not a single surgeon or procedure. I need to be sure > > and I'm not. Until I am reasonably sure, I > > cannot in good conscience (despite the economic > > hardship it causes my practice) > > > Oh, get out the violins and flowers and play Walter a sad song. > What a crock, Walter, what a load of self-serving, garbage! > > > work for people seeking this option if it may turn out to > > be dangerous to them. > > Walter, nobody can make you work for anyone you don't want to, > and you didn't need to go on this little crusade, attacking > Dr. Rutledge, both openly and in private emails, to simply > turn down work, but you have. > > I have received copies of several emails you have sent to > individuals, in which you don't simply decline representation, > you go out of your way to try to convince the people not to > go to Dr. Rutledge. > > That, Walter, is not only libel, it is tortious interference > with contract. In some states, it's also a deceptive > consumer practice. And it is clearly a matter outside > your field of expertise, so it could well be considered > practicing medicine -- giving medical advice -- without a > license. > > > I would propose some type of debate or controlled open > > forum involving Dr. Rutledge and some of his peers at > > ASBS...perhaps at the next meeting in Washington, DC. > > Perhaps a cooperative educational process airing out > > the concerns and giving Dr. Rutledge ample time to > > educate his peers about why this procedure is > > truly different would be of value...I know it would be > > of value to me -- and I know I am not alone in that. > > Oh, aren't you ever-so-pious sounding now, after you've > attacked Dr. Rutledge with base innuendo and false, unsupported > claims! > > You make me ashamed to be in the same profession as you. > > > I am pleased that you are having a good result and are > > happy with your choice. I wish that for all of us who > > seek surgical intervention of our disease. And I hope > > against hope that 10-15 years from now you will > > still be as excited and passionate about your choice > > and that I was proven to be very very wrong...but I > > choose to proceed with caution and reiterate > > my invitation that Dr. Rutledge follow through > > on his offer to provide me with " his side " of things. > > Which sets it up as Dr. Rutledge having to defend himself > against scurrilous and slanderous claims, from the outset. > Why on earth would he indulge you? Your mind, such as it is, > is clearly set. > > > Thanks for hearing my side of the story...so let the " flames " > > begin.................. > > Walter Lindstrom, Esquire > > Obesity Law & Advocacy Center > > www.obesitylaw.com > > 2939 Alta View Drive - Suite O-360 > > San Diego, CA 92139 > > Tel: > > Fax: > > > Walter, I think in the future, it would be a very good idea for > you to simply decline work that you don't want and keep your > misinformed, ill-advised medical opinions to yourself. > > > , J.D. > Attorney at Law > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds! > 1. Fill in the brief application > 2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds > 3. Get rates as low as 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR > http://click.egroups.com/1/6630/3/_/453517/_/963300658/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > This message is from the Mini-Gastric Bypass Mailing List at Onelist.com > Please visit our web site at http://clos.net > Get the Patient Manual at http://clos.net/get_patient_manual.htm > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 Walter I have a good attorney here in Springfield Missouri and we are sueing our insurance company because they denied my coverage. We are just waiting for a court date. My surgery was Jan 10, 2000 and I weighed 242 lbs and I am 5 ft 1 in tall. I have severe scoliosis and one lung is crushed, plus all the weight from my weight and I could hardly breathe and my edema was pathetic when I arrived in Durham. Dr Rutledge saved my life. I would be dead now if I had not gotten my surgery when I did!!!! My blood pressure had sky rocketed. I am age 56 and am doing great now. My weight is 153 lbs and I look like a totally different person. I am set for a long life now, I can feel it and I know it. The data speaks for itself. My tummy is small now and I can never over eat and I don't crave sweets or greasy foods. I will never be heavy again. I can exercise now and enjoy my family, friends and feel like a real person. I had to pay cash for my surgery and a lot of people can't do that. I will stand by and do all I can to help others get to Durham to have this incredible surgery that has given me back my life. in Springfield, Missouri Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 Dr. Rutledge has had *zero* cases of esophagitis in his 657 patient study. In the old loop, ulcer and esophagitis were a problem. In both the RNY and MGB, one of the main concerns is ulceration and esophagitis, especially at the point that the intestine is joined back to the newer stomach. The RNY has a higher incidence of ulceration and esophagitis, yet the incidence is acceptably low. > Hello, : > I read every line of your explanation twice............I do have a question > for you and anyone else out there. > My daughter has the MGB in April and I am scheduled 7/26. We discussed these > postings in great length this week. > In laymen's terms, are we correct in conluding.........that the old loop left > very little " stomach " and the bile backup did effect the esophagus....it so > seen to effect the cells of the esophagus, changed some of the cells to a > pre- cancerous condition and in some cases cancer was the end > result................ > In the MGB.........due to the placement and angle of the stomach (larger than > the old loop), there is no bile backup to do the damage that the old loop > did.........Am I correct in this over simplification ??????? > Anyone, please feel free to email me with their feelings too. > Thank you all, > Jane > JANEWOJO@a... > PreOp 7/26/00 > BMI 40 > 248 lbs > Insurance denied as an exclusion > Self-Pay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 Doctor Rutledge has put up illustrations of the old loop procedure at: http://www.clos.net/gbptypes.htm Notice in illustration C on that page how the intestine makes a loop at the hole into the stomach. That is apparently where the ulcers would form -- between these two intestinal sections -- in the old loop procedure. Also notice that the larger stomach portion is not cut away from the smaller part. Dr. Rutledge's procedure is shown at: http://www.clos.net/op_descr.htm See also: http://clos.net/eotd/07-00/07-11.htm http://clos.net/eotd/07-00/07-09.htm http://clos.net/eotd/07-00/07-06.htm > Hello, : > I read every line of your explanation twice............I do have a question > for you and anyone else out there. > My daughter has the MGB in April and I am scheduled 7/26. We discussed these > postings in great length this week. > In laymen's terms, are we correct in conluding.........that the old loop left > very little " stomach " and the bile backup did effect the esophagus....it so > seen to effect the cells of the esophagus, changed some of the cells to a > pre- cancerous condition and in some cases cancer was the end > result................ > In the MGB.........due to the placement and angle of the stomach (larger than > the old loop), there is no bile backup to do the damage that the old loop > did.........Am I correct in this over simplification ??????? > Anyone, please feel free to email me with their feelings too. > Thank you all, > Jane > JANEWOJO@a... > PreOp 7/26/00 > BMI 40 > 248 lbs > Insurance denied as an exclusion > Self-Pay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 > , you go girl..........that was great....kecia,rn Another nurse! ROTFLMAO. This is just too much fun. Thanks, Kecia! Kind regards, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 > Bravo >This is better then L.A Law on T.V . >I wanted to be an Attorney but after reading such well >written words I'll stick to being a Jeweler and Instructor. > I say he's guilty, guilty , guilty. To the Electric chair > for a little shock treatment. > Love > from Fla Oh, you made me laugh out loud! There's a program I've caught a couple of times, Law and Order I think it's called, that has a large female attorney who kicks butt. About time we got some equal time on TV! Kind regards, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 > I don't know who to address this letter to because I have > many concerns and comments about this Walter Lindstrom matter. > First, I wish, as someone else has already posted, that I > knew what happened with the gastric bypass patients 20 > years ago, that likens the MGB to its end results. > Secondly, Genz, your posting was VERY > informative. As an upcoming patient for the MGB next week, > reading Walter Lindstrom's letter was confusing as well > as it cast many doubts on my 'study' findings. It shouldn't. If you read it, he said nothing at all, he just took a lot of space to say it. He uses standard smear tactics: imply " bad " things and that " lots of people say it's bad, " but never identify the anonymous " they " and never say exactly what is " bad, " or what " causes doubts. " Genz did a great job of relaying a lot of good, factual infor- mation and so have dozens of others here, not to mention Dr. Rutledge's own website (and the information available on other websites, too). You don't have to settle for innuendo and propagandist tactics, when you have hard facts at your fingertips. Your own study has been based in fact -- don't doubt what you can see with your own eyes. My very best wishes for your great success in your upcoming surgery! Hugs, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 I was concerned two weeks ago when I read of Mr. Lindstrom's refusal to handle any more MGB cases. However, since that time I have looked back over all the emails I've received in the past from former MGB patients. The number of patients in the medical field or married to someone in the medical field was astounding. I have a relative in the medical field. She is obsessed with proper technique, failure rates, etc. I understand most individuals in medicine are that way. I corresponded with several former patients (nurses, wives of doctors, etc.). I don't believe that all these individuals would have submitted themselves to a risky dangerous procedure. These nurses and spouses of doctors would have done ANYTHING to prevent such risk. I feel much more comfortable now with my decision about MGB. I hope that others are scared away by vague warnings of it being unsafe. JC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 I was concerned two weeks ago when I read of Mr. Lindstrom's refusal to handle any more MGB cases. However, since that time I have looked back over all the emails I've received in the past from former MGB patients. The number of patients in the medical field or married to someone in the medical field was astounding. I have a relative in the medical field. She is obsessed with proper technique, failure rates, etc. I understand most individuals in medicine are that way. I corresponded with several former patients (nurses, wives of doctors, etc.). I don't believe that all these individuals would have submitted themselves to a risky dangerous procedure. These nurses and spouses of doctors would have done ANYTHING to prevent such risk. I feel much more comfortable now with my decision about MGB. I hope that others are scared away by vague warnings of it being unsafe. JC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2000 Report Share Posted July 11, 2000 Dear Genz, Could you tell me why Dr. Rutledge's procedure will not promote kidney transplantation? Just wondering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.