OPMC

[Guest guest]

Unfortunately, each doctor probably documents patients' cases in a

manner structured to serve his/her own needs in refering to a particular

case. Consequently, each doctor's methods will vary somewhat and would

be hard to evaluate on some type of " record-keeping standard " . Its a

cheap shot by the OPMC after 40 years of medical service to a community

to raise such an issue NOW and upon which to try and base the loss of a

license!

We all know it was over LD and we all know Dattwyler's professional

position regarding that, not to mention a possible " personal "

consideration on his part for helping to target Dr. Orens.....

Its bad enough the OPMC did what it did but do they have to lie about it

too?

Debi

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/19/99 11:47:50 AM Eastern Standard Time,

SloopDoggie@... writes:

<< Unfortunately, each doctor probably documents patients' cases in a

manner structured to serve his/her own needs in refering to a particular

case. >>

well,,,it seemed that nowhere in the chart did dr. orens ever document the

diagnosis was lyme disease, nor did he ever really get detailed with complete

symptom listings.....I still think it has a lot to do with his

" generation " ...like.... " why write it down.. " " .I know why I am treating

this patient with iv meds...it is Lyme Disease... "

seeing a medical chart as a reminder for himself rather than a medical proof

of his competence...or a history that can travel with the patient....

which is why I really did a lot of thinking about this and basically any

doctor would hang if chosen for scrutiny by the opmc....some easier than

others.....Bernadette

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/19/99 11:47:50 AM Eastern Standard Time,

SloopDoggie@... writes:

<< Its a

cheap shot by the OPMC after 40 years of medical service to a community

to raise such an issue NOW and upon which to try and base the loss of a

license! >>

Deb, you need to get a copy of this thing...it makes specific

allegations...like a patient was continued on meds despite elevationg liver

enzymes...a patient complained of chest pain and yet there was no

documentation that patient was evauated for a heart attack.....a patient with

an unspecified hemotological disorder was given a drug known to induce

hematologic abnormalities and the OPMC felt it was contra-indicated on this

case...it wasn't just record keeping...or lack of....that they used to revoke

his liscense...it was stuff found in those patients charts which indicated

problems, that were never followed up on by Dr. O., that they found to be

gross negligence...like one minute they accused him of overtesting, and they

found things that clearly warranted repeating...that was never done to the

patients detriment...

When I read that none of the charts had a diagnosis of Lyme Disease on it, it

just showed he chose not to document anything...cause after all the

conclusion at the very least should have been in there....I wish he was

better documenting...cause how could they have gone after him if he had more

clearly shown that the iv therapy helped these patients...if he never wrote

down what they had or how he was treating em, or why he changed meds...you

gotta KNOW he wasn't writing down improvements seen with antibiotic

therapy......

Would I still stand and picket? Yes I would....B

[Guest guest]

I seem to recall other NON-Lyme disease MD's who did not document much on the

patients' charts, did NOT lose their license by the OMPC (I don't have the

address of the site to check which doctors had what. I still feel it is the

Lyme treatments etc. that they are after.

Lea

<< From: BratDet@...

In a message dated 12/19/99 11:47:50 AM Eastern Standard Time,

SloopDoggie@... writes:

<< Unfortunately, each doctor probably documents patients' cases in a

manner structured to serve his/her own needs in refering to a particular

case. >>

well,,,it seemed that nowhere in the chart did dr. orens ever document the

diagnosis was lyme disease, nor did he ever really get detailed with

complete

symptom listings.....I still think it has a lot to do with his

" generation " ...like.... " why write it down.. " " .I know why I am treating

this patient with iv meds...it is Lyme Disease... "

seeing a medical chart as a reminder for himself rather than a medical proof

of his competence...or a history that can travel with the patient....

which is why I really did a lot of thinking about this and basically any

doctor would hang if chosen for scrutiny by the opmc....some easier than

others.....Bernadette

>>

[Guest guest]

bern....i can understand that ....sometimes these docs are their own worst

enemys...one thing my doc always did was have me fill out a serial symptom

list at each appointment rating the symptoms from 1-10......these became part

of my medical records.....along with what we talked about.....probably doc

orens talked about this stuff with his pts.....but never listed it in

reports......i hate to say it but he may have brought alot of this on or has

no defense due to record keeping .....i still feel he was treating with his

heart and doing the right thing but it may be hard to prove.......many docs

should wake up due to this .......COMPLETE RECORDS IS THE KEY.......for many

things...ssd,workmans comp, or just treament......it a shame that this is

what has happened however in our litigant society today thats the way it

is.....Reid

[Guest guest]

Our OPMC effort is not over. I recently received a response from New York State Assemblyman . Of course, all 161 of us received the same response. Somebody in his office included the entire MSWord file as an attachment, so we got to see the names and addressess and the (identical) response to all 161 of us.

I've included just one of the letters below, followed by my response, followed by his immediate response. Assemblyman 's last seems to be rather glib and dismissive, especially since he only answered one of my questions.

We've got to remember to keep the OMPC letter writting campaign going. I ping them at least once a month, putting in something slightly different each time. We've got a lot of areas to talk to them about; the LLMDs, the dumb docs, the vicious doc, our own LD nightmares, investigating the OPMC. A call for investigating the OPMC should be in every letter.

Well, here goes the includes:

=========================== 1 of 161 duplicates =============================

Dear XXXXXX:

In response to your recent letter regarding doctors treating Lyme Disease, it has come to my attention that these physicians are in the process of investigation for some serious charges. The process is long and arduous, perhaps involving a period of several years. Some of the preliminary findings are quite disturbing.

We have to remember not to let emotions blind us to the ultimate goal of patient safety and protection. Although these charges are not to be taken lightly, the investigation is not in the final stages as of yet.

As the only practicing health care provider in the New York State Legislature, I will continue to monitor this situation very closely.

Sincerely,

M. Member of Assembly97th Assembly District

JMM/mdd

================================ My Response ========================

Assemblyman ;

Thank you for your response to our concerns. As a practicing health care provider and representative of the people, you are to be applauded for supporting the "ultimate goal of patient safety and protection."

However, if in fact "Some of the preliminary findings are quite disturbing," one would question why the process would take place over "a period of several years." How is patient safety and protection served by this delay? If we are to be protected, speed is of the essence.

No sane person questions the need for patient safety and protection. However, I find it imperative to remind you the furor generated over "doctors treating Lyme Disease" was triggered by the less-than-impartial actions of the New York State Office of Professional Medical Conduct (OPMC), not by the actions of physicians.

As Assemblyman Gottfried has so succinctly stated in his response to our concerns:

"Third, the Health Department has responded to inquiries about these proceedings in a troubling way. Letters I have seen state that the Department's "investigative strategy" for these cases has been to "formulat(e) what are the accepted standards of practice and care." The letters then state:

In the case of Lyme disease, the Centers for Disease Control, American Lyme Disease Foundation, Medical Letter, and a host of other sources have provided guidance for the standard care of Lyme disease. Rarely, if ever, have these published guidelines indicated that anything more than two-three weeks of antibiotics are required to cure Lyme disease.

This seems to say that the Department's investigative strategy is to identify and investigate physicians who follow a particular treatment methodology. The fact that this text has been removed from more recent correspondence does not change the fact that it was there in the first place."

If there is wrongdoing on the part of any physician, by all means have the OPMC perform to the utmost their charter. If the issue is a difference of opinion in the best way to treat a patient, it remains outside their purview, as the OPMC has acknowledged when asked to investigate Dr. C. Steere. Dr. Steere remains a perceived danger to chronic Lyme disease patients with his propensity to undertreat LD patients. The OPMC has labeled this as a difference of opinion, not an issue of patient safety.

LD treating physicians are hardly out of the mainstream. There is overwhelming evidence (see: http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/Oasis/6455/therapy-special.html#support) to support the hypothesis that some patients are not cured with short courses of therapy; that persistent disease can be demonstrated both clinically and in the laboratory, and that such patients in many cases respond to aggressive retreatment. One could convincingly argue that a doctor who failed to treat a patient presenting with symptoms of chronic Lyme disease might fall below the standard of care given what we now know about persistent infection and treatment failure. Until clinical trials are completed, this issue remains open for argument; in the interim, the standard of care must continue to make room for both approaches.

If absence of studies are to be the basis for investigation and prosecution of physicians who treat Lyme disease victims, then the very first LD cases should never have been treated; there were no studies. As it turns out, the very first treatment regimen used by Dr. Steere proved to be deleterious to patient health. To this day, there are physician’s who have not educated themselves or kept current with the body of knowledge concerning LD and continue to use Dr. Steere’s outmoded methods. The OPMC by it’s own communications seeks to give official status to this bankrupt methodology.

By all means support the intended legislative goal that established the OPMC. However, when they overstep their charter concerning professional medical conduct and stray into the arena of medical politics, it is time to investigate the investigators.

We, as Lyme patients, have called for such an investigation of the OPMC. Can we count on your support in this endeavor? Very serious charges have also been raised against. The only difference is, we have put our names to the charges. Our very survival depends on it.

R. Euless, Texas

=================== His immediate glib response =========================

From:

"Assemblyman " <millerj@...>

To:

"R. " <rjamesmartin@...>

Subject:

Re: lyme e-mail

Date:

Wed, 19 Apr 2000 15:48:45 -0400

Organization:

New York State Assembly

Because due process and just cause are long and ardous tasks; however, they are worthwhile.

R. -- Euless, TexasA Tick Made Me SickTIICS Are Keeping Me That Way(The Insurance Industry Captive Specialists)http://www.angelfire.com/biz/romarkaraoke/james.htmlMay is Texas Tick-borne Disease Awareness Month