Posts Tagged malpractice

Is there a distinct standard of care for “integrative” physicians? The Woliner case

Board certification in family medicine and "integrative" medicine: different standards of care?

Board certification in family medicine and “integrative” medicine: different standards of care?

Florida Atlantic University student Stephanie Sofronsky was diagnosed with Hodgkin’s lymphoma in 2011, after review of her case by oncologists and pathologists at Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, the NIH/National Cancer Institute, and the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville. By June of that year, a PET scan showed the cancer had progressed to her pelvic region. She decided to be treated locally by oncologist Neal Rothschild, MD, and met with him to discuss chemotherapy and ongoing management of her cancer. At this point, with Stage III Hodgkin’s lymphoma, she had an 80-85% chance of being in complete remission with appropriate treatment.

Unfortunately, at the same time, Sofronsky was also seeing Kenneth Woliner, MD, a family medicine practitioner. Despite the fact that world-renowned cancer specialists agreed that Sofronsky had Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and knowing that she was about to start chemotherapy, Dr. Woliner told Sofronsky that cancer was “low on his list” of possible medical concerns and that increased lymphoctyes shown in her tests were not indicative of cancer, insinuating that oncologists “often overreact” to the presence of lymphocytes and recommend chemotherapy before making an actual diagnosis. Dr. Woliner suggested instead that Sofronsky have her house tested for mold, which could be causing allergies, and therefore her symptoms. Convinced, Sofronsky pursued treatment for her allergies and cancelled her follow-up appointment with Dr. Rothschild.

Sofronsky complained repeatedly to Dr. Woliner of symptoms that were, as our good friend Orac points out, consistent with progressing lymphoma – back pain and pain and swelling in her lymph nodes, abdomen and legs, to the point of having to use a cane. Yet, Dr. Woliner, over the next couple of years, continued to attribute her symptoms mostly to her allergies and also thyroid issues and some other minor illnesses. On February 7, 2013, at her last visit to his office and in significant distress from pain and severe leg swelling, he ordered a 100 mg shot of iron, despite the fact that her blood tests showed she was not iron deficient. She rapidly decompensated and died in the hospital three days later of from complications of untreated Hodgkin’s lymphoma. (more…)

Posted in: Cancer, Ethics, Health Fraud, Herbs & Supplements, Legal, Politics and Regulation

Leave a Comment (0) →

Medical Malpractice Lawsuits


We hear a lot about medical malpractice suits and how they affect the practice and the cost of medicine. Doctors sometimes get the feeling that a lawyer is looking over their shoulder as they interact with patients, and sometimes they practice “defensive medicine,” ordering unnecessary tests and doing what they think would look best in court rather than what is really in the patient’s best interests. One of my colleagues in the Air Force, a psychiatrist, said at his retirement ceremony that he considered his career a success because he had never been sued. That struck me as a sad commentary on what it means to practice medicine today.

Some of my preconceived ideas on the subject of malpractice were challenged by a recent survey. Medscape asked 3,480 U.S. physicians about their experience with malpractice suits. 60% of responding physicians reported they had never been named in a lawsuit, 31% had been sued in conjunction with other defendants like hospitals, and only 9% were sued as individuals. (more…)

Posted in: Legal

Leave a Comment (55) →

Wyeth vs. Levine: Should Drug Label Standards Be Determined By Juries?

It is with some degree of trepidation that I enter the fray on the Wyeth vs. Levine case. I’ve been watching the media frenzy about the lawsuit with interest – mostly because (for the first time in a while) I think that the pharmaceutical company is in the right on this one – and that most journalists (and even medical journal editors) have missed the salient points.

I think that a close review of the case is instructive in two ways. It shows: 1) the dangers of making legal decisions based on the perspective of the victim (a risk of harm equal to 1 in 20 million is unacceptable to that one person who suffered the consequence, but tolerable to the other 19,999,999 others) and 2) that a simple case of medical malpractice has made it all the way to the US Supreme Court because (as I discussed in my last post) a democratization of knowledge (juries reading a drug label) was believed to democratize expertise (how a physician would understand the label).

Posted in: Pharmaceuticals, Politics and Regulation, Public Health

Leave a Comment (20) →

Charlatan: Quackery Then and Now

Charlatan: America’s Most Dangerous Huckster, the Man Who Pursued Him, and the Age of Flimflam, by Pope Brock, is not only a rip-roaring good read, but it brings up serious issues about regulation of medical practice and prosecution of quackery. It tells the story of John R. Brinkley MD, who transplanted goat glands into people, and of Morris Fishbein MD, the editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association, who tried to stop him.

The Charlatan

Brinkley was a colorful character whose very first job was a scam, selling a patent remedy. He went to medical school but never finished, eventually buying a diploma elsewhere for $100. A bigamist, drunkard, liar, and con man of incredible audacity, he built up an empire of quackery that made him filthy rich. Apart from his medical adventures, he practically invented modern political campaigning techniques, revolutionized advertising, and was almost single-handedly responsible for popularizing country music and the blues with his radio station.

An impotent patient supposedly told Brinkley, “Too bad I don’t have goat nuts.” So Brinkley gave him some. A few weeks later he went back for a refresher course in surgery (which he failed because of drunkenness and poor attendance). He began to feel that he was gifted and should not be bound by the “jealous sheep ethics” of the AMA. (more…)

Posted in: Book & movie reviews, Health Fraud, Politics and Regulation

Leave a Comment (6) →