Dr. Dake sued

A forum to discuss Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency and its relationship to Multiple Sclerosis.

Dr. Dake sued

Postby Cece » Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:16 pm

http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/10/0 ... 6320121005
Last month two patients sued the university and Dr. Michael Dake, medical director of its catheterization and angiography laboratories, for performing dangerous experimental procedures on essentially healthy veins without properly informing patients of the risks.

"Dake really didn't consult with some of the other (doctors) who were further along with this," said Mark Wittwer, a co-plaintiff in that lawsuit who lost complete use of his right jugular vein. "A lot of this could have been avoided."

I hope the lawsuit will be resolved fairly. I have much respect for Dr. Dake, and also sympathy for anyone who has lost the use of a jugular.
Cece
Family Elder
 
Posts: 9044
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:00 pm

Advertisement

Re: Dr. Dake sued

Postby Cece » Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:45 pm

Cece
Family Elder
 
Posts: 9044
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:00 pm

Re: Dr. Dake sued

Postby CureIous » Wed Oct 10, 2012 7:48 pm

Looks like the lawyers wrote most of the article themselves.

Kinda sucks being so close to the sources too, its impossible to comment unfortunately.

Generally speaking however, most times we go to the Dr and get new meds or procedures (whether new or not), there is little spoken of the hundreds of different things that may go wrong, again, generally speaking here, it is incumbent upon us as patients to educate ourselves, to ask questions about our concerns and have those addressed prior to. Thats just for future ref, not a commentary on Oliver or Mark's situation.
RRMS Dx'd 2007, first episode 2004. Bilateral stent placement, 3 on left, 1 stent on right, at Stanford August 2009. Watch my operation video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwc6QlLVtko, Virtually symptom free since, no relap
User avatar
CureIous
Family Elder
 
Posts: 1210
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 2:00 pm
Location: Riverside, CA

Re: Dr. Dake sued

Postby milesap » Thu Oct 11, 2012 6:11 am

I hope these patients signed a waiver explaining the risks because if they did they may not get away with the case, if the didn't then he is sunk.
User avatar
milesap
Family Elder
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 2:00 pm

Re: Dr. Dake sued

Postby CureIous » Thu Oct 11, 2012 6:23 am

Pretty sure I signed something to that effect, cant recall exactly.

Even if there was something to that effect, it can be argued to be invalidated in a variety of ways.

Amusements parks do the same thing with their entry tickets, they still get sued and lose in certain cases.
RRMS Dx'd 2007, first episode 2004. Bilateral stent placement, 3 on left, 1 stent on right, at Stanford August 2009. Watch my operation video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwc6QlLVtko, Virtually symptom free since, no relap
User avatar
CureIous
Family Elder
 
Posts: 1210
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 2:00 pm
Location: Riverside, CA

Re: Dr. Dake sued

Postby CureIous » Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:07 am

I also feel it is sad that this much splash is being made, which the media will be more than happy to use as it fits their profile of gotcha jourrnalism, to paint yet again this picture that all ccsvi proponents, doctors and patients are running amok, tearing apart the fabric of scientific process, falling dead and wounded left and right, for a completely unproven shot in the dark.

This will be a handout flyer at every neurologists office, with nary a word of where things are at this point in time, and once again, 2012 and almost 2013, will be illuminated in the light of 2009 as if nothing else existed in between.

Media will lap up the controversy like the hungry dogs that they are.

In the end, nothing is gained for the rest of us except yet one more roadblock.

Point being no patients have received any stents at Stanford since 2009, nor do I think any will receive any in the future, the study it appears is on permanent hold, and this can only serve to delay that further. This meaning the lawyer's publicity stunt, they crave this type of forward publicity.

I am perfectly OK with, and respect the judicial process and the voice it provides for those who think they have been done wrong.

What I am NOT OK with, is using these media whores to achieve that purpose, and affecting progress that may benefit the many, for the sole purpose of relief for the few.

Thats called overkill, but I get it, it's what good lawyers do if they want to keep up those Mercedes payments...
RRMS Dx'd 2007, first episode 2004. Bilateral stent placement, 3 on left, 1 stent on right, at Stanford August 2009. Watch my operation video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwc6QlLVtko, Virtually symptom free since, no relap
User avatar
CureIous
Family Elder
 
Posts: 1210
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 2:00 pm
Location: Riverside, CA

Re: Dr. Dake sued

Postby vesta » Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:35 am

Progress has been made to improve CCSVI outcomes. All this lawsuit will do is make it increasingly difficult for MS patients who want treatment to get it. I doubt the plaintiffs were all that misinformed that they didn't understand that there were risks. No one dragged them kicking and screaming into the operating room. It's depressing news.
vesta
Family Elder
 
Posts: 347
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 9:10 am
Location: Paris, France

Re: Dr. Dake sued

Postby jamit » Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:15 pm

Sad thing is that Dake who ignored Zamboni's recommendations completely and started out using stents in the jugulars right from the getgo, why, well arrogance comes to mind. I guess just copying Zamboni wasn't enough for him not even in the beginning while learning. He certainly did ccsvi a disservice with that approach. Caution is a virtue. These lawsuits could so easily have been avoided.
User avatar
jamit
Family Member
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 3:00 pm

Re: Dr. Dake sued

Postby prairie » Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:11 pm

The article is clearly written or copied from the plaintiffs' attorney information, so the 'facts' are as they wish to present them.

What the real facts are will come out in court if it goes that far. I don't expect Stanford and Dr. Dake to also present their case through press releases, interviews and web posts - maybe they will, but I doubt it.
User avatar
prairie
Family Member
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 3:00 pm

Re: Dr. Dake sued

Postby Cece » Fri Oct 12, 2012 10:36 am

lots of discussion on this over at ccsvi locator:
http://ccsvi-ms.ning.com/profiles/blogs ... es_network
look for Carol Schumacher's comments in the comment section:
"I know for a fact it is not slowing down Dr Dake's work on CCSVI research."

Radeck's original thread. This was one of the first things I read after learning about CCSVI. chronic-cerebrospinal-venous-insufficiency-ccsvi-f40/topic8928.html
Cece
Family Elder
 
Posts: 9044
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:00 pm

Re: Dr. Dake sued

Postby CureIous » Fri Oct 12, 2012 6:23 pm

prairie wrote:The article is clearly written or copied from the plaintiffs' attorney information, so the 'facts' are as they wish to present them.

What the real facts are will come out in court if it goes that far. I don't expect Stanford and Dr. Dake to also present their case through press releases, interviews and web posts - maybe they will, but I doubt it.



The point here I would surely love to make, and have been making since my four STENTS were implanted in 2009, and continue to function admirably, with nary a complication whatsoever, is that the rest of us, (Oliver, Holly and Mark excluded, and delineated, not ignored and certainly not forgotten)is that there are many others who had positive,long lasting improvements as a result of long lasting, open veins, due to stents, period.
Do not take away from other's improvements, long lasting as they may be, and please, pleas do not take this as a stent advertisement, it is not, I believe that those of us with patent, open stents are THE test model not for how things should be per se, not at all, I do not reccommend anyone get stents unless absolutely necessary after other repeated angioplasties have failed, but please, please, stop margianalizing us as some kind of freaks to be ignored and mitigated, as we dont have the standard MO in effect now coursing through our veins.

I already put up with this crap with the so called Alliance, and Marc Stecker, so I have stents, they remain patent, I do not recc. them for anyone else, so ostracize me all you want, it does NOT change the fact my MS, symptoms and otherwise has been fully under control for over three years straight, at the same time my stents have remained open and flowing.

To me, that only shows that consistently open veins are a win win.

If that gets in the way of someone's political agenda to turn this is some PC "good for the media masses" nonsense then screw em, I dont care, tired of the pussyfooting around with people that only care what they GET out of this, rather what they can put INTO it.


This website has been killed off because it had too much of an open discussion, in favor of controlled tidbits of disseminated information coming through Facebook. IE a one-way check valve.

The truth matters, we should be be able to discuss it freely without fear of ramifications, ostracization etc.

But its all about image, its all about people "only playing doctor on the internet, not in real life".

Since this site has effectively been demobilized (quite well I may add) as a true source, and used primarily as a recruiting tool for hits on other blogs, fundraisers, and other websites, then I suppose my perfunctory diatribe will largely go unnoticed.

And thats okay.

I'm down with Dr. Dake
I'm down for Oliver.
I'm down for Holly.
I'm down for Carol Schimacher.
I'm down for CCSVI.

But I have no illusions either as to any and all of the above peacefully coexisting.

Look, this entire thing had "tragic story" written on it from the very beginning.

A perfect fairy tale ending was never in the cards.

We are human, we screw up, we learn, make the most of it, dont forget the past, and move on the best we can.

For those looking to make careers and names on plaques out of this, striving for recognition, and a place in infamy, I say, "screw you, get the hell out of the way, this isn't about YOU".

It has been, and always will be, about those still suffering now and seeking out the Kevorkians for a way out(see latest news).

We are not that hopeless, and we never give up....
RRMS Dx'd 2007, first episode 2004. Bilateral stent placement, 3 on left, 1 stent on right, at Stanford August 2009. Watch my operation video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwc6QlLVtko, Virtually symptom free since, no relap
User avatar
CureIous
Family Elder
 
Posts: 1210
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 2:00 pm
Location: Riverside, CA

Re: Dr. Dake sued

Postby vesta » Sat Oct 13, 2012 9:49 am

Dear Cureious,
Bravo. I don't understand the politics here but whatever works should be recognized and everyone should be free to make their own decision. This idea to wait for the results of the double blind study just means waiting for nothing. Early problems are being rectified, progress is being made and I don't understand why your testimony should be censored.
vesta
Family Elder
 
Posts: 347
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 9:10 am
Location: Paris, France

Re: Dr. Dake sued

Postby HappyPoet » Sat Oct 13, 2012 10:45 am

Hi Mark,

Congratulations on the success of your procedure!! I'm super happy for you and all the others Dr. Dake helped. Please know that your posts here are appreciated and respected by many, and I do hope you'll continue to be a member of our select group.

While I don't understand everything you said and am not among the original group of Dr. Dake's patients, I have had, over the past three years, some similar feelings and thoughts as you--you are not alone; in fact, I like to think that no members of TiMS are ever alone.

Keep enjoying your improvements, Mark. :)
User avatar
HappyPoet
Family Elder
 
Posts: 1401
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 2:00 pm

Re: Dr. Dake sued

Postby Cece » Sat Oct 13, 2012 1:56 pm

The openness here is a strength and a weakness. Playing doctor on the internet is a harsh bit of criticism, but learning is learning wherever it is done. Forums are superb in allowing people to bring different bits of information together and build something bigger than they'd have built on their own. In general at a forum there is always someone who knows more than you, and that is a good thing.

Back in 2009, this was the only place online that CCSVI was being discussed. You cannot say that today!

With the stents, it is very good that they are turning out well, and I think there will be a place for stents in CCSVI treatment once it's optimized, so it's known when stents are needed and when they're not. The up-high stents are more worrisome than elsewhere (risk of thrombosis, crushed by skull base, or closure causing high-up reflux as compared to a closure at the neck base) and yet they were successful in your case.
Cece
Family Elder
 
Posts: 9044
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:00 pm

Re: Dr. Dake sued

Postby marcstck » Sat Oct 13, 2012 10:14 pm

Since I've been called out by name here – cryptically and with some vitriol – let me shed some light on what has Mark so "curiously" peeved.

Back when the CCSVI Alliance was first getting going, Mr. Curious was part of the very large group of patients who were part its genesis, as was I. Since my "pre-disability" career had been spent in broadcast television and video production, my primary role was to serve as the Alliance's designated video editor. I designed the opening and closing graphics that went on all of the Alliance's videos, and edited together most of the videos that appeared on the Alliance website for the first year or so of the organization's existence.

In those very early days, Mark produced a video cobbled together from images taken from his venoplasty, giving a detailed look at his procedure. This video was forwarded to me by an Alliance higher-up to be given the Alliance "brand". Upon viewing the video, I noted that it showed multiple stents (three, if I'm remembering correctly) being placed back to back to back in Mark's jugular vein. I pointed this out to the Alliance higher-ups, since by that time procedures of this type were no longer the standard of practice (Doctor Dake's operation had already been shut down). After some discussion, the Alliance brain trust asked me if I could edit the video in such a way that it would show only one stent being inserted into the patient's jugular. I said I could, and was told to do so. Perhaps this was a lapse in judgment on my part, but I did it with the understanding that the video would not be posted without Mark's approval. Indeed, when the finished product was shown to Mark, he most decidedly did not approve, and the video was never posted.

So, that's my sin, for which Mark has been grinding an ax for 2+ years, and for which he now has had the audacity to publicly state my name in his diatribe, above. In retrospect, I probably should have left his video alone, and I'm sorry for whatever injury my tinkering may have caused him. Since I needed to edit the video anyway, at the time I figured creating a second version would be no big deal. As I said, the video never went public, to the best of my knowledge.

I join the rest of TIMS in wishing Mark the best, and congratulating him on the continued patency of his stents. I'm sorry he felt, and apparently still feels, so aggrieved, but really, calling me out by name in a public forum for a perceived affront over an issue that never saw the light of day, a good two years after said incident occurred, is taking it a little too far, at least in my book. As he pointedly notes, we are all in this together, some being fortunate enough to fare much better than others in their fight against the hideous effects of the disease. I certainly meant him no malice by fiddling with his handiwork, an issue which was resolved with no apparent harm done, except perhaps to Mark's ego. Again, for that I am sincerely sorry.

Peace out…
User avatar
marcstck
Family Elder
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 3:00 pm

Next

Return to Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency (CCSVI)

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


Contact us | Terms of Service