<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: My Favorite Medical Myths</title>
	<atom:link href="http://docisinblog.com/index.php/2007/04/10/medical-myths/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://docisinblog.com/index.php/2007/04/10/medical-myths/</link>
	<description>a physician looks at medicine, religion, politics, pets, &#38; passion in life</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 15 Apr 2012 21:54:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Homestead 1790</title>
		<link>http://docisinblog.com/index.php/2007/04/10/medical-myths/comment-page-1/#comment-21511</link>
		<dc:creator>Homestead 1790</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jul 2011 08:24:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://docisinblog.com/index.php/2007/04/10/medical-myths/#comment-21511</guid>
		<description>Judge tosses Duluth doctor&#039;s suit against patient&#039;s family  

By Mark Stodghill, April 28, 2011, Duluth News Tribune

A judge threw out a lawsuit today filed by a Duluth physician who said he was defamed by a man who publicly criticized his bedside manner.

Dr. David McKee, a neurologist with Northland Neurology and Myology, alleged that Dennis Laurion of Duluth defamed him and interfered with his business by making false statements to the American Academy of Neurology, the American Neurological Association, two physicians in Duluth, the St. Louis County Public Health and Human Services Advisory Committee and St. Luke’s hospital, among others. 

Laurion was critical of the treatment his father, Kenneth, received from McKee after suffering a hemorrhagic stroke and spending four days at St. Luke’s hospital from April 17-21 last year. Kenneth Laurion recovered from his condition. 

Dennis Laurion claimed that any statements he made about the doctor were true and that he was immune from any liability to the plaintiff. 

In his 18-page order dismissing the suit, Sixth Judicial District Judge Eric Hylden wrote that looking at Laurion’s “statements as a whole, the court does not find defamatory meaning, but rather a sometimes emotional discussion of the issues.”

Hylden addressed the fact that Laurion posted some of his criticisms of McKee on websites. “In modern society, there needs to be some give and take, some ability for parties to air their differences,” the judge wrote. “Today, those disagreements may take place on various Internet sources. Because the medium has changed, however, does not make statements of this sort any more or less defamatory.” 
Hylden concluded his order by stating that there wasn’t enough objective information provided to justify asking a jury to decide the matter.

Laurion was relieved by the court’s ruling.

“My parents, who are now 86, my wife and I have found this process very stressful for the past year, since my father’s stroke. There was never just one defendant,” he said. “We’re grateful that Judge Hylden found no need for a trial.”

In his suit, McKee alleged that Laurion made false statements including that McKee “seemed upset” that Kenneth Laurion had been transferred from the Intensive Care Unit to a ward room; that McKee told the Laurion family that he had to “spend time finding out if [the patient] had been transferred or died;” that McKee told the Laurions that 44 percent of hemorrhagic stroke victims die within 30 days; that McKee told the patient that he didn’t need therapy; that McKee said it didn’t matter that the patient’s gown was hanging from his neck with his backside exposed; that McKee blamed the patient for the loss of his time; and that McKee didn’t treat his patient with dignity.

According to the Minnesota Board of Medical Practice website, McKee has had no disciplinary actions brought against him. 

“I’m very disappointed by this court’s decision because as far as I can see the only avenue that I can see that I had to respond to this overwhelming attack was through the courts, and for the time being it appears that avenue has been closed without me ever getting a chance to present my evidence,” McKee said.

McKee said he hadn’t had a chance to confer with Marshall Tanick, his Minneapolis attorney. He said he will do so before he decides whether to appeal the decision. Tanick told the News Tribune he had not yet seen the decision and couldn’t comment on it.

“Dennis Laurion is a liar and a bully and a coward,” McKee said. “He knowingly made false and malicious statements about me to a total of 19 different professional and medical organizations, regulatory agencies and websites. He often used false names and attributed his statements to fictitious third parties. I’ll make the observation that every one of those organizations that was required to make an official decision or take an official action either determined that the statement that he made was so ludicrous that it required no response from me at all or decided that his complaint had no merit.”

Laurion’s attorney John Kelly has been in another trial this week and said tonight that he had not yet read the decision. 

“I’m grateful that the judge saw things our way for our client’s sake,” Kelly said. 

Kelly was critical of McKee’s reaction to the decision.


“I think it’s regrettable that somebody would choose language of that kind in commenting on a court decision,” Kelly said. “Secondly, this case has always been about Mr. Laurion’s reaction to what he perceived to be poor conduct on the doctor’s part in relation to his interaction with his father. And he stood up and said something about that and the judge has agreed that what he said was within the bounds that are permissible under our law.”</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Judge tosses Duluth doctor&#8217;s suit against patient&#8217;s family  </p>
<p>By Mark Stodghill, April 28, 2011, Duluth News Tribune</p>
<p>A judge threw out a lawsuit today filed by a Duluth physician who said he was defamed by a man who publicly criticized his bedside manner.</p>
<p>Dr. David McKee, a neurologist with Northland Neurology and Myology, alleged that Dennis Laurion of Duluth defamed him and interfered with his business by making false statements to the American Academy of Neurology, the American Neurological Association, two physicians in Duluth, the St. Louis County Public Health and Human Services Advisory Committee and St. Luke’s hospital, among others. </p>
<p>Laurion was critical of the treatment his father, Kenneth, received from McKee after suffering a hemorrhagic stroke and spending four days at St. Luke’s hospital from April 17-21 last year. Kenneth Laurion recovered from his condition. </p>
<p>Dennis Laurion claimed that any statements he made about the doctor were true and that he was immune from any liability to the plaintiff. </p>
<p>In his 18-page order dismissing the suit, Sixth Judicial District Judge Eric Hylden wrote that looking at Laurion’s “statements as a whole, the court does not find defamatory meaning, but rather a sometimes emotional discussion of the issues.”</p>
<p>Hylden addressed the fact that Laurion posted some of his criticisms of McKee on websites. “In modern society, there needs to be some give and take, some ability for parties to air their differences,” the judge wrote. “Today, those disagreements may take place on various Internet sources. Because the medium has changed, however, does not make statements of this sort any more or less defamatory.”<br />
Hylden concluded his order by stating that there wasn’t enough objective information provided to justify asking a jury to decide the matter.</p>
<p>Laurion was relieved by the court’s ruling.</p>
<p>“My parents, who are now 86, my wife and I have found this process very stressful for the past year, since my father’s stroke. There was never just one defendant,” he said. “We’re grateful that Judge Hylden found no need for a trial.”</p>
<p>In his suit, McKee alleged that Laurion made false statements including that McKee “seemed upset” that Kenneth Laurion had been transferred from the Intensive Care Unit to a ward room; that McKee told the Laurion family that he had to “spend time finding out if [the patient] had been transferred or died;” that McKee told the Laurions that 44 percent of hemorrhagic stroke victims die within 30 days; that McKee told the patient that he didn’t need therapy; that McKee said it didn’t matter that the patient’s gown was hanging from his neck with his backside exposed; that McKee blamed the patient for the loss of his time; and that McKee didn’t treat his patient with dignity.</p>
<p>According to the Minnesota Board of Medical Practice website, McKee has had no disciplinary actions brought against him. </p>
<p>“I’m very disappointed by this court’s decision because as far as I can see the only avenue that I can see that I had to respond to this overwhelming attack was through the courts, and for the time being it appears that avenue has been closed without me ever getting a chance to present my evidence,” McKee said.</p>
<p>McKee said he hadn’t had a chance to confer with Marshall Tanick, his Minneapolis attorney. He said he will do so before he decides whether to appeal the decision. Tanick told the News Tribune he had not yet seen the decision and couldn’t comment on it.</p>
<p>“Dennis Laurion is a liar and a bully and a coward,” McKee said. “He knowingly made false and malicious statements about me to a total of 19 different professional and medical organizations, regulatory agencies and websites. He often used false names and attributed his statements to fictitious third parties. I’ll make the observation that every one of those organizations that was required to make an official decision or take an official action either determined that the statement that he made was so ludicrous that it required no response from me at all or decided that his complaint had no merit.”</p>
<p>Laurion’s attorney John Kelly has been in another trial this week and said tonight that he had not yet read the decision. </p>
<p>“I’m grateful that the judge saw things our way for our client’s sake,” Kelly said. </p>
<p>Kelly was critical of McKee’s reaction to the decision.</p>
<p>“I think it’s regrettable that somebody would choose language of that kind in commenting on a court decision,” Kelly said. “Secondly, this case has always been about Mr. Laurion’s reaction to what he perceived to be poor conduct on the doctor’s part in relation to his interaction with his father. And he stood up and said something about that and the judge has agreed that what he said was within the bounds that are permissible under our law.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: North</title>
		<link>http://docisinblog.com/index.php/2007/04/10/medical-myths/comment-page-1/#comment-13475</link>
		<dc:creator>North</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2010 07:47:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://docisinblog.com/index.php/2007/04/10/medical-myths/#comment-13475</guid>
		<description>Duluth News Tribune

Mark Stodghill 6/12/10


A Duluth physician is suing the son of a former patient for publicly criticizing his bedside manner. Dr. David McKee, a neurologist with Northland Neurology and Myology, filed the lawsuit, which was made public Friday, in St. Louis County District Court. McKee alleges that Dennis Laurion of Duluth defamed him and interfered with his business by making false statements to various third parties, including the American Academy of Neurology, the American Neurological Association, two physicians in Duluth, the St. Louis County Public Health and Human Services Advisory Committee and St. Luke’s hospital, among others. 
 
Laurion claims that any statements he made about the doctor were true and that he is immune from any liability to the plaintiff. He referred questions to his Duluth attorney, John Kelly. 
 
McKee is asking for more than $50,000 in damages. The doctor was paged Friday but didn’t return a call seeking comment. He’s being represented by Minneapolis attorney Marshall Tanick, who in a phone interview alleged that Laurion defamed his client in several ways, including posting negative reviews of McKee’s work on various websites. “The basis for the lawsuit is the defamatory statements that were made on websites and to other sources,’’ Tanick said. “However, by no means does Dr. McKee want to in any way prevent or affect any kind of communications that may be made to the Board of Medical Practice or any other regulatory agencies. The purpose of the lawsuit is to prevent defamation being made on the websites and through other sources.’’ 
 
Kenneth Laurion, 85, a Navy combat medic in the Solomon Islands during World War II, suffered a hemorrhagic stroke and spent four days at St. Luke’s hospital from April 17-21. He recovered from his condition. 
 
McKee also alleges that the defendant made false statements about him to others including: McKee “seemed upset’’ that Kenneth Laurion had been transferred from the Intensive Care Unit to a ward room. McKee told the Laurions that he had to “spend time finding out if [the patient] had been transferred or died.’’ McKee told the Laurions that 44 percent of hemorrhagic stroke victims die within 30 days. McKee told the patient that he didn’t need therapy. McKee said that it didn’t matter that the patient’s gown was hanging from his neck with his backside exposed. McKee blamed the patient for the loss of his time. McKee didn’t treat his patient with dignity. 
 
Defense attorney Kelly said it was a tense and emotional situation for the Laurion family. “They were worried about Dad and the doctor comes along and, from their point of view — of what they saw and what they heard — they felt that the doctor didn’t act appropriately toward the father,’’ Kelly said. “So, among other things, they saw fit to report it to the hospital and to the Board of Medical Practice — which they have every right to do under the patient Bill of Rights — and they get sued.’’ 
 
Kelly said his client did post ratings of McKee on some websites but said he asked to have them removed, and they were. The defense attorney thinks that the lawsuit is without merit. “I think it’s an unfortunate incident of someone attempting to punish a person who has spoken out of concern for a family member,’’ Kelly said.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Duluth News Tribune</p>
<p>Mark Stodghill 6/12/10</p>
<p>A Duluth physician is suing the son of a former patient for publicly criticizing his bedside manner. Dr. David McKee, a neurologist with Northland Neurology and Myology, filed the lawsuit, which was made public Friday, in St. Louis County District Court. McKee alleges that Dennis Laurion of Duluth defamed him and interfered with his business by making false statements to various third parties, including the American Academy of Neurology, the American Neurological Association, two physicians in Duluth, the St. Louis County Public Health and Human Services Advisory Committee and St. Luke’s hospital, among others. </p>
<p>Laurion claims that any statements he made about the doctor were true and that he is immune from any liability to the plaintiff. He referred questions to his Duluth attorney, John Kelly. </p>
<p>McKee is asking for more than $50,000 in damages. The doctor was paged Friday but didn’t return a call seeking comment. He’s being represented by Minneapolis attorney Marshall Tanick, who in a phone interview alleged that Laurion defamed his client in several ways, including posting negative reviews of McKee’s work on various websites. “The basis for the lawsuit is the defamatory statements that were made on websites and to other sources,’’ Tanick said. “However, by no means does Dr. McKee want to in any way prevent or affect any kind of communications that may be made to the Board of Medical Practice or any other regulatory agencies. The purpose of the lawsuit is to prevent defamation being made on the websites and through other sources.’’ </p>
<p>Kenneth Laurion, 85, a Navy combat medic in the Solomon Islands during World War II, suffered a hemorrhagic stroke and spent four days at St. Luke’s hospital from April 17-21. He recovered from his condition. </p>
<p>McKee also alleges that the defendant made false statements about him to others including: McKee “seemed upset’’ that Kenneth Laurion had been transferred from the Intensive Care Unit to a ward room. McKee told the Laurions that he had to “spend time finding out if [the patient] had been transferred or died.’’ McKee told the Laurions that 44 percent of hemorrhagic stroke victims die within 30 days. McKee told the patient that he didn’t need therapy. McKee said that it didn’t matter that the patient’s gown was hanging from his neck with his backside exposed. McKee blamed the patient for the loss of his time. McKee didn’t treat his patient with dignity. </p>
<p>Defense attorney Kelly said it was a tense and emotional situation for the Laurion family. “They were worried about Dad and the doctor comes along and, from their point of view — of what they saw and what they heard — they felt that the doctor didn’t act appropriately toward the father,’’ Kelly said. “So, among other things, they saw fit to report it to the hospital and to the Board of Medical Practice — which they have every right to do under the patient Bill of Rights — and they get sued.’’ </p>
<p>Kelly said his client did post ratings of McKee on some websites but said he asked to have them removed, and they were. The defense attorney thinks that the lawsuit is without merit. “I think it’s an unfortunate incident of someone attempting to punish a person who has spoken out of concern for a family member,’’ Kelly said.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Moof</title>
		<link>http://docisinblog.com/index.php/2007/04/10/medical-myths/comment-page-1/#comment-10108</link>
		<dc:creator>Moof</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2007 00:35:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://docisinblog.com/index.php/2007/04/10/medical-myths/#comment-10108</guid>
		<description>Dr. Bob, yet another excellent post. The reality behind your words shakes me to the core as I wonder where it&#039;s all going to go from here.

Don&#039;t stop writing out of fear of being &quot;long winded&quot; ... someone needs to speak up ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dr. Bob, yet another excellent post. The reality behind your words shakes me to the core as I wonder where it&#8217;s all going to go from here.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t stop writing out of fear of being &#8220;long winded&#8221; &#8230; someone needs to speak up &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kentucky Packrat</title>
		<link>http://docisinblog.com/index.php/2007/04/10/medical-myths/comment-page-1/#comment-10098</link>
		<dc:creator>Kentucky Packrat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2007 12:58:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://docisinblog.com/index.php/2007/04/10/medical-myths/#comment-10098</guid>
		<description>The fundamental problem with health care insurance is that people want to ignore one word: &quot;insurance&quot;. Insurance isn&#039;t about paying for what you know will happen, it&#039;s about protecting you against what might happen.

If I went to Lloyd&#039;s of London and said &quot;I have a rocket that I want to insure for $1 million, and it&#039;s got a 100% chance of blowing up on the pad during launch. How much would that policy cost?&quot; After looking at me strange, they would quote me a policy well over $1 million, to cover the 100% chance AND their costs and profit.

Let&#039;s say that I am on blood pressure medicine (not yet, but it may happen soon), and the medicine costs $9 a month at Wal-Mart. If I want the insurance to pay for it, then either I have to give them at least $9 (and more like $15-$20) &lt;em&gt;or someone else does&lt;/em&gt;.

My family (and employer) pay $600 a month for an HMO, and it&#039;s their hospital and staff. Less than $200 of that insures against catastrophic health care expenses, the rest could easily pay for all of our office visits and medicines each year, with a couple of dinners thrown in.

Instead, I am paying for everyone else&#039;s medicines, with 40% off the top to the insurance agency. Maybe I&#039;d be less eager if I were getting more medicine than money, but I don&#039;t think so...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The fundamental problem with health care insurance is that people want to ignore one word: &#8220;insurance&#8221;. Insurance isn&#8217;t about paying for what you know will happen, it&#8217;s about protecting you against what might happen.</p>
<p>If I went to Lloyd&#8217;s of London and said &#8220;I have a rocket that I want to insure for $1 million, and it&#8217;s got a 100% chance of blowing up on the pad during launch. How much would that policy cost?&#8221; After looking at me strange, they would quote me a policy well over $1 million, to cover the 100% chance AND their costs and profit.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s say that I am on blood pressure medicine (not yet, but it may happen soon), and the medicine costs $9 a month at Wal-Mart. If I want the insurance to pay for it, then either I have to give them at least $9 (and more like $15-$20) <em>or someone else does</em>.</p>
<p>My family (and employer) pay $600 a month for an HMO, and it&#8217;s their hospital and staff. Less than $200 of that insures against catastrophic health care expenses, the rest could easily pay for all of our office visits and medicines each year, with a couple of dinners thrown in.</p>
<p>Instead, I am paying for everyone else&#8217;s medicines, with 40% off the top to the insurance agency. Maybe I&#8217;d be less eager if I were getting more medicine than money, but I don&#8217;t think so&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dr Bob</title>
		<link>http://docisinblog.com/index.php/2007/04/10/medical-myths/comment-page-1/#comment-10094</link>
		<dc:creator>Dr Bob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2007 14:23:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://docisinblog.com/index.php/2007/04/10/medical-myths/#comment-10094</guid>
		<description>Thanks Amy,

The problem in your boyfriend&#039;s situation isn&#039;t just that the plumber makes $75 and hour and he makes $30 an hour on a liver transplant; the plumber&#039;s overhead to make that $75 is maybe $10-20, while the surgeon pays &lt;em&gt;$100 in overhead&lt;/em&gt; an hour to make that $30. In effect, &lt;em&gt;he is paying the government&lt;/em&gt; to do that transplant surgery. This is why so many docs opt out of Medicaid (in Washington fewer than half of physicians accept it). It&#039;s not just about low income; it&#039;s about taking a loss. Not a sustainable business model.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Amy,</p>
<p>The problem in your boyfriend&#8217;s situation isn&#8217;t just that the plumber makes $75 and hour and he makes $30 an hour on a liver transplant; the plumber&#8217;s overhead to make that $75 is maybe $10-20, while the surgeon pays <em>$100 in overhead</em> an hour to make that $30. In effect, <em>he is paying the government</em> to do that transplant surgery. This is why so many docs opt out of Medicaid (in Washington fewer than half of physicians accept it). It&#8217;s not just about low income; it&#8217;s about taking a loss. Not a sustainable business model.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

