Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Medical topics with questions, information and discussion related to Lyme disease and other tick-borne diseases.
LymeH
Posts: 290
Joined: Mon 1 Mar 2010 16:41

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by LymeH » Mon 8 Mar 2010 5:05

rlstanley wrote:How come? I'd think it would be good to know about stuff like this especially if it pertains to something that might go on in LymeLand.
It is hard to explain. I hope to be able to express it better at some future time. Seriously though, I do appreciate the information. I would have found it much more helpful if I had been in a position to receive such information many years ago.

One problem with Escape from LymeLand (and I like the term LymeLand as it is appropriately derogatory imo) is that one has to deal with the fact that one ALLOWED oneself to enter and reside in LymeLand in the first place. I should change my name to Alice.

So, what land is this here on LNE - it is certainly not like any LymeLand I have ever experienced before. Is this outskirts of the real world for recent escapees? The King and Queen were not pleased with Alice for speaking up.

Did this site exist eight years ago????

rlstanley
Posts: 1637
Joined: Mon 3 Dec 2007 2:53

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by rlstanley » Mon 8 Mar 2010 21:10

LH:
Did this site exist eight years ago????
No. Looking at the membership here, it looks like it started in July 2007. Before that if one wanted uncensored information & debate, sci.med.diseases.lyme was the place to go. That group unfortunately devolved into a less than useless mess. You can see it here: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med. ... yme/topics

While pathetic and useless now, you can use the search function to find out stuff of historical significance in LymeLand.
.

LymeH
Posts: 290
Joined: Mon 1 Mar 2010 16:41

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by LymeH » Tue 9 Mar 2010 0:46

Thanks Rita. I'm having some second thoughts about the appropriateness of my screenname.

rlstanley
Posts: 1637
Joined: Mon 3 Dec 2007 2:53

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by rlstanley » Fri 9 Apr 2010 16:41

http://www.ncahf.org/digest10/10-14.html

Chelationist disciplined.
Rashid A. Buttar, D.O., who operates the Center for Advanced Medicine and Clinical Research in central
North Carolina, has signed a consent order under which he agreed to (a) be reprimanded, (b) obey all laws and all rules and regulations involving medical practice, and (c) to provide an informed consent form that includes language specified in an attachment to the order.

The agreement was a compromise in which Buttar acknowledged that his treatment of an out-of state autistic child whom he had never examined had been illegal and the North Carolina Medical Board agreed that the settlement would resolve all other pending complaints against him, which included concerns about seven patients mentioned in two Notices of Charges filed in 2009. The consent form includes acknowledgements that treatments that Dr. Buttar prescribes have not been proven effective and that, "the possible adverse effects . . . include, but are not limited to, infection, phlebitis, headaches, dizziness, hypoglycemia, electrolyte imbalance, mineral depletion, fatigue, kidney failure, or even death."

The Board's compromise, which resulted in a lighter penalty than Buttar deserved, was influenced by a North Carolina law that gives partial protection to nonstandard practices. [Novella S. Springtime for charlatans. Neurologica blog, April 8, 2010]

LymeH
Posts: 290
Joined: Mon 1 Mar 2010 16:41

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by LymeH » Sat 10 Apr 2010 2:49

rlstanley wrote:http://www.ncahf.org/digest10/10-14.html

Chelationist disciplined.
Rashid A. Buttar, D.O., who operates the Center for Advanced Medicine and Clinical Research in central North Carolina,
<snip>
The agreement was a compromise in which Buttar acknowledged that his treatment of an out-of state autistic child whom he had never examined had been illegal and the North Carolina Medical Board agreed that the settlement would resolve all other pending complaints against him, which included concerns about seven patients mentioned in two Notices of Charges filed in 2009.

<snip>

The Board's compromise, which resulted in a lighter penalty than Buttar deserved, was influenced by a North Carolina law that gives partial protection to nonstandard practices. [Novella S. Springtime for charlatans. Neurologica blog, April 8, 2010]
Would treating with antibiotics be considered 'standard practices'? It sounds like it is illegal in NC for a physician to treat patients they have never examined- imagine that. Interesting parallels.

rlstanley
Posts: 1637
Joined: Mon 3 Dec 2007 2:53

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by rlstanley » Sat 10 Apr 2010 18:16

LH:
... It sounds like it is illegal in NC for a physician to treat patients they have never examined- imagine that. Interesting parallels.
http://www.ncmedboard.org/position_stat ... escribing/

North Carolina Medical Board

Contact with patients before prescribing
It is the position of the North Carolina Medical Board that prescribing drugs to an individual the prescriber has not personally examined is inappropriate except as noted in the paragraphs below. Before prescribing a drug, a licensee should make an informed medical judgment based on the circumstances of the situation and on his or her training and experience. Ordinarily, this will require that the licensee personally perform an appropriate history and physical examination, make a diagnosis, and formulate a therapeutic plan, a part of which might be a prescription. This process must be documented appropriately.

Prescribing for a patient whom the licensee has not personally examined may be suitable under certain circumstances. These may include admission orders for a newly hospitalized patient, prescribing for a patient of another licensee for whom the prescriber is taking call, or continuing medication on a short-term basis for a new patient prior to the patient’s first appointment. Established patients may not require a new history and physical examination for each new prescription, depending on good medical practice.

Prescribing for an individual whom the licensee has not met or personally examined may also be suitable when that individual is the partner of a patient whom the licensee is treating for gonorrhea or chlamydia. Partner management of patients with gonorrhea or chlamydia should include the following items:

a. Signed prescriptions of oral antibiotics of the appropriate quantity and strength sufficient to provide curative treatment for each partner named by the infected patient. Notation on the prescription should include the statement: “Expedited partner therapy.“

b. Signed prescriptions to named partners should be accompanied by written material that states that clinical evaluation is desirable; that prescriptions for medication or related compounds to which the partner is allergic should not be accepted; and that lists common medication side effects and the appropriate response to them.

c. Prescriptions and accompanying written material should be given to the licensee’s patient for distribution to named partners.

d. The licensee should keep appropriate documentation of partner management. Documentation should include the names of partners and a copy of the prescriptions issued or an equivalent statement.

It is the position of the Board that prescribing drugs to individuals the licensee has never met based solely on answers to a set of questions, as is common in Internet or toll-free telephone prescribing, is inappropriate and unprofessional.

rlstanley
Posts: 1637
Joined: Mon 3 Dec 2007 2:53

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by rlstanley » Fri 16 Apr 2010 2:31

http://www.ncahf.org/digest10/10-14.html
Robban Sica, M.D. charged with violating probation.

Psychiatrist Robban A. Sica, M.D., who operates the Center for the Healing Arts in Orange, Connecticut, is facing charges that could result in revocation of her medical license. In 2003, she was charged with improperly using chelation therapy to treat cardiovascular disease, failing to obtain adequate consent for such treatment, and improperly managing many of these patients whom she said were suffering from heavy metal toxicity.

In 2005, Sica and the state licensing authorities signed a consent order under which she agreed to: (a) serve a year of probation, (b) stop using DMPS as a chelating agent, (c) stop using a provoked urine test to diagnose heavy metal toxicity, (d) use a patient consent form which states that chelation therapy has not been scientifically substantiated, and (e) have her practice monitored by an independent consultant. DMPS is not a legal drug. In March 2010, Sica was charged with violating the 2005 order by prescribing it for 11 patients. Quackwatch has additional information on Sica's background.

rlstanley
Posts: 1637
Joined: Mon 3 Dec 2007 2:53

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by rlstanley » Sat 1 May 2010 19:35

http://www.ncahf.org/digest10/10-17.html

Another "biomedical treatment" provider facing disciplinary action.
The Texas Medical Board has charged Jesus Caquias, M.D. with providing substandard care that involved negligence, inadequate recordkeeping, poor medical judgment, poor decision-making, failure to use proper diligence, and/or non-therapeutic prescribing and/or treatment. Caquias operates a medical office in Brownsville, Texas and worked part-time for CARE Clinics, an Austin-based facility that offered dubious and expensive services for children with autistic spectrum disorders.

The charges involved dealings with four patients. Two patients diagnosed with autism and another one with headaches were given IV vitamin infusions and other inappropriate treatments at his office. The fourth patient was a child whose mother brought him to a CARE satellite clinic in Florida whose staff Caquias had trained.The complaint states that staff members, who were not licensed to practice medicine, used his signature stamp to order an "extremely large battery of diagnostic tests and several prescriptions." The board charged that his failure to prevent his stamp from being misused "demonstrated a lack of proper diligence in his professional practice." Caquias has been disciplined twice by the Texas Board.

In 2006, it concluded that he had failed to maintain adequate medical records and ordered him to (a) resign from his role as a gatekeeper in the county indigent program, (b) undergo remedial training in recordkeeping, and (c) have his practice monitored for two years. In 2007, he signed an agreed order under which he was fined $5,000 and agreed to stop (a) advertising in a manner that would cause confusion to the public, (b) using overly broad claims that would "tend to mislead the public as to cures for diseases" and (c) advertising with references to organizations not recognized by the American Board of Medical Specialties. The misconduct described in the pending charges looks far more serious.

rlstanley
Posts: 1637
Joined: Mon 3 Dec 2007 2:53

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by rlstanley » Sun 10 Oct 2010 1:21

http://www.ncahf.org/digest10/10-38.html

Medical Letter pans provoked testing.
The Medical Letter on Drugs and Therapeutics, which is the scientific community's most respected drug advisory, has criticized the use of provoked testing as a prelude to chelation therapy. In this procedure, a chelating agent is administered before the urine or blood specimen is obtained and sent to a laboratory that measures the levels of lead, mercury and other heavy metals. Provocation transiently raises excretion levels, which the laboratory may (improperly) report as "elevated or "very elevated."

The Medical Letter concluded that "the use of chelation therapy in non-standard protocols for unsubstantiated indications should be discouraged. The results of provoked urine testing are not an acceptable basis for such treatment." [Nonstandard uses of chelation therapy. The Medical Letter 52: 75-76, 2010]


Post Reply