Archive for the ‘Biological Evidence’ Category

Why we haven’t cured cancer yet, review

June 11, 2012

Click image to enlarge
Why We Haven't Cured Cancer
Via: MedicareSupplementalInsurance.com

http://www.medicaresupplementalinsurance.com/why-we-havent-cured-cancer.html

Advertisements

Medical Malpractice Related to Nosocomial MRSA Infections, comment

July 7, 2010

Prescreening patients for MRSA prior to admission to the hospital is a very proactive approach to managing this “super bug”.  If we consider this part of our pre-surgical admission assessment rather than a legal issue, we can take some of the unnecessary fear and anxiety that has been instilled in the public from the media regarding MRSA. When patients are screened for Group B Strep prior to a vaginal delivery, it provides health care providers with useful information to treat the patient and potentially the infant prophylactically and could potentially save the hospital, patient and insurance companies money from complications.  We should consider MRSA in a similar scope because it is no longer rare and only nosocomial in nature, but it is commonly acquired in the community as well.  Prescreening patients upon admission, whether it be inpatient or outpatient, can only improve outcomes for patients and healthcare providers.  This does not have to be seen as a legal issue, or a means to panic the community needlessly, but rather a way of arming ourselves with information to provide the best quality care possible.  Protocols need to be established to prevent and control MRSA before it enters our patient environment, while still treating those who are carriers in a non-discriminatory manner.

Original Post

June 7, 2010

Title: MRSA frustrations! (comment)

I feel the same frustrations as posted in the attached! I feel like we, the nurses, are viewed as the Culprit in a patient acquiring a nosocomial infection. Never mind the fact that ‘we’ probably wouldn’t be in this predicament if these wonder drugs, antibiotics, hadn’t been given for every sore throat and cold that walked into the Dr’s office, clinic, or ER. In the hospital where I work, there is an ongoing ‘tally’ of hospital-acquired UTI, VAP, central-line infections, etc., by unit. It’s hard enough to work short-staffed, but to also glove and wash your hands every time you enter a patients presence then leave, just to enter another and wash all over again; takes even more time away from patient care and interactions; all the while someone standing over your shoulder monitoring… The pharmaceuticals have some ownership of this ‘super-bug’ epidemic. I don’t think they invested enough time and research into developing new antibiotics, because it didn’t make the money the other drug classes did. https://forensicnursingcourses.com/2010/05/26/medical-malpractice-related-to-nosocomial-mrsa-infection-comment/

Original Post

May 26, 2010

Title: Medical malpractice related to nosocomial MRSA infection, comment

After reading the posts regarding MRSA acquired during the hospitial stay and how this is a legal issue makes me think of one thing. Nurses need a law degree before stepping foot in a hospital. Well, that may be a little overboard. I see this everyday. Practicing medicine while keeping in mind that we can be sued. We order extra lab work, radiology, ultrasound, MRI, and swabs for MRSA so we cover all the bases and avoid going to court. I can understand the MRSA swabs that may need to be done in order to avoid a lawsuit, but we would have to swab everyone. We really don’t know if the history we are obtaining is inclusive. Is this done in other countries? Are people “sue happy”? This is a foriegn concept to some friends and family that visit the US. Maybe we can invent a body scan that will take photographs head to toe to cover wounds, swab every orifice, lower the beds to 1 foot off the ground, and make it mandatory to wear special non-slip shoes to avoid falls. Again, the above example is out of frustration that we are not only caring for patients, but always are adding new things to do in order to avoid a lawsuit. I wish it were different, but we all know it will only get worse.

Original Post

January 16, 2007

Title: Medical Malpractice Related to Nosocomial MRSA Infections

The media and government have educated the public in the “super bugs” some patients become infected with in the hospital environment. The most widely known “super bug” is methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). In June 2006 there was a case brought to court regarding the death of patient who had been in the hospital for a knee joint replacement. Since the patient had not been screened for MRSA prior to hospitalization it could not be proved if he picked up the MRSA during the hospital stay. With the documented community acquired MRSA he could have had the bacteria dormant in his body when he was admitted for the planned surgery. The doctor and hospital were not found negligent in this case.

Many hospitals are fearful of similar lawsuits based on nosocomial infections. Some hospitals are now culturing high-risk patients prior to hospital admission to determine if they are colonized. There is now a nasal swab test that has a turn around time of two hours to identify MRSA. Certainly this can be helpful so that colonized patients coming in for elective procedures can have this treated and also be isolated from non-colonized patients. Patients that test positive for MRSA can be cohorted with like patients or put in private rooms. There are multiple hospitals in Europe starting to follow this intervention with positive outcomes in their nosocomial rates.

It would seem to me the hospital administrators would prefer paying for the MRSA culture versus facing the potential of law suits from patients who develop nosocomial MRSA infections while inpatient. If I had a family member going to the hospital I would much prefer they be tested for MRSA prior to a surgery as “knowledge is power” Having the knowledge of colonized MRSA prior to surgical intervention can allow for adjustments that lead to positive outcomes for the hospital, surgeon and patient. I can visualize hospitals even being forced to do it to allow them better leverage in the court system by being able to say, “this person was colonized with MRSA” prior to hospital admission. From the epidemiology stand point it would also allow the opportunity to keep the more virulent strain of community MRSA from entering the hospital environment.

Healthcare Medical Malpractice Defense Attorney Lawyer

Online Forensic Nursing Course

Online Forensic Nursing Certificate Program

Tags: 

MRSA frustrations! (comment)

June 7, 2010

I feel the same frustrations as posted in the attached! I feel like we, the nurses, are viewed as the Culprit in a patient acquiring a nosocomial infection. Never mind the fact that ‘we’ probably wouldn’t be in this predicament if these wonder drugs, antibiotics, hadn’t been given for every sore throat and cold that walked into the Dr’s office, clinic, or ER. In the hospital where I work, there is an ongoing ‘tally’ of hospital-acquired UTI, VAP, central-line infections, etc., by unit. It’s hard enough to work short-staffed, but to also glove and wash your hands every time you enter a patients presence then leave, just to enter another and wash all over again; takes even more time away from patient care and interactions; all the while someone standing over your shoulder monitoring… The pharmaceuticals have some ownership of this ‘super-bug’ epidemic. I don’t think they invested enough time and research into developing new antibiotics, because it didn’t make the money the other drug classes did. https://forensicnursingcourses.com/2010/05/26/medical-malpractice-related-to-nosocomial-mrsa-infection-comment/

Original Post

May 26, 2010

Title: Medical malpractice related to nosocomial MRSA infection, comment

After reading the posts regarding MRSA acquired during the hospitial stay and how this is a legal issue makes me think of one thing. Nurses need a law degree before stepping foot in a hospital. Well, that may be a little overboard. I see this everyday. Practicing medicine while keeping in mind that we can be sued. We order extra lab work, radiology, ultrasound, MRI, and swabs for MRSA so we cover all the bases and avoid going to court. I can understand the MRSA swabs that may need to be done in order to avoid a lawsuit, but we would have to swab everyone. We really don’t know if the history we are obtaining is inclusive. Is this done in other countries? Are people “sue happy”? This is a foriegn concept to some friends and family that visit the US. Maybe we can invent a body scan that will take photographs head to toe to cover wounds, swab every orifice, lower the beds to 1 foot off the ground, and make it mandatory to wear special non-slip shoes to avoid falls. Again, the above example is out of frustration that we are not only caring for patients, but always are adding new things to do in order to avoid a lawsuit. I wish it were different, but we all know it will only get worse.

Original Post

January 16, 2007

Title: Medical Malpractice Related to Nosocomial MRSA Infections

The media and government have educated the public in the “super bugs” some patients become infected with in the hospital environment. The most widely known “super bug” is methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). In June 2006 there was a case brought to court regarding the death of patient who had been in the hospital for a knee joint replacement. Since the patient had not been screened for MRSA prior to hospitalization it could not be proved if he picked up the MRSA during the hospital stay. With the documented community acquired MRSA he could have had the bacteria dormant in his body when he was admitted for the planned surgery. The doctor and hospital were not found negligent in this case.

Many hospitals are fearful of similar lawsuits based on nosocomial infections. Some hospitals are now culturing high-risk patients prior to hospital admission to determine if they are colonized. There is now a nasal swab test that has a turn around time of two hours to identify MRSA. Certainly this can be helpful so that colonized patients coming in for elective procedures can have this treated and also be isolated from non-colonized patients. Patients that test positive for MRSA can be cohorted with like patients or put in private rooms. There are multiple hospitals in Europe starting to follow this intervention with positive outcomes in their nosocomial rates.

It would seem to me the hospital administrators would prefer paying for the MRSA culture versus facing the potential of law suits from patients who develop nosocomial MRSA infections while inpatient. If I had a family member going to the hospital I would much prefer they be tested for MRSA prior to a surgery as “knowledge is power” Having the knowledge of colonized MRSA prior to surgical intervention can allow for adjustments that lead to positive outcomes for the hospital, surgeon and patient. I can visualize hospitals even being forced to do it to allow them better leverage in the court system by being able to say, “this person was colonized with MRSA” prior to hospital admission. From the epidemiology stand point it would also allow the opportunity to keep the more virulent strain of community MRSA from entering the hospital environment.

Healthcare Medical Malpractice Defense Attorney Lawyer

Online Forensic Nursing Course

Online Forensic Nursing Certificate Program

Tags: 

Medical malpractice related to nosocomial MRSA infection, comment

May 26, 2010

After reading the posts regarding MRSA acquired during the hospitial stay and how this is a legal issue makes me think of one thing. Nurses need a law degree before stepping foot in a hospital. Well, that may be a little overboard. I see this everyday. Practicing medicine while keeping in mind that we can be sued. We order extra lab work, radiology, ultrasound, MRI, and swabs for MRSA so we cover all the bases and avoid going to court. I can understand the MRSA swabs that may need to be done in order to avoid a lawsuit, but we would have to swab everyone. We really don’t know if the history we are obtaining is inclusive. Is this done in other countries? Are people “sue happy”? This is a foriegn concept to some friends and family that visit the US. Maybe we can invent a body scan that will take photographs head to toe to cover wounds, swab every orifice, lower the beds to 1 foot off the ground, and make it mandatory to wear special non-slip shoes to avoid falls. Again, the above example is out of frustration that we are not only caring for patients, but always are adding new things to do in order to avoid a lawsuit. I wish it were different, but we all know it will only get worse.

Original Post

January 16, 2007

Title: Medical Malpractice Related to Nosocomial MRSA Infections

The media and government have educated the public in the “super bugs” some patients become infected with in the hospital environment. The most widely known “super bug” is methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). In June 2006 there was a case brought to court regarding the death of patient who had been in the hospital for a knee joint replacement. Since the patient had not been screened for MRSA prior to hospitalization it could not be proved if he picked up the MRSA during the hospital stay. With the documented community acquired MRSA he could have had the bacteria dormant in his body when he was admitted for the planned surgery. The doctor and hospital were not found negligent in this case.

Many hospitals are fearful of similar lawsuits based on nosocomial infections. Some hospitals are now culturing high-risk patients prior to hospital admission to determine if they are colonized. There is now a nasal swab test that has a turn around time of two hours to identify MRSA. Certainly this can be helpful so that colonized patients coming in for elective procedures can have this treated and also be isolated from non-colonized patients. Patients that test positive for MRSA can be cohorted with like patients or put in private rooms. There are multiple hospitals in Europe starting to follow this intervention with positive outcomes in their nosocomial rates.

It would seem to me the hospital administrators would prefer paying for the MRSA culture versus facing the potential of law suits from patients who develop nosocomial MRSA infections while inpatient. If I had a family member going to the hospital I would much prefer they be tested for MRSA prior to a surgery as “knowledge is power” Having the knowledge of colonized MRSA prior to surgical intervention can allow for adjustments that lead to positive outcomes for the hospital, surgeon and patient. I can visualize hospitals even being forced to do it to allow them better leverage in the court system by being able to say, “this person was colonized with MRSA” prior to hospital admission. From the epidemiology stand point it would also allow the opportunity to keep the more virulent strain of community MRSA from entering the hospital environment.

Healthcare Medical Malpractice Defense Attorney Lawyer

Online Forensic Nursing Course

Online Forensic Nursing Certificate Program

Tags: 

Medical Malpractice related to nosocomial MRSA infections, comment

April 28, 2010

After reading the 1/16/2007 post regarding nosocomial infections especially with MRSA, I had to respond. I think hospitals all over the US need to adopt what the hospitals are already doing in Europe. The nose swabs are a fast and effective way of determining whether a pt is at risk or not for MRSA. Many pts prior to leaving the hospital setting, suffered from MRSA which became very demanding for the nurse and ancillary staff to care for. Pts were placed on isolation and had to go into the room completely gowned up which requires extra steps to an already busy schedule for a 8-12 hour shift. This testing would also maintain the reimbursement Medicare gives hospitals because as of October 2008, it was determined by COHIaBA, who governs Medicare stipulations, would be taking away money from the hospitals if pts were diagnosed with MRSA or greater than Stage 3 Pressure Ulcers. THis would mean a greater reimbursement which would help maintain staffing and salaries to nurses and other ancillary staff. I think this is a great idea to assist with the on going changes with health care that this country is going through right now.

Original Post
January 16, 2007
Title: Medical Malpractice related to nosocomial MRSA infections
The media and government have educated the public in the “super bugs” some patients become infected with in the hospital environment. The most widely known “super bug” is methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). In June 2006 there was a case brought to court regarding the death of patient who had been in the hospital for a knee joint replacement. Since the patient had not been screened for MRSA prior to hospitalization it could not be proved if he picked up the MRSA during the hospital stay. With the documented community acquired MRSA he could have had the bacteria dormant in his body when he was admitted for the planned surgery. The doctor and hospital were not found negligent in this case.

Many hospitals are fearful of similar lawsuits based on nosocomial infections. Some hospitals are now culturing high-risk patients prior to hospital admission to determine if they are colonized. There is now a nasal swab test that has a turn around time of two hours to identify MRSA. Certainly this can be helpful so that colonized patients coming in for elective procedures can have this treated and also be isolated from non-colonized patients. Patients that test positive for MRSA can be cohorted with like patients or put in private rooms. There are multiple hospitals in Europe starting to follow this intervention with positive outcomes in their nosocomial rates.

It would seem to me the hospital administrators would prefer paying for the MRSA culture versus facing the potential of law suits from patients who develop nosocomial MRSA infections while inpatient. If I had a family member going to the hospital I would much prefer they be tested for MRSA prior to a surgery as “knowledge is power” Having the knowledge of colonized MRSA prior to surgical intervention can allow for adjustments that lead to positive outcomes for the hospital, surgeon and patient. I can visualize hospitals even being forced to do it to allow them better leverage in the court system by being able to say, “this person was colonized with MRSA” prior to hospital admission. From the epidemiology stand point it would also allow the opportunity to keep the more virulent strain of community MRSA from entering the hospital environment.

Healthcare Medical Malpractice Defense Attorney Lawyer

Online Forensic Nursing Course

Online Forensic Nursing Certificate Program

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Second puzzling case of autism reported, comment

April 12, 2010

Over the course of five years that I was an infusion nurse in a naturopathic medical clinic, I saw several cases of children with autism. These children often had one or several forms of heavy metal poisoning mercury and other metals. When treated with IV chelation these children improved drastically. Most of the history assessments revealed vaccines as the only source of mercury poisoning that was a definite factor.

During the course of the IV chelation and nutritional IV supplementation that went along with this, colonic irrigation was ordered to rid the body of metals that were being chelated out and adhering to the wall of the colon. Interestingly enough with these colonics, parasitic infestations were sometimes noted. Along with the chelation, natural antiparasitic botanicals and homeopathic remedies were given with an even more profound improvement in childrens behaviors related to the autism occured. So much that I intend on testing my autistic and even ADD and ADHD children not only for heavy metal poisoning but comprehensive stool analysis from a private lab when I start my practice.

It is a shame that alternative and what some refer even to "fringe" type medical treatments cannot be better studied in this country mostly due to non-acceptance my the traditional medical community and government funding for research.

I also feel, not only the mercury factor in vaccinations can be harmful but also live/attenuated viruses can become active in some sensitive individuals and possibly these illnees we are are trying to prevent are manifesting and effecting the brain and this is not detected ever or until after profound damage is done and the vaccine may not even become a consideration.

Original Post
November 26, 2009
Title: Second puzzling case of autism reported, comment
As governmental funds for researching the causes and eventual cure of Autism increase, it has naturally gained more attention from the public. I agree that this has its pros and cons. More parents are considering the possible ramifications of dosing their children with multiple vaccines. Parents are becoming more proactive and accountable when it comes to decisions regarding the medical care of their children. It is shedding light on a disease that has been, up until recently, misunderstood by most. On the flip side there isn’t a whole lot of concrete evidence linking autism directly to vaccine administration, yet there is a multitude of evidence that suggests that vaccines have saved lives, prevented the spread of potentially fatal disease and in some cases has eradicated the disease all together. I have a family member that became adamant that her children were never going to receive any type of vaccine – she executed extensive research on vaccines and homeopathic alternatives. To date her children have not received a single vaccine, they take multiple vitamins and herbal supplements on a daily basis and their diet is quite restricted. Sadly and ironically, her 13 year old son was diagnosised with autism at 3 years old.

Original Post
July 1, 2009
Title: Second puzzling case of autism reported
Federal health officials at an upcoming conference the controversial cases of a 9-year-old girl who became autistic after receiving numerous vaccinations. In January a 6-year-old girl received a flu vaccine and a week later became ill requiring hospitalization and ultimately died. Study after study has failed to show a link between vaccines and autism but many parents of autistic children claim that childhood vaccinations they received are responsible. In 1986 a National Vaccine injury compensation program was introduced to compensate injured children from vaccines. Many deadly epidemics have been prevented by vaccination. For the parent of a child injured following vaccination, grief and ambivalence would prevail. The questions that continue regarding these very complicated situations cause great concern for parents trying to decide whether to immunize a child.

Forensic Investigation Vaccine Autism Death Attorney Lawyer

Online Naturopathy Courses

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Second puzzling case of autism reported, comment

December 23, 2009

There are many theories as to what the cause of Autism is, yet no definitive answers have yet emerged. Although many believe vaccines are the cause of autism, research has failed to show this correlation. However, Thimerosal, which is a mercury containing organic compound used as a preservative in many vaccines, is implicated in the cause of Autism based on the fact that mercury as a known neurotoxin. In fact, as a result, manufactures such as the Eli Lilly Company, have worked towards decreasing or eliminating the use of Thimerosal in vaccines. As of October 5th the incidence of Autism is 1 in 91 individuals. As vaccines become Thimerosal free it would be interesting to see if the incidence of Autism reflects this change. 

Original Post

November 26, 2009

Title: Second puzzling case of autism reported, comment

As governmental funds for researching the causes and eventual cure of Autism increase, it has naturally gained more attention from the public. I agree that this has its pros and cons. More parents are considering the possible ramifications of dosing their children with multiple vaccines. Parents are becoming more proactive and accountable when it comes to decisions regarding the medical care of their children. It is shedding light on a disease that has been, up until recently, misunderstood by most. On the flip side there isn’t a whole lot of concrete evidence linking autism directly to vaccine administration, yet there is a multitude of evidence that suggests that vaccines have saved lives, prevented the spread of potentially fatal disease and in some cases has eradicated the disease all together. I have a family member that became adamant that her children were never going to receive any type of vaccine – she executed extensive research on vaccines and homeopathic alternatives. To date her children have not received a single vaccine, they take multiple vitamins and herbal supplements on a daily basis and their diet is quite restricted. Sadly and ironically, her 13 year old son was diagnosised with autism at 3 years old.

Original Post
July 1, 2009
Title: Second puzzling case of autism reported
Federal health officials at an upcoming conference the controversial cases of a 9-year-old girl who became autistic after receiving numerous vaccinations. In January a 6-year-old girl received a flu vaccine and a week later became ill requiring hospitalization and ultimately died. Study after study has failed to show a link between vaccines and autism but many parents of autistic children claim that childhood vaccinations they received are responsible. In 1986 a National Vaccine injury compensation program was introduced to compensate injured children from vaccines. Many deadly epidemics have been prevented by vaccination. For the parent of a child injured following vaccination, grief and ambivalence would prevail. The questions that continue regarding these very complicated situations cause great concern for parents trying to decide whether to immunize a child.

Forensic Investigation Vaccine Autism Death Attorney Lawyer

Tags: 

Second puzzling case of autism reported, comment

November 26, 2009

As governmental funds for researching the causes and eventual cure of Autism increase, it has naturally gained more attention from the public. I agree that this has its pros and cons. More parents are considering the possible ramifications of dosing their children with multiple vaccines. Parents are becoming more proactive and accountable when it comes to decisions regarding the medical care of their children. It is shedding light on a disease that has been, up until recently, misunderstood by most. On the flip side there isn’t a whole lot of concrete evidence linking autism directly to vaccine administration, yet there is a multitude of evidence that suggests that vaccines have saved lives, prevented the spread of potentially fatal disease and in some cases has eradicated the disease all together. I have a family member that became adamant that her children were never going to receive any type of vaccine – she executed extensive research on vaccines and homeopathic alternatives. To date her children have not received a single vaccine, they take multiple vitamins and herbal supplements on a daily basis and their diet is quite restricted. Sadly and ironically, her 13 year old son was diagnosised with autism at 3 years old.

Original Post
July 1, 2009
Title: Second puzzling case of autism reported
Federal health officials at an upcoming conference the controversial cases of a 9-year-old girl who became autistic after receiving numerous vaccinations. In January a 6-year-old girl received a flu vaccine and a week later became ill requiring hospitalization and ultimately died. Study after study has failed to show a link between vaccines and autism but many parents of autistic children claim that childhood vaccinations they received are responsible. In 1986 a National Vaccine injury compensation program was introduced to compensate injured children from vaccines. Many deadly epidemics have been prevented by vaccination. For the parent of a child injured following vaccination, grief and ambivalence would prevail. The questions that continue regarding these very complicated situations cause great concern for parents trying to decide whether to immunize a child.

Forensic Investigation Vaccine Autism Death Attorney Lawyer

Tags: , , , ,

Second puzzling autism case reported, comment

October 6, 2009

This is a very interesting topic. From my experience in pediatrics, I am noticing many parents rejecting immunizations these because of the Autism/Immunization controversy. Others are deciding to do a delayed vaccine schedule because of the belief that injecting numerous viruses into a child’s system at one time may cause harm to the brain, which may be a better solution than no vaccines at all. There are several books, articles and Internet sites supporting the delayed vaccine schedule but just be very selective in the source; not all information is accurate.

Original Post
July 1, 2009
Second puzzling autism case reported
Federal health officials at an upcoming conference the controversial cases of a 9-year-old girl who became autistic after receiving numerous vaccinations. In January a 6-year-old girl received a flu vaccine and a week later became ill requiring hospitalization and ultimately died. Study after study has failed to show a link between vaccines and autism but many parents of autistic children claim that childhood vaccinations they received are responsible. In 1986 a National Vaccine injury compensation program was introduced to compensate injured children from vaccines. Many deadly epidemics have been prevented by vaccination. For the parent of a child injured following vaccination, grief and ambivalence would prevail. The questions that continue regarding these very complicated situations cause great concern for parents trying to decide whether to immunize a child.

Adverse vaccine immunization drug health attorney lawyer

Tags: , , , , , ,

Bioterrorism

July 22, 2009

I had no idea until taking this pharmacology class taught by Dr. Johnson how easy bioterrorism could be. It is frightening to consider the possibility of some sick mind infecting millions with ricin or anthrax. It would appear that diagnosis would be difficult, at least initially, with the first couple of cases. The symptoms of coughing, tightness in the chest, difficulty breathing, nausea, fever, and weakness mimic many other common illnesses such as flu, pneumonia, and many other respiratory illnesses. In smaller community hospitals I would believe that bioterrorism is not the first thought when a patient presents with these symptoms. The key would have to be the volume of patients presenting with like symptoms. It is a very scary thought as to the ease with which these weapons could be obtained and I hope that we are ready if/when such an attack should occur.

Tags: , , , ,


%d bloggers like this: