The most serious blog IHRT has done to date - Kruschinski's profile!

Three shocking medical cases?

1.) Some years ago, a Colorado physician, using a mirror, removed his own appendix after notifying the news media. Though the surgery was successful, the medical community was not impressed with this surgical tour de force. Not only did his colleagues not fête him, they quickly revoked his license to practice.
Why such Draconian justice at what seems, in the end, little more than a sophomoric prank? Worst case scenario, he could have killed himself, thereby permanently, as it were, revoking his own license. The answer, of course, is that though he had endangered only himself, his judgment was no longer credible. Perhaps, next time, he would choose to remove someone else's appendix while blindfolded, or deliver a baby while standing on his head! Furthermore, his behavior reflects poorly on the entire medical profession.

2.) A surgeon in Kentucky who branded the initials of the University of Kentucky into a woman's uterus before he removed it defended his actions and said he was simply marking the midline of the organ. "I felt this was honorable since it made reference to the college of medicine where I received my medical degree." Though this action did not endanger the patient, it did show a serous lack of compassion and respect for this patient and could very easily affect her emotional and psychological well-being. Of course, this surgeon’s judgment was no longer credible, which was proven after nine other women asked to join the lawsuit after discovering that they too had been branded.

3.) A surgeon in Germany performed “clinical studies” on unsuspecting patients, who were not only charged for the surgeries, but were led to believe that the surgical technique being performed on them was a validated treatment that was safe and had already been proven to be effective. What is particularly pernicious about this case is that the irresponsible physician put innocent people at risk, as when the results of the “study” were revealed, they were NOT as effective as were hoped, but instead exacerbated most of the patients' conditions. Interestingly enough, the result of these studies determined that the robotic apparatus used in these surgeries was NOT being used as it was intended by the manufacturer, but was GROSSLY misused by the surgeon. The “Abdolift” has now been discontinued for sale and is no longer being produced by the company. Of course, this surgeon’s judgment was no longer credible, after violating his obligation to his patients and placing them in dangerous situations for his own gains and purposes. Where would he stop in performing untested surgical procedures in unregulated environments on unsuspecting patients if HE felt he wanted the studies?

Contrary to the ever-increasing numbers of true believers in society today who enthusiastically pursue medical interventions believing the surgeon is a “God,” and placing all their trust in them without question, many find out that the they made a big mistake! Many often ignore “red flags” that come up because they are desperate for the medical intervention or perhaps are simply too ill to take control. Many do not ask questions and present concerns to the surgeon. Even worse, patients take the word of others without checking the history and reputation of the surgeon, only to find out too late, that there were serious issues known all along about the surgeon, and could have easily been checked out by the patients themselves.

People have died — and continue to die — from medications and surgical interventions that are not regulated; others have lost the opportunity to undertake validated treatment because they trusted the wrong surgeon, lost precious time and money, after going to an unscrupulous surgeon. (This is not to say that validated treatments are always perfectly safe or effective, but at least they represent the best we can do.) The case described is the reductio ad absurdum of the tendency.

What we learn in the cases above is that the irresponsible physician does not endanger himself; instead he puts innocent people at risk, and without any sense of concern for their well-being. The drug may be toxic or the surgery might produce morbidity, thus the physician’s obligation to the patient is violated. Since the issue involves ill people seeking treatment from the only source known to them, and whom they trust, the physician’s obligation to society is also violated.

When a physician creates a situation where his practices are not trusted, the physician has, by his actions, struck a blow to the credibility of his medical profession and, thus, has violated his obligation to his peers and the profession as a whole. In the same way, he has eroded his own hard-won reputation, thus violating his obligations to himself. In short, one cannot envision a clearer case of unethical behavior as we see above in these 3 cases of injustices done to innocent, desperate suffering people whose only action was to trust their physician.

IHRT opens the door for your comments on these three cases.
IHRT asks your opinion of these three surgeons, and
IHRT asks what your gut reaction was regarding these surgeons…the unfortunate part of these cases is that some reading this might be one of the patients mentioned in the third case brought to you in this blog. YOU might very well have been an unwitting test subject at "Endogyn" in Germany who were not given the opportunity to say yes or no to undergoing an untested, unregulated surgery, and a surgery that cost you thousands of dollars!

IHRT believes there is only one kind of surgeon who would do such atrocious things to human beings who trusted them, and that is a severely dysfunctional psychopath.

Did YOUR surgeon fit this profile?

How to Recognize a Psychopath
By Simona Nielsen
• A psychopath appears as self-confident and innocent. He is obsessed with fantasies about power, honor and revenge and a feeling of having special rights. • In proportion to others he is superficial friendly, but the psychopath has no trust in others.
• The Psychopath doesn’t have the skills to co-operate on the same level with others. He lacks the skills to join groups and family life.
• The psychopath seems charming and seems to seek company. He makes many plans, has great ambitions but creates few results. He cares much about looks and status. He rarely goes through a full education and suffers from chronic boredom.
• In love and sexuality the psychopath is sly and seductive. He can be recognized by many partners and often changes in partners. Furthermore, many marriages and divorces. There is a danger of abuse, incest and sexual perversions.
• The psychopath doesn’t care about morality and it’s hard for him to feel pity for anyone except himself. He has deep LACK of real guilt and.or remorse. He often suffers from gambling mania and has a tendency to commit fraud.
• He is good at expressing himself verbally. He can get on anywhere in the world with his small-talk. He is interested in anything new, but hates routine.
• If you feel a beginning disgust towards a person, you’ve always had good thoughts about, this can be a sign. Psychopaths often gives people ‘the creeps’ when you get to know them better.
• It’s impossible to avoid conflicts with the psychopath. He only understands how to solve conflicts with power and manipulation.
• If you work with a psychopath, it’s important to set limit to what you’ll accept. Psychopaths are good at advancing in the workplace.

More to come on the "Dr. Daniel Kruschinski Profile" associated with his past and current behaviors! All facts as usual in IHRT!