ADHESIONS IHRT Chapter Five of: "The ever changing world of Endogyn!!"

IHRT Chapter Five of: "The ever changing world of Endogyn!!"
Endogyn, Emma-Klinic, Seligenstadt, Germany
Institut für Endoskopische Gynäkologie Head: Daniel Kruschinski, MD

Doc_Kru Most advanced
Posted Friday, March 17, 2006 @ 10:12 AM
Adhesions.de Message Board

IHRT quotes Daniel…(IHRT numbered the statement and our corresponding reply to it #7, #8, #9 )

(1) There is no technique better than the other as only longterm results and follow-up can show the success of a technique. On the other hand the same successful technique in one surgeon’s hand might show only moderate results in other surgeon’s hand.

(2) With my friend Harry Reich, we have very frequent fruitful discussions about gas and gasless surgery.

(3) And I am sure that we need another 15 years of research and clinical data to show which technique might be better.

(4) But in the end THE SURGEON is the key, regardless, which technique is used. Important is also the infrastructure that is offered for adhesion patients and the cooperation and interaction between patients and surgeon. The patients can rely that EACH surgeon does his best for the patient.

(5)There are only very few good surgeons for adhesions, but even the best surgeon won’t reach a 100 % success.

(6) Five years experience with SprayGel and Lift-laparoscopy (gasless) and a 2nd look laparoscopy, sometimes 3rd look gives so much material and clinical data, that patients can rely on the quality of surgery and infrastructure. And patients can choose a surgeon and a technique.

(7) Sometimes we can combine techniques (gas and gasless), if Harry Reich is here, which in the near future will be more often as he has recognized the high quality of organisation and infrastructure at EndoGyn.

(8) Just 2 days ago we finalized a more close cooperation to provide patients with a high quality of surgery and techniques."
Let’s work together to find more and better options for ARD patients!

(9) We (the surgeons) ARE doing it.

(10) We aim to extensively evaluate and discuss and question our techniques, the experimental / research studies and understand the adhesion prevention barriers. All this will throw much light on the optimal management of the enigmatic condition of ARD.
YOU (All patients) should join us in this mission!
With warm regards
http://www.endogynserver.com/cgibin/210/cutecast.pl?session=8amsd3jlR1URVx26nrWI6AHMmR&forum=2&thread=2275http://www.endogynserver.com/cgi-bin/210/cutecast.pl?session=8amsd3jlR1URVx26nrWI6AHMmR&forum=2&thread=2275

Quoting Daniel…
(7) "Sometimes we can combine techniques (gas and gasless), if Harry Reich is here, which in the near future will be more often as he has recognized the high quality of organisation and infrastructure at EndoGyn."

NO, no, no, Daniel, that is impossible as there IS no "high quality of organisation and infrastructure at EndoGyn" for adhesions patients!
Daniel, I spoke to Dr. Reich AFTER you did, and I explained why you called him in a panic to get to Germany for Deb’s surgery. I told him what you didn’t tell him, Daniel. I told him how you intercepted HIS email, and that you did that day’s before you contacted him with it. Daniel, I told him everything, and dear Dawn, sent him all the email communications between you and Deb.

WHY would YOU want to combine your adhesions "gasless" technique with one you do not believe in?

What would the purpose of "combine techniques (gas and gasless), for adhesions be?

Why would any adhesions ARD patient pay so much money to travel to Endogyn for Harry Reich, when they can go to the Grand Caymans, or Italy for near half of what you charge at Enodgyn, and NOT get adhesions caused by, "Das Hook?"

If a patient from the USA wants Dr. Reich, and the "Spraygel," they can secure a FREE flight from anywhere within the USA to Florida and then a 2 hour trip to a beautiful, tropical paradise, and for a lot less money then you charge, and where "Spraygel" IS effective in aborting adhesions formation!

If ANY International adhesions patient wants a VERY high quality adhesiolysis with "Spraygel," and by the BEST laporoscopic surgeon in the world, all they need to do is contact Dr. Mario Malzoni, and for less Euro’s then Endogyn charges, they secure surgery for adhesions from the best!

An ARD patient would NOT be "well served" to schedule a surgery at Endogyn with Harry Reich and you and "Das Hook," but that will never transpire anyway.
What in the world makes YOU think that you offer any patient with adhesions anything they cannot secure right in their own hometowns, Daniel?
YOU have the least credentials, experience, and affiliations of any surgeon with the "ARD" arena, and you attend the least medical Congress’s of them all!

Daniel,
YOU are the least of surgeons any person afflicted with ARD should consider allowing to perform a surgery on them, as you are NOT and have NEVER been recognized by your peers as an "Adhesion Specialist!"
Daniel, you do NOT posses the ethics, nor the class, to even be considered any where near the caliber of those surgeons who are recognized as an "Adhesions Specialist!"

Daniel, why is your focus on your relationship with Dr. Reich verses any other member of your "team?" IHRT is of the opinion that it is due to a prior comment you made regarding Dr. Reich when you said, " With Harry’s name associated to Endogyn, I will get lots of patients!"

Quoting Daniel…
(8) "Just 2 days ago we finalized a more close cooperation to provide patients with a high quality of surgery and techniques."

I say to all, "Watch and see how often Dr.’s Harry Reich, Mettler, or any other surgeon with brains, performs surgery at Endogyn, in the near future or not, it just will not happen.

Daniel Kruschinksi has been intercepting the emails of the Dr.’s on his supposed "team," and for years has not forwarded them onto these surgeons. Instead, he used their names to "harvest" patients by fraud!
Daniel not only used those he calls "friend" he broke his promise to them when he stated that he would accept the emails coming into Endogyn and then forward them on to each surgeon, which he did not do!

I repeat: "An ARD patient would NOT be "well served" to schedule a surgery at Endogyn with Harry Reich, you and "Das Hook," but that will never transpire anyway.
Like so many of Daniel’s "promises" and "claims" made in the past, there is no way to know if he is telling the truth here until it actually comes to pass, which it won't!
I will make up a list of Daniel's "promises" that have NOT ever produced....watch for it!

Quoting Daniel…
(9) "We (the surgeons) ARE doing it"

Daniel is nothing more then an "insult" to all who work so diligently and honestly for the cause of "Adhesion Related Disorder!"
Daniel is NOT involved with others who have work with respect, ethics AND who do publish their work in the area of ARD!

Daniel, is a fraud! (IHRT will prove these words to be true!)
Daniel tells lies, and miss-represents himself and ENDOGYN to the max by making claims on things and then changing those claims when he gets caught, and of course, he ALWAYS has an excuse as to why his adhesiolysis procedure doesn’t offer the relief he claimed it would! (IHRT will prove these words to be true!)

Quoting Daniel…
(10) "We aim to extensively evaluate and discuss and question our techniques, the experimental / research studies and understand the adhesion prevention barriers."

Daniel, has never shared ANY statistics or research data on anything he has claimed to have done, (and he must be daft to think that anyone would simply accept his wife’s papers on his stuff is absurd, other then if your Helen Dynda, Karen Stewart, and the "stooges" who follow them around like "blind mice!"

Who is "We?"

We thought that Daniel WAS doing this stuff, but in the absence of validation, him having done this stuff before, it looks like he hasn’t, but that he will, now! (So much for thinking you were going to an "Adhesions" specialist, huh folks??)

"WE" as in persons afflicted with adhesions, have already evaluated and discussed Daniel’s "techniques, the experimental / research studies," and he failed miserably!

Quoting Daniel…
(11) "YOU (All patients) should join us in this mission!"

Daniel has "used" his adhesions patients, and / or family members of adhesions patients, to make his claims for him, yet none of them have ever produced on validation for ANY of the claims expressed by them on his behalf! (Helen Dynda, Karen Stewart, Connie Haber, and others.)

Daniel has "exploited" every one of his adhesions patients, has taken advantage of their "appreciation" of his adhesions surgery knowing well that many, many adhesiolysis procedures are "effective" in reducing pain and symptoms, but in his case, most did not pass the time test!

Daniel used very "unethical" methods to lure desperately suffering adhesions patients by using pictures of food and promises that they will eat all of it after an adhesiolysis with him!

When Endogyn first started to offer "adhesiolysis with SprayGel" in 2003, EVERY adhesions patient made public claims of being "adhesion free" from EVERY surgery with Daniel. It was soon discovered that these same adhesions patients were returning to Endogyn for repeat adhesiolysis, and at reduced costs. Some even shared that they were offered "hush" money & favors from Daniel if they did not share their surgical results from Endogyn!

IHRT will not share more of the happenings at Endogyn since that time, as if you think it could not have gotten worse then that, it did! http://ihrt.blogspot.com/2006/03/another-website-to-warn-patients-of-dr.html
Another website to warn patients of Dr. Kruschinski

In conclusion:
IHRT’s report on Daniels post concludes that it was a lame attempt to try to show himself as being something and someone who is not only "associated" with Dr. Reich, but is working in the best interest of adhesions patients.
Daniel has NOT been working with Dr. Reich as he portrayed in his web site, or any other members of "his team!"
Daniel has NOT been "teaching" anyone how to use "Das Hook!"
Daniel is NOT a member of a number of the "membership" affiliations he claims he is, and some of these do not even exist! OR this:
"Scientific board member of the International Society for New Technology (ISONET) in Gynecology, Reproduction and Perinatology"
No affiliation here.....But a man with a similar name from New York!!?? http://www.bycam.it/tecnichechirurgiche/index.asp?id=60
IHRT encourages you to do a little research on the "publications" Daniel claims he is a part of! It is the opinion of IHRT that the, "Endogyn, Emma-Klinic, Seligenstadt, Germany Institut für Endoskopische Gynäkologie," under the direction of Daniel Kruschinski, is an unethical, dishonest, money making, facility that is allowing "research" and "experimental" surgical procedures to be performed there without properly informing the adhesions patients that this research is being performed on!

IHRT also charges that "Endogyn, Emma-Klinic, Seligenstadt, Germany Institut für Endoskopische Gynäkologie," under the direction of Daniel Kruschinski,
has caused irreparable physical, emotional and psychological harm to patients lured there by false and fraudulent claims created for a vulnerable and desperate audiences of persons who are afflicted with adhesions, " Adhesion Related Disorder."
IHRT also charges that the Endogyn web site contains false information meant to lure person’s afflicted with Adhesions Related Disorder" by using methods directly associated with the symptoms suffered by this vulnerable group.

Daniel Kruschinski’s post:
Posted Friday, March 17, 2006 @ 10:12 AM
Adhesions.de Message Board http://www.endogynserver.com/cgibin/210/cutecast.pl?session=8amsd3jlR1URVx26nrWI6AHMmR&forum=2&thread=2275http://www.endogynserver.com/cgi-bin/210/cutecast.pl?session=8amsd3jlR1URVx26nrWI6AHMmR&forum=2&thread=2275

GOOD LUCK to any adhesions patient traveling to Endogyn for surgery, as most will not ever see these reports to save themselves from harm at Endogyn! Once they are,
" intercepted" by Daniel & Co., they are sucked into a web of lies and deceit, and a future of hell and only after the damage is done, and Daniel has his money, will they start to search the Internet for help, and for most, there will be no help available!

The issues never ends at Endogyn…..no matter though as IHRT will be here to report everything as it presents itself!

Please pray for the two adhesions sufferers mentioned in Karen’s recent post in Endogyn, as they will need it.
IHRT will be watching, and will report, as these two are manuvioured through the Endogyn maze to a life of horror.

Gender: Female Location: Texas Registered: Jul 2003 Status: Offline Posts: 489
gingirl Master advanced
Posted Friday, March 31, 2006 @ 00:42 AM
http://www.endogynserver.com/cgi-bin/210/cutecast.pl?session=0E1iGPMpu1gEBZbdPaXhFsbIEC&forum=2&thread=2300

Related

The ever changing world of Endogyn!!" Endogyn, Emma Clinic, Frankfurt, Germany......

IHRT Chapter TWO of: The ever changing world of Endogyn!!" Endogyn, Emma KliniK, Frankfurt, Germany

IHRT Chapter Three of:The ever changing world of Endogyn!!" Endogyn, Emma KliniK, Frankfurt, Germany......

IHRT Chapter FOUR of: The ever changing world of Endogyn!!" Kruschinski

How Quackery Sells

How Quackery Sells
With Thanks to QuackwatchStephen Barrett, M.D.William T. Jarvis, Ph.D.

Modern health quacks are supersalesmen. They play on fear. They cater to hope. And once they have you, they'll keep you coming back for more . . . and more . . . and more.

Seldom do their victims realize how often or how skillfully they are cheated. Does the mother who feels good as she hands her child a vitamin think to ask herself whether he really needs it? Do subscribers to "health food" publications realize that articles are slanted to stimulate business for their advertisers? Not usually.Most people think that quackery is easy to spot. Often it is not. Its promoters wear the cloak of science. They use scientific terms and quote (or misquote) scientific references. Talk show hosts may refer to them as experts or as "scientists ahead of their time." The very word "quack" helps their camouflage by making us think of an outlandish character selling snake oil from the back of a covered wagon—and, of course, no intelligent people would buy snake oil nowadays, would they?Well, maybe snake oil isn't selling so well, lately. But acupuncture? "Organic" foods? Hair analysis? The latest diet book? Megavitamins? "Stress formulas"? Cholesterol-lowering teas? Homeopathic remedies? Magnets? Nutritional "cures" for AIDS? Products that "cleanse your system"? Or shots to pep you up?

Business is booming for health quacks. Their annual take is in the billions! Spot reducers, "immune boosters," water purifiers, "ergogenic aids," systems to "balance body chemistry," special diets for arthritis. Their product list is endless.What sells is not the quality of their products, but their ability to influence their audience. To those in pain, they promise relief. To the incurable, they offer hope. To the nutrition-conscious, they say, "Make sure you have enough." To a public worried about pollution, they say, "Buy natural." To one and all, they promise better health and a longer life.

Modern quacks can reach people emotionally. This article shows how they do it.
Appeals To VanityAn attractive young airline stewardess once told a physician that she was taking more than 20 vitamin pills a day. "I used to feel run-down all the time," she said, "but now I feel really great !""Yes," the doctor replied, "but there is no scientific evidence that extra vitamins can do that. Why not take the pills one month on, one month off, to see whether they really help you or whether it's just a coincidence. After all, $300 a year is a lot of money to be wasting.""Look, doctor," she said. "I don't care what you say. I KNOW the pills are helping me."How was this bright young lady converted into a true believer? First, an appeal to her curiosity persuaded her to try and see. Then an appeal to her vanity convinced her to disregard scientific evidence in favor of personal experience—to think for herself.
Supplementation is encouraged by a distorted concept of biochemical individuality—that everyone is unique enough to disregard the Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs).

Quacks won't tell you that scientists deliberately set the RDAs high enough to allow for individual differences. A more dangerous appeal of this type is the suggestion that although a remedy for a serious disease has not been shown to work for other people, it still might work for you. (You are extraordinary!)

A more subtle appeal to your vanity underlies the message of the TV ad quack: Do it yourself—be your own doctor. "Anyone out there have 'tired blood'?" he used to wonder. (Don't bother to find out what's wrong with you, however. Just try my tonic.) "Troubled with irregularity?" he asks. (Pay no attention to the doctors who say you don't need a daily movement. Just use my laxative.) "Want to kill germs on contact?" (Never mind that mouthwash doesn't prevent colds.) "Trouble sleeping?" (Don't bother to solve the underlying problem. Just try my sedative.)

Turning Customers into Salespeople
Most people who think they have been helped by an unorthodox method enjoy sharing their success stories with their friends. People who give such testimonials are usually motivated by a sincere wish to help their fellow humans. Rarely do they realize how difficult it is to evaluate a "health" product on the basis of personal experience. Like the airline stewardess, the average person who feels better after taking a product will not be able to rule out coincidence (spontaneous remission)—or the placebo effect (feeling better because he thinks he has taken a positive step).

Since we tend to believe what others tell us of personal experiences, testimonials can be powerful persuaders. Despite their unreliability, they are the cornerstone of the quack's success.

Multilevel companies that sell nutritional products systematically turn their customers into salespeople. "When you share our products," says the sales manual of one such company, "you're not just selling. You're passing on news about products you believe in to people you care about. Make a list of people you know; you'll be surprised how long it will be. This list is your first source of potential customers." A sales leader from another company suggests, "Answer all objections with testimonials. That's the secret to motivating people!"Don't be surprised if one of your friends or neighbors tries to sell you vitamins. Millions of Americans have signed up as multilevel distributors. Like many drug addicts, they become suppliers to support their habit. A typical sales pitch goes like this: "How would you like to look better, feel better and have more energy? Try my vitamins for a few weeks." People normally have ups and downs, and a friend's interest or suggestion, or the thought of taking a positive step, may actually make a person feel better. Many who try the vitamins will mistakenly think they have been helped—and continue to buy them, usually at inflated prices.

The Use of Fear
The sale of vitamins has become so profitable that some otherwise reputable manufacturers are promoting them with misleading claims. For example, for many years, Lederle Laboratories (makers of Stresstabs) and Hoffmann-La Roche advertised in major magazines that stress "robs" the body of vitamins and creates significant danger of vitamin deficiencies.Another slick way for quackery to attract customers is the invented disease. Virtually everyone has symptoms of one sort or another—minor aches or pains, reactions to stress or hormone variations, effects of aging, etc. Labeling these ups and downs of life as symptoms of disease enables the quack to provide "treatment."Some practitioners claim to detect "deficiencies" (or "imbalances" or "toxins," etc.) before any symptoms appear or before they can be detected by conventional means. Then they can sell you supplements (or balance you, or remove toxins, etc.). And when the terrible consequences they warn about don't develop, they can claim success.
Food safety and environmental protection are important issues in our society. But rather than approach them logically, the food quacks exaggerate and oversimplify. To promote "organic" foods, they lump all additives into one class and attack them as "poisonous." They never mention that natural toxicantsare prevented or destroyed by modern food technology. Nor do they let on that many additives are naturally occurring substances.
Sugar has been subject to particularly vicious attack, being (falsely) blamed for most of the world's ailments. But quacks do more than warn about imaginary ailments. They sell "antidotes" for real ones. Care for some vitamin C to reduce the danger of smoking? Or some vitamin E to combat air pollutants? See your local supersalesperson.

Quackery's most serious form of fear-mongering has been its attack on water fluoridation. Although fluoridation's safety is established beyond scientific doubt, well-planned scare campaigns have persuaded thousands of communities not to adjust the fluoride content of their water to prevent cavities. Millions of innocent children have suffered as a result.

Hope for Sale
Since ancient times, people have sought at least four different magic potions: the love potion, the fountain of youth, the cure-all, and the athletic superpill. Quackery has always been willing to cater to these desires. It used to offer unicorn horn, special elixirs, amulets, and magical brews. Today's products are vitamins, bee pollen, ginseng, Gerovital, pyramids, "glandular extracts," biorhythm charts, aromatherapy, and many more. Even reputable products are promoted as though they are potions. Toothpastes and colognes will improve our love life. Hair preparations and skin products will make us look "younger than our years." Olympic athletes tell us that breakfast cereals will make us champions. And youthful models reassure us that cigarette smokers are sexy and have fun.

False hope for the seriously ill is the cruelest form of quackery because it can lure victims away from effective treatment.
Even when death is inevitable, however, false hope can do great damage. Experts who study the dying process tell us that while the initial reaction is shock and disbelief, most terminally ill patients will adjust very well as long as they do not feel abandoned. People who accept the reality of their fate not only die psychologically prepared, but also can put their affairs in order. On the other hand, those who buy false hope can get stuck in an attitude of denial. They waste not only financial resources but what little remaining time they have left.

Clinical Tricks
The most important characteristic to which the success of quacks can be attributed is probably their ability to exude confidence. Even when they admit that a method is unproven, they can attempt to minimize this by mentioning how difficult and expensive it is to get something proven to the satisfaction of the FDA these days. If they exude self-confidence and enthusiasm, it is likely to be contagious and spread to patients and their loved ones.Because people like the idea of making choices, quacks often refer to their methods as "alternatives." Correctly employed, it can refer to aspirin and Tylenol as alternatives for the treatment of minor aches and pains. Both are proven safe and effective for the same purpose. Lumpectomy can be an alternative to radical mastectomy for breast cancer. Both have verifiable records of safety and effectiveness from which judgments can be drawn. Can a method that is unsafe, ineffective, or unproven be a genuine alternative to one that is proven? Obviously not.
Quacks don't always limit themselves to phony treatment. Sometimes they offer legitimate treatment as well—the quackery is promoted as something extra. One example is the "orthomolecular" treatment of mental disorders with high dosages of vitamins in addition to orthodox forms of treatment. Patients who receive the "extra" treatment often become convinced that they need to take vitamins for the rest of their life. Such an outcome is inconsistent with the goal of good medical care which should be to discourage unnecessary treatment.
Another clever trick is to include their product or procedure in a list of otherwise commonly-accepted practices in order to promote it by association. They may say, for example that their method works best when combined with lifestyle changes (which, quite often, will produce tangible benefits).The one-sided coin is a related ploy. When patients on combined (orthodox and quack) treatment improve, the quack remedy (e.g., laetrile) gets the credit.
If things go badly, the patient is told that he arrived too late, and conventional treatment gets the blame. Some quacks who mix proven and unproven treatment call their approach complementary or integrative therapy.
Quacks also capitalize on the natural healing powers of the body by taking credit whenever possible for improvement in a patient's condition. One multilevel company—anxious to avoid legal difficulty in marketing its herbal concoction—makes no health claims whatsoever. "You take the product," a spokesperson suggests on the company's introductory videotape, "and tell me what it does for you." An opposite tack—shifting blame -- is used by many cancer quacks. If their treatment doesn't work, it's because radiation and/or chemotherapy have "knocked out the immune system."
Another selling trick is the use of weasel words. Quacks often use this technique in suggesting that one or more items on a list is reason to suspect that you may have a vitamin deficiency, a yeast infection, or whatever else they are offering to fix.The disclaimer is a related tactic. Instead of promising to cure your specific disease, some quacks will offer to "cleanse" or "detoxify" your body, balance its chemistry, release its "nerve energy," bring it in harmony with nature, or do other things to "help the body to heal itself." This type of disclaimer serves two purposes. Since it is impossible to measure the processes the quack describes, it is difficult to prove him wrong. In addition, if the quack is not a physician, the use of nonmedical terminology may help to avoid prosecution for practicing medicine without a license.Books espousing unscientific practices typically suggest that the reader consult a doctor before following their advice. This disclaimer is intended to protect the author and publisher from legal responsibility for any dangerous ideas contained in the book. Both author and publisher know full well, however, that most people won't ask their doctor. If they wanted their doctor's advice, they probably wouldn't be reading the book in the first place.

Sometimes the quack will say, "You may have come to me too late, but I will try my best to help you." That way, if the treatment fails, you have only yourself to blame. Patients who see the light and abandon quack treatment may also be blamed for stopping too soon.
The "money-back guarantee" is a favorite trick of mail-order quacks. Most have no intention of returning any money—but even those who are willing know that few people will bother to return the product.
Another powerful persuader—something for nothing—is standard in ads promising effortless weight loss. It is also the hook of the telemarketer who promises a "valuable free prize" as a bonus for buying a water purifier, a six-month supply of vitamins, or some other health or nutrition product. Those who bite receive either nothing or items worth far less than their cost. Credit card customers may also find unauthorized charges to their account.
Another potent technique is cultural association, in which promoters ally themselves with religious or other cultural beliefs by associating their product or service with an article of faith or prejudice of their target audience.In a contest for patient satisfaction, art will beat science nearly every time. Quacks are masters at the art of delivering health care. The secret to this art is to make the patient believe that he is cared about as a person. To do this, quacks lather love lavishly. One way this is done is by having receptionists make notes on the patients' interests and concerns in order to recall them during future visits. This makes each patient feel special in a very personal sort of way. Some quacks even send birthday cards to every patient. Although seductive tactics may give patients a powerful psychological lift, they may also encourage over-reliance on an inappropriate therapy.

Psychologist Anthony R. Pratkanis, Ph.D., has identified nine strategies used to sell pseudoscientific beliefs and practices [Pratkanis AR. How to sell a pseudoscience, Skeptical Inquirer 19(4):19-25, 1995.]. They include setting phantom goals (such as better health, peace of mind, or improved sex life), making statements that tend to inspire trust ("supported by over 100 studies"), and fostering grandfalloons (proud and otherwise meaningless associations of people who share rituals, beliefs, jargon, goals, feelings, specialized information, and "enemies"). Multilevel sales groups, nutrition cultists, and crusaders for "alternative" treatments fit this description well.

Handling the Opposition
Quacks are involved in a constant struggle with legitimate health care providers, mainstream scientists, government regulatory agencies and consumer protection groups. Despite the strength of this science-based opposition, quackery manages to flourish. To maintain their credibility, quacks use a variety of clever propaganda ploys. Here are some favorites:"They persecuted Galileo!" The history of science is laced with instances where great pioneers and their discoveries were met with resistance. Harvey (nature of blood circulation), Lister (antiseptic technique) and Pasteur (germ theory) are notable examples. Today's quack boldly asserts that he is another example of someone ahead of his time. Close examination, however, will show how unlikely this is.
First of all, the early pioneers who were persecuted lived during times that were much less scientific. In some cases, opposition to their ideas stemmed from religious forces. Secondly, it is a basic principle of the scientific method that the burden of proof belongs to the proponent of a claim. The ideas of Galileo, Harvey, Lister and Pasteur overcame their opposition because their soundness can be demonstrated.A related ploy, which is a favorite with cancer quacks, is the charge of "conspiracy." How can we be sure that the AMA, the FDA, the American Cancer Society, drug companies and others are not involved in some monstrous plot to withhold a cancer cure from the public? To begin with, history reveals no such practice in the past. The elimination of serious diseases is not a threat to the medical profession—doctors prosper by curing diseases, not by keeping people sick. It should also be apparent that modern medical technology has not altered the zeal of scientists to eliminate disease. When polio was conquered, iron lungs became virtually obsolete, but nobody resisted this advancement because it would force hospitals to change. Neither will medical scientists mourn the eventual defeat of cancer. Moreover, how could a conspiracy to withhold a cancer cure hope to be successful? Many physicians die of cancer each year. Do you believe that the vast majority of doctors would conspire to withhold a cure for a disease which affects them, their colleagues and their loved ones? To be effective, a conspiracy would have to be worldwide. If laetrile, for example, really worked, many other nations' scientists would soon realize it.Claims of "suppression" are used to market publications as well as treatments. Many authors and publishers purport to offer information that your doctor, the AMA, and/or government agencies "don't want you to know about."
Organized quackery poses its opposition to medical science as a "philosophical conflict" or "paradigm shift," rather than a clash between proven versus unproven or fraudulent methods. This creates the illusion of a "holy war" rather than a conflict that could be resolved by examining the facts. Another diversionary tactic is to charge that quackery's critics are biased or have been bought off by drug companies.Quacks like to charge that, "Science doesn't have all the answers." That's true, but it doesn't claim to have them. Rather, it is a rational and responsible process that can answer many questions—including whether procedures are safe and effective for their intended purpose. It is quackery that constantly claims to have answers for incurable diseases. The idea that people should turn to quack remedies when frustrated by science's inability to control a disease is irrational. Science may not have all the answers, but quackery has no answers at all! It will take your money and break your heart.Many treatments advanced by the scientific community are later shown to be unsafe or worthless. Doctors also make mistakes. Such failures become grist for organized quackery's public relations mill in its ongoing attack on science.
Actually, "failures" reflect a key element of science: its willingness to test its methods and beliefs and abandon those shown to be invalid. True medical scientists have no philosophical commitment to particular treatment approaches, only a commitment to develop and use methods that are safe and effective for an intended purpose. When a quack remedy flunks a scientific test, its proponents merely reject the test.Each of these ploys represents a basic technique called misdirection -- analogous to what magicians do to shift the audience's attention away from what is important in order to deceive them. When faced with a criticism they cannot meet head on, quacks simply change the topic.How to Avoid Being TrickedThe best way to avoid being tricked is to stay away from tricksters. Unfortunately, in health matters, this is no simple task.
Quackery is not sold with a warning label. Moreover, the dividing line between what is quackery and what is not is by no means sharp. A product that is effective in one situation may be part of a quack scheme in another. (Quackery lies in the promise, not the product.) Practitioners who use effective methods may also use ineffective ones. For example, they may mix valuable advice to stop smoking with unsound advice to take vitamins. Even outright quacks may relieve some psychosomatic ailments with their reassuring manner.This article illustrates how adept quacks are at selling themselves. Sad to say, in most contests between quacks and ordinary people, the quacks still are likely to win.Related TopicsSpontaneous Remission and the Placebo EffectWhy Bogus Therapies Often Seem to WorkCommon Questions about Science and "Alternative" Health MethodsWhy Extraordinary Claims Demand Extraordinary ProofResponse to an Alt-Muddled FriendThis article was revised on January 20, 2005

...and for goodness sake will you get some sleep

Instead of staying up all those hours searching our web sites, you might be better served to search your own web site, Endogyn, and acclimate yourself to the "realities" of Daniel. Of course, this will not be an easy pill to swallow, but if you tried, you could pretend that you didn't find anything amiss, right?

You might want to research some of Daniel's memberships and publications yourself...IHRT has, and we really found some interesting material, of course, some VERY miss-represented in the Endogyn web site, as usual! ( unless we can be shown otherwise, that is.)

The good thing is that IHRT can contact some of these places where Daniel say's he is a member, and let them know what this guy is really like, at least we were able to secure the contact information from Endogyn.

You take care now, Helen.

And thank-you for the email, it was nice actually and very true, I had seen that one before. Why don't you put that one in Endogyn, instead of the "Donkey" one? Is it to "Christian" for Endogyn, you think?

BD

http://www.endogyn.de/index.php?seite=endogyn&sprache=en&a=EndoGyn&b=Physicians&c=DrKruschinski&d=vortraege
Memberships
Publications
Lectures
Dr. KruschinskiMemberships- Board member of the International Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ISGE) - Board member of the Gasless Laparoscopic & Endoscopic Surgeons Society (GasLESS) - Member of the European Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy (ESGE) - Member of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL) - Medical Advisor at OBGYN.NET (medical internet portal for gynecology and obstetrics) - Scientific board member of the International Society for New Technology (ISONET) in Gynecology, Reproduction and Perinatology - Board member of the Study Group for the Assessment of New Technologies in Gynecology, Subgroup of Experts on Gynecological Endoscopy of the Fédération Internationale de Gynécologie et d'Obstétrique (FIGO) - Member of the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) - Member of the Working Group for Reconstructive Surgery in Gynecology (AWO) of the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) - Member of the Working Group for Gynecologic and Obstetric Endoscopy (AGE) of the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) - Member of the Working Group for Information Processing in Gynecology and Obstetrics (AIG)


Member of the Working Group for Gynecologic and Obstetric Endoscopy (AGE) of the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG)
Cannot find such a "Group" as the AGE!

Member of the Working Group for Gynecologic and Obstetric Endoscopy (AGE) of the
German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG)
The Group The Æterna Zentaris group is comprised of healthcare-oriented companies evolving predominantly in the biopharmaceutical as well as personal care industries. Its success depends upon scientific and clinical expertise, financial acumen and sound market knowledge. The Æterna Zentaris group’s reliance at all levels on top-flight minds and specialty-focused partner organizations is foundational to its success. This emphasis on retaining the finest strategic talent informs every aspect of its corporate culture.Æterna Zentaris owns 100% of the biopharmaceutical company, Zentaris GmbH, based in Frankfurt, Germany and 100% of Echelon Biosciences Inc., a privately-held biopharmaceutical company based in Salt Lake City, Utah/USA. Æterna Zentaris also owns 48.40% of the equity of Atrium Biotechnologies Inc. (TSX: ATB.sv) and 64.9 % of its voting rights. Atrium is a developer, manufacturer and marketer of science-based products for the cosmetics, pharmaceutical, chemical and nutritional industries. The Æterna Zentaris group has over 350 employees in North America and Europe.

Publications

Publications in Journals with a scientific advisory board
Kruschinski D Laparoscopic GYN: 4 Reasons to Go Gasless OutpatientsSurgery, VOLUME VI, NO. 1, 49-53 (2006) - ONLY Daniel NO abstracts or scientific data nor researchOriginal paper (pdf file) Outpatient Surgery Magazine


Kruschinski D, Homburg S Lift-(Gasless) Laparoscopic Surgery Under Regional Anesthesia. Daniel and Shirli, NO abstractsSurg Technol Int. 14; 147-156 (2005) Original paper (pdf file) Surgical Technology Internation

Reich H, Roberts LM, Redan J. “Laparoscopic Surgery for Adhesions.” A Practical Manual of Laparoscopy. A Clinical Cookbook. Ed. Resad P. Pasic, M.D. and Ronald L. Levine, M.D. New York:Parthenon Publishing 2002:127-156.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Lift-laparoscopy+with+Abdolift+-+A+new+concept+of+gasless+surgery&btnG=Google+Search
Lift-laparoscopy with Abdolift - A new concept of gasless surgery


Kruschinski D, Homburg S, Wockel A, Kapur A, Reich H. NO Dr. Reich involved in writing this at all!Lift-laparoscopic total hysterectomy as a routine procedure. Surg Technol Int. 13; 147-156 (2004) Original paper (pdf file) Surgical Technology International

Your search - Knapstein PG, Bahlmann F, Beck T, Hawighorst S, Ibbels A, Kruschinski D, Schoenefuss G - did not match any documents.
Minimal invasive Chirurgie - Zukunftsaussichten Knapstein PG, Bahlmann F, Beck T, Hawighorst S, Ibbels A, Kruschinski D, Schoenefuss G Zentralbl Gynakol 118(2); 110-112 (1996)

Helen Dynda,You should be ashamed of yourself...

Helen Dynda,
You should be ashamed of yourself for being party to such a low and insensitive "plot" to harvest suffering and desperate ARD patients to Endogyn! ( *see post in the UK below) This is the most insidious deception of your fellow ARD sufferers that I ever saw, and YOU, of all people, being party to it makes me sick! YOU have sent ME material about "Christianity" and then I get this about YOU!

Helen, you can "tattle" to anyone you want, but it will do you, or Daniel, no good, as with THIS recent post in the UK ARD web site and other posts regarding Endogyn, I will expose them ALL for everyone to read and for everyone to draw their own conclusions about, after all, to quote your own words, " Knowledge is Power!"

(By the way Helen, I am very well yet today, and not angry nor harboring anything from my walk with ARD, however, what I do get "angry" about is stuff like this that takes advantage of those who are suffering enough as it is, and who do not need to be victimized by those within their own peer group, like you. You should be ashamed to try to implicate poor David in IHRT stuff! You knew better too, and we all knew that you knew it! YOUR really a piece of work, Helen, a low budget piece of work and getting lower each time your name appears in ARD web sites and material.)

On a personal note from me to you, " What the heck happened to you that you have given what appears to be your "ethics and morals" for someone you KNOW is not what he portrays himself to be?"
Though you make many claims for Daniel regarding his "research" and "surgical" statistics" YOU have never produced one single abstract to validate YOUR words of his claims, and neither has Daniel! I know that you understand the importance of abstracts when dealing with adhesion related issues, yet you seem to have compromised that importance in yourself? Why, Helen?

I think that had you not "denounced" your friendship with me by making false accusation against me some years past, you could have had YOUR space on any of our web sites, (not speaking for the IAS) but now that is impossible as there is no way you could ever be trusted, as in this post, you appear to have dropped to the lowest level void of ethics by following Karen Steward, and you have followed her right down to the bowels of deceit!

You, Karen, and others, make comments about how "evil" Dawn and I are, yet you seem to forget that Karen, Connie and others took to task many in the IAS, not just me! You seem blind to the fact that maybe, just maybe Dawn and I are right in our pursuit of the truth at Endogyn, in order to spare others from further harm, and from becoming bankrupt due to false claims backed by YOU!
All we ask for is validation of Daniels claims and promises, but all we seem to find is a web of deceit and fraud...and lies, and you also see this, yet you remain loyal to not just Daniel, but to Daniel's dishonest behaviors.
You also seem to have forgotten, and maybe forgiven, the dishonest behaviors of Karen, Connie, Sally, and far to many other patients to Endogyn, when they "lied" about the outcomes of their own surgeries there to others in the IAS looking to harvest them to a surgery that simply did not produce the results they all claimed, and Daniel allowed those miss-representations to continue as it meant money in his pocket, not a concern for his fellow human beings, and by you condoning this behavior, Helen, your no different then Daniel!!

You will never convince me, nor do you need to, that you do not see the discrepancies in Daniels claims, comments and promises, ever changing, ever empty, as your no fool, at least not in understanding what really exists in Endogyn! Repeat surgeries costing thousands of $$ per patient, long difficult trips to and from Germany, not to mention the time away from home, and what did they get, Helen, that was any different then they could have secured here in the USA? A "smile?" A "compassionate word?" (though void of truth over and over again)
A surgeon who took pleasure in "mocking our Lord" in a public way? A "plastic" surgeon doing abdominal scar revisions when he did breast implants? A surgeon who has the least "credentials & experiences" then any other surgeon in the ARD arena? A surgeon" who is not attending the "Adhesion ISGE" meeting in Argentina right now, today? A surgeon who doesn't attend "Congress's," like you see the other International Ob/Gyn surgeons attend?( And for reasons that I know after discussing Daniel with a number of very credible surgeons throughout the world, bit I will keep their confidences to myself. Though, it does relate to Daniels reputation within these circles, be assured of that, Helen, as his own peers aren't blind to happenings at Endogyn either!)

Your no fool when it comes to realizing that Daniel doesn't offer anything any different then an ARD patient can secure here in the USA, and even though Daniel uses a LOT of Spraygel per surgery, it is ineffective in his hands, proven!

Helen, I will STOP my pursuit of exposing Daniel IF YOU can show me "abstracts" of his research and statistics of his surgical outcomes, as long as we cannot secure this information from Daniel, and address these simple issues:

Who were the patients used in such research?

When was this research done, as in what years it took place?

Where did the research take place?

What "WAS" the research areas Daniel claims to have completed?

How did Daniel secure the data used in his upcoming book?

How did Daniel secure his numerous claims in his web site of having such information. ( NO, NOT papers written by Shirli as they are biased and NOT abstracts!!)

When DID Daniel discover that his hook "created" adhesions, as he didn't make it public until 2005! (I suspect that you too knew this, but hushed it up due to your allegiance to Daniel and wanting of "your" web areas within Endogyn! You sold yourself out for a few spots in Endogyn?)

How many of Daniel's patients remain well today? (I have a list of 200 prior patients of Endogyn, 196 had surgery with ONLY Daniel, and I also have a list of many who have had a follow-up adhesiolysis here in the USA validating that they were NOT adhesion free at Daniels second look procedures! I do have permission to use this list in a public way, which I will do!)

Posted Saturday, January 22, 2005 @ 05:01 AM
http://www.endogynserver.com/cgi-bin/210/cutecast.pl?session=rWjA7m6Ch4XAqL6TiNB4Wd1lZW&forum=2&thread=1392
Here you see how important it is to have the back-door opportunity of a 3rd-look laparoscopy. An adhesion formed to the umbilical incision of the second-look laparoscopy, and there is no way to avoid or exclude this as it is the last port that is open after we finish surgery, and this is still a very small wounded area with a minimal blood area where adhesions can form.


When was the last time one of the following surgeons performed a surgery at Endogyn and how often were they at Endogyn?

Harry Reich?
Dr. Mettler ?
Prof. Goeschen?
Any other surgeon for that matter?

Also:
How many US patients have returned to Endogyn for multiple surgeries?

How are they doing today?

Where are the results of Daniels follow-up screening?
http://www.endogynserver.com/cgi-bin/210/cutecast.pl?session=rWjA7m6Ch4XAqL6TiNB4Wd1lZW&forum=2&thread=1849Posted
Sunday, February 19, 2006 @ 04:42 PM Dr. Kru did you get a follow up form from me? If not please send me one. Thank you, Lynn Creacy

Why didn't Daniel refer Dr. Reich's email to him after he intercepted it from a US patient earlier this month?

Why did Daniel tell this lady that he performed over 3000 adhesiolysis procedures with 1 patient reforming adhesions?

Why did he tell this lady that he and Harry performed over 2500 adhesiolysi procedures at Endogyn?

Why did you, and Karen claim that Daniel invented the "Abdolift" with the patent made available to substantiate that claim?

Do YOU believe Daniel's words regarding his surgical claims with Reich?

Do YOU believe Daniel's claims of Co2 creating peritoneal lesions and adhesions?
If so, why?

Do you believe Daniel's words to the "Lady from Hawaii," and of his words to her?

On a personal note from me to you, " What the heck happened to you that you have given what appears to be your "ethics and morals" for someone you KNOW is not what he portrays himself to be?"

Though you make many claims for Daniel regarding his "research" and "surgical" statistics" YOU have never produced one single abstract to validate YOUR words of his claims, and neither has Daniel! I know that you understand the importance of abstracts when dealing with adhesion related issues, yet you seem to have compromised that importance in yourself? Why, Helen?

Come on Helen...who do you think your fooling here? Well, it's not me, that's for sure! I will say it like it is, whether you or anyone else likes it, as YOU know I speak the truth, and you nor anyone else owes me anything, least of all a confession, as what we both know well is that we stand alone in front of our Lord, and what is most important to me, Helen, is not what you think of me, or what I think of you, but what I will stand before my Lord with when that times approaches!

You want to use "Bible" quotes to "judge" me, go ahead, as I can do the same by pointing out that our Lord, Jesus, was too, subject to unjust persecution, and by his own family no less! If I am wrong in what I am doing in exposing wrongs being done to suffering , desperate and vulnerable people, then let me go to hell for all eternity, as this I can accept verses keeping quite when I believe an injustice is being done where I can intercept it and try to make a difference! This is a hell of a lot more then YOU can ever claim..at least not in the past three years that is!

Yes, Helen, this too will go public for all to see just how much IHRT has attempted to secure answers deserving of those who suffer ARD!

I will read each and every word you respond to this email with..and with an open mind, though I do expect your words to be substantiated with validations, not quoting Daniel, not using Shirli's written reports, not, giving YOUR personal opinions on Daniel's charisma and smile, as that doesn't do the surgery, just straight forward validations of your claims, and Daniel's claims!

(You can forward this to Karen and anyone else you want to, no problem in them helping you secure this information, it is actually appreciated.)

Beverly
*
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 8:15 PM
Subject: Posst from ukas
Jr. Member OfflinePosts: 16

Lysis of adhesions in UK ---- or Europe?
« on: January 03, 2006, 02:38:41 PM »

Am new here but have had a fair bit of contact with Helen Dynda and read lotsa websites - including this one - on adhesions and potential treatments.Does anyone know if there are any good skilled surgeons in Uk who use the 'best practice' as described by Helen and the German surgeons? If not is it possible to get treatment in Germany through the NHS?I would welcome any comments as I'm having difficulty breathing and indigesting with this sticky problem ....Regards, K
FounderAdministratorStar Member OfflineGender: Posts: 432
Knowledge is Power

Gasless Laparoscopy
« on: January 03, 2005, 11:50:25 PM »

Gasless Laparoscopy: New Technique of Laparoscopy without Carbon Dioxide GasToday, the surgical procedure known as keyhole surgery or minimally invasive surgery permits operations to be performed which formerly would have necessitated the use of the scalpel. Keeping the surgical wound as small as possible was for a long time the aim of physicians and surgeons. Therefore, surgical techniques were continually refined in order to gain access, with the minimum of adverse effects, to the site of disease. In gynecology, endoscopic investigations of the abdominal sex organs, such as the womb, fallopian tubes and ovaries, have a long tradition. Operations with the endoscope were also a routine procedure here. In the 70s laparoscopy was performed mainly for diagnosis or for tubal ligation. Thanks to the pioneer Professor Kurt Semm, from Kiel, more and more indications were established in Germany and worldwide. Today, laparoscopic procedures to treat benign manifestations in the ovaries and fallopian tubes (extrauterine pregnancy, ovarian cysts) as well as in the womb (myomas) are standard procedures carried out as a routine measure in endoscopic centers. The advantages of endoscopic operations for malignant cases cannot yet be definitively elucidated, which is why such operations are being conducted on an experimental basis in very few hospitals.Advantages of endoscopy Large surgical wounds are avoided on using endoscopy. Therefore, there is markedly less wound pain after surgery. The patient recovers and becomes mobile more quickly, hence the hospital stay is considerably shortened and indeed procedures can even be carried out in many cases on an outpatient basis. The cosmetic result is considerably better since only small scars remain. Wound healing disorders are seen less often after endoscopic operations than after open abdominal surgery, and there are fewer problems due to adhesions and scars. Risks and disadvantages of endoscopic operations But like all operations, endoscopic procedures also pose certain risks such as, for example, hemorrhage, organ injury or infection. Moreover, it can come to light in the course an endoscopic procedure that conventional surgery is warranted. Endoscopic procedures necessitate insufflation of the abdominal cavity with carbon dioxide in order to obtain a sufficient view of the surgical field and grant the surgeon enough space to work. This causes considerable build-up of pressure in the abdominal cavity and reduces the body temperature due to the cold gas, which in turn causes pain that in some cases can persist for several days, radiating to the shoulder and neck regions; these manifestations can prolong and complicate the recovery period. Moreover, the gas is held responsible for further side effects whose implications have not yet been adequately clarified. For example, there are increasingly more reports in the literature about incidences relating to carbon dioxide, which is converted in the body to carbonic acid. Long operations with carbon dioxide may lead, above all in older and less healthy patients, to a decrease in the pumping action of the heart or to overloading the organism with carbonic acid, and this in turn can cause acidosis of all organ systems. Insufflated gas can in very rare cases lead to gas accumulation in the vascular systems of the lungs (gas embolism), heart (decrease in coronary blood supply) and of the kidneys (poorer perfusion) or to the accumulation of carbon dioxide in the subcutaneous tissue of the skin (emphysema). While such side effects of carbon dioxide are extremely rare, they can prove fatal (kidney failure, heart attack, pulmonary embolism). Typical complications of an endoscopic procedure can occur while inserting the Verres needle - for gas insufflation - or the secondary trocars. This "insufflation needle" is pierced "blindly", i.e. without visual control, into the abdominal cavity. After the abdominal cavity has been filled with gas, the first trocar for the optic is inserted (also without visual control). Both can in rare cases cause injury to vessels or organs (for example the bladder, intestines, stomach and others), and this in turn can trigger emergency situations (e.g. bleeding) warranting immediate action. An undetected bowel injury following coagulation often results some time later in acute ileus and massive infection. Endoscopic operations are clearly more difficult and are therefore performed only by a few centers. By working with overly long, specially modified instruments, the surgeon loses tactile perceptions. The instruments are unfamiliar; they have the most diverse gripping systems and small graspers. All this detracts from precision during surgery. Only very few surgeons develop the ability to operate in the abdominal cavity with only indirect visual contact, i.e. looking at the monitor. Therefore, the learning curve associated with endoscopic surgical techniques is very long. The complication rate for endoscopic procedures is also higher than in open surgery, especially in the case of surgeons who are not yet optimally trained. This is also one of the reasons why, following the initial euphoria, stagnation can be noted in the spread of endoscopy. In order to avoid gas loss via the instruments, special trocars with valves were developed. The instruments themselves consist of multiple tubular and shaft systems which mimic the rotary and angled movements of the hand. To avoid gas loss while changing the instruments (for example between scissors and graspers), multi-functional instruments were developed. Industry has to make massive investments to manufacture these instruments, which is why the costs incurred for such instruments are much higher than in the case of conventional instruments. Endoscopic instruments are more laborious when it comes to maintenance and processing. Due to the myriad tubular systems, special washer-disinfectors must be purchased to clean these instruments and eliminate contaminants based on body secretions and blood which could cause infection. For the past 75 years (since the introduction of laparoscopy with carbon dioxide) industry has been trying in close cooperation with endoscopic surgeons to overcome the problems emanating from endoscopic procedures using gas. In the meantime, a very important market segment has therefore developed which, by continually developing newer instruments and equipment, makes endoscopic procedures using gas safer but also more expensive. The costs are spiraling due to, among other things, the use of special thread and suture materials, widespread use of disposables, such as titanium clip systems, suturing devices and angled instruments; all this calls into question the benefits of endoscopic procedures. Professor Axel Perneczky, neurosurgeon from Mainz, made the following statement regarding endoscopic surgery: "Keyhole surgery can be likened to a situation where we try to sew on a button on the bed linen in the bedroom with a tweezers through the keyhole of the front door; moreover, the rooms are full of furniture, around which we have to maneuver the tweezers..."Quotation by Dr. Daniel Kruschinski on the development and introduction of gasless laparoscopy: "Keyhole surgery can also be likened to a situation where we use a ladder to try to come in through a closed window of a bedroom on the first floor, although the front door is wide open..." New Technique: Gasless LaparoscopyThis method is based on the fundamentals of minimally invasive surgery combined with the conventional technique of "open" surgery. This technique prevents or minimizes all the aforementioned disadvantages, risks and complications of endoscopic operations with carbon dioxide, while preserving all the advantages of laparoscopy e.g. minimal scars, better cosmetic results, less wound pain, rapid recovery, short hospital stay, etc. Consequently, it means progress (the combination of newest techniques of endoscopic surgery) through regress (established and proven conventional techniques of open surgery). Insufflation of gas into the abdominal cavity is dispensed with. Instead, a special lift system, which is inserted into the abdominal cavity via a small cut in the lower umbilicus, raises the abdominal wall mechanically. This allows a similar view into the abdominal cavity as that afforded by laparoscopy with gas. To insert the instruments, two further small incisions are made above the pubic bone for the flexible trocars (see also Video and Photo Gallery on the adhesions.de website).For More Information Contact Dr.Daniel.Kruschinski@adhesions.de
Report to moderator Logged
In Friendship Kath Findlay
Hi Andy-Alias Maria,I do have a list of adhesions specialists in England and 1 in Ireland and also 3 in Germany, one of which I am the advocate for. I have tried to email you privately but the emails keep coming back to me.If you read this Maria, please get back to me.regards Kath
Report to moderator Logged
In Friendship Kath Findlay
Star Member OfflineGender: Posts: 432
Knowledge is Power

Re:Hi from Ireland looking for info on Sraygel Surgery
« Reply #4 on: August 24, 2004, 08:14:16 AM »

Hi Mel,Spraygel has been available in the UK for about a year now. Some surgeons have expressed fears that it may go the same way as InterGel and give people alergic reactions. The members that we have on our board who have used it, still have some pain but there are others who have had it done in Germany who are pain free.There is a new barrier coming out soon in the UK that sounds like what we have been been waiting for. Hope this is of help to you.
Report to moderator Logged
In Friendship Kath Findlay
Knowledge is Power

Advantages of Gasless Laparoscopy
« on: January 04, 2005, 12:08:36 AM »

Advantages of Gasless LaparoscopyAdvantages for the patient: by dispensing with insufflation of carbon dioxide, there is considerably less pain after surgery. Essentially, the shoulder pains observed after endoscopic procedures are avoided or greatly reduced. The patient needs fewer painkillers compared to laparoscopy with gas. The recovery period is shorter, with the patient returning to normal activity faster than after laparoscopy with gas; for instance the recovery period after a hysterectomy is only approx two weeks. The operation is safer and more precise because one can dispense completely with the long and unfamiliar instruments. The risk of infection posed by inadequately cleaned endoscopic instruments and by different tubular and pumping systems is eliminated. The serious complications associated with "blind" insertion of the Verres needle or trocars into the abdominal cavity are avoided, because in gasless laparoscopy the abdominal cavity is accessed under visual control. Complications from clips, suturing systems or electrical coagulation, e.g. injuries to the ureter during an endoscopic hysterectomy, are avoided. The not yet foreseeable late complications caused by titanium clips remaining in the body, which must still be investigated, can be avoided. All aforementioned side effects, risks and complications caused by carbon dioxide are avoided, so that in addition to young and healthy patients, older or risk patients can also be operated on with the gasless method. This technique also makes it possible to perform endoscopic procedures under regional anesthesia, something that was not hitherto possible because of the massive pressure from the pneumoperitoneum in the abdominal cavity, which causes pain and organ compression (diaphragm, lung). Operations can also be conducted on pregnant women using gasless laparoscopy, as there is no pressure build-up, caused by gas, on the growing uterus (miscarriage, decreased perfusion of the placenta and of the baby). Gasless laparoscopy in pregnancy can be carried out as it avoids acidity of the blood of the fetus so that organ damage can be prevented and, moreover, the operation can be performed without general anesthesia.Domenico D'Ugo, anesthesiologist from Rome, stated in 1997 at the International Symposium on Gasless Laparoscopy in Gynecology: "The use of carbon dioxide is almost the only reason for exclusion of risk patients from laparoscopy, who in truth would be the only ones to benefit from the minimally invasive procedure ..." Advantages for the surgeon: the dangerous complications, which are typical of endoscopic surgery, resulting from "blind" insertion of the Verres needle for gas insufflation or of the first trocar are avoided. In addition to special instruments, the surgeon can also use traditional surgical instruments. Accordingly, sutures can be applied using the tried and tested needle and thread method instead of clip and suture apparatus or electrical coagulation, which are expensive or can cause complications and whose benefits have not yet been clarified. Tried and tested surgical techniques which have proved themselves over decades can also be used, thus enhancing precision and safety and shortening the operating time. Unlike when using the long endoscopic instruments, the surgeon preserves tactile manual perceptions and can thus feel what he is cutting, holding or compressing. With the magnification conferred by the endoscope, the operation unfolds more precisely and more safely. Also the learning curve associated with the gasless technique for the surgeon is markedly shorter, because he need only learn how to interact with the monitor since the surgical technique remains the same as that practiced in open abdominal surgery and is therefore easier.Advantages for the healthcare system: minimally invasive operations using laparoscopy with carbon dioxide are about seven times more expensive than laparotomy. Minimally invasive operations with gasless laparoscopy are more cost effective as they dispense with systems that render laparoscopy with gas expensive. Instruments can be cleaned in the same way as hitherto, no special washer-disinfectors are required. Conventional instruments last considerably longer, they do not break as often as those instruments used for the gas method and need not be repaired or replaced so often. Neither is it necessary to continue using every novel instrument and technique that comes on the market so that the safety and maneuverability of gas laparoscopy can be improved. With the gasless method, no disposables are used, such as titanium clips and special threads which are enormously expensive. By combining the minimally invasive technique (short hospital stay and recovery period) with the cost effectiveness of the gasless method, this method of surgery is overall markedly more favorable than laparoscopy with gas. This technique is simple and easier to learn, so that more surgeons, who have so far not performed endoscopy surgery due to its inherent difficulties, can employ this technique and therefore more patients will benefit from the minimally invasive surgical method. Especially in the poorer countries of our world where, because of lack of the appropriate equipment and the high costs of devices and instruments, endoscopic surgical techniques were scarcely encountered or introduced, patients can be operated on with laparoscopy using the lifting technique. Indications in GynaecologySurgical treatment or removal of diseased sex organs, such as for example:Surgery for severe adhesions Treatment and removal of the wombTreatment of endometriosisRemoval of myomas from the wombRemoval of benign tumors of the ovaryRemoval of the ovaryTreatment of fallopian tube pregnancyDiagnosis and treatment of infertility. For more information contact Dr Daniel.Kruschinski@adhesions.de
Report to moderator Logged
In Friendship Kath Findlay

The Poor UK

So NOW people are responding to a March 5th post??? Daniel is getting desperate isn't he!! LOL! LOL!

Like so many of his, " promises" and "claims" he has made in the past, there is no way to know if he is telling the truth until it actually comes to pass, which it won't!


I will make up a list of Daniel's "promises" that have NOT ever produced....and neither will this one!
Subject: Poor UK
Registered as physician in UK !
printer friendly versionnext oldest post
Author
Messages
Doc_Kru Most advanced
Gender: Male Location: Registered: Jul 2003 Status: Offline Posts: 256

Posted Sunday, March 5, 2006 @ 03:44 AM Recently I got registered by the General Medical Council in UK. This will allow me to perform surgery in many other countries than Germany.
Many hospitals all over the world are seeking for specialised surgeons to perform surgeries.
So patients won't have always to travel so far.

--------------------Daniel Kruschinski, MD) EndoGyn.com, Adhesions.de, Hysterectomy.de, Fibroids.de, Endometriosis.de, gasless-laparoscopy.com
gingirl Master advanced
Gender: Female Location: Texas Registered: Jul 2003 Status: Offline Posts: 488

Posted Sunday, March 5, 2006 @ 01:29 PM Congratulations Dr. Kruschinski!!
--------------------Karen ......................................................................................................................................
Dr. Kruschinski's remarkable talent, gasless laparascopy, and SprayGel gave my daughter back her life!! Thank you Dr. Kruschinski!!
sybylsmom More advanced
Gender: Female Location: Brockton, MA. USA Registered: Jul 2003 Status: Offline Posts: 147

Posted Sunday, March 5, 2006 @ 02:31 PM Dear Dr. Kruschinski, That is wonderful news!! Keep up the good work and keep spreading your way of saving people from useless surgeries. Jan
Sally Grigg Unregistered

Posted Thursday, March 30, 2006 @ 01:28 AM Dear Dr. Kruschinski, That is indeed good news. Does that mean you will operate in England? I love England, it brings back so many wonderful memories. My niece went to Oxford. I hope you and yours are all well. I am so very busy that it is hard to find the time for anything other than the Inn and the Ranch. We had a new baby sheep yesterday and I've just got some pygmy goats, they are so cute. unbelievably adorable. Keep up the good work of fixing up us adhesion ridden patients. It is such a hard profession to be in, since adhesions just want to regrow and regrow. Take care and good luck, Sally Grigg
Doc_Kru Most advanced
Gender: Male Location: Registered: Jul 2003 Status: Offline Posts: 256

Posted Thursday, March 30, 2006 @ 06:45 AM I will announce where else we can do surgery. You know, that ist not only the surgery but also the infrastructure that has to be maintained. Regards
--------------------Daniel Kruschinski, MD) EndoGyn.com, Adhesions.de, Hysterectomy.de, Fibroids.de, Endometriosis.de, gasless-laparoscopy.com
http://www.endogynserver.com/cgi-bin/210/cutecast.pl?session=GJOIvSiyBHkbJQ1Junhs6fuY5Y&forum=2&thread=2264