Prominent oncologist suspended for professional misconduct

Dear Dr. Chris,
How are you and Mdm. Beng Im? Hope everything is okay.
I’ve just got this information from my friend in Singapore a couple minutes ago.
 ========================================================

Prominent cancer doctor Ang Peng Tiam given 8-month suspension by Supreme Court

Dr Ang Peng Tiam of Parkway Cancer Centre has been given an eight month suspension in lieu of a $25,000 fine.

SINGAPORE – Prominent cancer specialist Ang Peng Tiam of Parkway Cancer Centre, who had appealed to the Supreme Court against a Singapore Medical Council (SMC) fine of $25,000, has been given an eight-month suspension instead of the fine.

It would have been a 16-month suspension had the SMC acted on the complaint more expeditiously, said Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, who delivered the Court of Three Judges’ decision on Tuesday.

Two daughters of a former patient made a complaint against Dr Ang in 2010. The patient died in October that year. But the SMC served the notice of enquiry on Dr Ang in April 2015.

The SMC’s disciplinary tribunal had found Dr Ang, 59, guilty of two of the charges: That he made false representation to the patient who was suffering from lung cancer that there was a “70 per cent” chance of responding to the treatment he suggested and that he failed to offer her surgery as an option.

The disciplinary tribunal found that Dr Ang “had no reasonable basis” for saying there was a 70 per cent chance of response and felt that he had “wrongly held out false hope” to the patient and her family.

It also found him guilty of not offering surgery when that was “the preferred initial treatment option”.

A statement from the SMC on Wednesday (June 28) said the disciplinary tribunal found that there was an “intentional, deliberate departure from standards observed or approved by members of the profession of good repute and competency”.

Dr Ang had claimed that he has seen about 16,000 new patients over the past 16 years, of whom 10 to 15 per cent suffered from lung cancer.

It felt that his actions “merit severe penalty” but given testimonials in favour of Dr Ang as well as his community work, it decided against a suspension.

Instead, it imposed a fine of $25,000, a censure, an undertaking not to repeat the offence and for him to pay 60 per cent of the cost of the proceedings.

Dr Ang appealed against the tribunal’s decision to the Court of Three Judges which on Tuesday (June 27) upped his sentence from a fine to an eight-month suspension.

The SMC had also filed an appeal against what it considered was a light penalty from its disciplinary tribunal and had urged the court to impose a six-month suspension for each of the two offences for which Dr Ang had been found guilty.

Instead of taking his “eminence and seniority” as a mitigating factor, the court saw it as an “aggravating” factor and his “unblemished record” of more than 30 years had limited relevance in mitigation.

However, the court took into account the 41/2 years it took the SMC to serve notice of enquiry on Dr Ang after receiving the complaint. This “inordinate delay” caused suffering to Dr Ang.

Justice Menon said the appropriate sentence in the light of the seriousness of the offence would have been a suspension of 16 months for the two charges. But given the long delay by the SMC, it halved the sentence to an aggregate of eight months.

Source: http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/health/prominent-cancer-doctor-ang-peng-tiam-given-8-month-suspension-by-supreme-court?xtor=CS11-88

================================================

Well-known cancer surgeon gets 8-month suspension for professional misconduct

PUBLISHED: 5:23 PM, JUNE 28, 2017     UPDATED: 7:05 AM, JUNE 29, 2017

SINGAPORE — Prominent cancer surgeon Ang Peng Tiam’s punishment for giving a former patient suffering from Stage 2B lung cancer false hope about her disease has been upped to an eight-month suspension.

The suspension for his “aggravated” professional misconduct would have been double that, said the Court of Three Judges which heard his appeal, if not for the 4½-year delay in the disciplinary proceedings by the Singapore Medical Council (SMC).

In its grounds of decision released on Wednesday (June 28), the court made clear that the penalty it is imposing had nothing to with whether Dr Ang — a 35-year veteran and medical director of Parkway Cancer Centre — was correct in his treatment plan for the 55-year-old, who died about six months after seeing him.

Rather, Dr Ang had no basis to tell the patient there was a 70 per cent chance of her tumour shrinking with the treatment plan he had. He also should not have taken away her right to choose surgery, even if he assessed it to be an unsuitable course of action.

“A doctor might believe that a particular treatment option is in his patient’s best interests, but ultimately, it is the patient who must make the decision on her treatment,” said Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, delivering the judgment on behalf of the court on Tuesday.

Dr Ang first saw the patient in late-March 2010. She had a 8cm, fast-growing and aggressive tumour, as well as a few smaller growths, in her right lung.

He recommended combining chemotherapy with a drug called gefitinib, telling her, in Mandarin, this treatment would give her “at least a 70 per cent chance that the tumour will shrink”.

Dr Ang also explained to the patient, her husband, and their two daughters that his assessment of her chances was based on her being Chinese, female, someone who had never smoked, and a tumour diagnosed with adenocarcinoma.

But he had no justification for his claim because this rate of success was only applicable to patients with these characteristics who had also tested positive for epidermal growth factor receptor mutation. Dr Ang did not send the patient for a test to determine her status.

He also did not tell her that surgery was an alternative way to treat the cancer.

The patient went with his plan but did not respond well to treatment, dying a little over six months later. Her daughters lodged a complaint with the SMC later.

After a 13-day hearing, a disciplinary tribunal fined him S$25,000 for two counts of professional misconduct, relating to his unjustified claim about the patient’s chances and his failure to provide surgery as a treatment option. Dr Ang appealed against his convictions.

The Court of Three Judges, which included Judges of Appeal Andrew Phang and Judith Prakash, upheld the tribunal’s decisions on both counts.

This was not a case where Dr Ang had made a mistake, misjudged or misinterpreted medical papers on the effectiveness of his treatment plan for the patient, it said. Instead, he made the claims intentionally even though he knew or ought to have known there was no basis for him to do so.

On not giving the patient the option to go for surgery, which was the preferred option with similar conditions as this patient under the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, Dr Ang argued that as a doctor, he was obliged to exercise his clinical judgment instead of blindly and rigidly following the guidelines.

While they agreed that doctors should not suspend their clinical judgment and slavishly adhere to the guidelines, the judges said doctors were obliged to present the range of viable options and what the pros and cons of each of these were. Patients must get to decide for themselves what treatment they want, the judges added.

“It was not Dr Ang’s role to decide, but to inform,” the judges said.

In deciding on the sentence, CJ Menon said the priority in this case was in general deterrence, rather than preventing reoffending.

Noting Dr Ang’s senior position — he has been president of the Singapore Society of Oncology and Singapore Cancer Society, among others — he is “expected to set an exemplary standard and to serve as a role model for fellow practitioners”, he added.

“Seniority and eminence are characteristics that attract a heightened sense of trust and confidence, so that when a senior and eminent member of the profession is convicted of professional misconduct, the negative impact on public confidence in the integrity of the profession is correspondingly amplified,” CJ Menon said.

Dr Ang’s unblemished record and past contributions to society were also of little relevance. “The law must also not be misconstrued as providing those with an established good track record a free pass for misconduct on the basis that it is out of character,” said CJ Menon.

Source: http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/well-known-cancer-surgeon-gets-8-month-suspension-professional-misconduct

Advertisements

Drugs CAN NOT cure anything

Capture

 

Probably the most common question I am asked regarding the actual credibility of reversing cancer, goes something like this: If there really IS a CURE for cancer, why wouldn’t my doctor tell me about it?

Let me explain. Your doctor is trying to provide the best treatment for you within his or her knowledge and within the acceptable protocol of treatments offered. But doctors are taught almost nothing about prevention or nutrition in medical school.

Doctors are specialists in treating the symptoms of disease. Most doctors do not receive more than FOUR HOURS of training in nutrition during their four years of medical school. And the primary reason they receive this training now (because when I had cancer they were receiving less than 1 hour in four years) is because of the backlash from the public.

The pharmaceutical industry is a HUGE part of the problem. It’s a multi-billion-dollar industry which provides much of the funding for medical schools and nearly all of the advertising in medical journals. Money really talks in medicine. So your doctor’s ongoing education is largely about drugs and the newest drugs on the market.

The problem is… Drugs CAN NOT cure anything. They only treat symptoms at best and rake in lots of cash in the process. Even chemotherapy is a classic and long-standing example. Chemo is a drug, aimed at shrinking tumors and destroying cancer cells (symptoms). But it also makes the cancer more “chemo resistant” and never deals with the root problem of why a person has cancer in the first place.

Let’s not forget the world’s oldest GOLDEN RULE: He who has the gold – rules!

Source: http://www.paulablack.org/blog/2016/5/2/what-your-doctor-doesnt-know-may-be-killing-you-by-paula-black

 

India Promotes US$100b Ayurvedic Medicine Industry

NEW DELHI: India’s new government has launched a drive to promote the country’s ancient therapies as it seeks to cash in on the multi-billion dollar global market for holistic medicine.

India claims to have natural remedies for everything from cancer to the common cold, but ministers say it has failed to capitalise on its traditions as the world has woken up to alternative medicine.

Hindu nationalist Prime Minister Narendra Modi, a teetotal vegetarian who practices yoga daily, has said he wants the world to make Ayurveda “a way of life”—and in doing so expand India’s share of the growing global market for holistic medicine.

Earlier this month he appointed India’s first minister for Ayurveda, yoga, naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and homeopathy—known as the AAYUSH ministry—and has also called for an international yoga day.

“Call it whatever—Ayurvedic medicines or herbal medicines or traditional medicines—the global market is estimated at about US$100 billion (RM3 trillion) today,

Read more: http://www.malaysiandigest.com/world/528203-india-promotes-us-100b-ayurvedic-medicine-industry.html

http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/11/11/india-health-yoga-ministry-idINKCN0IV13J20141111

http://www.themalaymailonline.com/features/article/india-promotes-us100b-ayurvedic-medicine-industry
Comment: Great …one up for India!

 

Major Pharmaceutical Company Wants To Block Access To Clinical Trial Data Of Their Drugs In Fear of Profit Loss

AbbVie (recently split off from Abbott Laboratories), maker of Humira, and InterMune, maker of Esbriet, have filed a lawsuit against the European Medicines Agency (the European equivalent of the FDA) to block access to clinical trial data on the benefits and harms of their drugs, claiming that these vital facts are “trade secrets” whose release would harm their profits. Medical researches have been denied to clinical trial information.

Of course, when a drug causes cancer, release of clinical data information could potentially harm the profits of the company that makes it. Humira, a drug that is quickly becoming one of the best-selling drugs in the world causes cancer.

The FDA warning label on Humira warns of increased risk of “Lymphoma and other malignancies” including “a rare type of cancer called hepatosplenic T-cell lymphoma” that “often results in death,” along with “increased risk of serious infections leading to hospitalization or death, including tuberculosis (TB), bacterial sepsis, invasive fungal infections (such as histoplasmosis) and infections due to other opportunistic pathogens.

In addition to Lymphoma, TB and other infections, Humira is also linked to the following:

  • Leukemia
  • Skin Cancer
  • Candidiasis
  • Kaposi’s Sarcoma
  • Histoplasmosis Cryptosporidium

All of which can lead to death.

Read more: http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/09/04/major-pharmaceutical-company-wants-to-block-access-to-clinical-trial-data-of-their-drugs-in-fear-of-profit-loss/#_

 

225,000 American patients die in doctors’ hands: silence of the lambs

Medical system kiill

  • By the most conservative estimate, researched and published by mainstream medical sources, the US medical system kills 225,000 people each year. That’s 2.25 MILLION deaths per decade.
  • We have the reality that, of those 225,000 annual deaths, 106,000 occur as a direct effect of pharmaceutical drugs.
  • The statistics are real and true.

It’s wall-to-wall silence. Why? We can list the usual reasons, the medical/pharmaceutical advertising dollars spent on television and in newspapers being the most obvious reason.

The Role of the FDA

  • The FDA is the single government agency tasked with certifying all medicines as safe and effective before they’re released for public use. Any exposure of the medical death statistics would automatically indict the FDA.
  • The FDA spends an inordinate amount of time, energy, and money going after the nutritional supplement industry, which causes virtually no deaths in any year or decade.
  • By certifying medical drugs as safe and effective, drugs that kill, like clockwork, 106,000 people a year, the FDA is colluding with, and serving, Big Pharma.
  • You can’t possibly approve so many drugs that wreak so much human destruction through mere incompetence. It’s not merely negligent homicide. There is no negligence here.

The Role of the Press

The mainstream press is built to be able to maintain silence on issues such as this. It’s part of their job. Although many reporters and editors are simply ignorant and clueless, at the highest levels of media we are looking at sheer manipulation. We are looking at the crime of accessory to murder.

It’s murder because, when you know the facts, when you know what a huge government institution (FDA) is doing to the population, and when that institution itself is well aware of its lethal impact on the public and does nothing about it, year after year, decade after decade, it’s FDA murder and it’s media’s accessory to murder.

Underneath it all, the press maintains silence because they are not permitted to hammer a huge fracture in what is called “the public trust.”

And what is the public trust? It’s the false illusion that basically things are all right. That’s the simplest way to say it. Things are all right.

They’re especially all right when it comes to the medical profession. Doctors are modern priests in white coats.

But the priests are the ones who are prescribing the drugs that are killing people. If the extent of their crimes were made known, trust would evaporate in seconds. And not just trust in the medical profession

Read more: http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/225000-us-patients-die-in-doctors-hands-silence-of-the-lambs/

This article is written by Jon Rappoport. He was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Politics and Medicine – for our best interest?

Just two weeks after pleading guilty in a major federal fraud case, Amgen, the world’s largest biotechnology firm, scored a largely unnoticed coup on Capitol Hill: Lawmakers inserted a paragraph into the “fiscal cliff” bill that did not mention the company by name but strongly favored one of its drugs.

The company: Amgen has a small army of 74 lobbyists in the capital.

Amgen, whose headquarters is near Los Angeles and which had $15.6 billion in revenue in 2011, has a deep bench of Washington lobbyists that includes Jeff Forbes, the former chief of staff to Mr. Baucus; Hunter Bates, the former chief of staff for Mr. McConnell; and Tony Podesta, whose fast-growing lobbying firm has unusually close ties to the White House.

Amgen’s employees and political action committee have distributed nearly $5 million in contributions to political candidates and committees since 2007, including $67,750 to Mr. Baucus, the Finance Committee chairman, and $59,000 to Mr. Hatch, the committee’s ranking Republican. They gave an additional $73,000 to Mr. McConnell, some of it at a fund-raising event for him that it helped sponsor in December while the debate over the fiscal legislation was under way. More than $141,000 has also gone from Amgen employees to President Obama’s campaigns.

Amgen has deep financial and political ties to lawmakers like Senate Minority LeaderMitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, and Senators Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana, and Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah, who hold heavy sway over Medicare payment policy as the leaders of the Finance Committee.

“That is why we are in the trouble we are in,” said Dennis J. Cotter, a health policy researcher who studies the cost and efficacy of dialysis drugs. “Everybody is carving out their own turf and getting it protected, and we pass the bill on to the taxpayer.”

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/20/us/medicare-pricing-delay-is-political-win-for-amgen-drug-maker.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130120