Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
Sign in to follow this  
cliveandrews

Vigilante justice against quack physician

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Then see a better doctor and seek legal advice. It doesn't sound like you've seen things through enough to say that you can't make a case in court to at least say the doctor gave insufficient warning about risks. Did the doctor tell you what would happen if you abruptly stopped the orthotics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ideas regarding running and shoe design have changed over the decades.  This isn't ignorance or incompetence or negligence - it's just a reflection of how new the problem is.  People didn't traditionally run, nor run in shoes "made" for running.  Excessive running is bad for you, period.

 

I've run for over 30 years, and being 6'-5" tall, I was constantly told by "knowledgeable" runners that I over pronated and needed shoes to correct for that.  I always suffered from shin splints, planter fasciitis, knee problems, etc.    It wasn't until I took up trail running (in the mid 90's) that I realized that the unevenness of the trails made any notion that I was over pronating moot.  I switched to a minimal shoe, to better conform to variations in trail slope, and have been using them ever since - injury free - even on roads and tracks.  Nike and others make minimal shoes (Nike Free, Inov8, Merrell Trail Glove 2 {my current shoe} ) and they are so scared of litigation that they provide warnings with them.  It's damned if you do, damned if you don't.  I try and balance sprints with no more than about 3 mile runs now.  Chronic cardio is a killer.  You need to balance anaerobic with aerobic.  If you never run another mile in your life, you'll be fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ideas regarding running and shoe design have changed over the decades.  This isn't ignorance or incompetence or negligence - it's just a reflection of how new the problem is.  People didn't traditionally run, nor run in shoes "made" for running.  Excessive running is bad for you, period.

 

I've run for over 30 years, and being 6'-5" tall, I was constantly told by "knowledgeable" runners that I over pronated and needed shoes to correct for that.  I always suffered from shin splints, planter fasciitis, knee problems, etc.    It wasn't until I took up trail running (in the mid 90's) that I realized that the unevenness of the trails made any notion that I was over pronating moot.  I switched to a minimal shoe, to better conform to variations in trail slope, and have been using them ever since - injury free - even on roads and tracks.  Nike and others make minimal shoes (Nike Free, Inov8, Merrell Trail Glove 2 {my current shoe} ) and they are so scared of litigation that they provide warnings with them.  It's damned if you do, damned if you don't.  I try and balance sprints with no more than about 3 mile runs now.  Chronic cardio is a killer.  You need to balance anaerobic with aerobic.  If you never run another mile in your life, you'll be fine.

 

I agree, but I ran for love of the sport, not "cardio."

Edited by cliveandrews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, and I'm 100% certain that he didn't know.

Certainty comes from proof. What proves that he didn't know that immobilized joints should be rehabilitated gradually? Mind you, this is something everyone involved in professional athletics knows and practices.

Edited by Nicky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cliveandrews seems 100% sure about a lot of things, especially about things that he knows that doctors do not.

 

Cliveandrews, do you perhaps have a medical degree that would make you privy to some knowledge that these foot specialists who you have apparently seen - who have spent many years of their lives studying medicine, the human body, and feet - would, somehow, not have? What makes you think that the knowledge you've obtained through some as yet unknown means is more correct than the knowledge these doctors possess? Are you a medical doctor specializing in feet? 

 

I'm just curious why you're so sure that (apparently) several doctors are wrong about what's wrong with you. Usually one sees a doctor because the doctor knows more than ones' self. If this is not the case here, and you would doubt the doctors' conclusions in the first place... why on earth did you see other doctors?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cliveandrews seems 100% sure about a lot of things, especially about things that he knows that doctors do not.

 

Cliveandrews, do you perhaps have a medical degree that would make you privy to some knowledge that these foot specialists who you have apparently seen - who have spent many years of their lives studying medicine, the human body, and feet - would, somehow, not have? What makes you think that the knowledge you've obtained through some as yet unknown means is more correct than the knowledge these doctors possess? Are you a medical doctor specializing in feet? 

 

I'm just curious why you're so sure that (apparently) several doctors are wrong about what's wrong with you. Usually one sees a doctor because the doctor knows more than ones' self. If this is not the case here, and you would doubt the doctors' conclusions in the first place... why on earth did you see other doctors?

 

#1 - This argument is an appeal to authority. Yes, I know some things that doctors don't, because like I said, the particular issue falls outside the scope of their normal practice. None of the doctors that I have seen have likely ever had a patient who injured himself in the manner that I did. Also, it happens to be the case that many doctors are simply not all that knowledgeable due to their second-handedness and the facts that their thinking revolves around what they were taught in school and they believe whatever they hear from people in positions of authority (in academica, government, etc.). The problem is so bad that there exists an entire medical specialty that is a total pseudoscience that could never survive in a free market, yet most physicians in legitimate specialties still believe in it due to their lack of intellectual independence and unwillingness to question what others believe.

 

I do not care whether you consider my attitude grandiose. I've just had too many bad experiences with people who were supposed to be experts to assume that having attended professional school and having a bunch of letters after your name counts for anything.

 

#2 - I recently re-initiated my quest for a firm diagnosis, not because there was any doubt in my mind, but to get it documented for other reasons. I got my bone scan result back yesterday, and it finally confirmed what I have known for years. I was 100% correct and the doctors were wrong.

Edited by cliveandrews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I know some things that doctors don't, because like I said, the particular issue falls outside the scope of their normal practice.

If that's the case then why are you questioning the competence of one specific doctor, for not knowing what most of them don't know?  It doesn't sound like many people at all would've told you anything other than what he did.

Furthermore, while one could conclude that all doctors are "quacks" for their ignorance regarding this, the same reasoning would also apply to everything that everyone else on Earth doesn't know.

 

Do you know specifically how the motion of your fingers causes symbols to appear on other peoples' computers- and do you feel that ignorance prevents you from competently using your computer?*

 

*I realize that medical expertise is different, in the importance of its consequences, but not in its epistemic nature.  If a doctor must know every single facet of every trait which is possible to the human body (since no two bodies are really identical), in order to be properly qualified for his job, then not only has there never been a "competent" doctor; we can also be certain that there never will be one, either.

 

Which means, in short, that sometimes s*** happens.  Not only is it unhealthy for you to define yourself by your s*** (see my last post) but in this case it's really illogical to boot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cliveandrews, do you perhaps have a medical degree that would make you privy to some knowledge that these foot specialists who you have apparently seen - who have spent many years of their lives studying medicine, the human body, and feet - would, somehow, not have? What makes you think that the knowledge you've obtained through some as yet unknown means is more correct than the knowledge these doctors possess? Are you a medical doctor specializing in feet?

For what it's worth, a degree really only indicates knowing a lot of facts, but it really doesn't establish a doctor's skill with logical thinking. I've experienced many doctors who know plenty of facts, but fail to use logic, and just do whatever works statistically for similar symptoms. As a specialist or not, anyone can identify failure of logic. Whether failure of logic leads to malpractice is a different issue - the point of the thread. Clive didn't say he's blameless, but the original doctor, to what degree is that doctor to blame? At the least, vigilante is not necessary, there's no apparent reason this issue can't be taken to court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, a degree really only indicates knowing a lot of facts, but it really doesn't establish a doctor's skill with logical thinking. I've experienced many doctors who know plenty of facts, but fail to use logic, and just do whatever works statistically for similar symptoms. As a specialist or not, anyone can identify failure of logic. Whether failure of logic leads to malpractice is a different issue - the point of the thread. Clive didn't say he's blameless, but the original doctor, to what degree is that doctor to blame? At the least, vigilante is not necessary, there's no apparent reason this issue can't be taken to court.

There are a handful of reasons I can't take this to court, the least of which is that the statute of limitations has expired. It is bordering on impossible to prove the relationship between this doctor's advice and the onset of my joint damage. At the time I originally tried to pursue a malpractice case, I couldn't even get my injuries diagnosed, let alone could I get other medical personnel to endorse the mechanism of injury I described here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#2 - I recently re-initiated my quest for a firm diagnosis, not because there was any doubt in my mind, but to get it documented for other reasons.

What reasons? Why is everything so vague in your posts? Are your plans secret?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming that you try your best to serve what you believe to be justice, but in the end there is absolutely nothing to be done. The doctor stays in business, you receive no compensation for your injuries. Do you have an idea of what you will do if it transpires like this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What reasons? Why is everything so vague in your posts? Are your plans secret?

So that doctors and therapists will stop questioning my mental health when I complain of serious problems that haven't been diagnosed and that they can't see.

Edited by cliveandrews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that's the case then why are you questioning the competence of one specific doctor, for not knowing what most of them don't know?  It doesn't sound like many people at all would've told you anything other than what he did.

Furthermore, while one could conclude that all doctors are "quacks" for their ignorance regarding this, the same reasoning would also apply to everything that everyone else on Earth doesn't know.

 

The running injury (shin splints) for which I originally sought treatment, and the arthritis that resulted from that treatment, are two different issues. The podiatrist in question misdiagnosed the cause of my shin splints and prescribed a course of treatment that was preposterously inappropriate. Most doctors would not have done that. However, I would not reasonably expect most doctors to understand how that treatment would lead to the injuries I sustained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The running injury (shin splints) for which I originally sought treatment, and the arthritis that resulted from that treatment, are two different issues. The podiatrist in question misdiagnosed the cause of my shin splints and prescribed a course of treatment that was preposterously inappropriate. Most doctors would not have done that. However, I would not reasonably expect most doctors to understand how that treatment would lead to the injuries I sustained.

Because that treatment didn't cause the injury. You made it clear you ran after getting rid of the orthodics, then got injured. If you didn't run, then the injury wouldn't have happened. All you can say is you weren't properly warned - which may be subject to a malpractice suit, I don't know. It may be common practice to say "do not stop using the orthodics without proper doctor supervision".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because that treatment didn't cause the injury. You made it clear you ran after getting rid of the orthodics, then got injured. If you didn't run, then the injury wouldn't have happened. All you can say is you weren't properly warned - which may be subject to a malpractice suit, I don't know. It may be common practice to say "do not stop using the orthodics without proper doctor supervision".

 

You're wrong. It's wrong to dismiss the role that the podiatrist's terrible judgment played in precipitating my injury. By first pathetically misdiagnosing my running injury, and then prescribing a course of treatment that was both worthless and harmful, he needlessly created an abnormal danger that I had no way to be aware of. He is culpable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming that you try your best to serve what you believe to be justice, but in the end there is absolutely nothing to be done. The doctor stays in business, you receive no compensation for your injuries. Do you have an idea of what you will do if it transpires like this?

 

I'm not going to do anything more than leave him a damning review online. It makes me irate that I have no real recourse, which I why I fantasize about doing stuff like messing up his office.

Edited by cliveandrews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The running injury (shin splints) for which I originally sought treatment, and the arthritis that resulted from that treatment, are two different issues. The podiatrist in question misdiagnosed the cause of my shin splints and prescribed a course of treatment that was preposterously inappropriate. Most doctors would not have done that. However, I would not reasonably expect most doctors to understand how that treatment would lead to the injuries I sustained.

 

 Then why would most doctors not have done that?  This ignorance is either common amongst doctors, or it isn't; you can't have it both ways.

 

I'm not going to do anything more than leave him a damning review online. It makes me irate that I have no real recourse, which I why I fantasize about doing stuff like messing up his office.

 Then why are you here?

It's clear that you've already made up your mind about the whole thing, from the cause of your injury to the form of your proper retribution.  Which part of this did you want help in figuring out?  Or are you just looking for affirmation?

 

This really isn't the best place to ask questions that you don't want answered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Then why are you here?

It's clear that you've already made up your mind about the whole thing, from the cause of your injury to the form of your proper retribution.  Which part of this did you want help in figuring out?  Or are you just looking for affirmation?

 

This really isn't the best place to ask questions that you don't want answered.

 

When I started the thread, I was seriously considering doing what I said; I have since vetoed the idea.

Edited by cliveandrews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I started the thread, I was seriously considering doing what I said; I have since vetoed the idea.

Good for you -- it's hard making rational decisions when you're still bitter about something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×