Outpatient Procedure?: 2016

Thursday, December 29, 2016

GOOD MORNING GOD! THANK YOU FOR STOPPING THE MASSIVE HARM TO WOMEN WORLDWIDE! THE CARNAGE HAS TO STOP!

WHO IS PROTECTING WOMEN FROM SURGICAL HARM

BY DOCTORS IMPLANTING MESH?

Last I checked, NO ONE!

Not the FDA. Not Hospitals. Not Doctors. Not Medical Device Manufacturers. Not Attorneys.

If you as a woman have surgery for bladder suspension, pelvic organ prolapse, hysterectomy,

FOR SURE YOU WILL BE HARMED!

HYSTERECTOMY IS PROMOTED by JOHNSON & JOHNSON +Johnson & Johnson and ETHICON INC +Ethicon Inc. through Kathy Kelly and her Hyster Sisters commercial website, a company Ethicon has paid for years to drive women to their own website to their paid for doctors who use J&J/Ethicon products.

Hysterectomy sets you up for pelvic organ prolapse and a myriad of complications that will keep you in the doctors office the rest of your life seeking treatment for the problems caused by hysterectomy.

HYSTERECTOMY is an old wives tale PROMOTED BY J&J/ETHICON! DON'T HAVE ONE. YOU WILL REGRET IT.

Don't sign up for the Hyster Sisters website and

become a stat that pays Kathy Kelly very, very well

to influence you to be used and abused by

Major Drug & Device Companies!

Kathy Kelley
Hyster Sisters, Inc
2436 S. I-35 E. Ste. 376-184
Denton, Texas 76205
kathy@hystersisters.com

POSTED ON HER SITE TO GET ADVERTISERS!

Website Stats:

Threads: 591,714
Posts: 4,770,363
Members: 425,587
Women: 95%
Ages: 25-60
Uniques: 600K pm
Page Views: 2.7-3.0 mil pm

Here's the Link:
http://www.hystersisters.com/vb2/view_advertisingpolicy.htm

DON'T SIGN UP FOR HYSTER SISTERS!

DON'T BE A PAWN IN THE FAKE HELP SITES!

Wednesday, October 19, 2016

COLLUSION OR COINCIDENCE? PLAINTIFF ATTORNEYS PROTECTING THE SYSTEM, NOT THE PLAINTIFFS? ANTIQUATED ABDOMINAL SACRAL COLPOPEXY ATTACHING THE VAGINA TO THE SPINE WITH POLYPROPYLENE SURGICAL MESH PROTECTED IN A COURT OF LAW AND DOCTORS CAN NOT BE SUED FOR THE HARM THEY CAUSE WOMEN. HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?

1. Plaintiff Attorneys used an anemic trial strategy despite significant scientific expert evidence and knowledge to the contrary. Ambiguity remains. Hundreds of thousands of women are at risk from unsafe surgical procedures using synthetic surgical mesh in the female pelvis and reproductive system for serious permanent disabling injuries.

2. Plaintiff Attorneys did not integrate all the causes of the harm from transvaginal mesh procedures in their strategy. The procedure, synthetic surgical mesh and trocar combined in the female pelvis and reproductive system are catastrophic along with comorbidities, age, concomitant procedures, again catastrophic.

3. The Trial Strategy used was a limited concept of pore size which is difficult to prove and does not integrate the myriad physical and chemical properties of polypropylene synthetic surgical mesh and wound healing, critical to the understanding of mesh injury. Most important physical property: the polypropylene synthetic surgical mesh shrinks itself due to inherent manufacturing defects.

Synthetic Surgical Mesh remains on the market. Why?

1. Plaintiff Attorneys,

2. the American Urogynecological Society (AUGS)

3. the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG)

4. Doctors such as Dr. John Miklos and Dr. G. Willy Davila

5. Hospitals such as Cleveland Clinic and the Mayo Clinic

6. the United States Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health (FDA’s CDRH)

7. the director of the CDRH, Dr. Jeffrey Shuren, and David Krause, and other top officials at the FDA and

8. Johnson & Johnson’s Ethicon

Kept mesh on the market by a series of events.

The events listed below culminated in plaintiff’s attorneys proving abdominal sacral colpopexy was a better, safer alternative procedure to Pleivc Organ Prolapse repair through the vagina in bellwether trials in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.

January 2012: The FDA’s CDRH issues 522 orders to 33 companies for 99 products they must begin clinical trials testing their synthetic surgical mesh products for safety and efficacy.

April 2012: Dr. John Miklos and Dr. Robert Moore hold doctor conference in Atlanta. Topic of speech, how doctors can avoid legal liability when implanting mesh

April 12, 2012 Mass Torts Made Perfect Panel

Abdominal Sacral Colpopexy recommended

Pelvic Mesh: How to Represent the Victims

Robert Price, Levin Papantonio Thomas Mitchell Rafferty & Proctor

Amy Eskin, Hersh & Hersh

Lana Keeton, Truth in Medicine

April 27, 2012 Lana Keeton sends letter to all Plaintiff’s Attorneys in the MultiDistrict Litigation warning of the significant dangers of Abdominal Sacral Colpopexy including clinical trials

May 2012 Johnson and Johnson’s Ethicon will stop selling 5 of their transvaginal mesh products. Only the TVT Secur was removed and the rest of the TVT bladder sling meshes remained on the market.

GYNECARE ProliftTM Pelvic Floor Repair System

GYNECARE Prolift +MTM Pelvic Floor Repair System

GYNECARE ProsimaTM Pelvic Floor Repair System

GYNECARE GYNEMESH MTM Partially Absorbable Mesh

GYNECARE TVT SecurTM System (not all TVT products)

Ethicon also notified FDA's Office of Surveillance and Biometrics of their intention to make a labeling change to the Indication for Use for GYNECARE GYNEMESH PS Nonabsorbable PROLENE Soft Mesh indicating it for abdominal (open or laparoscopic) use only.

(ABDOMINAL SACRAL COLPOPEXY!)

With approval of the labeling change by the FDA, the 522 orders for their products were placed on hold and eventually terminated since the orders were applicable to vaginally placed POP mesh products only. Sales continued in the US and globally under the then current indication until regulatory approval of the labeling change was obtained in each country.

June 2012: Johnson and Johnson’s Ethicon send letter to Judge Joseph Goodwin they are removing 5 products from market

September 2012: The applied for approval of label changes for indication for use to Abdominal Sacral Colpopexy was eventually signed by Dr. Ben Fisher at the FDA’s CDRH

This Very neat package NEVER publicized Kept Mesh on the Market for use in the Female Pelvis and Reproductive System. This, in my opinion, is a crime against women. It PRESERVES:

a. Use of mesh for abdominal sacral colpopexy by doctors

b. The mesh profits for Johnson & Johnson’s Ethicon Gynemesh

c. Injury to hundreds of thousands of women patients

There is NO LEVEL ONE (1) EVIDENCE of success

of abdominal sacral colpopexy despite decades of use.

COLLUSION OR COINCIDENCE?

Tuesday, October 18, 2016

THE DECISION MAKERS and THE PAYEES - - - U.S. DISTRICT COURT for the SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA PTO 84 dated 08-26-2013 and PTO 207 dated 01-15-2016 COMMON BENEFITS FUND FEE & COST COMMITTEE (FCC) CONTACT INFO IS FROM THE PTO'S ON THE COURTS WEBSITE

THESE 18 ATTORNEYS IN PTO 84 BELOW ARE BEING PAID FROM THE 5% COMMON BENEFIT FUND OF ALL 7 MDLS IN WEST VIRGINIA.

THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF THE COMMON BENEFIT FUND BASED ON APPROXIMATELY 92,922 CASES THAT POTENTIALLY SETTLE FOR $40,000.00 EACH WILL BE $1.8 BILLION DOLLARS FOR THE WORK THE 18 HAVE DONE.

READ ALL THE WAY TO THE BOTTOM TO SEE THE 9 PEOPLE WHO DECIDE WHO GETS WHAT PORTION OF THAT MINIMUM $1.8 BILLION DOLLARS.

IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, THE ATTORNEYS WHO DO THE WORK IN THE MDL'S ARE THE ONES BEING PAID FROM THE 5% COMMON BENEFIT FUND $1.8 BILLION DOLLAR MINIMUM.

THE OTHER 40% BEING WITHHELD FROM YOUR SETTLEMENT IS MOST LIKELY FOR YOUR ORIGINAL ATTORNEY FILING YOUR SHORT FORM COMPLAINT, AND NOT MUCH ELSE. AND PROBABLY ADVERTISING COSTS TO GET YOU TO FIND HIM AND SIGN UP WITH HIM.

AUGUST 26, 2013 THE MDL 2187 C.R. BARD 5% FUND WAS ESTABLISHED BY PTO 84 WHICH YOU CAN FIND ON THE WEST VIRGINIA COURT WEBSITE.

PTO 84 AUGUST 26, 2013 ESTABLISHING MDL 2187 FUND to COMPENSATE and REIMBURSE ATTORNEYS for SERVICES PERFORMED and EXPENSES INCURRED for MDL ADMINISTRATION and COMMON BENEFIT

Plaintiffs’ Coordinating Co-Leads, Executive Committee And Co-liaison Counsel, consulted

and approved the same among all Plaintiff Steering Committee Counsel

Harry F. Bell, Jr.

Plaintiffs’ Co-Liaison Counsel

hfbell@belllaw.com

West Virginia Bar No. 297

The Bell Law Firm, PLLC, P. O. Box 1723 Charleston, WV 25326

(304) 345-1700

Paul T. Farrell, Jr.

Plaintiffs’ Co-Liaison Counsel

paul@greeneketchum.com

West Virginia Bar No. 7433

Greene Ketchum Bailey Walker Farrell & Tweel, P. O. Box 2389, Huntington, WV 25724-2389

(304) 525-9115

Carl N. Frankovitch

Plaintiffs’ Co-Liaison Counsel

carln@facslaw.com

West Virginia Bar No. 4746

Frankovitch Anetakis Colantonio & Simon, 337 Penco Road, Weirton, WV 26062

(304) 723-4400

Henry G. Garrard, III

Plaintiffs’ Coordinating Co-Lead Counsel and Executive Committee

Fred Thompson, III

Plaintiffs’ Coordinating Co-Lead Counsel and Executive Committee

fthompson@motleyrice.com South Carolina Bar No. 5548

Motley Rice, LLC, 28 Bridgeside Blvd., Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464

(843) 216-9118

Bryan F. Aylstock

Plaintiffs’ Coordinating Co-Lead Counsel and Executive Committee

BAylstock@awkolaw.com

Florida Bar No. 078263

Alystock Witkin Kreis & Overholtz, 17 E. Main Street, Suite 200, Pensacola, FL 32502

(877) 810-4808

Clayton A. Clark