Wednesday, July 26, 2017

MESH MEDICAL DEVICE NEWS DESK? RESPONSIBLE, EDUCATED, UNBIASED JOURNALISM? YOU DECIDE.

Talk show host mentality with an “if it bleeds it leads, strategy”. It’s the “Jerry Springer” show of mesh. A rough and tumble sideshow of guests screaming at and attacking each other. Does anyone exit the show with their dignity? Are their lives enriched by appearing on and/or watching such a sideshow? Not in my opinion.


If you are a #MESH injured man or woman, do you want to appear on the Jerry Springer show as one of his guests to be a spectacle to bring in viewers so his advertisers will pay him? Probably not.

Mesh Medical Device News Desk = The Jerry Springer Show of #MESH

As a seriously #MESH injured individual, my philosophy is no information is better than misinformation. Misinformation from a gynecologist is why I have spent the last 16 years of my life seeking medical treatment, researching the cause of my injuries, determining the inherent defects in the manufacturing process of polypropylene surgical mesh, founding Truth in Medicine, creating Medical Mesh Device Action Center, a yahoo health group, establishing an online presence so mesh manufacturers could no longer deny the horrors of mesh.

The collective harm caused by misinformation to #MESH INJURED MEN & WOMEN is infinite and criminal in my book.

How many will go to the wrong doctor? How many will not be properly represented by the attorneys they find and hire at Jane Akre’s site? Are there legal malpractice insurance policies for $100,000. available to readers from each and everyone of the attorneys who advertise on the site to protect the readers who hire attorney advertisers on her site? How many will bare their souls in an interview to be sold to an attorney by Jane Akre for the attorney’s website?

The very worst: how many will have hope of pain free lives and actual remuneration for their severe injuries? False hope caused by false information wounds and crushes the soul.

Where are Jane Akre’s credentials? She was a talk show host. And she wrote for the lawyer’s website, Injury Board. But good reporting must have experienced producers who research and produce segments. Reporters are not allowed to just start talking to interviewees without preparation by someone else. So maybe she was a great talk show host, but there are no producers at Medical Device News Desk.

Where are the solutions? I don’t see any on Jane Akre’s website. Telling a story and creating awareness is not a solution. WHO will take action? WHO has the authority to take action? WHO will actually make and enforce the changes? WHO will get #MESH off the market?

Not the Johnson & Johnson shareholders. They make MONEY off of J&J stock. The last thing they want is to bring the value of the stock down.

And look at one of the current advertisers, Hollis Law Firm. It is heavily involved in the latest hernia #MESH Multidistrict Litigation:

Ethicon Physiomesh and Atrium C-Qur

Hollis Law Firm partners, Adam Evans, Brett Vaughn and Jason Chambers are the latest to join the gang of Repeat Entrenched Players in Multidistrict Litigation.

While I was told by the attorneys at Hollis Law Firm, they wanted to make a difference for #MESH injured men and women when I contacted them to consult them, they did not want to know the truth to get #MESH off the market. Their only interest in me: adding my youtube channel videos to their website to draw more clients.

The attorneys at Hollis Law Firm are MDL leadership wannabees who want to take over the leadership of the MDL’s. Good luck cause the Repeat Entrenched Players and their Repeat Entrencehd Law Firms are no going without a fight, a dirty fight.

STOP THE MISINFORMATION!
STOP THE ABUSE OF #MESH INJURED MEN AND WOMEN!
STOP THE COLLECTIVE HARM OF SYNTHETIC SURGICAL #MESH!

RESPONSIBLE, EDUCATED, UNBIASED JOURNALISM IS PART OF THE SOLUTION, NOT PART OF THE PROBLEM!


WHAT WE HAVE NOW IS UGLY!

Sunday, July 23, 2017

FLORIDA BAR INVESTIGATES JANE AKRE AND HER OPERATION OF MESH MEDICAL DEVICE NEWS DESK AS FOR-PROFIT LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE, INCLUDES BLASINGAME, BURCH, GARRARD & ASHLEY, MUELLER LAW, HOLLIS LAW FIRM

FLORIDA BAR INITIATES INVESTIGATION INTO JANE AKRE AND HER OPERATION OF MESH MEDICAL DEVICE NEWS DESK AS A “LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE”. INVESTIGATION INCLUDES INVOLVEMENT WITH SEVERAL LAW FIRMS: BLASINGAME, BURCH, GARRARD & ASHLEY, MUELLER LAW, HOLLIS LAW FIRM AND BURGE AND BURGE PC and RN CHRISTINE KENT, WHOLE WOMAN INC

Jane Akre operates her website, Mesh Medical Device News Desk, as a one stop shop, referring women and men to doctors, attorneys, leading them to protest against mesh maker Johnson & Johnson/Ethicon Inc. at their annual shareholders meeting, doing interviews with Ralph Nader, offering non-scientific studies of autoimmune disease by Nonie Wideman, her own non-scientific analysis of the chemical and physical properties of polypropylene made into mesh derived from her reading of lawsuits and a free report from Whole Woman, a resource for pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence without surgery, all the while taking a position as a patient advocate for these same people.

I have watched this train wreck for years now with growing alarm because of the amazing amount of misinformation offered by “an unbiased journalist”.  No one person, no single practitioner, is qualified to offer all these services on one site. Having the knowledge and the time to responsibly vet each and every one of these services, while researching and writing the content on the site, commenting on the comments, managing social media and travel to report on trials is not a one person job.

Ms. Akre's response to the Florida Bar is due July 28, 2017. In the meantime, her efforts to clean up the site are evident. Much of the content has been removed and the front and center drop down box that was a questionnaire for pelvic mesh attorneys is no longer there. The content of the site, however, has so much pervasive "unlicensed practice of law" comments by Ms. Akre, she may be forced to shut it down and start all over. 

It’s no surprise there is an investigation by the Florida Bar and the management of this for-profit “lawyer referral service”. Why? Attorneys are the ones responsible for the following under the American Bar Association Model Rules of Professional Conduct.

RULE 4-7.10 LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICES

***
(b) Responsibility of Lawyer. A lawyer who accepts referrals from a lawyer referral service is responsible for ensuring that any advertisements or written communications used by the service comply with the requirements of the Rules Regulating  The Florida Bar, and that the service is in compliance with the provisions of this subchapter. It shall be a violation of these Rules Regulating The Florida Bar and a failure of such responsibility if the lawyer knows or should have known that the service is not in compliance with applicable rules or if the lawyer failed to seek information necessary to determine compliance.

With regard to for-profit lawyer referral services, the ABA further reports that at least 26 states limit lawyer participation to only not-for-profit lawyer referral service programs, either directly  in rule language or by interpretation. Involvement by Florida lawyers in  for-profit  lawyer referral services, however, has been authorized by the state Supreme Court since January 1987.

The rules in Florida allow lawyer involvement in a
for-profit lawyer referral service,

1) provided that the service uses an actual or a registered fictitious name in its communications;

2) the service registers with The Florida Bar and submits quarterly reports that identify its authorized personnel and participating attorneys;

3) the service affirmatively states that it is a lawyer referral service in any of its advertisements;

4) the service complies with the Supreme Court’s rules on lawyer communications and advertising (including the filing of proposed ads for Florida Bar review);

 5) there is no fee sharing between lawyers and non-lawyers;

6) referrals are only made to lawyers who are authorized to practice in Florida;

7) the service or participating lawyers maintain malpractice insurance in the amount of $100,000 per claim, per occurrence; and

8) the service responds in writing to official Florida Bar inquiries within 15 days

R. Regulating Fla. Bar 4-7.10


REPORT OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON 
LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICES
Final Report July 2012

I.               THE COMMITTEE


A.           Origin and Mission

In the midst of explosive increases in advertising by for-profit lawyer referral services – many directed at victims of motor vehicle accidents covered by Florida’s no-fault insurance law which provides attractive personal injury protection benefits – The Florida Bar’s Special Committee on Lawyer Referral Services was created in January 2011 by then-president Mayanne Downs.

The genesis for creation of this special committee was noted in an earlier observation from The Florida Bar’s Program Evaluation Committee, that the Bar had received “numerous complaints regarding advertising by lawyer referral services in Florida in the past few fiscal years.” In recommending the creation of this study group, the Program Evaluation Committee highlighted concerns over “the proliferation of lawyer referral services, the lack of regulation of lawyer referral services, and that lawyer referral services have not followed Florida Bar rules that are applicable to Florida Bar members.  Members of the Legislature also have indicated an interest  in this issue.”

The January 13, 2011 letters from President Downs appointing the chair and members of this 15- person special committee especially noted Florida’s dramatic growth of for-profit lawyer referral services in recent times, along with a corresponding increase in public concerns over the  potential harm from these entities and the misleading nature of their activities.

Downs observed: “The creative design of these services and the significant involvement of non- lawyers have posed particular regulatory challenges for The Florida Bar. Yet, people still look to this organization to assist in resolving some of the complex issues associated with responsible oversight of lawyer referral mechanisms in today’s world.”

The Bar president asked that the special committee “review the current practices of lawyer referral services, as well as all rules and regulations that may be applicable to such services.”   The appointment letters additionally stated that the assignment would include “consideration of possible rules changes, and whether and to what extent The Florida Bar can or should directly regulate lawyer referral services.”

The special committee initially sought to determine what is a “lawyer referral service.” Rule 4- 7.10(c) of the Florida Supreme Court’s Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, provides a rather specific definition, in stating:

A "lawyer referral service" is:

(1)   any person, group of persons, association, organization, or entity that receives any consideration, monetary or otherwise, given in exchange for referring or causing the direct or indirect referral of a potential client to a lawyer selected from a specific group or panel of lawyers; or

(2)     any group or pooled advertising program operated by any person, group of persons, association, organization, or entity wherein the legal services advertisements utilize a common telephone number and potential clients are then referred only to lawyers or law firms participating in the group or pooled advertising program.



The ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, created by the American Bar Association (ABA), are a set of rules that prescribe baseline standards of legal ethics and professional responsibility for lawyers in the United States.

Tuesday, July 18, 2017

IS FALSE EVIDENCE THE REASON SURGICAL MESH IS STILL ON THE MARKET? ARE JOHNSON & JOHNSON AND ETHICON PROTECTED BY PLAINTIFF ATTORNEYS? CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT FRAUD OR COINCIDENCE? MESH INJURED PATIENT....YOU DECIDE!



1.       Plaintiffs Attorneys dumbed down trial strategy despite significant scientific expert evidence and knowledge to the contrary resulted in anemic, lethargic settlements for thousands of women in @ETHICON MDL 02327. Ambiguity remains.
DO PLAINTIFFS ATTORNEYS 
      PURPOSELY FAIL THEIR 
      #MESH INJURED WOMEN CLIENTS?

     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 because Plaintiff's Attorneys litigated women's health.


2.       Plaintiffs Attorneys did not integrate all the causes of the harm from transvaginal mesh procedures in their dumbed down trial 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. These complications are not even mentioned as a basis of injury in the pathetic settlements. 

3.       The Dumbed Down Trial Strategy used was a limited concept of large vs. small 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.       Plaintiffs Attorneys,

2.       the American Urogynecological Society (AUGS)

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

4.       the International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)

5.       Doctors: Dr. John Miklos and Dr. G. Willy Davila

6.       Hospitals: the Cleveland Clinic and the Mayo Clinic

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

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

9.       Johnson & Johnson and its wholly owned subsidiary Ethicon, Inc

Kept mesh on the market by a series of events.


The events listed below culminated in a disaster for #MESH injured women. Plaintiff’s attorneys "proved" (perhaps "lied" is the operative word) abdominal sacral colpopexy was a better, safer alternative procedure to Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP) repair by Transvaginal Surgical Implantation with synthetic surgical mesh 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. J&J/Ethicon NEVER started the studies as mandated In June 2012 J&J/Ethicon removed the prolift from the market (not recalled) just stopped selling when the inventory ran out. 

April 2012: Dr. John Miklos and Dr. Robert Moore hold doctor conference in Atlanta.

April 12, 2012 Mass Torts Made Perfect Panel         
Abdominal Sacral Colpopexy recommended as trial strategy to a nationwide audience of 500 - 1,000 Trial Lawyers attending the conference
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 e-mail notification letter to all Plaintiff’s Attorneys known to her to represent #MESH injured women in the MultiDistrict Litigation in the Southern District of West Virginia warning of the significant dangers of Abdominal Sacral Colpopexy including clinical trials showing there IS NO "LEVEL ONE EVIDENCE" OF SAFETY OF ABDOMINAL SACRAL COLPOPEXY BUT HUGE PERCENTAGE OF FURTHER COMPLICATIONS

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.

SALES STOPPED: 
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.

<

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 transvaginally 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 of their transvaginal mesh products from market
September 2012: J&J RECEIVED> > 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.

CONSPIRACY OR COINCIDENCE?

YOU DECIDE!

Sunday, July 16, 2017

STOP PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY ABUSE OF THE MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION AND CLASS ACTIONS! POWER TO THE PLAINTIFF! PASS HR985!


"The world is a dangerous place,

 not because of those who do evil, 

but because of those who look on 

and do nothing!" 

Albert Einstein




TAKE ACTION!

WRITE YOUR SENATORS TO PASS HR985!

PROTECT YOURSELF AND OTHERS EVERY DAY
FROM THE HEALTH AND LEGAL SYSTEMS!


IN A WORLD WITH SO MANY LAWSUITS

AND SUPPOSED "SAFEGUARDS"

FOR OUR HEALTH,

IN REALITY WE ARE NOTHING MORE

THAN HUMAN COMMODITIES!

Friday, July 14, 2017

THE MENTALLY ILL ATTORNEY IN PELVIC MESH MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION IN THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA: IS IT REAL?



MILLIONS WORLDWIDE CONTINUE TO BE HARMED BY SYNTHETIC SURGICAL MESH!

MAJOR CORPORATIONS, THE HEALTH & LEGAL SYSTEMS ARE RIFE WITH SOCIOPATHS, PSYCOPATHS, MALIGNANT NARCISSISTS!

WAKE UP WORLD!

PROTECT YOURSELF FROM BEING
ONE OF THE 
MEN & WOMEN WHO ARE CATASTROPHICALLY INJURED EVERY DAY
BY HERNIA REPAIR, BLADDER SUSPENSION
AND PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSE REPAIR
WITH SYNTHETIC SURGICAL MESH
IMPLANTED BY UNSKILLED, UNEDUCATED SURGEONS
WHO LISTEN TO THEIR SALES REPS
FROM J&J/ETHICON, C.R. BARD, BOSTON SCIENTIFIC,
AMERICAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS, CALDERA
AND OTHER DEVICE MANUFACTURERS!



WE LIVE IN A SICK WORLD. DO NOT LET YOUR GUARD DOWN
WHEN SEEKING HEALTH CARE. 
DOCTORS CONSPIRE WITH THE FDA, CORPORATIONS & ATTORNEYS 
AND YOU ARE THE ONE WHO IS INJURED! 

READ www.LANAKEETON.COM 

PROTECT YOURSELF!



Wednesday, July 12, 2017

SENATE JUDICIARY & HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEES LOOKING AT FRAUD & CORRUPTION IN 7 TRANSVAGINAL MESH MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION (MDL's) PRESIDED OVER BY JUDGE JOE GOODWIN IN THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA!


GOOD NEWS!

The cavalry is coming! Chief Counsel in the Office of Senator Chuck Grassley, Chariman of the Senate Judiciary, and Chief Counsel in the Office of the House Judiciary Committee, Chairman Bob Goodlatte, are investigating the rampant fraud and corruption in the Abuse of the Settlement Process. Praise God this despicable mess called the legal system is getting a hard look to STOP THE UNADULTERATED ABUSE OF HUMANS FOR PROFIT, in both the Medical and Legal Worlds.

STAY TUNED!!

Thursday, July 6, 2017

SOCIOPATHIC CONTROL OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM THROUGH LEGAL OPPORTUNISM? "GAS LIGHTING" IN MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION & CLASS ACTIONS?

HR985 FAIRNESS IN CLASS ACTION ACT OF 2017 =
POWER TO THE PLAINTIFFS!

WHY HR985? 
STOP PLAINTIFFS ATTORNEY ABUSE OF THEIR CLIENTS. 

THERE IS A MASSIVE FAILURE OF THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM WHEN OVER 103,000 WOMEN INJURED BY PELVIC MESH ARE IN ONE COURT ALONE IN THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA ALLOWING PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEYS TO LITIGATE WOMEN'S HEALTH.  

THIS IS A SEISMIC FAILURE OF THE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM. THIS IS NOT A LEGAL PROBLEM.

IS THIS HAPPENING? ....

LEGAL OPPORTUNISM?
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia   Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_opportunism
"Legal opportunism is a wide area of human activity, which refers generally to a type of abuse of the proper intention of legal arrangements (the "spirit of the law" as distinguished from the letter of the law). More specifically, it refers to deliberately manipulating legal arrangements for purposes they were not meant for, guided by self-interested motives."

SHARP PRACTICE?
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia  
Sharp practice is a PEJORATIVE phrase to describe sneaky or cunning behavior that is technically within the rules of the law but borders on being unethical. 

GASLIGHTING?

Are there SOCIOPATHS and 

NARCISSISTS using gaslighting tactics in the Multidistrict Litigation in West Virginia?Are there Sociopaths there who consistently transgress social mores, break laws, and exploit others, but typically also are convincing liars, sometimes charming ones, who consistently deny wrongdoing. 


SCARY THOUGHT....

BUT DEFINITELY WORTH CONSIDERING WHEN THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF MESH INJURED MEN & WOMEN WORLDWIDE AND THE MEDICAL IMPLANTATION OF PELVIC AND HERNIA MESH CONTINUES UNABATED. 

WHY ELSE WOULD THIS CONTINUE? RESEARCH IT FOR YOURSELF. 

DID YOUR DOCTOR OR YOUR LAWYER GASLIGHT YOU? 

MISS T ALEXANDRIA DAISY JOYEUX! AMAZING WESTIE LOVE!!! 18 YEARS OF BEAUTY AND JOY IN MY LIFE!