When The Docs Killed Mrs. Hill

Quoted message said:

Subject: When The Docs Killed Mrs. Hill
From: [email hidden]
Date: 1/11/04 6:46 PM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

And what about the doc's motto of "First, do no harm."?

Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

Well...

First do no harm to your reputation. This is "usual and customary care". If
all the docs treat a disease they have diagnosed in the same manner, they are
not liable for the failure of the treatment or the death of their patient.

First do no harm to your practice. Charge the maximum the insurance companies
allow and/or anyone on the hook to pay.

First do no harm to your peers. MDs are not allowed to make mistakes and you
cannot admitt to a mistake nor claim that another doc made a mistake. Termed
the "code of silence.".

First do no harm to your specialty. Never degrade or berate your medical
education ( brainwashing or mis-education , whichever applies or both ). Keep
your mouth shut.

Just some of the do no harm mottos in use by the docs.

DrC PhD

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

An Unacceptable Loss

Many years ago, my Mom suddenly jumped me & said: "Do you remember Mrs.
Hill? Your Sunday School teacher? She's dead." [Mom likes to deliver
bad news, then stand there & snicker cruelly about it.]

My former Sunday School teacher (one of the few nice people in the
church), was dead. Now that was a major loss for me! [I think I was in
my teens (?) at this time, & was still trapped at the farm with Mom.]

After I asked questions for a while, I learned that Mrs. Hill had gone
to the hospital with the flu, had been given a shot, & the shot had
killed her.

Whenever I got the chance, I'd ask why the doctors would give someone a
shot, that would kill them. Nobody knew.

Why didn't the docs give people just a tiny amount of medicine first, to
see if they were allergic to it, ... or test them for allergies before
giving shots & medicine? Nobody knew.

Finally, I learned that the doctors have a standard treatment for an
illness, such as a certain antibiotic, ... that most docs won't deviate
from that, no matter what, ... & that docs refuse to take responsibility
for bad results, for the deaths they cause.

If the patient is allergic to the treatment, & is permanently
injured/disabled or killed by it, ... then it's considered an
"acceptable loss" by the docs. It's OK. [Heaven forbid that the
doctors should actually do something logical or practical, when
dispensing dangerous drugs.]

While the doctors might have considered Mrs. Hill's death "an acceptable
loss", & not cared about her, ... I did care. And it was Not OK with
me, that they killed her.

-----------

What is considered "an acceptable loss" by doctors? Your life? Your
child's life? Your mate's?

And what about the doc's motto of "First, do no harm."?

This person was sick enough to be admitted to hospital with the flu, which
can be lethal to elderly Sunday School teachers . She may have already had
secondary pneumonia for which antibiotics can be a life-saving treatment.
And we have a third or fourth hand account of what actually happened. Yet
the doctors "killed Mrs Hill"? Come on! Be reasonable.

Peter Moran

[email hidden] wrote in news:9997-4001E041-87@storefull-
3192.bay.webtv.net:

Quoted message said:

An Unacceptable Loss

Many years ago, my Mom suddenly jumped me & said: "Do you remember Mrs.
Hill? Your Sunday School teacher? She's dead." [Mom likes to deliver
bad news, then stand there & snicker cruelly about it.]

The mother is/was a mentally ill person. Since we have now established that
fact, the rest of the story is suspect AFAIC.

r

--
Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes.

Good Heavens, is this another one of Sweet Sue's stories? (And her
mother jumped her & her church members weren't nice either).

Maybe your SSchool teacher died from the flu,, period. People do do
that you know. Happened to my grandfather at age 35, even without a
"shot". But I'm sure you were at the hospital personally witnessing the
event, though you don't even seem to be absolutely positive you were a
teenager(?) at the time.

Rich Andrews wrote:

The mother is/was a mentally ill person. Since we have now established
that fact, the rest of the story is suspect AFAIC.

==========

Moral Disorders, Moral Illness

My Mom chose to be morally ill, to have moral disorders (antisocial &
narcissistic) & to enjoy them, ... to use them as her drug of choice,
her addiction. She'd get "high" from planning to harm people, & then
doing it, over & over.

Many people seem to have varying degrees of this disorder. [For some
reason, many people (with severe moral illness) seem obsessive about
attending church, ... and about using this as their proof of being a
good person, a "good Christian". ???]

There's a huge difference between moral disorders & mental illness.

----------

Mrs. Hill

Since Mom wouldn't give me details about Mrs. Hill's death, I had to ask
other people over & over, to learn what happened.

Mrs. Hill was probably in her 40s or 50s, at the time she died.

Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

PS Mental Illness?

So far, I don't know much about mental illness.

Most of the people I met at the MHMR here in East Texas, while I was
seeking abuse counselling, ... were in abuse, were very injured or
physically ill, ... were morally ill, were violent criminals, ... were
zonked-out on psych drugs, and/or always terrified these drugs would be
suddenly cut-off (& they'd experience withdrawal again, alone), ... were
alcoholics or street drug addicts (possibly in some stage of recovery),
... were obsessive/compulsive and/or addicted to something destructive
(like gambling, bronc- or bull-riding at rodeos, sex, night-clubs), &
the highs they got from it, ... or were suffering from stress disorders,
due to the failed systems here (legal, medical, govt), & all the harm
this does.

Recently, I met a guy shopping in a grocery store here, who kept getting
in my face & saying "Hi" over & over. Turns out, he's on Prozac. He
obviously can't focus, relate, or work while on this drug. However,
I've no way of knowing what he'd be like, if not on the drug, ... & I
don't think he'd be into nutrition, supplements, & exercise as an
alternative to medicine. So, I'm looking away.

From: [email hidden]

Good Heavens, is this another one of Sweet Sue's stories? (And her
mother jumped her & her church members weren't nice either).

Maybe your SSchool teacher died from the flu,, period. People do do that
you know. Happened to my grandfather at age 35, even without a "shot".

But I'm sure you were at the hospital personally witnessing the event,
though you don't even seem to be absolutely positive you were a
teenager(?) at the time.

==========

Hi kathy,

You seem to be very full of anger (hate & venom), ... the need to dump
it on others (those seeking to learn about altmed, in order to help
themselves), ... & the need to label others "liars".

I spent a lot of time answering your questions, hoping for some help in
learning about complimentary & alternative medicine, ... but you don't
seem to know anything about that. You keep acting determinedly-dumb,
ugly & abusive.

You seem to be here, to verbally attack people, & to play the same bad &
childish games over & over: "Liar liar, pants on fire." (yawn)

Plus, you've misquoted me. I never said I was at the hospital when Mrs.
Hill died, because I wasn't. And it's probably not unusual, to forget
exactly the age you were, when the people you've met & known, died.

Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

PS Sorry to hear about your grandfather dying of the flu, so young.

In a graveyard near here, there are lots of graves of children who died
in 1917(?) or so, ... & some have the cutest stone angels, lambs, &
stuff as tombstones.

When I asked what had happened to these children, people said the flu or
pneumonia-type stuff had took them that year.

Back then, I don't think the docs had antibiotics. So, antibiotics were
definitely a wonder drug, once discovered & put into use.

My concern is, that the doctors aren't doing the testing necessary
up-front, to see which drugs will benefit each patient, & which will
disable or kill them. Many docs are giving the same standard treatments
to patients, & are choosing not to care about those who sicken & die
from the medicines, not the disease.

I'm hoping for some positive changes.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

After I asked questions for a while, I learned that Mrs. Hill had gone
to the hospital with the flu, had been given a shot, & the shot had
killed her.

Is that a fact? Do you know for certain that the shot killed her, or is this
just rumor that was going around after the event?

Quoted message said:

Whenever I got the chance, I'd ask why the doctors would give someone a
shot, that would kill them. Nobody knew.

Why didn't the docs give people just a tiny amount of medicine first, to
see if they were allergic to it, ... or test them for allergies before
giving shots & medicine? Nobody knew.

"Are you allergic to any medications?" is one of the first questions asked
in the initial assessment of every patient. We must rely on self-report of
allergies, because individual allergy tests are neither effective nor
practical. Also, be aware that in-hospital deaths from allergic reactions
are very rare. Treatment for histamine reactions is quite effective. Almost
all allergy death happen in the field where emergency treatment is
unavailable.

Quoted message said:

Finally, I learned that the doctors have a standard treatment for an
illness, such as a certain antibiotic, ... that most docs won't deviate
from that, no matter what, ... & that docs refuse to take responsibility
for bad results, for the deaths they cause.

Nonsense. Medical practice is not nearly as cookbook as you imagine. Nor are
doctors uncaring and irresponsible.

Quoted message said:

If the patient is allergic to the treatment, & is permanently
injured/disabled or killed by it, ... then it's considered an
"acceptable loss" by the docs. It's OK.

No, it's neither acceptable nor "OK" when a patient dies from an allergic
reaction. But you must learn the concept of "risk/benefit" to understand
what is going on. If you have a pneumonia that is 95% likely to kill you if
you don't get an antibiotic for it, wouldn't you be willing to take the
antibiotic that has a 0.01% chance of causing an allergic reaction that in
turn has a 2% chance of killing you? That is the choice that doctors and
their patients make every day. The percentages change case-by-case, but the
principles are the same. So after a doctor saves thousands of lives with his
antibiotic, you want to villianize him as a killer when the roll of the dice
comes up wrong that one time?

Quoted message said:

[Heaven forbid that the
doctors should actually do something logical or practical, when
dispensing dangerous drugs.]

Read my last response. Do you consider it more logical and practical to NOT
give life-saving medications?

Quoted message said:

While the doctors might have considered Mrs. Hill's death "an acceptable
loss", & not cared about her, ... I did care. And it was Not OK with
me, that they killed her.

They did not kill her. She got a bad case of flu, and the doctors cared
enough about her to take care of her. She died. You do not know the details
of how that death happened, only rumors, and on the basis of only that you
are ready to convict her doctors, and by extention, ALL doctors, of callous
murder. Shame on you.

Quoted message said:

-----------

What is considered "an acceptable loss" by doctors? Your life? Your
child's life? Your mate's?

And what about the doc's motto of "First, do no harm."?

Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

--Rich --> You are entitled to your own opinions, but not to your own
facts.

[email hidden] wrote in news:9998-4002D54D-74@storefull-
3192.bay.webtv.net:

Quoted message said:

Rich Andrews wrote:

The mother is/was a mentally ill person. Since we have now established
that fact, the rest of the story is suspect AFAIC.

==========

Moral Disorders, Moral Illness

My Mom chose to be morally ill, to have moral disorders (antisocial &
narcissistic) & to enjoy them, ... to use them as her drug of choice,
her addiction. She'd get "high" from planning to harm people, & then
doing it, over & over.

Many people seem to have varying degrees of this disorder. [For some
reason, many people (with severe moral illness) seem obsessive about
attending church, ... and about using this as their proof of being a
good person, a "good Christian". ???]

There's a huge difference between moral disorders & mental illness.

----------

Mrs. Hill

Since Mom wouldn't give me details about Mrs. Hill's death, I had to ask
other people over & over, to learn what happened.

Mrs. Hill was probably in her 40s or 50s, at the time she died.

Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

PS Mental Illness?

So far, I don't know much about mental illness.

Most of the people I met at the MHMR here in East Texas, while I was
seeking abuse counselling, ... were in abuse, were very injured or
physically ill, ... were morally ill, were violent criminals, ... were
zonked-out on psych drugs, and/or always terrified these drugs would be
suddenly cut-off (& they'd experience withdrawal again, alone), ... were
alcoholics or street drug addicts (possibly in some stage of recovery),
.. were obsessive/compulsive and/or addicted to something destructive
(like gambling, bronc- or bull-riding at rodeos, sex, night-clubs), &
the highs they got from it, ... or were suffering from stress disorders,
due to the failed systems here (legal, medical, govt), & all the harm
this does.

Recently, I met a guy shopping in a grocery store here, who kept getting
in my face & saying "Hi" over & over. Turns out, he's on Prozac. He
obviously can't focus, relate, or work while on this drug. However,
I've no way of knowing what he'd be like, if not on the drug, ... & I
don't think he'd be into nutrition, supplements, & exercise as an
alternative to medicine. So, I'm looking away.

Morals have nothing to do with it.

A cruel, abusive person is sick mentally. If you choose to whitewash that
fact just as Mom did, then you are just lying to yourself.

I'll bet she beat animals too. I have never met or heard of a person who
was *not* abusive to both animals and people.

Morals are social issues, her's were behavorial. Anyone that relishes
mental, ritualistic torture is sick.

I am not going to suggest that her children seek counseling or anything
like that. It is a waste of time.

r

--
Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes.

No I have a vey good memory for when things occurred, including year &
time of year. And I'd certainly remember if I was a teenager or
not...that's a pretty long time span.

Sue, after making all that noise about that Smokey Mountain Testing Lab.
why don't you spend your tiime more productively & contact them as you
said you were going to do. Apparently they only deal with "alternative
practioners" (8,000 of them) & surely you cn hook up with at least ONE
of those 8,000 & finally make yourself happy.

Rich Andrews wrote:

Morals have nothing to do with it.
A cruel, abusive person is sick mentally. If you choose to whitewash
that fact just as Mom did, then you are just lying to yourself.
I'll bet she beat animals too. I have never met or heard of a person who
was *not* abusive to both animals and people.
Morals are social issues, her's were behavorial. Anyone that relishes
mental, ritualistic torture is sick.
I am not going to suggest that her children seek counselling or anything
like that. It is a waste of time.

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

Yes, Mom tortured, abused, & killed animals.

I agree that most counselors (esp. psychologists) aren't trained to "do
squat". Most don't seem trained to do anything, but sit & listen
(badly) & to give bad/harmful advice. Plus, most proved abusive also, &
played bad games. A waste of time & money. And they also overly-push
the bad psych drugs, to sicken & weaken their victims ... uh, clients.

I've worked very hard to get information & explanations about abuse &
abusers, & to learn better life-skills for dealing with them when they
attack. And I'm trying to pass these skills on, partly via newsgroups
on the internet, ... so that other people will have a better chance, for
living a good life. Information is power.

The thing that helped me most, in better understanding some people & the
meanness they do, was the definition of evil: "What a person can't be,
have, own, or control, they destroy," for no reason except to get "high"
from it, to enjoy it, to have some "fun". That explained a lot.

I don't agree with your ideas about mental illness.

Mental illness suggests that someone has an physical brain-type illness,
over which they have little or no control, & for which they're not fully
responsible. They had no choice in acquiring the disease/disorder.

Moral illness suggests that someone had choices, & that they repeatedly
made the wrong ones, they made bad ones, ... for which they are fully
responsible & accountable.

My Mom is fully responsible & accountable for what she's done & is
doing. There should be something in the legal system, to get people
like her out of society, or to better control & punish them, but there
isn't.

If you label her as being mentally ill, then she can claim she's not
responsible, ... which would present a legal problem. A Catch-22.

Then, every criminal could claim mental illness, as their excuse &
justification for all sadistic & criminal acts.

Moral & Mental Illness are very different things. One is a choice. The
other usually isn't.

Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

[email hidden]

No I have a vey good memory for when things occurred, including year &
time of year. And I'd certainly remember if I was a teenager or
not...that's a pretty long time span.

Su_Texas writes;

I have a good memory for some things, but not for dates, months or
years. At the farm, one day was pretty much like another, I had to
focus mostly on surviving the abuse, & information was very limited
and/or often wrong.

------------

kathy wrote:

Sue, after making all that noise about that Smokey Mountain Testing Lab.
why don't you spend your tiime more productively & contact them as you
said you were going to do. Apparently they only deal with "alternative
practioners" (8,000 of them) & surely you cn hook up with at least ONE
of those 8,000 & finally make yourself happy.

Su_Texas writes:

Fighting cancer is not a one-shot deal. The best I can tell so far, you
need to approach it from many angles, & in many ways.

It's a shame that the docs are mostly geered to pushing aromatase
inhibitors for breast cancer, & won't help.

So far, I can't find a doctor who does good blood-work (like gsdl), &
who'll take insurance for it.

Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

PS I have a dental appt this afternoon, for which I'm already late.
Bye.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

From: [email hidden]

Good Heavens, is this another one of Sweet Sue's stories? (And her
mother jumped her & her church members weren't nice either).

Maybe your SSchool teacher died from the flu,, period. People do do that
you know. Happened to my grandfather at age 35, even without a "shot".

But I'm sure you were at the hospital personally witnessing the event,
though you don't even seem to be absolutely positive you were a
teenager(?) at the time.

==========

Hi kathy,

You seem to be very full of anger (hate & venom), ... the need to dump
it on others (those seeking to learn about altmed, in order to help
themselves), ... & the need to label others "liars".

I didn't see the word "liar" in anything you quoted from Kathy, who so
far seems to be a pretty even-tempered sort. You, on the other hand,
seem to be quite angry.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

David Wright wrote:

I didn't see the word "liar" in anything you quoted from Kathy, who so
far seems to be a pretty even-tempered sort. You, on the other hand,
seem to be quite angry.

==========

From past posts & this one, it was implied.

On some levels, I'm very angry for the crimes & meanness that happen
here in East Texas, & for the harm this has done to me & others, for the
pain, suffering, & loss it's caused.

I'm trying to channel this anger into positive things, into making
positive changes, so that other people won't get harmed so badly.

Susan, Su_Texas my opinions