I Get Called Out Again

After my last post, a person known as Antithesis_98 wrote me a comment challenging my assertions about John Edwards. These are his comments:

John Edwards as the cause of increased costs is a real turn off to your sensible readers; and me, heh.

You use his name in a fit of grandstanding then say you have no problem with penalizing negligent practitioners.
The inference thus lumps Edwards with the frivolous lawsuits you despise.

Your next post should state the frivolous lawsuit of which he is a party, or you should apologies for the inference.


First, let’s get a few things out in the open. Antithesis is from the United Kingdom. I do not need to explain my positions to those who are from other places and therefore probably have little knowledge of the facts but, in the interest of educating this person, I will do just that. BTW, I have nothing against the UK. I have some very good friends who live in New Castle. Secondly, I did not say Edwards was the sole reason for the problems in health care. Trial lawyers in general are in part responsible for the mess. Now for the last part about backing my claims. Strap on your seatbelt mate, it is going to get a bit bumpy my little wanker friend.

John Edwards made his fortune suing over things that are not medically sound. He played on the emotions of juries and got them to award huge settlements for things that have no basis in science. At Find Law you will see an interesting biography of John Edwards. He had a 25 million dollar suit because a girl was severely injured by a pool drain. I am sure this was terrible. Why did the parents have the girl in the pool while they were draining it? Also, the claim was that the drain lacked a warning because there had been trouble before. Would a warning on the drain made a difference? Who can see the warning at the bottom of the pool? You will also find four cases where a newborn suffered Cerebral Palsey supposedly from a myriad of reasons ranging frm delay in performing a C-section to not using pitocin to induce labor. I want to make this clear, there is no evidence that complications during birth cause cerebral palsey. This is pseudoscience. It is smoke and mirrors. John Edwards took his snake oil show out and snookered (thought the Brit might enjoy that term) them in to believing there is a correlation. Third world countries have many more difficulties during birth yet the rate of cerebral palsey is no higher. The number of cases in babies born naturally and those born via C-section is nearly the same. Don’t take my word for it. Read all about cerebal palsey from THE ALFRED I. DUPONT INSTITUTE

There are no specific events that, if they occur during pregnancy, delivery, or infancy, will always occurring at birth or right after birth). This is apparently why the incidence of CP in undeveloped and poverty stricken areas of the world, where infant mortality is very high, is the same as in northern Europe, where infant mortality is the lowest. It also explains why modern obstetrical care, including monitoring and a high rate of Cesarian section, has lowered infant mortality rates but not the incidence of cerebral palsy.


Now read that carefully. John Edwards played on people’s emotions and made them believe that which is contradicted by science. The folks here should know a bit more about CP than Edwards. There you have it Antithesis_98, the frivolous lawsuits to which he was a party.

But wait, there’s more. There was a suit against a trucking company by the estate of man killed by a company driver, arguing that the company acted recklessly in paying drivers by the mile, thereby encouraging unsafe conduct. There is no mention of whether the driver actually was unsafe. Only that the company practice lead to unsafe conduct. Perhaps the other driver was at fault.
Here is another: Doctor’s delay and failure to properly treat 45-year-old’s severely lacerated foot ultimately required amputation of foot three years later. I have seen many lacerations and there have been delays in treatment. Sometimes there are sicker people. Why did it take three years for this problem to manifest? Was the patient a diabetic? Did he have other disease processes that caused peripheral vascular disease? These last items can certainly be debated and maybe they were legitimate. The CP cases were definitely not legitimate and border on fraud.

As I stated in the last post, I have no problem with law suits against doctors who are truly negligent. This does not contradict my position that frivolous lawsuits are commonplace and drive up the costs of health care. I know that my post here will not change anyone’s mind if they are believers in Edwards. I did , however, back up my claims as requested by my tosser reader in the UK.

Antithesis_98, I believe that it is I who is owed the apology. I of course do not blame you for being confused. You folks in the UK have a real tough time with the law over there. Keep reading and I will get you straight.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Comments are closed.