At BAKER CHIROPRACTIC, PA , Dr. John Raymond Baker, DC is putting the care back into healthCARE and continues to put patients first.

 That’s 903-753-5400.

~Dr. John Raymond Baker,DC and Staff

Baker Chiropractic, PA

Hurt in a wreck or on the job?
Baker Chiropractic continues to accept
new cases. To schedule an appointment,
please call 903-753-5400. God bless you.
Thank you.

By Rob Stein

Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 14, 2006; Page A01

Younger women who regularly eat red meat appear to face an increased risk for a common form of breast cancer, according to a large, well-known Harvard study of women’s health.

The study of more than 90,000 women found that the more red meat the women consumed in their 20s, 30s and 40s, the greater their risk for developing breast cancer fueled by hormones in the next 12 years. Those who consumed the most red meat had nearly twice the risk of those who ate red meat infrequently.

The study, published yesterday in the Archives of Internal Medicine, is the first to examine the relationship between consumption of red meat and breast cancer in premenopausal women, and the first to examine the question by type of breast cancer.

Although more research is needed to confirm the association and explore the possible reasons for it, researchers said the findings provide another motivation to limit consumption of red meat, which is already known to increase the risk of colon cancer.

“There are already other reasons to minimize red meat intake,” said Eunyoung Cho, an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, who led the study. “This just may give women another good reason.”

Cho added that the findings could be particularly important because the type of breast cancer the study associated with red meat consumption has been increasing. Eating less red meat may help counter that trend.

Other researchers said the findings could offer women one of the few things they can do to reduce their risk for the widely feared malignancy. Breast cancer strikes nearly 213,000 U.S. women each year and kills nearly 41,000, making it the most common cancer and the second most common cause of cancer death among women.

“So many risk factors for breast cancer are things that you can’t alter,” said Nancy E. Davidson, a breast cancer expert at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. “This represents something women could take charge of — something you can change to affect your risk.”

Why red meat might increase the risk for breast cancer remains unknown, but previous research has suggested several possible reasons: Substances produced by cooking meat may be carcinogenic, naturally occurring substances in meat may mimic the action of hormones, or growth hormones that farmers feed cows could fuel breast cancer in women who consume meat from the animals.

Researchers have long wondered whether there might be a link between red meat consumption and breast cancer risk, but few studies have addressed the question. Those that have, including one large analysis that pooled data from eight studies, did not find any association. But the earlier studies focused on older women and did not differentiate between types of breast cancer.

In the new study, Cho and her colleagues analyzed data collected from 90,659 female nurses ages 26 to 46 who are participating in the Nurses’ Health Study II, a long-term project examining a host of women’s health issues. As part of the study, participants provided detailed information about their diets every four years.

When the researchers analyzed the data from 1991 to 2003, they found no overall link between red meat consumption and an increased risk of breast cancer. But when they examined the data from only the 512 women who developed the type of breast cancer whose growth is fueled by the hormones estrogen and progesterone, they found an association.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/13/AR2006111300824.html

“SENIOR doctors are urging health professionals to consider permitting the euthanasia of seriously disabled newborn babies.

The proposal, by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecology, follows the increase in the number of such children surviving because of medical advances.”

http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/health.cfm?id=1639102006 

“ DETROIT — A doctor has been ordered to spend the rest of his life in prison for prescribing narcotic drugs without a legitimate medical purpose.Mukunda Dev Mukherjee, 64, of Fenton, was found guilty in February of 44 counts of illegal distribution of controlled substances.U.S. District Judge Paul Gadola on Monday sentenced Mukherjee to 328 years in prison by imposing the maximum sentence for each count and ordering that the sentences be served consecutively. Mukherjee also must forfeit nearly $170,000 in assets.”The severity of today’s sentence should be an object lesson to any unethical medical professionals who would use their prescription-writing authority to put dangerous narcotics in the hands of addicts,” U.S. Attorney Stephen Murphy said.Prosecutors showed during Mukherjee’s trial that he charged people $45 to $90 for postdated prescriptions for drugs such as Oxycontin, Morphine and Vicodin without physical examinations.”

We brought you the information on Dr. Eric Scheffey, MD and his 78 lawsuits, 20 years of misconduct allegedly before he was stopped in the Summer of 2005, and then, he was arrested in September 2005 in Colorado for practicing medicine without a license. We brought you info on Dr. Chitale in Ennis, who was allegedly commiting sexual assaults on his female patients.

Now, here is an interesting article from Palestine on a work comp doctor. Now, I am just reporting what has been reported in the major news media on this doctor. Please read what the major news media says….

“Patients Suffer After Doctor’s License Is Temporarily Suspended

Patients Suffer After Doctor’s License Is Temporarily Suspended

\nThose who work here say many of their patients, like Patrick, are on workers\’ compensation. They say Dr. Byrnes didn\’t file the proper paperwork for months, and many of their patients are now in jeopardy of losing benefits. For Patrick, the problem is even worse than that.\n

\n”We\’re threatened to be kicked out of our apartment. We\’re behind on our rent. Our utilities, we had a little bit of help with, but basically, our lives have been turned upside down,” says Patrick.

\nThe clinic is looking for a full time replacement for their practice, so patients can continue getting the treatment they need. They say there is still a lot of work before things can get back to normal. “,1] ); //–> patients.Dr. Robert J. Byrnes of the Palestine Medical and Rehabilitation Center had his license temporarily suspended Friday.

The board cited, among other things, a June indictment for insurance fraud, a guilty plea in August for making assaults and threats to a family member, and a positive urine test in July for amphetamines.

He was also cited for a list of prescription drugs like oxycodone that were allegedly found in his car in August.

As KLTV 7′s Lindsay Wilcox expains, those Dr. Byrnes once treated are now suffering for his alleged actions.

When allegations surfaced against Dr. Robert Byrnes last month, it left patients like Patrick Tuskey stunned.

“I thought i had a good doctor,” says Tuskey.

Patrick’s been a patient at the rehab center since he hurt his back on the job a year ago. The clinic is now being run by Doctor James Branch, a retired doctor with 42 years experience, who’s cleaning up the mess he says Dr. Byrnes left behind.

“He had taken all of the records, so I had to start a new history and physicals. We had to call for X-Rays, MRI’s, lab work. We didn’t have anything. We had some people on large doses of pain medication, and I had to ween them off, or at least cut them down. Some of them were taking three to four times what a normal person would take,” says Branch.

Those who work here say many of their patients, like Patrick, are on workers’ compensation. They say Dr. Byrnes didn’t file the proper paperwork for months, and many of their patients are now in jeopardy of losing benefits. For Patrick, the problem is even worse than that.

“We’re threatened to be kicked out of our apartment. We’re behind on our rent. Our utilities, we had a little bit of help with, but basically, our lives have been turned upside down,” says Patrick.

The clinic is looking for a full time replacement for their practice, so patients can continue getting the treatment they need. They say there is still a lot of work before things can get back to normal. lwilcox@kltv.com

“,1] ); //–>

The Texas Medical Board says Byrnes was ‘…An imminent peril to the public health, safety and welfare that requird immediate effect of this Order of Temporary Suspension.’

We tried to reach Dr. Byrnes for his comment, but were unable to.

Lindsay Wilcox/Reporting: lwilcox@kltv.com ”

From http://www.kltv.com/Global/story.asp?S=5522776

 You notice the slant of the story is patients sufffering, and not the question, why is his license only being TEMPORARILY suspended?

 Let’s look at an article of interest with regard to the actions of the Texas Medical Board with regard to discipline of doctors.

http://www.jaoa.org/cgi/content/full/106/3/153

“JAOA • Vol 106 • No 3 • March 2006 • 153-156

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Google Scholar Articles by Cardarelli, R. Articles by Licciardone, J. C. Articles citing this Article PubMed Articles by Cardarelli, R. Articles by Licciardone, J. C.

Address correspondence to: Roberto Cardarelli, DO, MPH, University of North Texas Health Science Center at Fort Worth—Texas College of Osteopathic Medicine, Department of Family Medicine, Division of Education and Research, 855 Montgomery St, Fort Worth, TX 76107-2553. E-mail: rcardare@hsc.unt.edu

	Methods

Top Methods Results Comments Conclusion References

All procedures for this retrospective analysis were reviewed and approved by the institutional review board at the University of North Texas Health Science Center at Fort Worth—Texas College of Osteopathic Medicine.

Data on physician sex, race, medical degree, primary specialty, method of licensure, years in practice, type of violation, and the type and number of disciplinary actions taken were obtained from the Texas Medical Board (TMB; formerly called the Texas Board of Medical Examiners). This study included physicians disciplined by the TMB between January 1, 1989, and December 31, 1998. Only the most recent instance of disciplinary action was analyzed for physicians with a history of multiple violations (ie, 1 vs 2). Exclusion criteria for TMB physician records were those with missing data and those documenting out-of-state violations.

Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to compute odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for factors associated with physician license revocation, the most severe disciplinary action, compared with all other forms of disciplinary action combined. Hypotheses were tested at the .05 level of statistical significance using SYSTAT software (SPSS Inc, Chicago, Ill).⁷

	Results

Top Methods Results Comments Conclusion References

Most physicians in this retrospective review (N=1129) were men, white, graduates of allopathic medical schools in the United States, and specified primary care as their primary specialty (Table 1). Number of years in practice was positively associated with license revocation compared with all other types of disciplinary action combined (Table 2). In addition, the odds of license revocation were greater among anesthesiologists, general practitioners, and psychiatrists compared with family physicians. A history of multiple disciplinary actions (ie, 2 disciplinary actions) was also associated with license revocation.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 1 Characteristics of Physicians Disciplined by the Texas Medical Board (N=1129)*

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 2 Physicians Disciplined by the Texas Medical Board* Factors Associated With Medical License Revocation (N=1129)

	Comments

Top Methods Results Comments Conclusion References

Our study found several factors associated with the severity of disciplinary action taken by the TMB. Although previous researchers have analyzed physician characteristics as factors that placed physicians at risk of disciplinary action by state medical boards,^1–4 those studies did not review the decision-making process of the boards themselves. Therefore, to study the process of disciplinary action in the TMB, we chose to analyze factors associated with high-severity disciplinary action while controlling for the type of violation.

In our analysis, the personal characteristics of disciplined physicians did not influence the TMB’s decisions to take high-severity disciplinary action against them. This result suggests that TMB decisions during the study period were based on the specifics of the cases reviewed, substantiating the board’s primary responsibility to protect patients in the state of Texas.

However, we found evidence that the TMB was more likely to revoke the license of physicians who had a history of disciplinary actions from the board (ie, 2 or more disciplinary actions). Unfortunately, the characteristics of physicians’ practices, such as patient volume, staff, clinic location, and environmental factors, which may confound our findings, cannot be accounted for. In a similar study based in Ohio that was published in JAOA—The Journal of the American Osteopathic Association,⁴ researchers did not find an association between high-severity disciplinary action and multiple physician offenses.

A longer time in medical practice was also associated with an increased probability of medical license revocation. This factor has not been reported in similar studies. We suggest that the longer a physician practices medicine, the greater the number of patient encounters (ie, higher levels of patient “exposure”), resulting in greater potential for violations and subsequent disciplinary actions by state medical boards.

In the Ohio study,⁴ physician gender is not associated with high-severity disciplinary action. Although women are less likely to be disciplined by state medical boards than their male counterparts,^1–4 once disciplinary action is taken, physician gender is not associated with high-severity disciplinary action.

Our results concur with those of the Ohio study⁴ in that the TMB did not impose high-severity penalties disproportionately between allopathically or osteopathically trained physicians. In addition, there seems to be no relationship between high-severity disciplinary action for allopathic physicians as trained in the United States or abroad.

Although family and general practitioners, obstetrician-gynecologists, and psychiatrists are at increased risk for disciplinary action,^1,3 we found only anesthesiologists, general practitioners, and psychiatrists at increased risk for license revocation once disciplined.

The effect of board certification was not directly measured in our study. However, our study design categorized family medicine and general practice separately, and we believe that we can use these data as a proxy for board certification. Although not proven, one potential hypothesis is that because general practitioners lack formal specialized medical training, they may be prone to committing mistakes with more severe outcomes. However, we cannot exclude the possibility that state medical boards may punish more severely physicians who lack board certification.

Anesthesiology is a specialty at increased risk for disciplinary action in some studies,² but not in others.^1,3,4 Based on our findings, once an anesthesiologist is found to be at fault, the severity of disciplinary action by TMB is harsh.

Psychiatrists were most likely to have their licenses revoked. Additional studies are needed to confirm this finding, however, and to further evaluate factors that may be associated with this outcome.

Contrary to the results of the Ohio study,⁴ we found no increased risk of license revocation among physicians with substance abuse and prescription misuse violations. There was no increased risk for license revocation among the types of violations, except for “Other.” In our study, however, criminal charges were included in the “Other” category, which most likely explains our statistically significant finding. Additional violation categories may have also contributed to the statistically significant finding in “Other,” but the small number of such violators precluded a more stratified analysis.

There are several limitations to our study. The details of physician violations were not available in the TMB records that were provided to us. Because these data were unavailable, we were not able to determine the degree and severity of the violations themselves. For example, physician use of alcohol may affect professional conduct to the extent that there is a fatal patient outcome. Alternatively, another physician may suffer from alcohol dependence yet never commit a medical error. It is unknown whether the severity of TMB disciplinary actions was determined by the severity or outcome of the violation cited.

Another limitation that researchers using data gathered from state medical boards must confront is the temporal realities of state medical boards. Members serving on state medical boards serve several-year terms, possibly resulting in a fluctuation of the decision-making processes on these boards.

	Conclusion

Top Methods Results Comments Conclusion References

Although the findings of our study cannot be generalized nationally because medical boards and physician characteristics differ somewhat across the nation,⁴ it is our hope that they will create an impetus for further research on the importance of physician specialty, lack of board certification, and multiple disciplinary actions as predictors of license revocation. In addition, further studies are needed to evaluate the decision-making processes of state medical boards to ensure that there are no age, specialty, or degree biases. Programs aimed at addressing these factors and providing appropriate physician education or early intervention may be useful in mitigating the toll of license revocation on physicians and their patients.

	References

Top Methods Results Comments Conclusion References

1. Cardarelli R, Licciardone JC, Ramirez G. Predicting risk for disciplinary action by a state medical board. Tex Med.2004; 100:84 –90.[Medline] 2. Morrision J, Wickersham P. Physicians disciplined by a state medical board. JAMA.1998; 279:1889 –1893.[Abstract/Free Full Text]3. Kohatsu ND, Gould D, Ross LK, Fox PJ. Characteristics associated with physician discipline: a case-control study. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:653 –658.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

4. Clay SW, Conaster RR. Characteristics of physicians disciplined by the State Medical Board of Ohio. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2003;103:81–88. Available at: http://www.jaoa.org/cgi/reprint/103/2/81. Accessed February 23, 2006.

5. Papadakis MA, Hodgson CS, Teherani A, Kohatsu ND. Unprofessional behavior in medical school is associated with subsequent disciplinary action by a state medical board. Acad Med.2004; 79:244 –249.[Medline]

6. Tex Occup Code ch 164. Available at: http://www.tmb.state.tx.us/rules/codes/chapter164.php#164001. Accessed March 1, 2006.”

I find this highly interesting !