Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [infoguys-list] was the stroke avoidable.

Expand Messages
  • oracleintl@aol.com
    So, you re the moderator, demand proof or bounce her out of here. Bill In a message dated 11/1/2010 12:07:41 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, suesarkis@aol.com
    Message 1 of 12 , Nov 1, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      So, you're the moderator, demand proof or bounce her out of here.

      Bill


      In a message dated 11/1/2010 12:07:41 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
      suesarkis@... writes:





      Bill -

      I must admit that I am now at a cross between angered and bewildered.
      Angered because my repeated requests for the answer about the winner have
      gone
      not only unanswered but totally ignored. Bewildered because now I would
      also like to know who won the iPod which she offered early last month. If
      my memory serves me correctly, she was going to raffle that after she
      received 300 opinions. Perhaps she hasn't received 300 yet.

      I truly don't remember how many responses to the inquiry there were and I
      also do not know whether there were private responses. What I do know,
      however, is that the question should be answered immediately, if not
      sooner.


      Sincerely yours,
      Sue
      ________________________
      Sue Sarkis
      Sarkis Detective Agency

      (est. 1976)
      PI 6564
      _www.sarkispi.com_ (_http://www.sarkispi.com/_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/) )

      1346 Ethel Street
      Glendale, CA 91207-1826
      818-242-2505

      "one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"

      If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English,
      thank a military veteran

      In a message dated 11/1/2010 8:32:21 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
      _oracleintl@..._ (mailto:oracleintl@...) writes:

      Hey Sue -- I don't think anyone actually responded to that post but me. I
      don't know if she paid that, but I can tell you she didn't pay me.

      That makes you wonder about all this "donation" business doesn't it?

      Bill

      In a message dated 10/29/2010 8:21:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
      __suesarkis@..._ (mailto:_suesarkis@...) _
      (mailto:_suesarkis@..._ (mailto:suesarkis@...) ) writes:

      Amy -

      John's stroke my pitutti. Who won the $250 for the best analogy that you
      offered. You said the author of the best one would receive $250.

      Who did you pay? How many more times must one ask? Since I didn't submit
      one, obviously I do not have a jealous nor ulterior motive. I just want
      to know who the winner was.

      Sincerely,
      Sue

      In a message dated 10/29/2010 5:16:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
      ___Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:__Jurydoctor@...) _
      (mailto:__Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:_Jurydoctor@...) ) _
      (mailto:__Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:_Jurydoctor@...) _
      (mailto:_Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:Jurydoctor@...) ) ) writes:

      this case involves John's stroke. I need to know what you need to know in
      order to make a decision and what opinions, if any you have about the case.
      $20 to Smile train for each opinion as always your opinions are extremely
      helpful and I thank you in advance.

      Amy

      Plaintiff argues that:

      1. The Primary care physician sent John to the ER thinking he was having
      an evolving stroke.
      The nurse and ER doctor made the correct differential diagnosis of CVA/TIA
      but failed to do the tests necessary to rule out evolving stroke or call
      in a neurologist to consult;

      2. The radiologist should have called the ER doctor to report the
      significant changes in John's brain seen on CT, even though there was no
      "acute"
      (immediate) damage seen;

      3. The hospital is responsible for radiology and ER, plus it had
      complaints from the doctors about the communication between ER and
      radiology and
      failed to take steps to improve the procedures; and,

      4. The proper stroke protocols of putting John on blood thinners and
      providing the interventions to keep his carotid arteries open for blood
      flow
      would have prevented the complete blockage that happened several days
      later.
      Evolving carotid stenosis is among the most readily treatable causes of
      stroke. Timely treatment allows these patients to avoid disaster and live
      long
      and healthy lives.

      The defense argues that:

      1. John was told to follow up with his doctor in three days and did not do
      so (Jane said she signed John out and did not recall this instruction in
      the discharge papers; rather, she thought that if John got better, then it
      was likely the Valium reaction, as the ER doctor told her). John did get
      better. If John followed up with his doctor, he might not have had a major
      stroke.
      But then John acutally experienced a major stroke event and was rushed
      back to the hospital. (Several days later)

      2. John's problem was unavoidable, this is 20/20 hindsight

      3. Jake's underlying hardening of the arteries has continued to progress
      and that is what has made him unable to function; and,

      4. The doctors are independent contractors and if mistakes were made it
      was by the doctors for which the hospital is not responsible.

      John and Jane have since divorced. John moved in across the street with a
      woman who has orthopedic disabilities. Jane continues to feel for John and
      loves him.

      John worked for a company doing computer aided drafting. His last project
      was "Titan". John designed the containers that would be outfitted by the
      military and utilized to transport mobile command and control centers for
      use
      in our war efforts in the middle-east. Jake was an artist and avid
      musician. He had a music studio in his house. He loved to work on old cars
      and
      ride one of his two Harley Davidson motorcycles. His loss of cognition and
      motor controls have rendered him incapable to work or enjoy his hobbies.

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • rjmlegalservices@yahoo.com
      Stop Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry® ... From: oracleintl@aol.com Sender: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 12:17:59
      Message 2 of 12 , Nov 1, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Stop
        Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®

        -----Original Message-----
        From: oracleintl@...
        Sender: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 12:17:59
        To: <infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com>
        Reply-To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] was the stroke avoidable.

        So, you're the moderator, demand proof or bounce her out of here.

        Bill


        In a message dated 11/1/2010 12:07:41 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
        suesarkis@... writes:





        Bill -

        I must admit that I am now at a cross between angered and bewildered.
        Angered because my repeated requests for the answer about the winner have
        gone
        not only unanswered but totally ignored. Bewildered because now I would
        also like to know who won the iPod which she offered early last month. If
        my memory serves me correctly, she was going to raffle that after she
        received 300 opinions. Perhaps she hasn't received 300 yet.

        I truly don't remember how many responses to the inquiry there were and I
        also do not know whether there were private responses. What I do know,
        however, is that the question should be answered immediately, if not
        sooner.


        Sincerely yours,
        Sue
        ________________________
        Sue Sarkis
        Sarkis Detective Agency

        (est. 1976)
        PI 6564
        _www.sarkispi.com_ (_http://www.sarkispi.com/_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/) )

        1346 Ethel Street
        Glendale, CA 91207-1826
        818-242-2505

        "one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"

        If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English,
        thank a military veteran

        In a message dated 11/1/2010 8:32:21 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
        _oracleintl@..._ (mailto:oracleintl@...) writes:

        Hey Sue -- I don't think anyone actually responded to that post but me. I
        don't know if she paid that, but I can tell you she didn't pay me.

        That makes you wonder about all this "donation" business doesn't it?

        Bill

        In a message dated 10/29/2010 8:21:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
        __suesarkis@..._ (mailto:_suesarkis@...)_
        (mailto:_suesarkis@..._ (mailto:suesarkis@...) ) writes:

        Amy -

        John's stroke my pitutti. Who won the $250 for the best analogy that you
        offered. You said the author of the best one would receive $250.

        Who did you pay? How many more times must one ask? Since I didn't submit
        one, obviously I do not have a jealous nor ulterior motive. I just want
        to know who the winner was.

        Sincerely,
        Sue

        In a message dated 10/29/2010 5:16:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
        ___Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:__Jurydoctor@...)_
        (mailto:__Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:_Jurydoctor@...) )_
        (mailto:__Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:_Jurydoctor@...)_
        (mailto:_Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:Jurydoctor@...) ) ) writes:

        this case involves John's stroke. I need to know what you need to know in
        order to make a decision and what opinions, if any you have about the case.
        $20 to Smile train for each opinion as always your opinions are extremely
        helpful and I thank you in advance.

        Amy

        Plaintiff argues that:

        1. The Primary care physician sent John to the ER thinking he was having
        an evolving stroke.
        The nurse and ER doctor made the correct differential diagnosis of CVA/TIA
        but failed to do the tests necessary to rule out evolving stroke or call
        in a neurologist to consult;

        2. The radiologist should have called the ER doctor to report the
        significant changes in John's brain seen on CT, even though there was no
        "acute"
        (immediate) damage seen;

        3. The hospital is responsible for radiology and ER, plus it had
        complaints from the doctors about the communication between ER and
        radiology and
        failed to take steps to improve the procedures; and,

        4. The proper stroke protocols of putting John on blood thinners and
        providing the interventions to keep his carotid arteries open for blood
        flow
        would have prevented the complete blockage that happened several days
        later.
        Evolving carotid stenosis is among the most readily treatable causes of
        stroke. Timely treatment allows these patients to avoid disaster and live
        long
        and healthy lives.

        The defense argues that:

        1. John was told to follow up with his doctor in three days and did not do
        so (Jane said she signed John out and did not recall this instruction in
        the discharge papers; rather, she thought that if John got better, then it
        was likely the Valium reaction, as the ER doctor told her). John did get
        better. If John followed up with his doctor, he might not have had a major
        stroke.
        But then John acutally experienced a major stroke event and was rushed
        back to the hospital. (Several days later)

        2. John's problem was unavoidable, this is 20/20 hindsight

        3. Jake's underlying hardening of the arteries has continued to progress
        and that is what has made him unable to function; and,

        4. The doctors are independent contractors and if mistakes were made it
        was by the doctors for which the hospital is not responsible.

        John and Jane have since divorced. John moved in across the street with a
        woman who has orthopedic disabilities. Jane continues to feel for John and
        loves him.

        John worked for a company doing computer aided drafting. His last project
        was "Titan". John designed the containers that would be outfitted by the
        military and utilized to transport mobile command and control centers for
        use
        in our war efforts in the middle-east. Jake was an artist and avid
        musician. He had a music studio in his house. He loved to work on old cars
        and
        ride one of his two Harley Davidson motorcycles. His loss of cognition and
        motor controls have rendered him incapable to work or enjoy his hobbies.

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • suesarkis@aol.com
        Amy - I don t doubt the donations and I think I implied that when I mentioned the Alzheimer s issue. I am surprised about the minimal amount of responses you
        Message 3 of 12 , Nov 1, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Amy -

          I don't doubt the donations and I think I implied that when I mentioned the
          Alzheimer's issue. I am surprised about the minimal amount of responses
          you have received in that I know you post to other groups as well. 15
          seems like a very poor showing.

          However, what I am concerned about is that you offered on this list a
          payment of $250 to the winner in regards to sending in the best analogy
          regarding a scenario you provided. Although I only remember seeing one response
          with an analogy, you might have received many privately. I have no way of
          knowing. However, since it was a post sent exclusively to this group
          contrary to your normal posts I would expect the winner to be from this group.
          We would all like to know who that winner was.

          Now, regarding your poor response numbers. I think Bob Hrodey explained
          why he gave up responding and I am quite positive that many have for the
          same reason. I've mentioned that to you in the past. You do not take the
          time to separate one from the other and it sometimes comes off looking like
          one idiot rambled on incessantly. That, in turn, makes it impossible for any
          of us to respond either in favor or opposed to some of the comments.

          I also believe that many do not respond because your initial posts are
          usually so lacking in information that common sense should dictate we need to
          know. Yes, as we pose questions you usually do state that you will go back
          and ask and do provide answers when you receive them. However, even those
          posts are sometimes convoluted and confusing.

          So, in closing I will ask again, WHO WON THE $250 ????

          Sincerely,
          Sue


          In a message dated 11/1/2010 10:08:35 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
          jurydoctor@... writes:

          Sue,
          I have received 15 opinions so far..You are right 300 opinions. Only
          need 285 to go..
          Please tell Bill that we went thru this donation business 5 years ago when
          the investigators checked me out and called the places I donate to.
          It kind of sickens me...
          But I keep on plugging away.
          Escpecially since, I donate 20 bucks per opinion to charity.. you'd think
          people would respond out of a sheer sense of altruism.
          Perhaps I am too naive.
          I do appreciate your kindness.
          Amy





          -----Original Message-----
          From: SueSarkis <SueSarkis@...>
          To: infoguys-list <infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com>
          Cc: Jurydoctor <Jurydoctor@...>
          Sent: Mon, Nov 1, 2010 12:07 pm
          Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] was the stroke avoidable.



          Bill -

          I must admit that I am now at a cross between angered and bewildered.
          Angered because my repeated requests for the answer about the winner have gone
          not only unanswered but totally ignored. Bewildered because now I would
          also like to know who won the iPod which she offered early last month. If
          my memory serves me correctly, she was going to raffle that after she
          received 300 opinions. Perhaps she hasn't received 300 yet.

          I truly don't remember how many responses to the inquiry there were and I
          also do not know whether there were private responses. What I do know,
          however, is that the question should be answered immediately, if not sooner.


          Sincerely yours,
          Sue
          ________________________
          Sue Sarkis
          Sarkis Detective Agency






          (est. 1976)
          PI 6564
          _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)

          1346 Ethel Street
          Glendale, CA 91207-1826
          818-242-2505

          "one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"

          If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English,
          thank a military veteran



          In a message dated 11/1/2010 8:32:21 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
          _oracleintl@..._ (mailto:oracleintl@...) writes:

          Hey Sue -- I don't think anyone actually responded to that post but me. I
          don't know if she paid that, but I can tell you she didn't pay me.

          That makes you wonder about all this "donation" business doesn't it?

          Bill


          In a message dated 10/29/2010 8:21:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
          _suesarkis@..._ (mailto:suesarkis@...) writes:

          Amy -

          John's stroke my pitutti. Who won the $250 for the best analogy that you
          offered. You said the author of the best one would receive $250.

          Who did you pay? How many more times must one ask? Since I didn't submit
          one, obviously I do not have a jealous nor ulterior motive. I just want
          to know who the winner was.

          Sincerely,
          Sue

          In a message dated 10/29/2010 5:16:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
          __Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:_Jurydoctor@...) _
          (mailto:_Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:Jurydoctor@...) ) writes:

          this case involves John's stroke. I need to know what you need to know in
          order to make a decision and what opinions, if any you have about the case.
          $20 to Smile train for each opinion as always your opinions are extremely
          helpful and I thank you in advance.

          Amy

          Plaintiff argues that:

          1. The Primary care physician sent John to the ER thinking he was having
          an evolving stroke.
          The nurse and ER doctor made the correct differential diagnosis of CVA/TIA
          but failed to do the tests necessary to rule out evolving stroke or call
          in a neurologist to consult;

          2. The radiologist should have called the ER doctor to report the
          significant changes in John's brain seen on CT, even though there was no
          "acute"
          (immediate) damage seen;

          3. The hospital is responsible for radiology and ER, plus it had
          complaints from the doctors about the communication between ER and
          radiology and
          failed to take steps to improve the procedures; and,

          4. The proper stroke protocols of putting John on blood thinners and
          providing the interventions to keep his carotid arteries open for blood
          flow
          would have prevented the complete blockage that happened several days
          later.
          Evolving carotid stenosis is among the most readily treatable causes of
          stroke. Timely treatment allows these patients to avoid disaster and live
          long
          and healthy lives.

          The defense argues that:

          1. John was told to follow up with his doctor in three days and did not do
          so (Jane said she signed John out and did not recall this instruction in
          the discharge papers; rather, she thought that if John got better, then it
          was likely the Valium reaction, as the ER doctor told her). John did get
          better. If John followed up with his doctor, he might not have had a major

          stroke.
          But then John acutally experienced a major stroke event and was rushed
          back to the hospital. (Several days later)

          2. John's problem was unavoidable, this is 20/20 hindsight

          3. Jake's underlying hardening of the arteries has continued to progress
          and that is what has made him unable to function; and,

          4. The doctors are independent contractors and if mistakes were made it
          was by the doctors for which the hospital is not responsible.

          John and Jane have since divorced. John moved in across the street with a
          woman who has orthopedic disabilities. Jane continues to feel for John and
          loves him.

          John worked for a company doing computer aided drafting. His last project
          was "Titan". John designed the containers that would be outfitted by the
          military and utilized to transport mobile command and control centers for
          use
          in our war efforts in the middle-east. Jake was an artist and avid
          musician. He had a music studio in his house. He loved to work on old cars
          and
          ride one of his two Harley Davidson motorcycles. His loss of cognition and
          motor controls have rendered him incapable to work or enjoy his hobbies.







          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • suesarkis@aol.com
          In a message dated 11/1/2010 10:12:22 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, jurydoctor@aol.com writes: the $250 best analogy went to Janet Wilson. You can confirm this
          Message 4 of 12 , Nov 1, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            In a message dated 11/1/2010 10:12:22 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
            jurydoctor@... writes:

            the $250 best analogy went to Janet Wilson. You can confirm this her email
            address _jwilson5011@..._ (mailto:jwilson5011@...)
            I do not think I am giving out confidential info on her since she posted
            with her email address to another yahoogroup that also gives opinions.
            Amy


            Amy,

            Now wasn't that easy. I do not need to confirm as you wouldn't post if it
            wasn't true. However, would you mind sharing the analogy with us? I
            would like to see it as I pounded my head trying to think of one and truly
            couldn't come up with a beneficial one for your purpose as I understood it to
            be.

            Sue


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.