• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Naturopath's negligence 'caused death'

Yes. The article also says

... counsel for defense told the jury a post-mortem examination revealed Mr Krsteski had a previously unknown severe heart disease

But I suspect that without the 'treatment' he would have survived quite a while longer. The court will decide this question in due course.

I think detoxing is absolute crapola.
How could the consumption of things cause bad things to be expelled from the body (other than via the well known food-->waste pardigm)?
ie, How could such a process evolve in humans?
 
Flange Desire said:
But I suspect that without the 'treatment' he would have survived quite a while longer. The court will decide this question in due course.
Click to expand...

I suspect the naturopath will learn the meaning of "you take your victim as you find him". He's using a very weak defense but probably all that's available. If I were he, I'd plead guilty and get a lighter sentence.
 
Indeed, the article seems contradictory. Although the headline quotes the barrister as saying that the naturopath's negligence caused the death, that quite specifically isn't the case he's making, which is

The crown case is the accused filled Vecko with false hope for profit
Click to expand...


It would be very difficult to prove that what the naturopath did actually caused a myocardial infarction, and even if it did, myocardial infarctions tend to be accidents waiting to happen anyway.

It seems to me that the case is much more based on some sort of fraud allegation, and that the prosecution will have to prove that the hope offered to the deceased was indeed "false hope", knowingly offered "for profit".

In that case, the death of the patient almost seems like an irrelevance. Hmmm. It will be interesting to find out how this one plays out.

Rolfe.
 
Beady said:
What are your medical qualifications?

Also, since it's fairly axiomatic around here that the press gets it wrong more often than not, what do you know that wasn't in the article?
Click to expand...

Why on earth would you want to know about my qualifications?
One does not need to have 'qualifications' to have an opinion.

PS, I know nothing more about the case than what I read in the article.
 
There's a lot more information in this article.


Kidney treatment forsaken for 'cure'

Geesche Jacobsen
September 6, 2007

VECKO KRSTESKI was desperate for a cure and Jeffrey Dummett advertised one, based on what he called the "eight laws of health: nutrition, exercise, water, sunshine, temperance, air, rest, and trust in divine power".

Krsteski, a 37-year-old with chronic kidney disease, followed the program for two weeks - and died on day 14....Krsteski...had suspended his conventional treatment to follow the naturopath's regimen.

Krsteski's doctors had prescribed dialysis four times a day, as well as regular medication, a controlled diet and no more than a litre of fluids a day...

Then his sister told him about Dummett's program; Dummett advertised his services with the slogan "Need a cure?"

...Krsteski signed up for a live-in detoxification program in February 2002...he believed [Dummett] was a doctor, the prosecutor, Paul Leask, told the court.

He stopped his conventional treatment and started a liquid diet... After nine days he noticed chest pains and numbness in his fingers, Mr Leask told the court. By day 10 he had lost 11 kilograms. On the morning of day 14, Krsteski was found dead.
Click to expand...


Also ran across this whilst Googling:

This is not the first time that Mr. Dummett has been in trouble for his treatment of patients. The 2003 annual report of the New South Wales Medical Board mentioned Mr. Dummett and his activities.

"Last year the Board prosecuted Jeffery Dummett, an unregistered person for holding himself out as being entitled, qualified or willing to practice medicine or perform a medical service. He was convicted, fined and placed on a bond. This year the Board again prosecuted him for similar offences and he was convicted in relation to that prosecution."

The conviction was mentioned in a press release by the New South Wales Health Minister Craig Knowles.

"A recently discredited procedure was the Live Blood Cell Analysis by which a self-proclaimed naturopath claimed he could diagnose illnesses by examining a pinprick of a patient's blood under a microscope and devise treatments to cure whatever disease was found.

"But the naturopath, Jeffrey Dummett was fined almost $34,000 and court costs in May this year for making false health claims as expert medical evidence found Dummet's claims could not possibly be true.
Click to expand...
 
Heart disease may well have been "unsuspected" in this case, but it shouldn't have been. It commonly accompanies chronic renal disease (which is often caused by or causes high blood pressure in addition).

If this man stopped renal dialysis, one of the first results would have been to elevate potassium levels. This is a major, major risk for precipitating cardiac arrythmias. If the guy had heart disease, it would just have been a matter of time (ie how many days?) before he died from this particular complication.

Telling someone to stop renal dialysis is equivalent to manslaughter IMO, whatever the other as yet unknown facts about the case.

(PS - my opinion is not uninformed - I have about a dozen letters after my name - all of them medical)
 
do people post on here when MDs and surgeons face accusations of 'gross negligence'?

no, I thought not
 
plumjam said:
do people post on here when MDs and surgeons face accusations of 'gross negligence'?

no, I thought not
Click to expand...

It is when physicians/surgeons do not follow reasonable medical/surgical practice that the consequence can be "gross negligence". This is a case where following the practice is what led to the death - i.e. it is the practice that is harmful rather than the practitioner acting contrary to the purportedly reasonable practice.

Linda
 
plumjam said:
do people post on here when MDs and surgeons face accusations of 'gross negligence'?
Click to expand...

From time to time. Andrew Wakefield is currently up on professional misconduct charges for example.
 
plumjam said:
do people post on here when MDs and surgeons face accusations of 'gross negligence'? {snip}
Click to expand...
It is important to emphasize the fact that naturopaths, etc., are quacks and their "standard of practice" is likely to do more harm than good. On the other hand, MDs and DOs who err are aberrations, and not instructive. In short, naturopathic practice is generally harmful whereas medical practice is not; and that is useful to know.
 
Here’s an interesting investigative news segment that was recently shown on Australian television:
http://skepticalsurfer.blogspot.com:80/2008/02/naturopathetic-medicine.html
(8mins 43 secs)

Towards the end of the segment we see how a 5-month old cocker spaniel, Rosie, managed to start her own naturopathic business. All the Dept. of Fair Trading did was register a business name as, incredibly, it has no role in checking out the qualifications of those who want to start up as therapists.

It seems to have much in common with the story of Ben Goldacre’s cat, Hettie, who posthumously became a member of the American Association of Nutritional Consultants (AANC):
http://www.badscience.net/?p=131
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom