Re: Steere/Yale MAJOR screw-up.

From: derdrittemann (derdrittemann2003_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 07/17/04 

Date: 17 Jul 2004 16:35:18 -0700

a_weisman@yahoo.com (A_Weisman) wrote in message news:<e55e6d97.0407170320.4e08306e@posting.google.com>...

> >>
> "I'm very troubled by the notion that you and der dritte mann seem to
> be endorsing the idea that Allen Steere should be disciplined by a
> medical board for offering his opinion and for the fact that others
> have agreed with him IF THAT IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING????"

And I am very troubled that you apparently don't bother to read what
either of us are saying before you start responding.

What? Huh? Say whut? And I said anything even remotely resembling
this...just where exactly?

(BTW...I didn't say Nietzsche was a nihilist, either, yet you
proceeded to tell me why I was wrong about that...if you are going to
set up the arguments AND respond to them...well)...
>
> "I absolutely think that anyone who was misdiagnosed by him or
> mistreated by him has a legitimate complaint. But to urge people to
> make complaints against Steere because their doctor agreed with him
> and followed his guidelines? That is I think a VERY dangerous
> proposition".

You seem to be getting the issue of personal responsibility for his
writings in professional literature somehow confused with an attempt
by former patients to have him called to account for undertreating the
disease.

You seem to be linking these things in your mind. I certainly don't
link them...and if you examine the letter that you posted...you will
see that we are talking about personal contact within his professional
doctor/patient relationship.

Where does it say anything like that?...or where did Greg or I say
that complaints should be made against Steere because of the treatment
guidelines?

So far as the document itself goes...seems to me it is a legitimate
attempt to notify potential class members...whether you agree or not
that it was a good thing to do...seems legit to me.
>
> "Listen by endorsing this notion there is a whole new area of liability
> created. Now people aren't responsible for what they have done but
> what others do based on offering their opinions not on a specific case
> but as a general matter"?

That's nice. Who is saying this?
>
> "Steere has a right to his opinion. So does Burrascano. The idea that
> either should be disciplined for their opinions alone is something I
> think is not only wrong but many steps down the road to intellectual
> and actual fascism and I oppose it".

Hooray for you...you have managed to "take the high road" against an
argument no one was making.

Quantcast