Iatrogenic means "caused by medical treatment". The term iatro comes from the Greek word "iatros", for medical or medicinal.

Iatrogenic death occurs when people die due to errors or negligence caused by doctors and pharmacists. Thousands of patients in our hospitals or under doctors care die annually and scores of others suffer serious injury because of medical "mistakes" and "doctor-caused" injury and illness is clearly the leading cause of death in Canada. All Canadians should be outraged at this monstrous wasting of human life.

It is estimated that one in every 200 patients in our hospitals has an iatrogenic death annually, even homicide can go undetected because autopsies are not being performed and there are no safeguards in place. The truth is that many diseases, including cancer can be traced to "iatrogenic" causes. In fact, more patients die from the treatments they receive than from the malaise doctors so dubiously seek to cure, with iatrogenic deaths attributed to "natural, non-specific or undetermined" causes.

Since fewer than 10 percent of medical mistakes are reported to hospital authorities, or any other authorities for that matter, the patients, or their families are never told that the injuries were caused by the doctors. That means greater than 90 percent of iatrogenic deaths go undiscovered, hence no disciplinary action is ever taken on any of the doctors involved in these incidents. It is also a measure of honesty and integrity in the medical profession, a profession that has its roots in occult formulas, medieval magic, and quackery of all kinds.  The 1960's saw physicians in Canada  go on strike and the mortality rate dropped.

Beware of the backstage workings of Ontario’s medical establishment, and in particular, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario and its conflicting interest relationship with the Office of the province’s Chief Coroner.

That the purpose of a coroner’s investigation is to determine cause of death, or that the prime function of the coroner’s office is to prevent deaths is grossly misrepresented. Alarmingly, the Coroner’s Act precludes coroners from finding fault or assigning blame, a perversion incorporated into the Act to "shield" bad doctors from medical wrongdoing. The truth is that the coroner’s office is used as a dumping ground for cases embarrassing either to the government or the medical profession, as in the case of Arlene H. Berry, who died suddenly, and unexpectedly at the age of 41. She was the victim of a horrific chain of medical negligence that is nothing short of criminal. No autopsy was performed. A family request for a formal inquest was also denied.

That it is still possible to bury things in the coroner’s office is both shocking and appalling. My experience with the coroner is that this office is "totally corrupt", and involved in "massive coverups" of it’s own, primarily involving iatrogenic (doctor-caused) deaths. One might ask how many iatrogenic deaths are uncovered as a direct result of a coroner’s investigation? How many reported by the office of the Chief Coroner in his annual report? The answer is NONE.

The office of the Chief Coroner for Ontario is spearheaded by Dr. James Gordon Young, a non-practicing GP with no specialties of his own, who if he were not attached to the public purse there to divert the natural order of things would still be on “temporary employment practice”. He was appointed chief coroner in order to minimize complaints from the minorities and there is further evidence to suggest ethnic discrimination in coroner’s dealings with minorities, such as seen in "sudden unexplained deaths in Asian immigrants" in which a coroner investigation involving Dr. Young uncovered "non-specific factors" associated with "acute pulmonary edema". In all there were eight cases, all of them involving men between the ages of 23 and 44, from 1992 to 1995. It is not known whether "vaccines" were ever mentioned or offered as a possible cause for these Asian deaths, but iatrogenic causes cannot be ruled out, i.e. late delayed hypersensitivity, as with mortality and morbidity associated with vaccine "research linked to BCG immunization, or the DPT vaccine with its damaging effects on the brain, without "informed consent", Dr. Young.

The Regional Coroner for Northeastern Ontario in the year 2000, at the time of Arlene Berry's death, was Dr. Barry Alexander McLellan, also a non-practicing MD with a background in emergency medicine, (primarily involving multiple training sites) with about two month’s educational rotation in a variety of disciplines. He is only permitted to practice in areas for which he is qualified, and so is seen to function primarily as a public relations tool.

Both the chief coroner and the regional coroner for N.E. Ontario are graduates of the University of Toronto, a fraternity of “liars” which has abdicated its responsibility for teaching ethics and proper patient care to concentrate on “teaching medical students to lie”, where students are actually “graded” on how well they tell the lies, and where the long term benefits accrue to keeping each other out of jail.

According to a CMAJ-JAMC report on medical ethics "The profession has accepted that dishonesty is necessary because of the dire consequences of being truthful."

Although a coroner’s responsibility is to the public, his allegiance is first to the government and medical profession, corruption notwithstanding.

The coroner perceives his findings to be unalterable. One might argue that such findings are not credible because no matter what the facts,  he would still conclude no findings of medical wrongdoing, evidence of altered and falsified medical records notwithstanding.

Coroners rely explicitly on the opinion of others, because they have none of their own. The bald truth is that specialists in a given field are "not always expert in that field". What they don’t understand is what they are too lazy or incompetent to find out, Dr. McLellan.

As a death investigator, the coroner, with his immature posture of infallibility does not have first hand knowledge of the topic on which he professes to affirm, yet he concurs with opinions of others that lie outside the field of his own expertise, with his own opinion, if he had one, being of secondary value.

Bias is the single most serious problem when dealing with expert opinion and doctors are the worst offenders. There is no such thing as an unbiased expert, and scientific misconduct goes far beyond discriminating against ethnic groups to include targeting the "have-nots" of society. Lawyers often regard certain doctors as "hired guns", who take cash for comment.

The coroner, in his biased efforts to prejudice the results of his investigation does not give his "hand-picked" expert all of the facts. All communication is limited, slanted, or biased to include or exclude relevant information. But omission can also be used as a deliberate way of concealing. By withholding vital information, such as iatrogenic radiation injury to the nervous system, for example, he tells the expert only what he wants him to know. The expert knows this, and so analyses and returns his opinion according to data input.

With a simple "meeting of the minds", the expert proceeds to tailor or lard the report to justify the opinion that is in his opinion, being sought, often using parallel links in the given theory to obfuscate the truth.

While pretending to educate the coroner in the technical matters at hand, the objective of the biased expert is to make it appear as though the coroner understands the technical issues, while also giving as little information as possible.

Once there is a perception of understanding the expert infers from the opinion expressed that the coroner is the one making an independent decision and that his opinion will be correct rather than just agreeing with him. Of course this is just theatre which allows professional bias to skew the results.

"The opinions expressed herein by the author do not necessarily take into account all the facts and circumstances surrounding the death."

"The final conclusions of the Coroner’s investigation may differ significantly from the opinion expressed herein".

Further findings suggest that expert opinion, in the absence of consensus "evidence-based medicine", and published literature, is totally worthless.

A medical expert renders his opinion in his own "self-serving" interest, given his own values, and how much credence should be given to such opinion may well be subject to debate. It is in the analysis of "self-interest" that values most clearly play their role. For example, the coroner’s expert invariably has insinuated himself into a case or “conspiracy” for money, some with "revolving door" payoffs.

The coroner in his “dubious” dealings with other doctors would invariably have wheedled himself, predictably, upon the favours of one of his self-aggrandize and flatter colleaugues, i.e., classmate or golfing buddy, or other conflicting interest minion he knows personally due to being involved with one doctor or hospital or another, such as from Sunnybrook Hospital, for example, Dr. McLellan.

One might ask whether it is possible, in his field of expertise for legitimate differences of opinion to occur between qualified experts. Since the answer is invariably “yes”, the opinion expressed is not necessarily the correct one, is it? The expert therefore is not a wholly dependable source of information.

Any medical professional who, in rendering his opinion as to cause of death, volunteers his unsolicited belief as to another doctor’s conduct or standard of care, finding in favour of his fellow colleague invites being labeled retrospectively with the most nefarious motive, Dr. McLellan.

In this regard, one might well ask what is the frequency with which such expert sells his opinion for monetary gain, including the side for which he predominantly finds, and whether he consistently finds in favour of his fellow colleagues. One might also ask what is his relationship to the coroner.

As can be seen, the coroner’s expert is, if not a charlatan, at least not what he is purported to be. In fact, he is nothing more than a paid shill and thus unworthy of belief. Indeed there is no need for him to show up at the coroner’s office - he would simply have mailed his opinion together with his time and charges.

Coroners are keen to play a role in decision-making but generally lacking when it comes to problem solving where expediency is a "means-end". Being closed minded may predispose.

The coroner sometimes uses the police to assist with an investigation, but the police rely on the coroners to interpret what they have uncovered. The coroner has no expertise in forensic science and the police have none in medicine. They tell each other only what they want each other to know. The coroner has the final say and will say what he is told to say by the hierarchy. Coroners neither investigate a complaint thoroughly, impartially, or accurately, unless considerable legal and public pressure is brought to bear. And in the absence of an autopsy or fact-finding post mortem, a coroner’s report can be a mixture of half-truths and bald falsehoods.

Much about what we have come to learn about disease, including statistical information, was discovered and confirmed through autopsies. But as it now stands, doctors seek to confirm their findings through human experimentation, i.e., by trial and error, using unsuspecting patients as their test subjects.

Autopsy findings help measure the overall quality of care in a hospital and community. But autopsies are seldom performed, except in medico-legal cases or where they are specifically requested, and in fact doctors try to discourage them, usually because they themselves have something to hide.

Coroners don’t do post-mortems, they know almost nothing about pathology. They are performed by a pathologist, who reports his findings to the “attending” physician. Talk about a "conflict of interest" should the attending physician or medical negligence be at fault.

Coroners are a partisan group of professional disinformation artists with a vested interest concealed behind a neutral, bland, inoffensive name who tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams whose prime function is to prevent rational and complete examination of evidence which would hang them or any of their self-aggrandize and flatter colleagues. They are white coats in black hats acting as provincial government officials, licenced to practice ignorance, mayhem and unpardonable blunder with immunity from liability for wrongdoing.

Coroners, as with other physicians, are incredibly polished, and they are all charmers, but they are basically narrow, shallow people who don’t give a damn about iatrogenic death, or the pain and suffering that doctors have caused. Further findings suggest that coroners, like many other doctors, suffer from metacognitive skill deficit disorder, a syndrome that spans a broad continuum of metacognitive incompetence or lack of capacity to distinguish accuracy from error. Not only do these doctors reach erroneous conclusions and make bad choices, but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it. Faulty reasoning may predispose.

With iatrogenic death falsely ascribed to illness, chalked up to natural, non-specific or undetermined causes, skewed by indiscreet investigative case histories, medical omission and bold-faced lies (to include falsified information on death certificates) undoubtedly surfeit and permeate the coroner’s files with disgust to excess.

In May of 2001, "The Toronto Star began undertaking a serious investigation into the College and exposed that 99% of all complaints are either dismissed or handled in secrecy."

"My experience with this system is that this agency is totally corrupt, and involved in massive coverups... The investigators who handle the complaints for the College of Physicians and Surgeons are either uninformed, ignorant or criminal in their investigations." Thunder Bay On-line

Patient Advocacy

HOW RELIABLE IS MEDICAL OPINION?

Addendum

All of the doctors and hospitals named in the Arlene Berry death coverup were partners in the NORTH telehealth network, an experiment undertaken by the Harris government from a 1995 OMA study to compensate for hospital funding cutbacks, and doctor shortages. They all have a vested interest in protecting each other against the legal pitfalls of treating their patients at arm's length, over the telephone.  Promises Made...Promises Broken -- The Real Story on Health Care Spending in Ontario (PDF) View as html

Truths, Half-truths & Lies.

Health Care Truths

Demon Doctors Physicians as Serial Killers

Canada Supreme Court Sends "Mercy Killer" to Jail

CQ - Canadian Quackery Watch -

THE POISONED NEEDLE by Eleanor McBean

If doctors don't understand ethics, it's time to start teaching them...

Addendum - Re: The Arlene Berry Death Coverup

Rx for Injustice!

Coroner orders review of Toronto pathologist. It seems clear, Ontario's Chief Coroner should be reviewed! How to keep an idiot busy...

Dr. Barry A. McLellan "In my opinion the doctors who attended to Ms. Berry met a reasonable standard of care".

Sez You...

           a physician  with a Propensity for and Getting Paid For It.

A Branded Cancer QUACK...!

deserving of Stigma.

yoU'rE...

 

Redress Information & Analysis

www.meverett.com

 

                        "Nobody made a greater mistake
                 than he who did nothing because he
                 could do only a little." (Edmund Burke,
                                   political thinker

* * * * *    Truth/Justice/ Patient Safety     * * * * *
It's a path

 

FEEDBACK

Sowing The Seed For A Safer Medical Future

In Memory of Arlene Berry

 

  

 Passing it on!