Dr Eben Alexander's new book

He was fined. I’ll try to find the reference. I’ve posted it before but perhaps not on here. He definitely wasn’t prohibited from practicing. I haven’t seen any record of criminal proceedings or a civil action.

Page 16 here... http://www.dhp.virginia.gov/medicine/new...rief69.pdf

Alexander, III, Eben, MD 0101-239440 Lynchburg, VA 03/23/09

Reprimand, $3500 monetary penalty, based on two patient cases of performing surgery on the wrong surgical site; and in one of the cases, failure to disclose same to the patient, and altering the original operative report to obscure the fact of the wrong site surgery.

misconduct
noun
mɪsˈkɒndʌkt/

1. 1. 
   unacceptable or improper behaviour, especially by an employee or professional person.
   

Yes, I remember that quite well. Alexander himself accounted for this. He says the patients were informed. From the IANDS article. https://iands.org/ndes/more-info/ndes-in...facts.html

And what of the other allegations insinuated or levelled at Eben Alexander? He deserves to have his side of these cases heard as well. Dr. Alexander’s 25-year neurosurgical career included over 4,000 surgeries. Luke Dittrich does not have a good track record with the truth with respect to Eben Alexander: one cannot trust Dittrich's portrayal of the facts.

The most serious of the cases Dittrich cites, that Dr. Alexander altered medical records in a case of wrong-level spine surgery, similarly distorts the truth, according to Dr. Alexander. The patient in question had excellent relief of his symptoms after Dr. Alexander's surgery, delaying Alexander’s discovery that surgery had been performed at an unintended level. Dr. Alexander corrected the record to reflect the newly learned facts of the case, and disclosed the surgical error to all parties after follow up revealed a genuine surgical benefit. After full investigation by three state medical boards and the American Board of Neurological Surgeons, Dr. Alexander continued to practice medicine without restriction, with his board certification intact.

So I guess it's who do you believe. He was fined but was that a serious blemish on his career ? You say yes, I say no. Everyone will decide for themselves.

[Ninshub]

The correct answer is No.

Yes, I remember that quite well. Alexander himself accounted for this. He says the patients were informed. From the IANDS article. https://iands.org/ndes/more-info/ndes-in...facts.html

And what of the other allegations insinuated or levelled at Eben Alexander? He deserves to have his side of these cases heard as well. Dr. Alexander’s 25-year neurosurgical career included over 4,000 surgeries. Luke Dittrich does not have a good track record with the truth with respect to Eben Alexander: one cannot trust Dittrich's portrayal of the facts.

The most serious of the cases Dittrich cites, that Dr. Alexander altered medical records in a case of wrong-level spine surgery, similarly distorts the truth, according to Dr. Alexander. The patient in question had excellent relief of his symptoms after Dr. Alexander's surgery, delaying Alexander’s discovery that surgery had been performed at an unintended level. Dr. Alexander corrected the record to reflect the newly learned facts of the case, and disclosed the surgical error to all parties after follow up revealed a genuine surgical benefit. After full investigation by three state medical boards and the American Board of Neurological Surgeons, Dr. Alexander continued to practice medicine without restriction, with his board certification intact.

So I guess it's who do you believe. He was fined but was that a serious blemish on his career ? You say yes, I say no. Everyone will decide for themselves.

I don’t say it’s a serious blemish. But I think it’s hard to say it isn’t a blemish. He’d have had his say at the disciplinary panel of course. If they heard his explanation they clearly didn’t accept it or it wasn’t sufficient to excuse his actions. That said, the penalty looks to be at the light end of what they could probably have imposed and must reflect their view of the seriousness of it, ie pretty minor. 

The question is perhaps what relevance does it have to his book? I think that’s probably a subjective judgement.  My own subjective view is that it has no relevance.

I don’t say it’s a serious blemish. But I think it’s hard to say it isn’t a blemish. He’d have had his say at the disciplinary panel of course. If they heard his explanation they clearly didn’t accept it or it wasn’t sufficient to excuse his actions. That said, the penalty looks to be at the light end of what they could probably have imposed and must reflect their view of the seriousness of it, ie pretty minor. 

The question is perhaps what relevance does it have to his book? I think that’s probably a subjective judgement.  My own subjective view is that it has no relevance.

Regardless of anyone's take on the book itself or his views on NDEs, I'd be surprised if anyone who's trying to be intellectually honest said any sanctions leveled against him as a neurosurgeon have any relevance whatsoever to his book or his opinions on NDEs. 

They may, I suppose, if you're trying to suggest that his book is deceitful or shady in some manner, but in terms of its content or his opinions thereof I'm not sure how it could be relevant. It doesn't seem to me that a sanction or medical malpractice suit necessitates that you don't know what you're talking about, or that his opinion as a neurosurgeon is less valid because of that.

I don’t say it’s a serious blemish. But I think it’s hard to say it isn’t a blemish. He’d have had his say at the disciplinary panel of course. If they heard his explanation they clearly didn’t accept it or it wasn’t sufficient to excuse his actions. That said, the penalty looks to be at the light end of what they could probably have imposed and must reflect their view of the seriousness of it, ie pretty minor. 

The question is perhaps what relevance does it have to his book? I think that’s probably a subjective judgement.  My own subjective view is that it has no relevance.

 Obiwan said > But I think it’s hard to say it isn’t a blemish.

My view is that it was a mistake and we all make those, even neurosurgeons. I am assuming that the IANDS article is accurate and that tells us  .....

(Alexander) disclosed the surgical error to all parties after follow up revealed a genuine surgical benefit. After full investigation by three state medical boards and the American Board of Neurological Surgeons, Dr. Alexander continued to practice medicine without restriction, with his board certification intact.

Regardless of anyone's take on the book itself or his views on NDEs, I'd be surprised if anyone who's trying to be intellectually honest said any sanctions leveled against him as a neurosurgeon have any relevance whatsoever to his book or his opinions on NDEs. 

They may, I suppose, if you're trying to suggest that his book is deceitful or shady in some manner, but in terms of its content or his opinions thereof I'm not sure how it could be relevant. It doesn't seem to me that a sanction or medical malpractice suit necessitates that you don't know what you're talking about, or that his opinion as a neurosurgeon is less valid because of that.

Jesus. And for the last time. I’m  not trying to suggest anything I’m just giving you the info. Personally I couldn’t care less, there are far more evidential NDE reports than his. What the sanction brings into question is his probity. For those who’d like to dismiss his experiences, it perhaps gives them an opportunity to question his truthfulness. One can either dismiss it or not.

 Obiwan said > But I think it’s hard to say it isn’t a blemish.

My view is that it was a mistake and we all make those, even neurosurgeons. I am assuming that the IANDS article is accurate and that tells us  .....

(Alexander) disclosed the surgical error to all parties after follow up revealed a genuine surgical benefit. After full investigation by three state medical boards and the American Board of Neurological Surgeons, Dr. Alexander continued to practice medicine without restriction, with his board certification intact.

He made a mistake yes. The reason he got sanctioned was because, in the view of the tribunal, he tried to cover it up. Maybe the way he went about it was the wrong way. It is what it is.

"Personally I couldn’t care less"

Amazing how this complete disinterest has been the motivation for so many posts in this thread. Something doesn't add up.

He made a mistake yes. The reason he got sanctioned was because, in the view of the tribunal, he tried to cover it up. Maybe the way he went about it was the wrong way. It is what it is.

Obiwan said > He tried to cover it up

I can only refer you back to Alexander's statement.  (I) disclosed the surgical error to all parties after follow up revealed a genuine surgical benefit.

That's clear in the statement by those at IANDS who are generally rigorous with their facts. It's possible IANDS is wrong, yes but he was cleared by the board(s)

In hindsight he should have taken the precise action that would have prevented any comeback. But what was he trying to cover up that was so terrible ? He made a surgical error which happens all the time (apparently) and it all came out in the end anyway. 

Looking through the long list of doctors reprimanded in that PDF it seems fairly unremarkable. But we all see things different ways.

Jesus. And for the last time. I’m  not trying to suggest anything I’m just giving you the info. Personally I couldn’t care less...

I wasn't suggesting that you do, nor was I saying anything about you at all. I was just speaking generally.

When I said "you're" I meant anyone, not you personally. Sorry that I was not more clear.