-
More alternative views, about hernia societies and conflicts of interest.
https://file.scirp.org/pdf/IJCM_2014071513232526.pdf
“Abstract
The intended purpose of hernia societies is being lost. Originally, they were meant to be a venue
for the dissemination of basic science, knowledge and sharing of acquired research, experiences
by surgeons with the ultimate aim of improving a patient’s lot. Instead, they have become venues
and brokerage houses where the plastics industry may advertise and sell products which have
barely been tested or about which the truth was never entirely revealed. An FDA approval, sadly,
is not assurance that all is well. We are discovering these facts through the courts and the lay press.
We, as surgeons, are not told the whole truth to impart to patients who expect nothing less! Have
any of us been complicit, knowingly or not?” -
5 Replies
-
This makes me recall Implant Files by International Consortium of Investigative Journalists.
Examples include Replacement hips and vaginal mesh products sold to hospitals without any clinical trials, Complications with hernia mesh that ruled one of Britain’s top athletes out of competing for years, Regulators approving spinal disc replacements that later disintegrated and migrated in patients.
This includes regulators throughout the world, US, Europe, UK, Australia and so on.
Implant Files – ICIJ
https://www.icij.org
Health authorities across the globe have failed to protect millions of patients from poorly tested implants, the first-ever global examination of the medical device industry reveals. -
No doubt we are overusing mesh. We need to consider more non- mesh repair a bit more than we are.
-
Dear Good Intentions.
As usual, I enjoy reading your comments.
Thank you. Bill Brown MD -
Hi GoodIntentions,
Thank you for sharing this. I believe as time goes on the use of mesh for hernia repair will become more and more controversial.. It seems that many surgeons are either ignorant on the topic of mesh related complications or simply choose to deny that they exist, possibly to protect themselves from litigation. One question I have always asked myself is whether or not surgeons are able to receive ‘kickbacks’ for their use of certain mesh products on patients, similarly to how pharmaceutical companies in the past have paid doctors to prescribe their medications. Regardless, it seems like the companies that produce these devices have too much influence over all, which leads to an unnecessary number of mesh implants in patients when other methods could have been be used.
-
Very difficult to realize that this was published four years ago, 4/15/2014. Yet, the supertanker plows forward. Much of what he writes is much worse today. I am aware of three mainstream TV channels that have mesh lawsuit commercials on, on a daily basis, where just one year ago, you only saw them on the fringe channels. Mesh problems are so commonplace that they are becoming background noise.
Log in to reply.