- Report: #1009342
Report - Rebuttal - Arbitrate
Complaint Review: Mayo Clinic Rochester General Internal Medicine
Mayo Clinic Rochester General Internal Medicine200 1st SW St Rochester, Minnesota United States of America
Mayo Clinic Rochester General Internal Medicine John B Bundrick MD publishes about how to handle chronic abdominal wall pain conservatively, Dr. Michael Sarr operates & does neurectomies on women patients without consent, Mayo Clinic needs to explain in Mayo Clinic P Rochester, Minnesota
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
Click here now..
Physicians send patients to Mayo Clinic, and parents send familiy members, to get the treatments outlined in The Mayo Clinic Proceedings - treatments that are on the Boards of Internal Medicine or Surgery. Dr. Sarr - Chief of General Surgery and a national fixture on the General Surgery lecture circuit - never learned about ACNES & Carnett's test - but the problem comes in that he mistreated probably hundreds to thousands of patients with this problem in the last 20-30 years, and tried to sue one for defamation, when she tried to tell him about Carnett's test. And when you try to bring him the literature, say time-out for thought - he presses on to fill his surgery schedule. It's all about the money - and the glory of Mayo Clinic. Why don't Mayo Clinic surgeons know what Carnett's test is - it's in all the Family Practice literature & reviews - Reviews that Mayo Clinic writes.
Such a problem happens with the chronic abdominal wall pain problem, case no 3, Mayo Clinic Proceedings January 2011. There a are a number of patients who came to Mayo Clinic in the last 20 years, and were mistreated because the first physician they saw at Mayo Clinic was not Dr. Bundrick, or any physician with a brain and ability to talk to a professional patient questioning about other options, nerve injections, anesthesia consult. The Mayo Clinic Proceedings knows about the patients who didn't get that treatment - that something 'else' needs to be published.
None of the residents, interns or students at Mayo appear to read The Mayo Clinic Proceedings or attend Dr. Bundrick's talks. And many of the Staff don't - but there is no excuse for the Chiefs of Surgery at Mayo Clinic who manage chronic abdominal wall pain DAILY & HOURLY to not know about Carnett's test - and when a woman MD objects they put her under an anesthesia that she did not consent to, neurectomize her - multilate, make things worse - and she never consented - she just wasn't Dr. Bundrick. She wasn't a GUY - so she was a JOKE - only the men take the men seriously at Mayo Clinic.
There's no excuse for a 3-month intern operating on a MD patient who had more Surgery training than 3 months also - Dr. Sarr should do the procedures, or think about the procedures, with MD patients. But he's a jerk, and Jill Beed-Smith hates women MDs and likes them cut up - in shreds - unrecognizeable tissue when those Mayo interns get through.
What are these neurectomy patients to do? and who will repair the deformities, the long-standing nerve problems (removing the nerve makes this worse = in the literature since 1926), the skin atrophy, the muscle damage? That needs to go in a Comment in The Mayo Clinic Proceedings. These neurectomies were done by 3-month interns while Dr. Sarr was socializing, or drinking, or doing whatever he does to mismanage & mistreat. These interns didn't have a clue about Carnett's test - so what were they doing in the OR besides taking up space?
Jill Smith Esq likes women to be multilated and damaged - it what she does - she allows that the Dr. Sarr & his Surgery Service operate without consent on women patients. The problem with the mistreatment of women patients starts in the Legal Department - where they hang up, refuse to undo the procedure, and just behave like in high school. Mean girls. Is Jill Beed-Smith even into high school behaviors - hanging up on another girl is really grade school or kindergarten.
The General Surgery Service, at all the Mayo Clinics, will see a good proportion of these abdominal wall pain patients - and without labs, workup, Carnett's test, or reassurance - schedule a surgery - where they do whatever they want to the patient ie grope (breasts, vaginas UA), scare, bring in useless students to TWEET. The woman is put under anesthesia so that she can't identify the source of pain - she's assaulted without consent. To do anything to a woman patient without consent is ASSAULT - touching, cutting, taking nerves out, cutting muscles, putting an airway in. There has to be CONSENT - and you should not have to say it 20 times.
This is malpractice - as the treatment is as John Bundrick MD describes - since 1926, not since 2011 or before. And this problem, and the correct treatment, has been in the Surgery literature since 1926 - not the Medicine - the SURGERY Journals. Surgeons at all the Mayo Clinics have huge staff, huge libraries, and are supposed to know how to diagnose and treat the MOST COMMON CAUSE OF ABDOMINAL WALL PAIN. They are supposed to read, discuss, and be ethical, decent human beings. And the interns don't know ETHICAL, or CONFIDENTIAL (FACEBOOK is where the surgery pictures show up), so that a MD patient is a Chief of Surgery case - to make the diagnosis correctly and not for the woman patient to choose an intern, resident. MD patients are to be handled by the staff - every touch - not the smelly residents.
There's no excuse for Mayo Clinic to cut the nerves out of women patients with common mass closures that rupture after 3-5 years. Cut the nerves out of Warner Oldenburg - he won't consent either, but that doesn't matter. The Legal Department has been asked that Dr. Sarr's associates - not Dr. Sarr - undo all these unnecessary neurectomy procedures at Mayo Clinic expense - 15+ years ago. This should have been arranged long before 2011 or 2013.
Jill Beed-Smith has no plans to undo. So John Bundrick you are a farce - what's in case 3 is not REALLY what happens at Mayo Clinic - and Mayo Clinic doesn't really care - what really happens is that the nerves are removed with a butcher surgery - not even scopes as that is too much effort for Dr. Sarr - won't make his cocktails or his next flight out. Many women patients get neurectomized to humiliate them, see them naked, and to mutilate them for their parents - Dr. Mengele stuff - Jewish surgeons like Dr. Sarr getting back. The parents questioning Dr. Sarr are just sad - Dr. Sarr will tell them that he IS Mayo Clinic. And the women patients come to Mayo Clinic just for consultations - not the knives - he knew that he should not be scheduling a surgery without givine her time for informed consent. Informed consent takes at least 24 hours. But many Mayo Clinic MDs know only how to mistreat women - how to rush things.
Women patients who are going to be put under anesthesia - a family member needs to be present. And when you say this to Dr. Sarr, he will put you under anesthesia without allowing a chance for the familiy to come - or without talking with the family - he destroys, mutilates, and neurectomizes normal nerves. And you ask for local or another time - Dr. Sarr lies. There isn't a lie that Dr. Bundrick, Dr. Sarr, The Mayo Clinic Proceedings, or Jill Beed-Smith can't tell. They blame you for their mistakes, when you tried to question, tried to insist, even sent them the articles on Carnett's test. The procedures need to be repaired - all muscles and nerves - at Mayo Clinic expense - those Plastic Surgeons who can't recognize ACNES.
Dr. Michael Sarr mistreats this problem daily - and has for 20 years. The Mayo Clinic Legal Department, The Mayo Clinic Proceedings, and the Medical Board of MN know about the problem - no one has stopped the out-of-date neurectomy procedurs in the last 20 years. Dr. Bundrick needs to publish about the mistreatment of these cases that go on at Mayo Clinic - how many got surgery, what were the complications, and what are these patients to do with the chronic abdominal wall pain? The neurectomy only makes things worse - what all the articles say.
Just no one reads those articles at Mayo Clinic - certainly not Jill Beed-Smith - she's into sex with her new husband.
Somehow special surgical clearances are arranged for these mostly women patients, so that they don't see anyone on the General Medicine Service - Dr. Sarr has a special FMG woman who has her mind on her kids, her Boards, her husband, and her special Mont Blanc pen. Guys would punch Dr. Sarr out if he cut the muscles up.
Jill Beed-Smith will cover up - that Dr. Sarr can do anything he wants to women patients without consent, without their parents consent, and the symptoms are the same as described in case #3. The mutilation of women patients = the mission of Mayo Clinic. The women protest and are attempted to be sued by Dr. Sarr.
More money & time is spent with lawyers than was ever spent on the woman patient's care at Mayo Clinic - that is the problem. Dr. Bundrick you need to mention that Dr. Sarr cuts many of the abdominal pain women up - mercilessly - and what will the next chronic abdominal wall pain patient to come to Mayo Clinic get: the injection or the scalpel of a 3-month disaster of an intern. You should at least check that the surgical interns can cut a cadaver's skin (or cut a dog in the dog labs) before you unleash them on women patients. Dr. Sarr is a mutilation surgeon - no one has seen worse incisions, subcu closures, and decisions. The common mass closures all rupture, and the nerve was not to be removed. Where the surgical checklist?
The Mayo Clinic needs to admit the error(s), and repair every woman patient that they mistreated with an unnecessary neurectomy - they need to pay for the nerve they removed without consent = $500,000/nerve would stop the misdiagnosis and mistreatment. The treatment hasn't changed, it is just that no one on the Surgery Service reads or consults - since 1926 apparently. The Mayo Clinic Proceedings knows that case #3 treatment is rare at Mayo - most patients are misdiagnosed & mistreated badly.
The Mayo Clinic Proceedings needs to publish what the neurectomy patients should do. Whether the Surgery Service is still doing this ghoulish procedure - neurectomies went out in 1926 - not 1998, not 2011. And how many neurectomies were done 1990-2013?
Patients, and physicians, do not want to come to Mayo Clinic for substandard care that the Surgery Service does because Dr. Michael Sarr is not thinking, not in the room, doesn't do the workup, or doesn't talk with Dr. John Bundrick. Why can't a woman physician get the care in case #3, with some reassurance. Where is the teamwork?
One woman MD was attempted to be sued by Dr. Sarr for defaming him that the treatment was not a neurectomy of a normal nerve. Neurectomies went out probably before WWII. And certainly before you do a procedure with any removal(s), you have to have patient - or next of kin - consent. Even for a physician patient. CONSENT.
Perhaps Dr. Warner Andrew Oldenburg can get his normal abdominal nerves removed (Vascular Surgery Jacksonville Mayo Clinic) - like he goes along with having done to his Medical School classmates for no reason? The get-back has gone too far. Perhaps Dr. Sarr's daughter would like her abdominal nerves removed, or his RN wife? It's a procedure done to women, but you couldn't get away doing it to a black woman or Oprah.
This procedure would have been stopped long ago if it had been done to a Mayo Clinic staff, faculty or family member. But the Mayo Clinic should not be doing care that is not able to be published, or care that they would not do on themselves, care that contradicts the Mayo Clinic Proceedings, and certainly not care without a proper workup & consultation with the Medical Service (which takes more than 24 hours). That Dr. Sarr would not routinely do a Carnett's test - why is he Chief of Surgery? The woman MD who he tried to sue just tried to tell him exactly what Dr. Bundrick published. Why isn't that woman MD on Mayo Clinic Staff - she at least reads the Mayo Clinic literature. Next time treat her correctly and offer her a job - let her keep her nerves & abdomina wall intact.
Some apologies are in order, some repairs by the Plastic Servce at Mayo, and some resignings if Staff do not read the Mayo Clinic Proceedings.
Will patients coming to Mayo Clinic get their abdominal nerves removed, or an injection and reassurance? The Mayo Clinic Proceedings needs to publish a retraction about case #3 - that's not what happens, and to advise what the patients who got neurectomies without consent should do. Jill Beed-Smith knows that these patients should have been offered repairs years ago. That needs to be in The Mayo Clinic Proceedings - the mistakes of Mayo Clinic and how they handle them.
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 02/05/2013 02:25 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Mayo-Clinic-Rochester-General-Internal-Medicine/Rochester-Minnesota-55905/Mayo-Clinic-Rochester-General-Internal-Medicine-John-B-Bundrick-MD-publishes-about-how-to-1009342. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.
Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:Search Tips
In order to assure the best results in your search:
- Keep the name short & simple, and try different variations of the name.
- Do not include ".com", "S", "Inc.", "Corp", or "LLC" at the end of the Company name.
- Use only the first/main part of a name to get best results.
- Only search one name at a time if Company has many AKA's.
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.
- Business's (11)
- Lawyers and Law Firms (5312)
- Administrative Law (11)
- Admiralty & Maritime Law (27)
- Agricultural Law (2)
- Alternative Dispute Resolution (10)
- Antitrust & Trade Regulation (1)
- Appellate Practice (72)
- Aviation & Aerospace (11)
- Banking Law (90)
- Bankruptcy (380)
- Business Law (232)
- Civil Rights (55)
- Class Actions (30)
- Commercial Law (13)
- Communications Law (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Construction Law (83)
- Contracts (7)
- Corporate Law (75)
- Criminal Law (668)
- Debtor & Creditor (51)
- Education Law (14)
- Elder Law (77)
- ElectionCampaign & Political (0)
- Eminent Domain (5)
- Employee Benefits (7)
- Energy (0)
- Entertainment & Sports (17)
- Environmental Law (43)
- Family Law (13)
- Finance (0)
- Government (14)
- Government Contracts (2)
- Health Care (1)
- Immigration (482)
- Indians & Native Populations (1)
- Insurance (90)
- Intellectual Property (526)
- International Law (33)
- International Trade (0)
- Internet Law (7)
- Investments (1)
- Labor & Employment (12)
- Legal Malpractice (92)
- Litigation (20)
- Media Law (1)
- Medical Malpractice (13)
- Mergers & Acquisitions (0)
- Military Law (5)
- Natural Resources (10)
- Occupational Safety & Health (0)
- Personal Injury (842)
- Products Liability (21)
- Professional Liability (0)
- Real Estate (361)
- Securities (169)
- Taxation (142)
- Technology & Science (0)
- Toxic Torts (0)
- Transportation (2)
- Trusts & Estates (368)
- White Collar Crime (1)
- Wills & Probate (7)
- Workers Compensation (242)
- Zoning, Planning & Land Use (10)
- Legal Services (32)
- Arbitrators/Mediators (7)
- Automotive Expert Witnesses (0)
- Bail Bonds (0)
- Court Reporters (1)
- Electronic Data Discovery (1)
- Expert Witnesses (1)
- Forensic Experts (1)
- Jury Selection (0)
- Legal Assistants (8)
- Legal Speakers (2)
- Litigation Support (2)
- Medical Expert Witnesses (1)
- Other (14)
- Paralegal (5)
- Private Investigators (6)
- Process Servers (7)
- Translators/Interpreters (0)
- Miscellaneous Business Services (19)