View Full Version : Cancer Quacker KILLLS!
Another victim of the vitamin/enema/wankery approach
to cancer.
From: http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/209007p-
180119c.html
Dr. Atkins killed me, suit says
Cancer victim faulted diet guru's 'quackery'
By HELEN PETERSON and DON SINGLETON DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
From beyond the grave, a woman who died of breast cancer is
suing the late diet guru Dr. Robert Atkins for giving her
the advice that she says ended up costing her life. The
suit, seeking unspecified damages, was filed in Manhattan
Supreme Court by the estate of Carol Rubick, a woman who
died of breast cancer on Jan. 18, 2003, after receiving five
years of oncological treatments at the Atkins Center for
Complementary Medicine.
The plaintiff, Linda Lou Poag, executrix of Rubick's estate,
claims that Atkins and two other doctors at the Atkins
Center were negligent in treating Rubick's cancer.
In 1995, Rubick, then 39, underwent a lumpectomy of her
right breast for treatment of stage two breast cancer,
according to court papers. The surgeon - not affiliated with
Atkins - referred Rubick to a traditional oncologist for
chemotherapy.
Rubick decided instead to pursue "alternative care" with Dr.
Atkins, care that consisted of such "quackery" as dietary
manipulation, enemas and vitamin therapy, the suit says.
In 2000, a new lump developed in Rubick's right breast
and she underwent a mastectomy. Less than three years
later, she died.
Poag's suit includes a physician's opinion that Rubick died
"as a result of the care and treatment rendered by the
defendants," and by their failure to advise her to go for
chemotherapy.
An Internet search last week for information on the Atkins
Center turned up an undated Web site carrying the following
message: "Dr. Atkins is cutting back on his cancer practice
- He is only doing cancer prevention and he does have a
unique hormonal program for prostate cancer. He is focusing
on his diet program."
In last week's published decision, Justice Joan Carey
allowed the suit to proceed, granting a renewal of the
original complaint, which was filed before the deaths of
Rubick and Atkins.
Neither Poag; Rubick's lawyer, Roger Kunkis, nor Dawn
Bristol, attorney for Atkins and his co-defendants, Drs.
Fred Pescatore and Lawrence Kempf, could be reached for
comment yesterday.
A spokesman for Veronica Atkins, Atkins' widow, did not
return a reporter's phone calls yesterday.
hpeterson@edit.nydailynews.com
"MHA Reaction Force" <jkingoff@aol.comTFMHA121> wrote in message
news:20040704120735.11452.00000599@mb-m23.aol.com...
> Another victim of the vitamin/enema/wankery approach
> to cancer.
>
> From: http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/209007p-
> 180119c.html
>
> Dr. Atkins killed me, suit says
>
> Cancer victim faulted diet guru's 'quackery'
>
> By HELEN PETERSON and DON SINGLETON DAILY NEWS STAFF
> WRITER
>
> From beyond the grave, a woman who died of breast cancer
> is suing the late
diet
> guru Dr. Robert Atkins for giving her the advice that she
> says ended up
costing
> her life. The suit, seeking unspecified damages, was filed
> in Manhattan Supreme
Court by
> the estate of Carol Rubick, a woman who died of breast
> cancer on Jan. 18,
2003,
> after receiving five years of oncological treatments at
> the Atkins Center
for
> Complementary Medicine.
>
> The plaintiff, Linda Lou Poag, executrix of Rubick's
> estate, claims that
Atkins
> and two other doctors at the Atkins Center were negligent
> in treating
Rubick's
> cancer.
>
> In 1995, Rubick, then 39, underwent a lumpectomy of her
> right breast for treatment of stage two breast cancer,
> according to court papers. The
surgeon -
> not affiliated with Atkins - referred Rubick to a
> traditional oncologist
for
> chemotherapy.
>
> Rubick decided instead to pursue "alternative care" with
> Dr. Atkins, care
that
> consisted of such "quackery" as dietary manipulation,
> enemas and vitamin therapy, the suit says.
>
> In 2000, a new lump developed in Rubick's right breast and
> she underwent a mastectomy. Less than three years later,
> she died.
This is the other side of the story with those testimnials
where a woman has a lumpectomy for breast cancer, but
refuses the adjuvant treatment (radiotherapy +/-
chemotherapy) usually advised to reduce the risk of local
recurrence if the breast is to be preserved and to treat
possible micrometatastases and decides to entrust her life
to alternatives. We can predict some will get away with it
if the lumpectomy has been well clear of the cancer and they
are lucky enough to have a less aggressive kind of cancer..
By the same token it has to be admitted that stage 11 breast
cancer will lead to the death on many women regardless of
any treatment. If in the right age group have mammography
performed. This is also proved to reduce mortality.
Peter mroan
>
> Poag's suit includes a physician's opinion that Rubick
> died "as a result
of the
> care and treatment rendered by the defendants," and by
> their failure to
advise
> her to go for chemotherapy.
>
> An Internet search last week for information on the Atkins
> Center turned
up an
> undated Web site carrying the following message: "Dr.
> Atkins is cutting
back on
> his cancer practice - He is only doing cancer prevention
> and he does have
a
> unique hormonal program for prostate cancer. He is
> focusing on his diet program."
>
> In last week's published decision, Justice Joan Carey
> allowed the suit to proceed, granting a renewal of the
> original complaint, which was filed
before
> the deaths of Rubick and Atkins.
>
> Neither Poag; Rubick's lawyer, Roger Kunkis, nor Dawn
> Bristol, attorney
for
> Atkins and his co-defendants, Drs. Fred Pescatore and
> Lawrence Kempf,
could be
> reached for comment yesterday.
>
> A spokesman for Veronica Atkins, Atkins' widow, did not
> return a
reporter's
> phone calls yesterday.
>
> hpeterson@edit.nydailynews.com
Nicerly done website but you are full of **** despite what
you put in it. Nice fake but no cigar.
"MHA Reaction Force" <jkingoff@aol.comTFMHA121> wrote in
message news:20040704120735.11452.00000599@mb-m23.aol.com...
> Another victim of the vitamin/enema/wankery approach
> to cancer.
>
> From: http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/209007p-
> 180119c.html
>
> Dr. Atkins killed me, suit says
>
> Cancer victim faulted diet guru's 'quackery'
>
> By HELEN PETERSON and DON SINGLETON DAILY NEWS STAFF
> WRITER
>
> From beyond the grave, a woman who died of breast cancer
> is suing the late
diet
> guru Dr. Robert Atkins for giving her the advice that she
> says ended up
costing
> her life. The suit, seeking unspecified damages, was filed
> in Manhattan Supreme
Court by
> the estate of Carol Rubick, a woman who died of breast
> cancer on Jan. 18,
2003,
> after receiving five years of oncological treatments at
> the Atkins Center
for
> Complementary Medicine.
>
> The plaintiff, Linda Lou Poag, executrix of Rubick's
> estate, claims that
Atkins
> and two other doctors at the Atkins Center were negligent
> in treating
Rubick's
> cancer.
>
> In 1995, Rubick, then 39, underwent a lumpectomy of her
> right breast for treatment of stage two breast cancer,
> according to court papers. The
surgeon -
> not affiliated with Atkins - referred Rubick to a
> traditional oncologist
for
> chemotherapy.
>
> Rubick decided instead to pursue "alternative care" with
> Dr. Atkins, care
that
> consisted of such "quackery" as dietary manipulation,
> enemas and vitamin therapy, the suit says.
>
> In 2000, a new lump developed in Rubick's right breast and
> she underwent a mastectomy. Less than three years later,
> she died.
>
> Poag's suit includes a physician's opinion that Rubick
> died "as a result
of the
> care and treatment rendered by the defendants," and by
> their failure to
advise
> her to go for chemotherapy.
>
> An Internet search last week for information on the Atkins
> Center turned
up an
> undated Web site carrying the following message: "Dr.
> Atkins is cutting
back on
> his cancer practice - He is only doing cancer prevention
> and he does have
a
> unique hormonal program for prostate cancer. He is
> focusing on his diet program."
>
> In last week's published decision, Justice Joan Carey
> allowed the suit to proceed, granting a renewal of the
> original complaint, which was filed
before
> the deaths of Rubick and Atkins.
>
> Neither Poag; Rubick's lawyer, Roger Kunkis, nor Dawn
> Bristol, attorney
for
> Atkins and his co-defendants, Drs. Fred Pescatore and
> Lawrence Kempf,
could be
> reached for comment yesterday.
>
> A spokesman for Veronica Atkins, Atkins' widow, did not
> return a
reporter's
> phone calls yesterday.
>
> hpeterson@edit.nydailynews.com
In article
<40e8660d$0$19410$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-01.brisbane.pipenetworks.c
om.au>,
"Peter Moran" <moringa@gil.com.au> wrote:
> "MHA Reaction Force" <jkingoff@aol.comTFMHA121> wrote in
> message news:20040704120735.11452.00000599@mb-
> m23.aol.com...
> > In 1995, Rubick, then 39, underwent a lumpectomy of her
> > right breast for treatment of stage two breast cancer,
> > according to court papers. The
> surgeon -
> > not affiliated with Atkins - referred Rubick to a
> > traditional oncologist
> for
> > chemotherapy.
> >
> > Rubick decided instead to pursue "alternative care" with
> > Dr. Atkins, care
> that
> > consisted of such "quackery" as dietary manipulation,
> > enemas and vitamin therapy, the suit says.
> >
> > In 2000, a new lump developed in Rubick's right breast
> > and she underwent a mastectomy. Less than three years
> > later, she died.
>
> This is the other side of the story with those testimnials
> where a woman has a lumpectomy for breast cancer, but
> refuses the adjuvant treatment (radiotherapy +/-
> chemotherapy) usually advised to reduce the risk of local
> recurrence if the breast is to be preserved and to treat
> possible micrometatastases and decides to entrust her life
> to alternatives. We can predict some will get away with it
> if the lumpectomy has been well clear of the cancer and
> they are lucky enough to have a less aggressive kind of
> cancer..
Indeed. For example, for an early stage tumor less than 2
cm, if the surgical margins are clear, the local recurrence
rate can be expected to be around 33% or so. Radiation
decreases that by a factor of two or three. That means 2/3
of women who undergo clear margin lumpectomies will not
recur in the same breast.
Similarly, chemotherapy gives an an absolute survival
benefit that ranges from only a few percent for "curable"
Stage I cancers to maybe three or four times that few
percent for potentially "curable" Stage III cancers. What
that means is that, for Stage I cancers, a significant
proportion are "cured" with surgery alone. The problem is,
we can't predict ahead of time who those women will be. Even
for Stage III cancers, which have a five year survival
hovering in the 50% range, even with chemotherapy and
radiation, there will be a subset of women who are still
"cured" with surgery alone and no adjuvant chemotherapy or
radiation. This is much less common than for early stage
women, but these women still exist. This means that there
are the occasional women with Stage III disease who refuse
conventional adjuvant radiation and chemotherapy in favor of
alternatives and are then lucky enough not to recur. Their
existence does not indicate that the alternatives did
anything, although they sometimes become pitchwomen for the
alternatives they opted for.
> By the same token it has to be admitted that stage 11
> breast cancer will lead to the death on many women
> regardless of any treatment. If in the right age group
> have mammography performed. This is also proved to reduce
> mortality.
Quite true. For example, the overall five year survival for
Stage I breast cancer is in the 92-95% range. That means
that there will still be some unfortunate women with early
stage cancer who, regardless of therapy, will recur and die
of their disease after seeming "curative" treatment.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do
|you inconvenience me with questions?"
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by
vBSEO 3.3.0
