Posted:
Dr. Sreedhar, the nephrologist who had been accused of negligence, along with Fortis hospital has accused Amir Khan and his team of improper research. He has submitted the entire case history of Mrs. Seema Rai along with all related documents. Here is the complete article:
It's quite long and there are a lot of medical terminlogies. Here is the article in a nutshell in case anyone is interested:
1.) He is a highly reputed doctor from USA and has practiced there for lots of years before returning in 2003. He explained everything that happened, why each and every step was taken. He said the main problem that occured was Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation (DIC) which is a bleeding condition and septic shock or infection in lay man language. (After transplant surgeries, patients have to be given immunosuppressives which increase infection risk. Patients with diabetes and kidney failure have a high infection rate as it is.)
2.) He clarified about the blood transfusion thing and platelets as well. 33 units of blood were given which is equal to 13 litres of blood and also platelets were given. (since the patient was bleeding bcos of DIC)
3.) Valid consent was taken during each and every step of the surgery. Mr Rai was grateful to him and his team for doing his best.
4.) Later when Mr. Rai filed the court case on him two years back, the whole case was investigated from a scratch. Karnataka Medical Council gave him a clean chit after one year of thorough investigation and said there was no negligence. Surprisingly when Mr. Rai filed the court case, he did not mention about the 'lack of valid consent' at all which he mentioned in SMJ. Mr. Rai then took up the case with the MCI, the verdict for which has not been passed yet.
5.) The official spokesperson of SMJ has not yet reverted back to the mails and documents sent by the nephrologist telling his side of the story.
Another article by The Hoot:
1.) Independent opinions by four reputed surgeons from four different hospitals of India and one of Brooklyn have diluted Rai's claims. The article says that none of such assessment was done on the show and only Mr. Rai's words were taken as the truth.
2.) The Hoot claims to have copy of original consent forms signed by Mr. Rai prior to his wife's surgery.
3.) Mr. Rai had not mentioned on the show that he has filed a case in consumer forum seeking Rs.84,55,933.
The Hoot also analysed where Aamir went wrong in this episode, saying that if you are making such serious accusations, you have to allow the other party to give their side of the story too, just as it is in journalism. Here, the KMC had declared the nephrologist as not guilty, and the MCI has yet to pass a decision, yet only Mr. Rai's words were taken as the truth and only one side of the argument shown.
Disclaimer: I'm simply posting the article and it's summary. These are not my views or arguments.
Arjun
Cricket
