The Revocation of Dr. Glenn Warner's License is Unjust and Cruel

[Guest guest]

The Revocation of Dr. Glenn Warner's License is Unjust and Cruel

 

 

The Washington State Medical Quality Assurance Commission's

revocation of board-certified oncologist Dr. Glenn Warner's license

is an affront to reason and humanity. If the State does not reverse

this ill-considered decision [an appeal is being filed],.I, Patrick

McGrady, director of the research referral service called CANHELP,

shall lose one of my most sophisticated consultants. The patients who

are presently treated by Dr. Warner, many of whom did poorly

under " cookbook " treatments, risk losing far more.

 

In her attack on Dr. Warner before the Court of Appeals on June

28, the Commission's attorney, Beverly Goetz, argued that cancer

patients are " incapable " and " unqualified " to know whether they're

getting appropriate care or not. Only a body of experts such as the

Commission, she stated, were so qualified.

 

No one is more qualified to understand appropriate care than the

patient. Certainly not the Commission members, who comprise not a

single cancer doctor or oncology expert. In fact, the Commission's

display of its ignorance on cancer matters over the now several years

of hearings has been nothing short of astonishing.

 

Probably no other cancer doctor in the Seattle community can claim

to match Dr. Warner's 1000-plus surviving cancer patients. The

Commission cites just 6 complaints, several of them malpractice

lawsuits, from among the 20,000 cancer patients that Dr. Warner has

treated over the past 40 years. Even if one accepts at face value

what some observers qualify as these 6 specious charges, the most

recent charge is over 8 years old!

 

And yet Ms. Goetz makes the bewildering charge that Dr. Warner

practicing today constitutes a menace to " public health. " This

despite the fact that, at the behest of the Commission and with Dr.

Warner's consent, he has been liable to round-the-clock supervision

and monitoring of his practice and files by the Commission over the

past year. Note that during this time not a single charge of

wrongdoing, error, or malpractice has even been suggested!

 

Clearly, the Commission has engaged in a most vicious vendetta

against a holistic physician, knowledgeable in both conventional

medicine and its alternatives. This despite all the evidence showing

excellent results from his distinctive, compassionate approach. Even

the official Tumor Registry, which was given access to every one of

his patient files, determined that his survivals in this dread

disease were at least as good as the others in the 13 county area

surveyed. (They also commented informally that the quality of life

claimed by his patients was vastly superior.)

 

When charges were first filed against Dr. Warner by this

commission, more than 350 patients wrote individual letters

protesting against this attack. In the ensuing months, hundreds more

letters have been written by patients in his behalf.

 

The nonsensical allegation by the State of Washington's

medical " experts " that a patient is simply unable to know whether he

or she is being properly cared for could not be farther off the mark.

Cancer patients are eminently qualified to know:

 

Whether they are alive or dead.

Whether they are in pain or not.

How many years they have survived a disease that often kills within a

year or two.

How long their relatives and friends survived on conventional

treatments, and how poorly.

How difficult it is to keep track of the toxic-therapies that fall in

and out of official favor, virtually on a weekly basis.

How much time Dr. Warner devotes to each patient individually, how

well he listens, and how clearly and painstakingly he explains his

methods.

That they are all entitled to speak with him freely at the open

support group he attends every Wednesday night in Bellevue,

Washington.

That if they are denied the right to continue Dr. Warner's unique

multidisciplinary care, they may die. (Even various official referees

and judges have pointed out the egregious unwisdom in depriving

patients of a doctor whose special care has kept them alive for

years!) One administrative law judge said that, despite his worry

about the welfare of the patients, he felt compelled to accept the

Commission's finding because their charges failed the test of being

labeled " frivolous. " Their charges, however, do pass the tests of

monumental stupidity, viciousness, and cruelty. They are also an

insult to common sense.

 

One hopes that the Court will restore Dr. Warner's license, or

that the Governor, who till now has refused even to hear Dr. Warner's

side of the case, will reverse this Kafkaesque regulatory decision.

 

Nothing less than the lives of literally hundreds of cancer

patients are in jeopardy. Should they suffer from this senseless

revocation of a good doctor's license, they will know whom to hold

responsible, collectively and singly.

 

 

Patrick M. McGrady, Director

 

CANHELP, Inc.