Honolulu Personal Injury Lawyer

Hawii Diabetes Alert: Actos diabetes medication linked to bladder cancer

Wayne Parsons — Tue, 15 May 2012 05:38:07 GMT

Actos is a diabetes drug that has been linked to bladder cancer. Actos' single ingredient is Pioglitazone. A medication called Duetact is a combination of Pioglitazone and Glimepiride. ActosplusMet and Actosplus Met XR are Actos combined with Metaformin. All are diabetes medications.

A recent story from Fox News explained bladder cancer:

Bladder cancer begins in the bladder, a central organ in the urinary system. The National Cancer Institute reports that 14,880 people will die from bladder cancer and 73,510 new cases of the disease will be diagnosed this year.

*****

The kidneys filter carcinogens (a substance that causes cancer) out of the body. The Official Foundation of the American Urological Association reports that before removal via urination, these carcinogens can rest in the bladder for several hours. The carcinogens damage the urothelium (the bladder's lining), which is where over 90 percent of all bladder cancers begin.

The Fox news story, Symptoms and treatment for bladder cancer, May 10, 2012, identifies the following symptoms of bladder cancer:

Hematuria, blood in the urine, is the main symptom of bladder cancer, according to the American Bladder Cancer Society. Other common warnings signs include dysuria (painful urination), lower back pain, recurrent urinary tract infections and overactive bladder. A patient with any of these symptoms in Hawaii who was or is taking Actos should report them to the doctor.

A leading legal authority on pharmaceutical products that injure patients is Joe Saunders from Pinellas Park, Florida and he has recently covered the Actos story in his article: Thousands of Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits Expected

In the spring of 2011 the European Medicines Agency (EMA) began a review of the risks of bladder cancer from Actos. In June of 2011, France’s drug safety agency suspended the use of Actos followed by Germany and Luxembourg. In June of 2011 the FDA required a new safety label indicating that: “The use of Actos for more than one year may increase a person’s chance of bladder cancer”.

The FDA warning should be seriously considered by those taking Actos or another of the suspect products:

Based on these data, FDA calculated that duration of therapy longer than 12 months was associated with 27.5 excess cases of bladder cancer per 100,000 person-years follow-up, compared to never use of pioglitazone.

The FDA cautioned patients not to stop taking the medications unless they consulted with their doctor on the subject as in some patients it may be better for them to stay on the Actos.

A recent article in the timesunion.com entitled: Resource Center Warns Increased Actos Use for Depression Could Lead to More Cases of Actos Bladder Cancer is a good source of information for patients taking Actos::

The Actos Resource Center, a bladder cancer patient advocacy group, is alerting patients of the risks of bladder cancer from Actos after new research in the journal Neuropsychopharmacology indicated the drug may be beneficial in treating depression.

Actos, a popular treatment for type II diabetes, has been linked to bladder cancer by researchers in France, Germany, Canada and the United States in recent years. Researchers with Health Canada and the French Medicines Agency have discovered as much as a 40% increased risk of bladder cancer with long-term Actos use.

The article goes on to expose another new potential problem associated with Actos use for treatment of Major Depressive Disorder:

However, scientists recently found Actos may improve the effects of antidepressants in treating Major Depressive Disorder. Last week, the journal Neuropsychopharmacology published findings from researchers at Tehran University indicating patients given Actos along with antidepressant drugs reported more symptom relief.

Professor Shahin Akhondzadeh commented that the results were important since a large percentage of patients treated for depression fail to respond to the available antidepressant medications.

Use of Actos in Hawaii was heavy and so some Hawaii patients may need help with bladder cancer.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Wayne Parsons

Important tip for Hawaii High school graduation month: don't ride in the back of a puck-up truck!

Wayne Parsons — Tue, 15 May 2012 04:29:44 GMT

We have to wear seatbelts and we can't drive and use a handheld cell phone. I'll buy that. Those are good rules. Where did they come from? A combination of common sense and our elected officials: its the law!

So why do we let people ride in the back of a pick-up? A lot of people are seriously injured or killed in Hawaii each year because they were in the bed of a pick-up truck that crashed. It is crazy bad judgment to climb into that truck bed.

Two years ago a news story by Diana Leone, an Advertiser Staff writer reported on renewed momentum for the legislature to pass a ban on truck bed rider, Death renews talk of total ban:

Over the past 14 years in Hawai'i, 34 people have been killed while riding in the beds of pickup trucks.

Most of the deaths were on O'ahu, and the victims ranged in age from 12 to 61 years old, according to Dan Galanis, an epidemiologist with the state Health Department's Injury Prevention Program.

One 12-year-old died before the Jan. 1, 1998, passage of a Hawai'i law that prohibits children 12 or younger from riding in a truck bed.

The death Wednesday of 13-year-old Kaaikalau Kamakea-Naluai of Waimanalo, who was thrown from the bed of a pickup truck in Kailua, has some state lawmakers talking again about outlawing passengers in pickup beds.

Sen. Will Espero, D-20th ('Ewa Beach, Waipahu), sent an e-mail to fellow lawmakers yesterday with a link to the news of the latest tragedy and a message:?"Colleagues — It's time to pass a bill banning ALL from riding in the back of a truck. O'ahu or neighbor island, it impacts us all."

Espero has sent a similar message during each legislative session every time there's been an accident in which someone riding in the back of a pickup truck was killed.

"What's the difference between the skull of an 11 year old and a 15 year old and an adult?" Espero asked. "When they hit the asphalt the result is the same."

With deadlines for new legislation passed, it's unlikely such a measure would be heard this year, but Espero said he will introduce a bill again in 2011.

How could anyone in their right mind oppose this ban? Well Senator Hee D-23d (Kane'ohe, Kahuku), is worried about "rural" folks complaining. Really? I will bet that any poll of all of the "rural" folks would support the ban. But this is politics and politics is about friends and the few. Politics is about who makes the most noise. Why didn't he educate his constituency about the fact that even the death of one high school kid is enough to overcome any "inconvenience". Is he telling us that he sat around with the "rural" folks that he refers to and they decided, after a careful consideration of the inevitable deaths of Hawaii kids and the destroyed families that live, that they would accept the deaths because they didn't want to be inconvenienced?

I would like Senator Hee to visit a family who lost a child, thrown from the back of a truck and killed or paralyzed. He could explain this ridiculous reasoning. Tell that to a mother and a father of a dead child.

"I wouldn't support a ban of people riding in the back of pickup trucks, simply because for many communities that's the only means of transportation," Hee said.

Rural O'ahu and Neighbor Island residents would object, he added.

And you know, many people complain about the laws. That is why we have laws. Laws get people to do things that they wouldn't normally do. Taxes for instance.

Now, about pick-up trucks. They are more prevalent in rural areas. And deaths from pick-up trucks, which generally result in more serious injuries and deaths, are higher in rural areas.

This year the legislature is considering Senate Bill 59, a law to prohibit the particularly vulnerable kids who are 12 years or under and would require seat belts for all others in the truck bed:

SECTION 1. Hawaii law prohibits the operation of a pickup truck with any passenger twelve years of age or under in the bed or load-carrying area of the truck. However, the legislature finds that recent accidents resulting in the death of or injury to persons riding in pickup truck beds underlines the need to strengthen Hawaii law.

The purpose of this Act is to additionally require that no pickup truck may be operated unless all passengers seated in the bed or load-carrying area of the truck are restrained by a seat belt assembly and seated in a secured mounted seat that is in full compliance with state and federal safety laws, rules, regulations, and guidelines. This Act does not affect the exception currently provided under section 291-14(b), Hawaii Revised Statutes, that is applicable to persons or corporations operating a business or businesses that serve the public.

There is good support for this law from Traffic Safety and Public Health: State Legislative Action, 2009
By Melissa A. Savage, Anne Teigen and Nicholas Farber for the National Conference of State Legislatures:

Pickup Trucks:

As the use of pickup trucks continues to rise, so does passenger use of cargo areas. Studies
have shown that passengers seated in the back of pickup trucks are at an increased risk to
be thrown from the vehicle in the event of a crash, even at low speeds. According to a 2007
article in the Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics, researchers identified 73 pediatric patients
with injuries related to riding in the cargo areas of trucks; 53 of these were children (73
percent) who had sustained neurological injuries, including isolated head injuries, spinal
injuries and peripheral nerve damage.

Some state occupant protection laws exempt pickup trucks, so it is not against the law for
passengers to ride in the back of these vehicles. Most state child passenger protection laws
prevent young children from riding unrestrained and, therefore, would make it illegal for
children to ride in the back of pickup trucks. During the 2009 state legislative sessions,
Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland and Wisconsin considered legislation to
regulate passenger use of pickup truck cargo areas. Florida passed a law requiring all
pickup truck passengers to use a seat belt. (See Appendix E for laws relating to cargo areas
in pickup truck laws.)

The Hawaii Legislature fearing complaints from rural voters that they preferred a few deaths of children over any inconvenience, put Senate Bill 59 over until next year. Perhaps they should appropraite some money for flowers at funerals. Maybe it will pass next year, but don't hold your breath!

But we don't need laws to do the right thing. We can educate ourselves and teach our families and friends to be safe. So if you are asked to get into the bed of a pick-up truck, don't do it. You see it doesn't matter if the driver is a good driver or the truck is large and new. When a drunk driver or speeded crashes into your truck, you will go flying and there is almost no way you will walk away. I have handled many of these cases for bereaved families over the years. The cases make me sick and I vow to do everything I can to prevent such senseless deaths.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Wayne Parsons

Honolulu Alert: Beyond ending distracted driving, end distracted walking!

Wayne Parsons — Tue, 15 May 2012 03:18:31 GMT

We all know about the movement on many fronts across the country to end distracted driving. But now Claude Wyle from San Francisco and one of the country's top lawyers, warns that pedestrians, distracted as they use cell phones and music devices, are walking into collisions with cars. I hadn't thought about that problem but it makes sense. Claude Wyle's article is illuminating and a good read: Is Distracted Walking Contributing to More Pedestrian Injuries?:

There are striking, growing statistics pointing to the danger of distracted walking while wearing headphones:

Researchers recently found 116 instances of pedestrians either dying or being injured because they were wearing headphones. 81 of these accidents were ultimately fatal to the pedestrian involved.

The dangers escalates when the distracted pedestrian is wearing headphones walking on city streets, alongside moving traffic. While a woman who is completely engrossed in a text message (traveling around the internet via YouTube) falls into a mall fountain may have only suffered from a bruised ego, many other distracted pedestrians are not so lucky.

The leading organizations on distracted driving have mad a major impact by going into the schools and community groups around the country to build awareness. They have great resources and they are saving and will save hundreds of thousands of lives. I commend you all to go to their websites and get involved in your community or at least with your own family and friends:

www.EndDD.org: Casey Feldman died as the result of a distracted driver. She was young and smart and caring and The Casey Feldman Memorial Foundation and EndDD.org are dedicated to saving lives and preventing distracted driving crashes. Casey's mom and dad, Dianne and Joel Feldman of Philadelphia, have organized an army of volunteer speakers to go into the schools and teach kids not to drive while distracted.
www.NODD.org: Jeff Weinstein , a great Texas trial lawyer, and great guy, has been going into Texas schools for over a year teaching kids to say "NO to Distracted Driving" - NODD.
www.60forsafety.org: 60 for Safety is a national effort to coordinate injury prevention and safety that has been a champion in organizing the effort to end distracted driving.

It seems to me that Claude Wyle has pointed to another branch of the "end distracted" movement. We certainly need the help in Hawaii where pedestrian injury and death is high:

Where danger treads, May 29, 2005, Honolulu Advertiser, By Mike Leidemann

Hawaii Pedestrians Face Crosswalk Threats, December 18, 2008

Another Pedestrian Dies in Honolulu - why?, August 3, 2011

Is it possible to curtail distracted driving and/or distracted walking? What do you think?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Wayne Parsons

Hawaii High School Graduation Week: end tha txt

Wayne Parsons — Wed, 09 May 2012 04:47:44 GMT

Hawaii high school students will be celebrating graduation this month and into June and the text messages and Tweets will be flying through cyberspace each night. If, on May 26th for instance at 8 pm , a high school student composes and sends a text that takes 10 seconds and the recipient, also at the wheel of a car reads and responds, taking another 10 seconds that will equate to each car traveling 73.33 feet with a blindfolded driver. Other drivers and pedestrians and any passengers in the cars will be at risk for those 10 seconds and the distance that defines this out-of-control missile is146.66 feet. That is about fifty yards or half the length of a football field. If at that time 1,000 high school students are Tweeting or Texting (or Googleing or emailing, etc.) and 1,000 are receiving while operating their cars, that is nearly 300,000 feet of Hawaii in Hawaii with blind drivers. That amounts to 56 miles of Hawaii roads with blind drivers for 20 seconds. .The average person glances at their cell phone 150 times per day.

Are we talking about matters of convenience? Is this about whether we should ask drivers - or "make" drivers give up the "convenience of chatting or texting while driving? If anyone thinks this is a matter of convenience, the statistics from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in "Distracted Driving 2009" paint a grim picture of death and injury and ruined lives:

.In 2009, 5,474 people were killed on U.S. roadways and an estimated additional 448,000 were injured in motor vehicle crashes that were reported to have involved distracted driving (FARS and GES).
Of those people killed in distracted-driving-related crashes, 995 involved reports of a cell phone as a distraction (18% of fatalities in distraction-related crashes).
Of those injured in distracted-driving-related crashes, 24,000 involved reports of a cell phone as a distraction (5% of injured people in distraction-related crashes).
Sixteen percent of fatal crashes in 2009 involved reports of distracted driving.
Twenty percent of injury crashes in 2009 involved reports of distracted driving.
The age group with the greatest proportion of distracted drivers was the under-20 age group – 16 percent of all drivers younger than 20 involved in fatal crashes were reported to have been distracted while driving.
Of those drivers involved in fatal crashes who were reportedly distracted, the 30- to 39-year-olds had the highest proportion of cell phone involvement.

In 2011 the statistics continued to be grim according to the NHSTA:

Each day, more than 15 people are killed and more than 1,200 people are injured in crashes that were reported to involve a distracted driver.1 Distracted driving is driving while doing another activity that takes your attention away from driving; these activities can increase the chance of a motor vehicle crash.

In an article in the New York Times, Keeping Eyes on Distracted Driving’s Toll by JANE E. BRODY
Published: April 11, 2011, it was pointed out that studies have shown that using a hands free device, thought by many to be safe, is the equivalent of driving with an alcohol level of 0.8, the level of drunk driving in Hawaii. Journalist Brody goes on to show that research has demonstrated that putting on make-up, eating and other activities in a car can amount to dangerous distracted driving..
So let's do something about it. The organizations EndDD.org, NODD.org and 60 for Safety have been working together raise awareness in the public and especially among high students. Check out their websites for these programs and if you are a Hawaii high school Principal, teacher, student or parent, ask for a presentation from me to the student body or any group of students or teachers. Let's save some lives in Hawaii this graduation season.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Wayne Parsons

Patient Safety at Hawaii Hospitals

Wayne Parsons — Wed, 09 May 2012 03:16:10 GMT

Any type of surgery can be scary. But would you feel better or worse about your impending surgery if you knew how the hospital ranked in terms of patient safety? For some this very question may not enter their mind as we blindly trust the doctor and hospital. But, for those that do consider this thought they don’t know even know where to look to find such information.

The Dallas Morning News compiled an analysis and review of 9 million discharge records from hospitals in the state to provide a measuring tool for patient safety. It took more than six months. That report was recently published in the paper as a public service and indisputable proof that there is not nearly enough transparency when accessing how hospitals perform.

Parkland Memorial Hospital had numerous questions raised in regard to quality of care within the industry. Based on the analysis, Parkland is not alone. In fact, the sheer number of large institutions within the area ranked far below the federal governments composite scoring of hospital safety issues, which include but are not limited to infections acquired at hospitals and surgical error.

The information contained in the report will not be made available until 2013. You can however see the list of 10 lowest ranked hospitals in Texas.

Now that we know what is going on in Texas in terms of patient safety what about in other states? How can concerned consumers find out how their doctors and hospitals are ranked? Below are some helpful sites and links to more information.

Hospital Ratings by Consumer Reports - Ratings are based on survey responses from millions of patients, plus data on infections and readmissions.

Health Grades has hospital quality ratings in 30 categories. They also have doctor ratings in 30 categories as well.

Hospital Compare: The Department of Health & Human Services offers information on Medicare hospitals, and can help you compare different facilities.

2011 National Patient Safety Goals by The Joint Commission is worth a read.

U.S. News Best Hospitals 2011-12: Find out about the best hospitals in the U.S.A. Rankings is listed by category.

Also, take a moment to read 98,000 Reasons to Care about Patient Safety. And visit 98000 Reasons by the American Association for Justice (AAJ), named after the number of Americans who die from medical errors ever year.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Wayne Parsons

How do you feel about the Florida Supreme Court Justices' retention elections?

Wayne Parsons — Sun, 06 May 2012 13:35:36 GMT

The politicians and the special interests and lobbyists that fund them are supposed to keep their hands off the judicial branch of government. That is how the American system works. The Judicial branch is there to check and balance the politicians. It does one other key thing that should be foremost in every citizen's mind: the judiciary protects the people and it can be characterized as the peoples' branch of government.

You see an individual who has no connections and no money and no political influence can ask an independant judge or a jury drawn at random from the citizenry, to review and decide an issue where they have been wronged. The big corporations and special interests own the Congress, the state legislatures and the executive branch of government. The politicians work in thoise branches and they know that with only 30% to 50% of the eligible voters voting in elections, they must ple4ase the special interests to stay in office. The people have no direct vote in the many issues facing legislators. There is no direct democracy in those two branches.

But in the courts citizens with no conflict of interest sit on juries and decide issues themselves. Politicians, lobbyists and big corporation don't like that and they sometiomes try to interfere with the peoples' branch of government. In Florida they are seeing this attack on judicial independence by a right wing corporate driven organization. The Miami Herald reports that:

The right-leaning organization, Restore Justice, which is linked to the Tea Party movement, targeted the justices after they voted with the 5-2 majority in a ruling that rejected a legislatively-backed constitutional amendment to allow the state to opt-out of federal health care reform because it failed to meet the state’s ballot requirements.

This year, the organization has started up again and is prepared to campaign against the remaining three justices in the opinion, each of which has twice before won merit retention approval.

So if corporate America or some other special interest doesn't like what a judge does they look for ways to attack the judge and get them removed from the court. People who do not understand basic civics as taught in high school do not understand that tampering with the independence of the judiciary is an attack on our democracy in America. The Tea Party, although supported by many well intentioned voters does seem to be well educated on basic civics. Their leaders like Paul Ryan talk about reducing government and then support federalization of laws, like tort law, that are matters for each state to deal with. Maybe in Ryan's case it is because he is the front man for big corporations and the lobbyist, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, but we are seeing that true conservatives like Andrew Cochran and swinging the mainstream of the Republican Party and the conservative voters in America back to the sound Constitutional principles of small governement and state's rights.

In Florida, the system of judicial retentions has not resulted in removals in the past and was intended to give voters a way to remove a corrupt or incompetent jurist. It was not intended to provide a vehicle for the lobbyists to remove simple because they don't like the judge's decisions. And now in Florida the targeted Supreme Court Justices up for retention face a very difficult challenge because it is difficult for them to defend themselves as explained by the Miami Herald story:

But the justices have their hands tied. The ethics laws governing judges in Florida prohibit them from discussing their policy views, unlike candidates running for elected office, but those who launch an opposition campaign to defeat a judge can say whatever they want.

“They can’t explain how they have ruled in the past or how they may rule in the future,’’ Hawkins said. “The restrictions on what candidates for judicial office can say are severe and strict.”

But because of this system, the bar “believes the importance of impartial, balanced and accurate information is critical,’’ he said.

The goal of the merit retention election is to give voters an opportunity to assess the body of work done by the justices and determine if they continue to remain qualified for the job. It is not to police bad judges, Hawkins said. That job goes to the Judical Qualifications Commission, which reviews, removes and sanctions judges for bad behavior, of the impeachment process which allows the state Senate to remove a bad judge. Read more here: http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2012/04/florida-bar-seeks-to-publicize-merit-retention-election-for-judges.html#storylink=cp

Others share my opinion as shown by the story in the Orlando Sentinel in "Drive to bounce justices threatens independence", May 5, 2012:

We have no objection to an investigation that'll settle the question. But the flap over the justices' paperwork shouldn't overshadow a broader principle at stake in the challenge they face this year to keep their jobs: judicial independence.

Florida's Supreme Court justices and appeals court judges are appointed by the governor in a nonpartisan, merit-based process. They normally come up for approval or rejection by voters every six years in retention elections. Voters properly consider if justices or judges are still fit to serve, not whether they've issued any rulings that offended politicians or interest groups. No justice or judge has lost his or her job since Florida began the merit system in the 1970s.

The Orlando Sentinal goes on to conclude that:

But bouncing the three justices from the high court as payback for that ruling or others would be an abuse of the retention process. Worse, it could make others still on the bench wary or even unwilling to issue controversial or unpopular rulings for fear of losing their jobs.

Floridians count on their courts to uphold the rule of law and stand up when needed to the other two branches of government, the governor and Legislature. If justices and judges start making decisions based on public opinion or political expediency instead of the law, Florida's democracy will be in trouble.

The attacks on these Florida Supreme Court Justices is an attack on Democracy. Like the midnight ride of Paul Revere I hope that Florida voters will stand up and be counted at the ballot box to tell the lobbyists, politicians, big corporations and special interests to keep their politics away from Florida courts. For more good reading on the subject, I suggest:

Resist special-interest purge, Palm Beach Post

Groups Targeting the Florida Supreme Court Just Like the Iowa Supreme Court, John Hopkins

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Wayne Parsons

Justice in Hawaii: storm warning from Florida Supreme Court election

Wayne Parsons — Fri, 04 May 2012 16:04:41 GMT

Democracy is often equated with justice and giving power to the people. Popular elections are held up as the hallmark of freedom. In Florida they elect their judges _ something we don't do in Hawaii _ and what is going on with the Florida Supreme Court elections in 2012, shows how elections with a popular vote are not always good for the people.

In Florida, powerful corporate right wing interests are pouring money into retention elections and targeting justices whose prior decisions have gone against these powerful money interests. Retention elections in Florida have been historically uncontroversial as long as the Justice has behaved ethically. But now the anti-justice corporate billionaires, are picking on Florida Supreme Court Justices who have no ability to match the money power coming into the state from these corporate sources.who

But according to John Hopkins, a Florida attorney who is trying to get the truth out to the public, it isn't just money that is being thrown into the election by these corporate forces, but the misrepresentation of facts that is being used against these Justices. Dirty Tricks"

These groups have now thrown stones at these justices claiming they violated the law when they filed their papers in order to qualify for retention. Scott Plakon is spending a great deal of time and has even written to the governor demanding that the justices be investigated.

Why?

Because the justices had employees in the clerk's office notarize their filing papers. Now, understand that the clerk's office has clearly stated they notarize for any Florida citizen. That, however, has not stopped groups like Jesse Phillips' Restore Justice or career politicians like Scott Plakon.

It turns out that Governor Scott would like to get rid of these Justices according to a report from the Huffington Post:

Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) almost got the opportunity to replace three state Supreme Court justices, thanks to a near-hiccup with election paperwork.

On Friday, Justices Fred Lewis, Barbara Pariente and Peggy Quince nearly missed the deadline to qualify for the ballot, the Associate Press reports. They filed the necessary paperwork just minutes before the state’s noon deadline, and only after the court put a hearing on hold.

Supreme Court justices in Florida are appointed by the governor and are subject to a merit-based vote every six years. Lewis, Pariente, and Quince were all appointed with the support of Democratic Gov. Lawton Chiles. Had the justices missed the filing deadline, Scott could have appointed three new ones.

Scott’s relationship with the Florida Supreme Court was shaken last year when the court ruled against him in a 5-2 decision, saying that Scott had “overstepped his constitutional authority” by issuing an executive order freezing all pending rules until he could approve them -- essentially hijacking the legislature’s rulemaking authority and violating the separation of powers, in the opinion of the court.

The public must protect the independence of the judiciary _ the peoples' branch of government _ from attacks by special interests and Big Mopney. Hopefully the voters will go to polls and fend off these attacks by outsiders.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Wayne Parsons

Wayne's Top 10 List for Saturday: Why do they speed?

Wayne Parsons — Sun, 29 Apr 2012 03:11:22 GMT

On the H-1 in Honolulu there is a short stretch of freeway between Punahou and Kahala Mall where cars battle for position and road rage is rampant. The distance of this road rage zone is about 3 miles. The area is a bottleneck where the speed limit is drooped to 45 mph from 55 mph.

Most drivers follow the speed limit and slow down. that's what I do as I drive home every night. I go through that stretch and I slow down. But every time I am on that stretch there are one or two drivers who appear to be outraged that they are asked to slow down and they honk their horns, make obscene gestures and ride the bumpers of the folks that obey the law. The speeders will follow too closely, dart in and out of lanes to get around the law abiding citizens who are obeying the law. Why are they so angry? I sure hope it isn't because they want to get to the end of this stretch of freeway 3 minutes before the rest of us. If that is their way of thinking, perhaps we should take their license to drive a car away from them.

Have you noticed that a growing segment of the American population is angry. That's how Osama Bin Laden started out from what I have read. Let's not go there. Is the stretch of freeway that I refer to a real problem or is that a place that is used as an excuse for this angry American to get it all off their chest. Behind the wheel of a 3,000 pound vehicle wheeling along at 45 mph, or if they can get around drivers like me, 70 mph, these angry Honolulu drivers are in command of quite a weapon of death and destruction.

If you check out the automobile collisions and the resultant deaths and serious personal injuries, you will see that speeding is a major cause. Of course these amateur road racers don't think it will ever be them. They would tell you that they are good drivers and that they can drive fast without getting into collisions. They are fools.

Want the facts? Take a look at the statistics from Advocates for highway and auto safety:

Speeding-related crashes resulted in 13,192 fatalities in 2004. (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, NHTSA, 2005)

The economic costs of crashes that involved excessive speed were $40.4 billion, representing 18 percent of total crash costs and an average cost of $144 for every person in the United States. (NHTSA, 2002)

When speed increases from 40 mph to 60 mph, the energy released in a crash more than doubles. (IIHS, 2003)

Research by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) found that when speed limits were raised by many states in 1996, travel speeds increased and motor vehicle fatalities went up approximately 15 percent on Interstate highways in those states.

The relative proportion of speeding-related crashes to all crashes decreases with increasing driver age. In 2002, 39 percent of male drivers 15 to 20 years old who were involved in fatal crashes were speeding at the time of the crash. (NHTSA, 2003).

Combine alcohol and other forms of distracted driving and you can understand why the emergency rooms at hospitalAlcohol and speeding are a deadly combination.

In 2002, 42 percent of drivers with a BAC of .08 or higher involved in fatal crashes were speeding, compared to only 15 percent of sober drivers involved in fatal crashes. (NHTSA, 2003)s in Hawaii are full of innocent people injured in automobile collisions.

Alcohol and speeding are a deadly combination. In 2002, 42 percent of drivers with a BAC of .08 or higher involved in fatal crashes were speeding, compared to only 15 percent of sober drivers involved in fatal crashes. (NHTSA, 2003)

When you see the HPD officer with a speed gun trying to catch these speeders, give them a "thumbs up". People are dying.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Wayne Parsons

What should you do if you have a metal on metal (MoM) hip implant?

Wayne Parsons — Sat, 27 Aug 2011 07:03:43 GMT

The news is full of stories about hip replacement implant surgeries gone bad. Joseph Saunders, a leading medical device expert attorney from Florida has been a great news source for the status of lawsuits by patients and about what is wrong with the implants, particularly the Depuy ASR. The New York Times reports a crisis in patients with these devices in a recent news story, Hip Implant Complaints Surge, Even as the Dangers Are Studied

The federal government has received a surge in complaints in recent months about failed hip replacements, suggesting that serious problems persist with some types of artificial hips even as researchers scramble to evaluate the health dangers.

The New York Times

An analysis of federal data by The New York Times indicates that the Food and Drug Administration has received more than 5,000 reports since January about several widely used devices known as metal-on-metal hips, more than the agency had received about those devices in the previous four years combined.

The vast majority of filings appear to reflect patients who have had an all-metal hip removed, or will soon undergo such a procedure because a device failed after only a few years; typically, replacement hips last 15 years or more.

The mounting complaints confirm what many experts have feared — that all-metal replacement hips are on a trajectory to become the biggest and most costly medical implant problem since Medtronic recalled a widely used heart device component in 2007. About 7,700 complaints have been filed in connection with that recall.

Several major manufacturers of these FDA approved devices are facing lawsuits that allege the devices cause a condition called metalosis in the patients. Depuy is the most likely hip implant to cause serious injury. Many younger adults are opting for hip implants. Metal on metal (MoM) devices become more frequently used by doctors. According to the Alaska Epidemiology Bulletin:

Over the past decade, cobalt-chromium Metal-on-Metal Hip Arthroplasty (MoMHA) has been performed with increasing frequency throughout the United States, particularly in active and younger patients. During a recent review of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database, 35% of 112,095 primary total hip replacements performed in the United States between October 1, 2005, and December 31, 2006 were MoMHAs

There a number of Hawaii implant recipients and some lawsuits filed.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Wayne Parsons

What is the downside of declining hormone therapy"

Wayne Parsons — Sat, 27 Aug 2011 05:38:42 GMT

In a recent study it has been observed that lower rates of hormone therapy have resulted in doctors decreasing mammograms:

A study published online in the American Cancer Society journal Cancer suggests that when women stop going to their doctors for hormone therapy prescriptions, the physicians do not remind them to get a mammogram (DOI: 10.1002/cncr.26218). The analysis found that there has been a decline in hormone therapy in women between age 50 and 64 that is linked with a lower mammogram rate in this age group.

The research was stimulated by the observation that national mammography rates dropped for the first time in 2005, but had been rising steadily in the United States from 1987 to 2002. In recent years there has been a decrease in hormone therapy usage because of a reported increased risk of breast cancer; the authors examined whether the drop in hormone therapy usage was linked to the concurrent drop in mammograms.

Why do the doctors for these women stop reminding their patients about the need for mammograms? Do these doctors believe that mammograms are not worth doing?

Hawaii women suffer more breast cancer per capita than the rest of the US. Pesticides are mainly to blame. Why do they keep soaking Hawaii soil with pesticides? Read Breast Cancer and Pesticides in Hawaii: The Need for Further Study to understand the problem.

Do Hawaii doctors fail to remind women who decline hormone therapy that they should still get regular mammograms?

Is it because the doctors lose interest in women when the profit decreases?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Wayne Parsons