Reading the Charlotte Sun Newspaper

There’s an apparently plagiarized story in the today’s Charlotte Sun’s health-news tab, “Feeling Fit.”

Michele Ritter, who is not listed on the newspaper’s staff directory as a writer or editor, is given as the author of an item that is identified as “Special to Feeling Fit,” and headlined “New colorectal surgical procedure performed at Fawcett Memorial Hospital.”

I suspect Ritter is a hospital a public relations person who was handed a press release written either by a manufacturer or the training staff at a large metropolitan hospital. I hope she didn’t troll the Web, as I did, looking for this item. However she obtained the article, she has no business putting her byline on the piece. In doing so, she tells me and other readers that she wrote it. She didn’t. Here’s my evidence.
We can start with a news release posted on the Web from the University of Cincinnati dated June 20, 2006. Ritter’s item is posted at the Sun newspaper site.

The paragraph-by-paragraph comparison of the two documents is given below in full with no elisions. Nearly every word, including the local doctor’s quotes, were published more than a year ago in Ohio.

New colorectal surgical procedure performed at Fawcett Memorial Hospital
By Michelle Ritter
Special to Feeling Fit

Domingo Galliano, Jr., MD, FACS, FACRS recently became the first surgeon in Charlotte County to perform a transanal endoscopic microsurgical procedure, a minimally invasive method for removing rectal cancers that eliminates the need for external incisions.

This procedure is a safe alternative to open surgery for removing very early rectal cancers and polyps, the precancerous masses that form on the lining of the colon or rectum.

“TEM is a great alternative for many patients, especially those who might not be able to tolerate a big operation,” explains Galliano, a colorectal surgeon at Fawcett Memorial Hospital. Galliano is not only board certified in colorectal surgery, but he is the only board-certified and fellowship-trained surgeon in Laparoscopic Colon Surgery in Charlotte County.

“The recovery time is minimal, and functional results — namely bowel function and control — are often better, so patients can return to their normal activities faster.”

Here are the opening grafs of the Cincinnati hospital news release.

CINCINNATI—University of Cincinnati (UC) colorectal surgeons have become the first in the Tristate to perform a transanal endoscopic microsurgical (TEM) procedure, a minimally invasive method for removing rectal cancers that eliminates the need for external incisions.

Surgeons say the procedure is a safe alternative to open surgery for removing very early rectal cancers and polyps, the precancerous masses that form on the lining of the colon or rectum.

“TEM is a great alternative for certain patients, including those who might not be able to tolerate a big operation,” explains Bradley Davis, MD, an assistant professor of surgery at UC and a colorectal surgeon at Christ Hospital. “The recovery time is
minimal, and functional results—namely bowel function and control—are often better, so patients can return to their normal activities faster.”

Ritter’s second section reports: It is estimated that approximately 26 centers, including Fawcett, perform this procedure. The technique is a minimally invasive method for operating inside the rectum using a fiber-optic light source, a camera and specialized instruments, eliminating the need for an external incision and leave no visible scarring.

“TEM allows surgeons to reach tumors deeper in the rectum,” says Galliano. “It’s very accurate, and cancer recurrence rates are typically as low as those achieved using other established methods.”

University of Cincinnati’s Web page reads: The technique, known as “endoluminal surgery” is a minimally invasive method for operating inside the rectum using a fiber-optic light source, a camera and specialized instruments. Inserted through the anus, the instruments eliminate the need for an external incision and leave no visible scarring.

“TEM allows surgeons to reach tumors deeper in the rectum,” says Davis. “It’s very accurate, and cancer recurrence rates are typically as low as those achieved using other established methods.”

In the next section, Ritter writes: Traditional rectal surgery
often involves removing a large part of the rectum, which results in less room to store solid waste. This results in a decreased ability to “hold” feces and can even result in incontinence. The TEM procedure can help patients to avoid a temporary — and sometimes permanent — colostomy bag, a pouch connected to the bowel and worn outside the body to the collect waste that would normally pass through the digestive system.

“The important thing,” stresses Galliano, “is that the patient is diagnosed and evaluated properly. TEM is only appropriate for polyp and very early cancer removal. More advanced cancers require a more aggressive treatment to completely eradicate the disease.”

University of Cincinnati’s Web page reads: Traditional
“radical” rectal surgery often involves removing a large part of the rectum, which results in less room to store solid waste. This results in a decreased ability to “hold” feces and can even result in incontinence. Endoluminal surgery allows certain patients to avoid a temporary—and sometimes permanent—colostomy
bag, a pouch connected to the bowel and worn outside the body to the collect waste that would normally pass through the digestive system.

“The important thing,” stresses Davis, “is that the patient is diagnosed and evaluated properly. TEM is only appropriate for polyp and very early cancer removal. More advanced cancers require a more aggressive treatment to completely eradicate the disease.”

Moving along, Ritter writes: Before surgery, the patient is given spinal anesthesia and positioned on the side, back or stomach, depending where the tumor is located. Guided by a video monitor, the surgeon navigates a thin, flexible instrument equipped with a three-dimensional camera and light source at its tip — through the anal canal to the tumor.

The bowel is inflated with gas to improve tumor visualization. Then, the surgeon detaches the tumor and a small section of surrounding tissue using a specialized electronic scalpel that simultaneously seals affected blood vessels. Once the tumor is removed, the rectal wall is cleansed and sutured.

The procedure takes about an hour, and patients are typically released from the hospital the next day.

University of Cincinnati’s Web page reads: Before surgery, the patient is given spinal anesthesia and positioned on the side, back or stomach, depending where the tumor is located. Guided by a video monitor, the surgeon navigates a “rectoscope”—a thin, flexible instrument equipped with a three-dimensional camera and light source at its tip—up through the anal canal to the tumor.

The bowel is inflated with gas to improve tumor visualization. Then, the surgeon detaches the tumor and a small section of surrounding tissue using a specialized electronic scalpel that simultaneously seals affected blood vessels. Once the tumor is removed through the anus, the rectal wall is cleansed and sutured.

The TEM procedure takes about an hour, and patients are typically released from the hospital the next day.

In winding up, Ritter writes: “This is revolutionary rectal surgery technology,” says Vickie Pettigrew, director of surgical services at Fawcett. “It’s an easy outpatient procedure with no incision and no pain.”

“Patients have valid concerns about quality-of-life issues that result from radical rectal surgery,” says Galliano. “TEM maximizes surgical effectiveness while minimizing the negative side effects, such as incontinence, that can cause both discomfort and embarrassment during recovery.”

University of Cincinnati’s Web page reads: “Patients have valid concerns about quality-of-life issues that result from radical rectal surgery,” says Davis. “TEM maximizes surgical effectiveness while minimizing the negative side effects, such as incontinence, that can cause both discomfort and embarrassment during recovery.”

Plagiarism or no plagiarism?

There’s an apparently plagiarized story in the today’s Charlotte Sun’s health-news tab, “Feeling Fit.”

Michele Ritter, who is not listed on the newspaper’s staff directory as a writer or editor, is given as the author of an item that is identified as “Special to Feeling Fit,” and headlined “New colorectal surgical procedure performed at Fawcett Memorial Hospital.”

I suspect Ritter is a hospital a public relations person who was handed a press release written either by a manufacturer or the training staff at a large metropolitan hospital. I hope she didn’t troll the Web, as I did, looking for this item. However she obtained the article, she has no business putting her byline on the piece. In doing so, she tells me and other readers that she wrote it. She didn’t. Here’s my evidence.

The paragraph-by-paragraph comparison of the two documents is given below in full with no elisions. Nearly every word, including the local doctor’s quotes, were published more than a year ago in Ohio.

New colorectal surgical procedure performed at Fawcett Memorial Hospital
By Michelle Ritter
Special to Feeling Fit

Domingo Galliano, Jr., MD, FACS, FACRS recently became the first surgeon in Charlotte County to perform a transanal endoscopic microsurgical procedure, a minimally invasive method for removing rectal cancers that eliminates the need for external incisions.

This procedure is a safe alternative to open surgery for removing very early rectal cancers and polyps, the precancerous masses that form on the lining of the colon or rectum.

“TEM is a great alternative for many patients, especially those who might not be able to tolerate a big operation,” explains Galliano, a colorectal surgeon at Fawcett Memorial Hospital. Galliano is not only board certified in colorectal surgery, but he is the only board-certified and fellowship-trained surgeon in Laparoscopic Colon Surgery in Charlotte County.

“The recovery time is minimal, and functional results — namely bowel function and control — are often better, so patients can return to their normal activities faster.”

Here are the opening grafs of the Cincinnati hospital news release.

“TEM is a great alternative for certain patients, including those who might not be able to tolerate a big operation,” explains Bradley Davis, MD, an assistant professor of surgery at UC and a colorectal surgeon at Christ Hospital. “The recovery time is
minimal, and functional results—namely bowel function and control—are often better, so patients can return to their normal activities faster.”

Ritter’s second section reports: It is estimated that approximately 26 centers, including Fawcett, perform this procedure. The technique is a minimally invasive method for operating inside the rectum using a fiber-optic light source, a camera and specialized instruments, eliminating the need for an external incision and leave no visible scarring.

University of Cincinnati’s Web page reads: The technique, known as “endoluminal surgery” is a minimally invasive method for operating inside the rectum using a fiber-optic light source, a camera and specialized instruments. Inserted through the anus, the instruments eliminate the need for an external incision and leave no visible scarring.

“TEM allows surgeons to reach tumors deeper in the rectum,” says Davis. “It’s very accurate, and cancer recurrence rates are typically as low as those achieved using other established methods.”

In the next section, Ritter writes: Traditional rectal surgery
often involves removing a large part of the rectum, which results in less room to store solid waste. This results in a decreased ability to “hold” feces and can even result in incontinence. The TEM procedure can help patients to avoid a temporary — and sometimes permanent — colostomy bag, a pouch connected to the bowel and worn outside the body to the collect waste that would normally pass through the digestive system.

“The important thing,” stresses Galliano, “is that the patient is diagnosed and evaluated properly. TEM is only appropriate for polyp and very early cancer removal. More advanced cancers require a more aggressive treatment to completely eradicate the disease.”

University of Cincinnati’s Web page reads: Traditional
“radical” rectal surgery often involves removing a large part of the rectum, which results in less room to store solid waste. This results in a decreased ability to “hold” feces and can even result in incontinence. Endoluminal surgery allows certain patients to avoid a temporary—and sometimes permanent—colostomy
bag, a pouch connected to the bowel and worn outside the body to the collect waste that would normally pass through the digestive system.

“The important thing,” stresses Davis, “is that the patient is diagnosed and evaluated properly. TEM is only appropriate for polyp and very early cancer removal. More advanced cancers require a more aggressive treatment to completely eradicate the disease.”

Moving along, Ritter writes: Before surgery, the patient is given spinal anesthesia and positioned on the side, back or stomach, depending where the tumor is located. Guided by a video monitor, the surgeon navigates a thin, flexible instrument equipped with a three-dimensional camera and light source at its tip — through the anal canal to the tumor.

The bowel is inflated with gas to improve tumor visualization. Then, the surgeon detaches the tumor and a small section of surrounding tissue using a specialized electronic scalpel that simultaneously seals affected blood vessels. Once the tumor is removed, the rectal wall is cleansed and sutured.

The procedure takes about an hour, and patients are typically released from the hospital the next day.

University of Cincinnati’s Web page reads: Before surgery, the patient is given spinal anesthesia and positioned on the side, back or stomach, depending where the tumor is located. Guided by a video monitor, the surgeon navigates a “rectoscope”—a thin, flexible instrument equipped with a three-dimensional camera and light source at its tip—up through the anal canal to the tumor.

The bowel is inflated with gas to improve tumor visualization. Then, the surgeon detaches the tumor and a small section of surrounding tissue using a specialized electronic scalpel that simultaneously seals affected blood vessels. Once the tumor is removed through the anus, the rectal wall is cleansed and sutured.

The TEM procedure takes about an hour, and patients are typically released from the hospital the next day.

In winding up, Ritter writes: “This is revolutionary rectal surgery technology,” says Vickie Pettigrew, director of surgical services at Fawcett. “It’s an easy outpatient procedure with no incision and no pain.”

“Patients have valid concerns about quality-of-life issues that result from radical rectal surgery,” says Galliano. “TEM maximizes surgical effectiveness while minimizing the negative side effects, such as incontinence, that can cause both discomfort and embarrassment during recovery.”

University of Cincinnati’s Web page reads: “Patients have valid concerns about quality-of-life issues that result from radical rectal surgery,” says Davis. “TEM maximizes surgical effectiveness while minimizing the negative side effects, such as incontinence, that can cause both discomfort and embarrassment during recovery.”

Plagiarism or no plagiarism?

 

CORRECTION
“The wrong mug ran with [nice woman]’s column about the Masonic Lodge’s activities in Friday’s Our Town. This is the correct mug. The Sun regrets the error.”

Maybe it’s a case of accidentally publishing one of those internal notes, but unless we’re talking about her coffee cup, it makes the newspaper look rude and crude, in addition to being careless.

Over on the sports front, page designers strung football scores into a big black crawler-style border: “—-West Virginia 21, South Florida 13—-” But the headline below screams “Bulls deliver knockout.” (SF fields the Bulls.) Also, it’s a bit early in the season to dip into boxing lingo to describe a football game. If we can’t think of a football verb in September, what are we going to do in November?

Maybe it’s a case of accidentally publishing one of those internal notes, but unless we’re talking about her coffee cup, it makes the newspaper look rude and crude, in addition to being careless.

Over on the sports front, page designers strung football scores into a big black crawler-style border: “—-West Virginia 21, South Florida 13—-” But the headline below screams “Bulls deliver knockout.” (SF fields the Bulls.) Also, it’s a bit early in the season to dip into boxing lingo to describe a football game. If we can’t think of a football verb in September, what are we going to do in November?

This morning’s “In Your Corner” column by David Morris advises a storm-shutter buyer who wants his money back about the “three-day right of recession.” I like this malapropism. It has potential.

Sorry, it’s “recision,” rooted in “rescind,” a synonym for “cancel.” I normally wouldn’t mention this (it’s mean to play Gotcha with everyday grammar, spelling and punctuation hiccups) except the columnist quotes the Florida Bar and changes the quote.

Here’s the post on a Florida Bar Web site that I think he used.

Contrary to what many people believe, there is no automatic right to cancel a valid contract, even if done within 3 days. Only certain types of contracts come with a “3-day right of rescission”, such as health club contracts or some sales of goods or services made at your home.

In the morning newspaper, the quoted material changes rescission to recession. This is not good. But, the writer’s change introduces an error, which is worse than not good.

What to do? The source spells the “right word” in a nonstandard way. Either insert [sic] near to the error to let folks know you didn’t sin, or paraphrase and make all the spelling and style changes you want, including getting that pesky comma inside the quote mark.

This morning’s “In Your Corner” column by David Morris advises a storm-shutter buyer who wants his money back about the “three-day right of recession.” I like this malapropism. It has potential.

Here’s the post on a Florida Bar Web site that I think he used.

In the morning newspaper, the quoted material changes rescission to recession. This is not good. But, the writer’s change introduces an error, which is worse than not good.

What to do? The source spells the “right word” in a nonstandard way. Either insert [sic] near to the error to let folks know you didn’t sin, or paraphrase and make all the spelling and style changes you want, including getting that pesky comma inside the quote mark.

A local chiropractor ran a full-page, red-and-yellow attention grabber touting his spine-decompression machine in Monday’s Charlotte Sun newspaper. As part of the pitch, the chiro, Stephen Stokes, claims to have studied with the man who invented both the back-stretcher and a more well-known device, the heart defibrillator. I suggest the local chiropractor might be the victim a fraud. Here’s why.
In a section of the ad titled “Personal Invitation from Dr. Stokes,” the ad claims the device (brand name Vax-d) was invented by the doctor who “invented one of the most vital medical tools used in hospitals around the world today: the heart defibrillator. His name is Allan Dyer M.D.” Stephen Stokes, the local advertiser, reports “I have [...] trained personally with Dr. Dyer for many years.”

I don’t question that Stokes trained with someone named Allan Dyer. But I find no evidence or report that Dyer invented the heart defibrillator, or even contributed to its many improvements over the years.

I started my little research expedition with the Encyclopedia Britannica. It reports the defibrillator was developed in 1965 by Frank Pantridge, an Irishman, cardiologist, and inventor who died in 2004. Closer to home, Paul Maurice Zoll, a Boston cardiologist, “conducted pioneering research that led to the development of the cardiac defibrillator,” among other neat things related to hearts, according to EB.

Now, I hesitate to use Wikipedia as a source for much of anything, but it’s interesting to see Allan Dyer has no entry and isn’t mentioned in the section that discusses the defibrillator’s invention or refinements. Here’s a summary of what the industrious Wikipedians assembled.

The entry “Defibrillation,” names several men who contributed to the development of the high-voltage heart zapper. The names begin back in 1899 when two Swiss physiologists applied electrical shocks to dogs’ hearts. Forty six years later, Claude Beck, professor of surgery at Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, used the technique during an open-chest surgery on a youngster with a congenital heart defect. External defibrillation was “pioneered” by Russians V. Eskin and A. Klimov in the mid-1950s, according to the entry. Further enhancements came from Bernard Lown, Barouh Berkovits and others, culminating in a portable version credited to Pantridge. The implantable defibrillator was a team effort that included Stephen Heilman, Alois Langer, Morton Mower, Michel Mirowski, and Mir Imran, at Sinai Hosptial in Baltimore with the “help of industrial collaborator, Intex Systems of Pittsburgh,” the entry says. The general credit for inventing the external defibrillator is given to Bernard Lown.

A further Web search turns up a history of defibrillation by Igor R. Efimov of Washington University. Efimov’s article (2004) is notable for its comprehensive, documented survey and its generous tone. Although there’s clearly pride in noting Case Western Reserve and Cleveland Clinic Foundation as the “birthplace of clinical defibrillation,” Efimov quickly goes on to report “[...] generations of scientists and clinicians from many countries contributed to the success of shock therapy, which then culminated in the recent worldwide application of implantable defibrillators and external defibrillators, saving hundreds of thousands of lives in all countries around the world.”

No where does Efimov document Allan Dyer’s “invention” of the defibrillator. Of course, a man by this name may hold a patent on a part or variation of one company’s version of a defibrillator — although my search of U.S. Patent and Trademark Office databases didn’t locate his name.

If the local chiro spent money to study with the “inventor” of the defibrillator, I suggest he was defrauded. And if a man claims what isn’t his, especially when there’s a profit to be made, then I wonder what else he misrepresents. It’s a shame the local practitioner did not vet his ad before publishing it.

Alas, there’s more. Stokes’s ad carries a bright yellow box bearing an endorsement from “Robert Channey, M.D., Former Assistant Surgeon General of the United States.”

In the course of looking stuff up, I called the U.S. Surgeon General’s office in Maryland to ask how “former” this man might be. The nice staff (Rebecca Ayer and Jennifer Koentop, 202-690-7694) conducted a search of their records for me: No doctor or other person with that name has worked there that they can find. “And we went pretty far back into some very old records,” Ayer said.

The staff also said me the U.S. Surgeon General’s office doesn’t use the title “assistant surgeon general.” However, the uniform services (Navy, etc.) may use the title if a medically qualified rear admiral or higher elects to use the title. It’s sort of a self-selected, honorary thing. And finally, all the searches I conducted for Channey’s name and title came back solely to Vax-d Web sites. I found no published article, no PubMed author, no government site, and not even the slimmist Wikipedia vanity entry for this name. I used about a dozen different search engines as well as my state university system’s LINCC portal, to accesses scores of proprietary databases. And finally, if this person does exist, I’m not sure it’s ethical for a U.S. Surgeon General (assistant, former, or otherwise) to use his office and title to endorse one particular, privately patented device above others that might do the same job. Is he, if he exists, a paid spokesperson for Vax-d? We deserve to know this, Dr. Stokes.

I can’t pass judgment on the medical effectiveness of the contraption’s claims, although one of my favorite health-fraud researchers, Stephen Barrett, M.D. has published this caution about Vax-d.

My conclusion: When it looks like an advertiser has been gulled by his own suppliers into publishing product endorsements by apparently fictional persons, my caveat emptor organ starts wiggling. A practitioner who advertises “pain free in four weeks” and presents himself as a “medical director” owes readers a big dose of accurate information that’s not presented in a misleading way. Shame on everyone involved in this ad: the product maker that provided the endorsements, the local chiropractor for not checking things out, the newspaper that put it on the presses, and the endorsers themselves — assuming they’re not fictions.

A local chiropractor ran a full-page, red-and-yellow attention grabber touting his spine-decompression machine in Monday’s Charlotte Sun newspaper. As part of the pitch, the chiro, Stephen Stokes, claims to have studied with the man who invented both the back-stretcher and a more well-known device, the heart defibrillator. I suggest the local chiropractor might be the victim a fraud. Here’s why. Read the rest of this entry »

Reporters seem especially susceptible to Copspeak, that creole spoken by the civic heroes who serve and protect. The lingo establishes sense of “insider-ness.” It’s unfortunate — and lazy — when reporters write stories in the shorthand of cops and medics. This morning’s story about a truck accident yesterday is a case in point.

“Charlotte County Fire & EMS reponded to the scene, which was near the Kings Highway exit in Port Charlotte.”

In our native tongue, people are said to have responded to a question, responded to a pinprick, or responded to a loud noise. But it sounds silly to report they “responded to the scene,” as if the scene had emitted a stimulus.

If the writer insists, I suppose I’d let it go if the sentence said the rescuers “responded to a call for help,” or some such. But why bother at all? The parallel crime is wasting a sentence to tell readers rescuers arrived at (“responded to”) the accident. Of course they got there, whatever verb they rode.

Readers want to know what the medics saw and what they did to help the victims. Since the story ran more than 24 hours after the accident, there was plenty of time for a reporter to call and get quotes or eye-witness details. But no, the story has been presented “according to the accident report.” No doubt the accident report was e-mailed to the office so the reporter didn’t have to leave the air-conditioned office.

Reporters seem especially susceptible to Copspeak, that creole spoken by the civic heroes who serve and protect. The lingo establishes sense of “insider-ness.” It’s unfortunate — and lazy — when reporters write stories in the shorthand of cops and medics. This morning’s story about a truck accident yesterday is a case in point.

“Charlotte County Fire & EMS reponded to the scene, which was near the Kings Highway exit in Port Charlotte.”

In our native tongue, people are said to have responded to a question, responded to a pinprick, or responded to a loud noise. But it sounds silly to report they “responded to the scene,” as if the scene had emitted a stimulus.

If the writer insists, I suppose I’d let it go if the sentence said the rescuers “responded to a call for help,” or some such. But why bother at all? The parallel crime is wasting a sentence to tell readers rescuers arrived at (“responded to”) the accident. Of course they got there, whatever verb they rode.

Readers want to know what the medics saw and what they did to help the victims. Since the story ran more than 24 hours after the accident, there was plenty of time for a reporter to call and get quotes or eye-witness details. But no, the story has been presented “according to the accident report.” No doubt the accident report was e-mailed to the office so the reporter didn’t have to leave the air-conditioned office.