Spine Surgeon Charged in Device Kickback Scheme

By Fred Schulte, Kaiser Health News

A Florida orthopedic surgeon and designer of costly spinal surgery implants was arrested Tuesday and charged with paying millions of dollars in kickbacks and bribes to surgeons who agreed to use his company’s devices.

Dr. Kingsley Chin, 57, of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, is the founder, chief executive officer and owner of SpineFrontier, which also does business as LESspine, a device company based in Malden, Massachusetts. Chin and the company’s chief financial officer, Aditya Humad, 36, of Cambridge, Massachusetts, were each indicted on one count of conspiring to violate federal anti-kickback laws, six counts of violating the kickback statute and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering, officials said.

The indictment alleges that SpineFrontier, Chin and Humad paid surgeons between $250 and $1,000 per hour in sham consulting fees for work they did not perform.

In exchange, the surgeons agreed to use SpineFrontier’s products in operations paid for by federal health care programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. Surgeons accepted between $32,625 and $978,000 in improper payments, according to the indictment.

“Kickback arrangements pollute federal health care programs and take advantage of patient needs for financial gains,” said Nathaniel Mendell, acting U.S. attorney for the District of Massachusetts. “Medical device manufacturers must play by the rules, and we will keep pursuing those who fail to do so, regardless of how their corruption is disguised.”

DR. KINGSLEY CHIN

(Update: In a Sept. 16 press release, Chin’s lawyer called the charges “baseless.”

“Dr. Chin did not commit these alleged offenses. He is a leading Harvard-trained orthopedic spine surgeon and inventor who has dedicated his life to the welfare of others. He is also a role model for aspiring Black professionals who have overcome great hardship and humble beginnings to achieve success through education, grit, and hard work,” said attorney William Weinreb. “It is deeply disappointing that Dr. Chin’s success has attracted the attention of federal law enforcement, who have filed these baseless charges. Dr. Chin looks forward to his day in court – and to reclaiming his good name.”)

Chin and SpineFrontier were the subjects of a KHN investigation published in June that found that manufacturers of hardware for spinal implants, artificial knees and hip joints had paid more than $3.1 billion to orthopedic and neurosurgeons from August 2013 through 2019. These surgeons collected more than half a billion dollars in industry consulting fees, federal payment records show.

Chin, a self-styled “doctorpreneur,” formed SpineFrontier about a decade after completing his training at Harvard Medical School. Chin has patented dozens of pieces of spine surgery hardware, such as doughnut-shaped plastic cages, titanium screws and other products that generated some $100 million in sales for SpineFrontier, according to government officials. In 2018, SpineFrontier valued Chin’s ownership of the company at $75 million, though its current worth is unclear. He maintains a medical practice in Hollywood, Florida.

Seth Orkand, a Boston attorney who represents Humad, said his client “denies all charges, and looks forward to his day in court.”

The Department of Justice filed a civil lawsuit against Chin and SpineFrontier in March 2020, accusing the company of illegally funneling more than $8 million to nearly three dozen spine surgeons through the “sham” consulting fees. Chin and SpineFrontier have yet to file a response to that suit.

However, at least six surgeons have admitted wrongdoing in the civil case and paid a total of $3.3 million in penalties. Another, Dr. Jason Montone, 45, of Lawson, Missouri, pleaded guilty to criminal kickback charges and is set to be sentenced early next year. Federal law prohibits doctors from accepting anything of value from a device-maker for agreeing to use its products, though most offenders don’t face criminal prosecution.

The grand jury indictment lists seven surgeons as having received bribes totaling $2,747,463 to serve as “sham consultants.” One doctor, identified only as “surgeon 7,” received $978,831, according to the indictment. Many of the illicit payments were made through a Fort Lauderdale company controlled by Chin and Humad, according to the indictment.

“Medical device companies that pay surgeons kickbacks, directly or indirectly, corrupt the market, damage the health care system, and jeopardize patient health and safety,” said U.S. Attorney Andrew E. Lelling of the District of Massachusetts. 

The SpineFrontier executives set up the separate company partly to evade requirements for device companies to report payments to surgeons to the government, according to the indictment. Some surgeons were told they could bill for more consulting hours if they used more expensive SpineFrontier products, officials said.

Conspiring to violate the kickback laws can bring a sentence of up to five years in prison, while violating the kickback laws can result in a sentence of up to 10 years, officials said.

“Kickbacks paid to surgeons as sham medical consultants, as alleged in this case, cheat patients and taxpayers alike,” said Phillip Coyne, special agent in charge of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General.

“Working with our law enforcement partners, we will continue to investigate kickback schemes that threaten the integrity of our federal health care system, no matter how those schemes are disguised.”

Kaiser Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues.

Sales Reps Assist Surgeons During Implant Operations

By Fred Schulte, Kaiser Health News

Cristina Martinez’s spinal operation in Houston was expected to be routine. But after destabilizing her spine, the surgeon discovered the implant he was ready to put in her back was larger than he wanted to use — and the device company’s sales rep didn’t have a smaller size on hand, according to a report he filed about the operation.

Dr. Ra’Kerry Rahman went ahead with the operation, and Martinez awoke feeling pain and some numbness, she alleges. When Rahman removed the plastic device four days later and replaced it with a smaller one, Martinez suffered nerve damage and loss of feeling in her left leg, she claims.

Martinez is suing the surgeon, implant maker Life Spine Inc., and its distributor and sales representatives, alleging their negligence led to her injuries because the right part wasn’t available during her first surgery. All deny wrongdoing. The case is set for trial in November.

The lawsuit takes aim at the bustling sales networks that orthopedic device manufacturers have built to market ever-growing lines of costly surgical hardware — from spinal implants to replacement knees and artificial hips commonly used in operations. Sales in 2019 topped $20 billion, though covid-19 forced many hospitals to suspend elective surgeries for much of last year.

Device makers train sales reps to offer surgeons technical guidance in the operating room on the use of their products. They pay prominent surgeons to tout their implants at medical conferences — and athletes to offer celebrity endorsements. The industry says these practices help ensure that patients receive the highest-quality care.

But a KHN investigation found these practices also have been blamed for contributing to serious patient harm in thousands of medical malpractice, product liability and whistleblower lawsuits filed over the past decade.

Some patients allege they were injured after sales reps sold or delivered wrong-size or defective implants, while others accuse device makers of misleading doctors about the safety and durability of their products. Six multi-district federal cases have consolidated more than 28,000 suits by patients seeking compensation for injuries involving hip implants, including painful redo operations.

In other court actions, patients and whistleblowers repeatedly have accused device companies of failing to report injury-causing defects to federal regulators as required — or of doling out millions of dollars in illegal kickbacks to surgeons who agreed to use their products. Device makers have denied the allegations and many such cases are settled under confidential terms.

‘Inundated With New Implants’

At least 250 companies sell surgical hardware, and many more distribute it to doctors and hospitals across the country. Spine companies alone obtained more than 1,200 patents for devices in 2018, according to an industry report. Many come to market through a streamlined Food and Drug Administration process that approves their use because they are essentially the same as what is already being sold.

“In orthopedics, we are inundated with a multitude of new implants that debut each year,” Dr. James Kang, chairman of the orthopedic surgery department at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, remarked at a Harvard Medical School roundtable discussion published in 2019.

Kang said surgeons often rely on industry “reps” in the operating room for guidance because it is “usually burdensome and difficult” for surgeons to know “all of the intricate details and nuances” of so many products.

Martinez’s lawsuit says the process went awry during her 2018 spinal fusion in Houston, an operation in which an implant is inserted into the spinal column to replace a worn or damaged disc.

Martinez was under anesthesia, with her spine destabilized, when Rahman discovered the Life Spine surgical kit did not contain any implants shorter than 50 millimeters, or about 2 inches. That was too large, according to the complaint. Martinez, a former day care worker, blames her injuries on the redo operation, which replaced the implant with a 40 mm version Life Spine supplied later.

Through his lawyer, Rahman declined to comment. In court filings, the surgeon has denied responsibility. His operating notes, according to court pleadings, say he had ordered “all lengths available” of the implant through a Life Spine distributor and its sales reps. In a June court filing, Rahman contends the “small area of leg numbness experienced by Ms. Martinez was a known complication of the first surgery … and was not the result of any alleged negligence.”

In the court filing, Rahman also argues it was “appropriate” for him to rely on the sales reps and hospital staff to “inform him as to whether all materials and equipment needed for surgery were available.”

Illinois-based Life Spine also denies blame. In court filings, it says the sales reps initially ordered a sterile kit that included only implants from 50 mm to 55 mm long, which it duly shipped to Houston.

At the time of Martinez’s operation, Life Spine was the target of a sealed whistleblower lawsuit accusing it of paying improper consulting fees and other kickbacks to more than 60 surgeons who agreed to use its wares. Court records in the whistleblower case identify Rahman as one of the company’s paid consultants, although he and the other surgeons were not named as defendants.

Life Spine and two of its executives settled the matter in 2019 by paying a total of nearly $6 million. An orthopedic surgery expert hired by Martinez for her suit faulted Rahman for not making sure he had the right gear “prior to the start of surgery,” according to his report. The expert also criticized the sales rep for failing to bring “all available lengths to the procedure or to inform Dr. Rahman that the necessary implants were not available,” court records show. The sales rep and distributor denied any blame, arguing in court filings that they “met all applicable standards of care.”

Frenzied Competition for Sales

Major device makers train a corps of sales agents, some recruited right out of college, to cultivate and work closely with surgeons — one likened the relationship to a caddy and an avid golfer. Duties can include lugging 20-pound sets of surgical hardware to the operating room, assuring it is sterile and knowing its specifications, though the reps are not required to have medical training or credentials.

Stryker, one of the nation’s top four spine implant manufacturers, spends what it calls “a significant amount of time and money” to train reps. When hired, they typically “shadow” other reps for three to six months, then attend a 10-day intensive “Spine School” and other training. In all, the company said in a court filing, it typically takes eight to 18 months, often longer, to develop “long-term relationships” with customers.

For those who do, the jobs can pay handsomely. Veteran reps who influence which brands of hardware surgeons select command salaries and bonuses that can stretch into the low six figures and beyond, court records show.

The market is so hotly competitive that device makers typically require reps to sign contracts that prohibit them from working for a rival company in the same territory for a year or more — and aren’t shy about suing to fend off raids on their staffs, court records show.

In 2019, DePuy Synthes sued an Alabama sales rep who jumped ship, blaming him for stealing away accounts “worth millions of dollars practically overnight.” An arm of health care giant Johnson & Johnson, DePuy Synthes filed at least two dozen similar suits from 2014 through the end of 2020, court records show. Most, including the case of the Alabama sales rep, have been settled under confidential terms.

Some companies have spent lavishly to poach experienced sales agents — practices that can violate business conduct laws. One allegedly paid a New York sales pro a “staggering, seven-figure signing bonus.” Another is said to have dangled an $800,000-a-year job as “director of surgeon education,” while a gambit to make inroads in the Phoenix market dubbed “Sun Devil” guaranteed a branch manager a $500,000 annual salary, court records show. Another promised a sales agent $900,000 paid out over three years.

Whistleblowers and government investigators have argued for years that so much money changing hands can lead to kickbacks or other marketing schemes that corrupt medical judgment and endanger patients. Some injury suits also have blamed sales reps and distributors for staying mum about product deficiencies they observed in the operating room. These cases often are settled with no admission of wrongdoing.

Sometimes, surgeons help promote implants at medical meetings and other gatherings. Orthopedic surgeons and neurosurgeons received a total of about $511 million in industry consulting fees from 2013 through 2019 and nearly $300 million more for “serving as faculty or speaker” at industry-sponsored events, a KHN analysis of government data found.

Dozens of lawsuits have taken aim at Indiana device maker Biomet’s advertising a hip replacement for “younger, more active patients” that showcased Olympic gold medal gymnast Mary Lou Retton. One ad says “Mary Lou lives pain-free, and so should you.” Yet Retton suffered painful heavy-metal poisoning requiring the implant’s removal and sued the company for damages, according to court records. Retton said she and Biomet settled the suit in 2019 under confidential terms.

Defects Ignored or Downplayed

Whether touted by renowned surgeons or celebrities, orthopedic surgery marketing materials stress quick improvement in a person’s quality of life. That proves true for most patients. Yet researching how often implants fail or cause life-changing injuries — and which brands have the best safety records — can be daunting.

The FDA requires device makers to advise the agency of information “that reasonably suggests” a device they sell “may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury or has malfunctioned” in a way that could recur. The FDA posts the reports on a public website, with the caveat that they may convey “incomplete, inaccurate, untimely, unverified, or biased data.”

KHN found that thousands of malpractice and product liability lawsuits have accused device marketers of concealing or downplaying hardware defects, leaving patients and their doctors in the dark about possible risks. In many cases, these claims are bolstered by company records, or actions by state or federal regulators.

In 2019, for instance, DePuy Synthes paid $120 million to settle a lawsuit filed by 46 state attorneys general; the suit accused the company of advertising that a replacement hip it sold lasted three years in 99.2% of operations, when it knew of data showing that 7% had failed within that time. The company did not admit wrongdoing in settling the case.

British device company Smith & Nephew faces a federal civil proceeding comprising nearly 1,000 injury suits, including one that says the company “underreported and withheld” notices of malfunctions and “willfully ignored the existence of numerous complaints about [its] failures.”

An expert hired by the patients cites a company audit showing “significant adverse events” were logged from two days to 142 days late, while a corporate memo circulated among executives to push sales was titled “Milk the Cash Cow,” according to court records. Smith & Nephew has denied the allegations and in one court paper called the expert’s opinions “speculative.”

John Saltis is suing spinal device company NuVasive over its handling of his complaint that a screw holding his spinal implant in place snapped in May 2016, about 17 months after his operation.

Saltis, 68, was two hours into his workday as a toolmaker at General Electric in Rutland, Vermont, when he felt sharp pain in his neck and shoulder, bad enough to send him to the hospital emergency room. X-rays revealed the screw had broken and, according to Saltis, fractured vertebrae in the process.

Saltis said the San Diego-based device company told the FDA the incident caused no harm. But Saltis said he has lingering numbness and pain in his right hand. As a result, he said, his lifestyle has “changed dramatically.”

“I miss things like bowling and playing toss with my grandkids,” he said.

Hans Pennink for KHN

In 2019, Saltis sued NuVasive without a lawyer, hoping to show the $600 screw was defective. In a court filing, NuVasive said Saltis is arguing “the screw is defective because it broke.” That’s not good enough, according to NuVasive, which argues that Saltis must show the screw was “unreasonably dangerous” to press his claim. In late June, a federal judge agreed and dismissed the suit, though she allowed Saltis to amend his complaint, which he is pursuing. The case is pending.

A Push for Change as Pandemic Eases

As hospitals resume elective operations stalled by the coronavirus, some industry critics see an opportunity to rethink orthopedic surgery practices — from sales to tracking of injuries.

Some want to keep industry reps out of operating rooms and place tighter restrictions on their access to hospitals. They say the current system needlessly drives up health care costs and exposes patients to risks such as infection from extra people in the operating room.

Sales reps say their technical knowledge and skills make operations safer for patients and note that many surgeons enjoy the security of having them present in the operating room. Reps also say they perform tasks that hospitals would need to hire additional personnel to do, such as keeping track of device inventories.

“The industry has embedded reps into the supply chain, and it is a hard culture to break,” said Itai Nemovicher, president of the Orthopaedic Implant Co., which seeks to produce lower-cost implants.

Yet guidelines for “reentry” after covid put out by AdvaMed and the American Hospital Association say medical device reps should deliver “services, information and support remotely whenever possible.” The guidelines advise hospitals to use videoconferencing gear when it “does not compromise patient safety or privacy.”

Dr. Adriane Fugh-Berman, a professor of pharmacology and physiology at Georgetown University, said device reps are viewed as part of the operating room team even though they are there to sell products.

“That is pretty horrifying from a patient’s point of view,” said Fugh-Berman. “Relying on sales reps in the OR is appalling. We need to come up with a better system.”

Greater transparency might have helped Little Rock, Arkansas, resident Christopher Paul Bills. He sued Consensus Orthopedics, the maker of a hip implant system that he alleged failed and sent metal through his hip joint that his surgeon said in 2016 looked “as if a bomb had gone off.” An Australian registry that tracks outcomes of operations identified the implant as having a “higher number” of hip failures compared with other manufacturers, according to the suit.

Bills underwent four operations and spent more than a year in the hospital and in rehabilitation, costs borne by Medicare and private insurance.

“Mr. Bills was left with no right hip at all and his surgeon does not plan to install a replacement hip,” the suit says. Bills uses an electric scooter to get around and hopes to graduate to hand-held crutches. “Since his right leg is useless, he will require a vehicle with hand-controls to drive,” according to the suit. The company disputed Bills’ claims and denied its hip system had any defects.

The case ended in 2019 when Bills died of cancer unrelated to his operations, said his lawyer, Joseph Saunders. “He never did get justice,” Saunders said.

Kaiser Health News is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Kaiser Family Foundation, which is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

FDA Approves Spinal Cord Stimulator for Diabetic Neuropathy

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Like many other people with diabetic neuropathy, Lee Cagle suffered from burning and stinging sensations in his legs – pain so severe that he used sheets at night to build a small tent around his feet so that the fabric didn’t touch his skin and trigger another flare.

The 33-year-old Arkansas man tried pain medications such as hydrocodone and gabapentin (Neurontin), but didn’t like their side effects or potential for addiction.

“I don’t want to get hooked on pain meds. I’ve seen people hooked on pain meds and I didn’t want that for myself,” Cagle told PNN. “I only used them on the worst of worse days, when I could not fall asleep because I was in so much pain.”

Last year Cagle heard about a clinical trial for people with painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN) and decided to take a chance, enrolling in the study to see if a Nevro spinal cord stimulator could relieve his pain. The device emits mild electrical pulses to disrupt pain signals before they reach the brain. 

“It was almost instantaneous. The ease of the pain that it gave me,” Cagle said. “I felt so much better.”

The results from his two-week trial were so promising that Cagle agreed to have the stimulator permanently implanted along his spine during an outpatient procedure. That was nine months ago.

“I’m a completely different person now, compared to what I was before I got it put in my back,” said Cagle, who had only one minor setback when one of the electrodes leading from the stimulator failed.      

Cagle was one of 113 patients with PDN who had Nevro stimulators implanted during the clinical trial. Several dropped out of the study due to adverse events such as infections and two had their devices removed.

Most of those who remained reported significant pain relief of at least 50% and improved quality of life.

NEVRO IMAGE

The overall results were so promising that the Food and Drug Administration recently approved Nevro’s Senza stimulators for the treatment of PDN, making it the only spinal cord stimulation system approved for that condition. The Senza stimulators are unique because they use high frequency electric pulses of 10 kHz, a frequency that doesn’t create an uncomfortable tingling sensation that’s common with other stimulators.

"The substantial pain relief and improved quality of life demonstrates that 10 kHz Therapy can safely and effectively treat this patient population," said lead investigator Dr. Erika Petersen, Professor of Neurosurgery and Director of Functional and Restorative Neurosurgery at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences. "I'm grateful to my co-investigators and the patients who participated in this study, as the results and this approval will have far-reaching impact on the lives of PDN patients."

‘Dangerously Lax’ Oversight

FDA approval of the Nevro stimulator for PDN is a significant expansion of the medical device market. Of the 34 million Americans with diabetes, about one in five have painful neuropathy, a condition that develops when high blood glucose levels damage peripheral nerves. Until now, most spinal cord stimulators were only approved for patients with severe back pain.

FDA approval also comes at a time when the agency is under growing scrutiny for its regulation of medical devices, particularly spinal cord stimulators. A 2020 report by Public Citizen accused the FDA of “dangerously lax” oversight of stimulators, which were linked to 156,000 injuries and 931 deaths. Ironically, the report noted that spinal cord stimulators are often touted as safer alternatives to opioid medication.  

“In the midst of the opioid crisis, medical device companies and medical centers that implant spinal cord stimulators increasingly have been marketing spinal cord stimulation as an alternative to opioids for chronic pain,” the report found. “Importantly, no evidence was provided that spinal cord stimulators reduce the use of opioids.”  

The FDA responded to the Public Citizen report by sending a letter to healthcare providers reminding physicians to only implant stimulators after a trial period that demonstrates the device provides effective pain relief. An FDA review of adverse events involving spinal cord stimulators found that nearly a third were reports of unsatisfactory pain relief. Even worse, the review identified nearly 500 deaths linked to the devices between 2016 and 2020.

A new study published this week in JAMA Internal Medicine concluded that the FDA’s adverse events reporting system for medical devices may significantly underestimate the number of deaths that actually occur. Researchers found the system relies too heavily on adverse events reported by device manufacturers.

The Center for Medicare Services (CMS) is also taking a harder look at spinal cord stimulators. On July 1, CMS implemented a new rule requiring Medicare patients to get prior authorization before a stimulator is implanted. The agency said there has been significant expansion in the use of spinal cord stimulators – about 50,000 are now implanted every year in the U.S. – but it could find no medical reason to justify the increasing number of procedures.

“After reviewing all available data, we found no evidence suggesting other plausible reasons for the increases, which we believe means financial motivation is the most likely cause," CMS said.

Industry groups and some members of Congress lobbied hard against the CMS rule, saying prior authorization would create “significant barriers to access to medically necessary procedures.”    

For patients who are desperate for pain relief, who find medication ineffective or difficult to obtain, spinal cord stimulation may be one of the few options remaining. Asked if he would recommend the Nevro stimulator to other DPN patients, Lee Cagle said he would.

“Definitely. Most definitely. I’m a totally different person now,” he said. “If Nevro came in with something else, if they needed me for a trial study, I wouldn’t hesitate.”  

Medical Device Makers Paid Billions to Doctors To Use Their Products

By Fred Schulte and Elizabeth Lucas, Kaiser Health News

Dr. Kingsley R. Chin was little more than a decade out of Harvard Medical School when sales of his spine surgical implants took off.

Chin has patented more than 40 pieces of such hardware, including doughnut-shaped plastic cages, titanium screws and other products used to repair spines — generating $100 million for his company SpineFrontier, according to government officials.

Yet SpineFrontier’s success arose not from the quality of its goods, these officials say, but because it paid kickbacks to surgeons who agreed to implant the highly profitable devices in hundreds of patients.

In March 2020, the Department of Justice accused Chin and SpineFrontier of illegally funneling more than $8 million to nearly three dozen spine surgeons through “sham consulting fees” that paid them handsomely for doing little or no work. Chin had no comment on the civil suit, one of more than a dozen he has faced as a spine surgeon and businessman. Chin and SpineFrontier have yet to file a response in court.

Medical industry payments to orthopedists and neurosurgeons who operate on the spine have risen sharply, despite government accusations that some of these transactions may violate federal anti-kickback laws, drive up health care spending and put patients at risk of serious harm, a KHN investigation has found.

These payments come in various forms, from royalties for helping to design implants to speakers’ fees for promoting devices at medical meetings to stock holdings in exchange for consulting work, according to government data.

Health policy experts and regulators have focused for decades on pharmaceutical companies’ payments to doctors — which research has shown can influence which drugs they prescribe. But far less is known about the impact of similar payments from device companies to surgeons. A drug can readily be stopped if deemed harmful, while surgical devices are permanently implanted in the body and often replace native bone that has been removed.

‘Staggering’ Amounts of Money

Every year, a torrent of cash and other compensation flows to these surgeons from manufacturers of hardware for spinal implants, artificial knees and hip joints — totaling more than $3.1 billion from August 2013 through the end of 2019, a KHN analysis of government data found. These bone specialists make up a quarter of U.S. doctors who have accepted at least $100,000 or more, and two-thirds of those who raked in $1 million or more, from the medical device and drug industries last year, the data shows.

“It is simply so much money that it is staggering,” said Dr. Eugene Carragee, a professor of orthopedic surgery at the Stanford University Medical Center and critic of the medical device industry’s influence. Much of the money is deemed to be compensation for consulting duties or medical research, or royalties for inventing, or fine-tuning, new surgical tools and techniques. In some cases, it pays for trips or splashy junkets or rewards surgeons for promoting products to their peers.

Device makers say the long-established practice leads to higher-quality, safer products. “Doctors help develop and refine medical devices, and they even create new devices themselves, sharing their intellectual property with companies to help save and improve patients’ lives,” said Scott Whitaker, president and CEO of AdvaMed, the medical technology industry’s trade group.

But industry whistleblowers and government investigators say all that money changing hands can corrupt medical judgment and tempt surgeons to perform unnecessary and wasteful operations. In ongoing lawsuits, patients say they have suffered life-altering injuries from screws or other spinal hardware that snapped apart or live with disabilities they blame on defective knee or hip implants.

Patients alleging injuries range from seniors on Medicare to celebrities such as Olympic gold medalist Mary Lou Retton, who had surgery to replace both her hips. The gymnast sued device maker Biomet in January 2018, alleging the hip implants were defective. The suit has since been settled under confidential terms.

The case of Chin’s company, SpineFrontier, is among more than 100 federal fraud and whistleblower actions, filed or settled mostly in the past decade, that accuse implant surgeons of taking illegal compensation from device makers — from surgeon entrepreneurs like Chin to marquee names like Medtronic and Johnson & Johnson. In some cases, device makers have paid hundreds of millions of dollars in fines to wrangle out of trouble for their involvement, often without admitting any wrongdoing.

Court pleadings examined by KHN identified more than 700 surgeons who have taken money, including dozens who pocketed millions in royalties, fees or other compensation from 2013 through 2019. The names of hundreds more surgeons were redacted in court filings or sealed by judges.

Court filings named 35 spine surgeons who used SpineFrontier’s surgical gear, some for years. At least six of those surgeons have admitted wrongdoing and paid a total of $3.3 million in penalties. Another has pleaded guilty to criminal charges. It’s illegal under federal law to accept anything of value from a device maker for using its wares, though most offenders don’t face criminal prosecution.

Chin, 57, who lives in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and owns SpineFrontier through his investment company, declined comment about the DOJ lawsuit or the consulting agreements.

“There is a court date [for the DOJ case] as ordered by a judge,” Chin said via email. “If we get to that point the facts of the case will be litigated.”

Back Surgeries Under Scrutiny

The nation’s outlay for spine surgery to treat back pain, or to replace worn-out knees and hips, tops $20 billion a year, according to one industry report. Taxpayers shoulder much of that cost through Medicare, the federal program for those 65 and older, and Medicaid, which caters to low-income people.

In one common spinal procedure, surgeons may replace damaged discs with an implant and screws and metal rods that hold it in place. The demand for surgery to replace worn-out knees and hips also has mushroomed as aging boomers and others seek relief from joint pain that restricts their movement.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the competition for sales of orthopedic devices is fierce: Some 250 companies proffer a dizzying array of products. Industry critics blame the Food and Drug Administration, which allows manufacturers to roll out new hardware that is substantially equivalent to what already is sold — though it often is marketed as more durable, or otherwise better for patients.

“The money is just phenomenal for this medical hardware,” said Dr. James Rickert, a spine surgeon and head of the Society for Patient Centered Orthopedics, an advocacy group. He said most of the products are “essentially the same,” adding: “These are not technical instruments; [it’s often] just a screw.”

Hospitals can end up charging patients $20,000 or more for the materials, though they pay much less for them. Spine surgeons — who make upward of $500,000 a year — bill separately and may charge $8,000 to $20,000 for major procedures.

Which equipment hospitals choose may fall to the preference of surgeons, who are wooed by manufacturing sales reps possibly present in the operating room.

And it doesn’t stop there. Whistleblower cases filed under the federal False Claims Act allege a startling array of schemes to influence surgeons, including compensating them for joining a medical society created and financed by a device company. In other cases, companies bought billboard space or other advertising to promote medical practitioners, hired surgeons’ relatives, paid for hunting trips — even mailed checks to their homes.

Orthopedic and neurosurgeons collected more than half a billion dollars in industry consulting fees from 2013 through 2019, federal payment records show.

These gigs are legal so long as they involve professional work done at fair market value. But they have drawn fire as far back as 2007, when four manufacturers that dominated the hip and knee implant market, including a J&J division, agreed to pay $311 million to settle charges of violating anti-kickback laws through their consulting deals.

KHN found at least 20 whistleblower suits, some settled, others pending, that have since accused device makers of camouflaging kickbacks as consulting work, including paying doctors to sit on suspect “advisory boards” or other activities that entailed little work to justify the fees.

In November 2019, device maker Life Spine and two of its executives admitted to paying consulting fees to induce dozens of surgeons to use Life Spine’s implants in the operating room. In all, 21 of the top 30 Life Spine adopters were paid and they accounted for about half its total device sales, according to the Justice Department. Life Spine and the executives paid a total of $6 million in penalties. The company did not respond to requests for comment.

Similarly, SpineFrontier received “the vast majority” of its sales, more than $100 million worth, from surgeons who were compensated, the Justice Department alleges. Often, they were paid by way of a “sham” company run by Chin’s wife, Vanessa, from a mail drop in Fort Lauderdale, according to the Justice Department. Vanessa Dudley Chin, a defendant in the DOJ civil case, had no comment.

Kingsley Chin told KHN via email that he takes no salary from SpineFrontier, based in Malden, Massachusetts. In 2013, Chin received $4.3 million in income from the company, according to court filings in a divorce case in Philadelphia from an earlier marriage. In 2018, SpineFrontier valued Chin’s interest in the company at $75 million, according to government records, though its current worth is unclear.

SpineFrontier’s management thought paying doctors was “the only reliable way to steadily increase its market share and stave off competition,” Charles Birchall, a former business associate of Chin’s, alleged in a whistleblower complaint. The case is one of two whistleblower suits filed against SpineFrontier that the DOJ has joined and consolidated. Chin has yet to file a response in court.

From March 2013 through December 2018, the company offered some surgeons $500 or more an hour for “consulting,” which could include the time they spent operating on patients — even though they already were being paid by Medicare or other health insurers. Other surgeons were paid repeatedly to “evaluate” the same products, though their feedback was “often minimal or nonexistent,” according to the DOJ complaint.

Patient Injuries Pile Up

While the payments have piled up for doctors, so have injuries for patients, according to lawsuits against device makers and whistleblower testimony.

Orthopedic surgeon-turned-whistleblower Dr. Manuel Fuentes is suing his former employer, Florida device maker Exactech, alleging it offered “phony” consulting deals to surgeons who had complained about alarming defects in one of its knee implants.

Their findings should have been forwarded to the FDA to protect the public, Fuentes and two former Exactech sales reps alleged in their suit. Instead, the company paid the surgeons “to retain their business and secure their silence” about patients needlessly undergoing a second operation to address the defects implanted in the first, according to the suit. Lawyer Thomas Beimers, who represents Exactech in the case, said the company “emphatically denies the allegations and looks forward to presenting the real facts to the court.” In a court filing, the company said the suit was “full of conclusory, vague and immaterial facts” and said it should be dismissed.

In Maryland, spine surgeon Dr. Randy F. Davis faces a lawsuit filed in early 2020 by 14 former patients who claim he implanted counterfeit hardware from a device distributor that had paid him hundreds of thousands of dollars in consulting fees and other compensation.

Davis used the hardware, which had not been FDA-approved, on about 250 patients at the University of Maryland Baltimore Washington Medical Center in Glen Burnie, Maryland, according to the suit. Several patients say screws or other implants failed and they sustained permanent injuries as a result. One woman said she was left with little feeling in her right foot and needs a cane or walker to get around. Others claim “extreme mental anguish” for fear the hardware inside them will fail, according to the suit.

The patients allege that Davis improperly disposed of defective screws and other hardware he removed rather than send the items for analysis or report the failures to authorities. Instead, the University of Maryland hospital sent “hush” letters to patients that falsely told them that no defects had been found, according to the suit. A spokesperson for the hospital, which also is a defendant in the suit, denied the allegations, noting: “We will vigorously defend this lawsuit and at its conclusion are quite confident we will prevail.” Davis and his lawyer didn’t respond to repeated requests for comment. The lawsuit is pending in Anne Arundel County state court.

Surgeons are free to implant devices they helped bring to market or promoted, though doing so can prompt criticism when injuries or defects occur.

That happened when three patients filed lawsuits in 2018 against Arthrex, a Florida device company. The patients argued they were forced to undergo repeat operations to replace defective Arthrex knee devices implanted by Pennsylvania orthopedic surgeon Dr. Thomas Meade.

Meade was not a defendant in the cases. But the patients accused him of misleading them about the product’s safety and a recall. One noted that Meade had served as a prominent consultant to Arthrex and had “participated in the design, testing, marketing, promotion and sales” of the knee implant. The patient alleged that Arthrex had paid Meade more than $250,000 for work that included “promotional speaking, travel, lodging, and consulting.”

In court filings, Arthrex admitted making payments to Meade for “consulting and royalties” but denied wrongdoing. The cases were settled in 2020. Meade did not respond to requests for comment.

Chin’s dual roles as SpineFrontier’s CEO and user of its hardware was called a “huge” conflict of interest by a judge in a pending malpractice case filed against him and the company in South Florida.

In that case, Miami resident Patrick Chapoteau alleges Chin performed back surgery in 2014 using SpineFrontier hardware even though it had little chance of success. According to the suit, a Chin-designed screw implanted to stabilize Chapoteau’s spine broke in half, causing him pain and disabling injuries.

In a legal brief, Chin’s lawyers argued that he regularly operates on people with disabling back problems, noting: “The surgery is sophisticated and challenging. On a few rare occasions, his patients have not obtained the relief they expected or experienced unanticipated complications that required additional care.”

Joseph Wooten, a former Chin patient and Florida power company employee, alleged in a 2014 lawsuit in Broward County Circuit Court that Chin had 15 previous malpractice claims that had ended in more than $8 million in settlements, an assertion Chin’s lawyers disputed.

“He never told me of his bad record injuring people,” Wooten, 64, wrote in a court filing. He and his wife, Kim, said the surgery caused “debilitating and life-altering injuries.” The case has since been settled. Chin acknowledged no wrongdoing and the terms are confidential.

KHN reviewed court pleadings in nine settled malpractice cases in Philadelphia, where Chin served on the faculty of the University of Pennsylvania Medical School from 2003 to 2007, and six in South Florida filed since 2012. Details of the settlements are confidential. Five of the six South Florida cases are pending, including one filed in December by the widow of a man who died shortly after spine surgery. In all the cases and settlements, Chin has denied negligence.

In her lawsuit pending against Chin in South Florida, Nancy Lazo of Hialeah Gardens, Florida, said she slipped and tumbled down the stairs outside her Miami office, landing on her back and arm. When the pain would not go away, she turned to Chin and had two operations, in 2014 and 2015. Her lawyers allege that a SpineFrontier screw Chin implanted in her spine in the second procedure caused nerve damage. Lazo, 51, a former billing clerk with two adult sons, said she can no longer work and remains in “constant” pain. “Based on what my doctors have told me,” she said, “I will never get back to normal.” Chin denied any negligence and the case is pending.

Government Struggles to Keep Pace

Concerns that industry payments can corrupt medical practice have been aired repeatedly at congressional hearings, in media exposés and in federal investigations. The recurring scandals led Congress to require that device makers and pharmaceutical companies report the payments, starting in August 2013, to a government-run website called Open Payments. That website shows that payments to all doctors have risen from $8.6 billion in 2014 to just over $10 billion last year. A recent study found payments by device makers exceeded those of pharmaceutical companies by a wide margin.

Both the North American Spine Society and the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons told KHN that close ties with the industry, while seeming to generate huge payouts to some surgeons, lead to the design of safer and better implants.

“These interactions are really essential for good outcomes in patient care and that needs to be preserved,” said Dr. Joshua J. Jacobs, who chairs the orthopedic surgery department at Rush University Medical Center in Chicago and the AAOS’ ethics committee.

Although more than 600,000 American doctors lap up industry largesse, most do so through small payments that cover the cost of food, drinks and travel to industry-sponsored events. When it comes to big money, however, orthopedists and neurosurgeons dominate, collecting 25% of the total — even though they represent only 5% of the doctors accepting payments, according to the KHN analysis of Open Payments data.

Dr. Charles Rosen, a spine surgeon and co-founder of the advocacy group Association for Medical Ethics, said he was once offered $2,000 just to show up and watch an industry-sponsored panel. “It was quite unbelievable,” he said.

Rosen said while he believes a “relatively small number” of surgeons cash whopping industry checks, many who do so are influential figures who can “help direct medical care.”

Government data confirms that even as several orthopedic and neurosurgeons received tens of millions of dollars in 2019, 81% of them got less than $5,000 from industry.

Federal officials recently signaled their displeasure with the hefty fees paid to doctors who promote their products to peers, especially at restaurants, entertainment or sports venues that feature free food and booze but little educational content. In November, the inspector general at the Department of Health and Human Services issued a special fraud alert that such gestures could violate anti-kickback laws.

Companies that ignore the reporting law can be fined up to $1 million, though no fines were levied from 2014 through spring 2020, according to a CMS report. That changed in October, when device giant Medtronic agreed to pay the government $9.2 million to settle allegations that it paid kickbacks to Sioux Falls, South Dakota, neurosurgeon Dr. Wilson Asfora to promote its goods.

Officials said the company sponsored more than 100 events at a Brazilian restaurant owned by the surgeon to clinch the sales. Just over $1 million of the fine was assessed for failing to report the transactions. A Medtronic spokesperson said the company fired or took other disciplinary action against the sales employees involved and “remains committed to maintaining the highest standards of ethical conduct.”

KHN identified four spinal device makers — including SpineFrontier — that have been accused in whistleblower cases of scheming to hide consulting payments from the government.

Responding to written questions, a CMS spokesperson said the agency “has multiple formal compliance actions pending which it is unable to discuss further at this time.”

But penalties for paying, or accepting, kickbacks often are small compared with the profits they can generate.

“Some people would say if you penalize companies enough, they won’t be making these offers,” said Genevieve Kanter, an assistant professor at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine. She said small fines may be chalked up to the “cost of doing business.”

The Federation of State Medical Boards does not keep data on how often its members discipline doctors for civil kickback offenses, according to spokesperson Joe Knickrehm. The federation has “long advocated for stronger reporting requirements,” Knickrehm said.

Justice Department officials would not discuss whether they are seeking fines from more surgeons. But in a statement in April 2020, then-U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts Andrew E. Lelling noted that the government will investigate any doctor “who accepts money from a device manufacturer simply for using that company’s products.”

Kaiser Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues.

Faulty Medical Devices Blamed for Thousands of Deaths

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said today it would take steps to modernize and improve its oversight of medical devices in the wake of a scathing new report that found faulty devices were responsible for over 83,000 deaths and 1.7 million injuries worldwide in the last decade.

The “Implant Files” project, a year-long joint investigation by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) and over 50 media partners, found that the FDA approved many devices with little clinical testing and rarely pulled them off the market when problems arose.

Spinal cord stimulators have some of the worst safety records among the 4,000 devices tracked by the FDA, the ICIJ found. Stimulators are implanted near the spine and send electric currents to block pain signals from reaching the brain. The devices are often touted as safer alternatives to opioid pain medication and about 60,000 are now implanted annually.

But a review of FDA data found over 500 deaths and 80,000 injuries involving stimulators since 2008. Patients reported being shocked or burned by the devices and many had them removed.  

“I thought I would have a wonderful life,” a disabled 45-year old South Carolina man told the Associated Press. “But look at me.”

Jim Taft’s doctor told him a spinal cord stimulator would cloak the chronic pain in his severely injured right arm and make him “good as new.” But a wire in the device broke and after an operation to repair it, Taft said it shocked him so many times he had trouble sleeping and fell down a flight of stairs. The stimulator was removed within a year of being implanted and Taft is now bedridden.  

“This is my death sentence,” Taft said from his bed. “I’ll die here.”

Outdated FDA Review Process

Artificial hips, pain pumps, spinal disc replacements and hundreds of other devices were also found to be faulty, raising concern about the level of scrutiny they received before going on the market.   

“In contrast to drugs, many surgical innovations are introduced without clinical trial data or centrally held evidence,” Professor Derek Alderson, president of the Royal College of Surgeon, told The Guardian.  “This is a risk to patient safety and public confidence.”

FDA commissioner Scott Gottlieb, MD, said his agency would modernize its “outdated” 40-year old review process for medical devices.

“The new technology that we’re seeing holds tremendous public health promise for patients. But with the advances also come new complexities that can make the review of safety and effectiveness more challenging,” Gottlieb said in a statement.

“Advances in material science, digital health, 3D printing and other technologies continue to drive an unparalleled period of invention in medical devices. It’s vital that the FDA’s regulatory approach continue to evolve and modernize to safely and efficiently advance these opportunities. Not only must we keep pace with this complexity and innovation, but we must also stay ahead of the new and evolving risks that sometimes accompany this progress.”

Gottlieb said about 20% of medical devices are based on technology that is more than 10 years old. He said the FDA would consider releasing a list of those devices in order to stimulate the use of newer technologies.

“To be clear, we don’t believe devices that rely on old predicates are unsafe, or that older devices need to be removed from the market. However, we believe that encouraging product developers to use more modern predicates would give patients and their doctors a choice among older and newer versions of a type of device,” Gottlieb said.

Do you have a medical device and want to check its safety record? The ICIJ has a database of over 70,000 recalls, safety alerts and safety notices in 11 countries. You can search by the device name or manufacturer by clicking here.

FDA Wants More Medical Devices to Treat Pain

By Pat Anson, Editor

The deadline is fast approaching for companies to enter the Food and Drug Administration’s medical device challenge, a contest of sorts aimed at stimulating the development of new technologies to treat pain and prevent opioid abuse.

The FDA announced the innovation program in May and the deadline for applications is September 30.  Medical devices in any state of development – including those already on the market – are eligible for submission.

“Medical devices, including digital health devices like mobile medical apps, have the potential to play a unique and important role in tackling the opioid crisis,” FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, MD, said in a statement. “Better medical devices that can effectively address local pain syndromes can, in some cases, supplant the use of systemic opioids. This can help reduce overall use of opioids.”

Devices that are found to innovative will receive a “breakthrough device” designation from the FDA – similar to the “fast track” designation that the agency gives to promising pharmaceutical drugs. With fewer regulatory hurdles, companies can bring their products to the market sooner.

“I think its great. It’s exactly the kind of thing that’s needed,” said Shai Gozani, MD, President and CEO of NeuroMetrix, the maker of Quell. “It’s a little unclear what exactly they’ll offer to the winners. It looks like they’ll give you intensive help for a period of time to climb the regulatory pathway."

In recent years, the FDA has granted or approved over 200 devices related to the treatment and management of pain. One of them was Quell – a nerve stimulation device worn just below the knee – that relieves pain without drugs in patients suffering from arthritis, neuropathy, fibromyalgia and other chronic conditions. Since its release in 2015, over 150,000 Quell devices have been shipped.

This week NeuroMetrix released Quell 2.0 – an updated version that is half the size and weight. Customers wanted a smaller device to make it easier and more comfortable to wear throughout the day and while sleeping.

NEUROMETRIX IMAGE

“The feedback we got from customers over the past three years is that the single most valuable way to improve the product was to make it smaller,” said Gozani.  “Quell 2.0 is half the size, without any sacrifice in the electric stimulation characteristics. In fact, we increased the power by 20 percent, which allows us to stretch the range of patients that can be treated even further.”    

Gozani told PNN there is no single disorder or medical condition that Quell works best on -– it depends more on the individual, who may live with a variety of different conditions.

“Most people who use our product typically have five sites of pain and three or four medical conditions. It’s not like you can say that person has diabetes or that person has lower back pain or knee osteoarthritis. It all overlaps,” he said. “Surprisingly, we’ve seen that it works better in older adults than in younger.”

PNN columnist Jennifer Kilgore, who lives with chronic back pain, has used Quell every day for three years. She appears below in this promotional video for Quell.

A major difference between Quell 2.0 and the older “classic” Quell is that the new version is operated entirely by an app. It adjusts therapy automatically based on body position and doesn’t need to be turned on and off.

Quell is sold over-the-counter, does not require a prescription and is not usually covered by insurance. Quell 2.0 sells for $299, while the classic Quell is still available at $249. There’s a 60-day money back guarantee for both.

For more information, click here.

Why ‘The Bleeding Edge’ Gave Me a Panic Attack

By Emily Ullrich, Guest Columnist

If you haven't seen it yet, you've likely heard the buzz about The Bleeding Edge on Netflix. This documentary should be seen by every adult in America, not just chronically ill or chronic pain patients.

The Bleeding Edge gives insight and affirmation to those of us who have dealt with the medical system a little too much and demonstrates how important self-advocacy is. If you haven't seen it yet, don't let what I'm about to tell you deter you. I've seen it twice now. The first time I watched it, I had a full-on panic attack because it reminded me of the infuriating ordeal I went through dealing with the American medical system.

I wanted to watch the film again, hoping I would be able to watch it more objectively. I made it through the second time without a panic attack, but I was still yelling at the screen.

The film covers an array of medical device errors and malfunctions. But more importantly, it also delves into the mistakes and oversights that the FDA, CDC, American Medical Association and others have made (and continue to make) at the expense of our health because it's more lucrative to make us sick than it is to ensure our safety.

One of the main topics in The Bleeding Edge is the autoimmune disorders that many women developed after the implantation of the Essure birth control device. I was especially stricken by this story.

My first experience with chronic pain was pelvic pain, due in part to endometriosis. I started having my periods when I was 11 years old, and by age 12 was literally passing out because of the severe pain I had when menstruating. I saw doctor after doctor, and every one of them told me the same three things:

“This is normal.”

“At least part, if not all of this, is psychological.”

“Take ibuprofen and a hot bath, and you'll be fine.”

Of course, they were all wrong.

By age 19, I went to probably my twelfth doctor. She decided, in her infinite and culturally superior attitude, that since I had two sexual partners in my lifetime that I must be promiscuous. And if I continued this reckless behavior, she would not be able treat me and would be forced to tell my parents. When I told her I didn't need to be judged or lectured, she clucked her tongue and shook her head, as though I was a lost cause.

Many years and irresponsible, uncaring and uninformed doctors later, at age 31, I went to a doctor who told me I probably had endometriosis and performed a laparoscopic procedure to confirm this diagnosis. The procedure was also supposed to remove it and I was supposed to feel better. It didn't.

As I aged, it got worse. And as I moved around the country, I had to go through the degrading and exasperating experience of finding a doctor who believed me and believed in endometriosis. Many OB/GYN's and MD's still do not.  Even now, I see doctors on occasion who refer to it as a “garbage pail diagnosis.”

The Mirena IUD

At age 36, I was finally referred to a pelvic pain specialist. He believed in my pain and suffering and wanted to help. I cried because he was so nice.

After a fourth endometrial ablation surgery, he suggested the Mirena IUD as a long-term solution to my problem. He said it would not only prevent pregnancy but would be effective in reducing or eliminating my periods. As I lay back to have the IUD inserted, he assured me that it would not be painful that I would merely feel a “slight pinch.”

I never felt ANYTHING as excruciatingly painful. The doctor mistakenly punctured the fundus of my uterus. So, he casually penetrated me again with the same invasive tools, pulled the IUD out, opened a new one and attempted to place it. My uterus simply spat it back out at him. He said, laughing, “Your body doesn't seem to like this! Wanna try it again?”

I should have listened to my body and said no. But he tried again and finally placed it. For the next nine months. I bled profusely every day and the pain was worse than ever. I called and visited the doctor numerous times throughout these months, and every time he assured me the bleeding would stop and I should be patient.

Finally, I marched into an appointment and demanded he remove it. He did, and although I had pain for the next few days, it finally got a little better.

My point in all of this is that I now have about 15 chronic pain conditions. And with each one, I have a similar horror story. I feel a connection to the women who had the Essure device and who later developed autoimmune illnesses because of it. I will never know if any of my ongoing list of health problems stemmed from the Mirena, but I do know that after my bad experience with it and a few other attempted medical devices, my body doesn't respond well to foreign objects.

We are all different chronic pain snowflakes, if you will, and different treatments work for different people. However, as one goes through the process of repetitive ER visits, hospital admissions and doctor's appointments, we get to know what we can and cannot tolerate pretty well.

The pain patients' mantra of “Be Your Own Best Advocate” could not be hammered home better than it was watching The Bleeding Edge. The film struck a deep chord within me about the irresponsibility of our government, medical companies and doctors, as well as their willingness to suspend disbelief if it is easier and more financially convenient, even if it's at the cost of people's lives.

It is very much like the movement to stop the use of opioids, a proven and mostly safe class of pain medication, while encouraging the use of under-tested drugs with bad side effects that are often prescribed off label to treat conditions they were never intended for. It doesn't matter anymore if the patient has a better life or not. It only matters that the medical system drains our wallets and souls, while selling theirs.

Still, after all of this, we have to fight. We have to because no one else is going to do it for us. We have to do our own research and educate ourselves about medical devices and treatments.

As The Bleeding Edge demonstrates, when you can buy stock in healthcare companies, when government became controlled by corporations, and when doctors get paid for using and recommending their products, we lost the ability to trust them. 

Emily Ullrich lives with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS), Sphincter of Oddi Dysfunction, Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, endometriosis,  Interstitial Cystitis, migraines, fibromyalgia, osteoarthritis, PTSD, insomnia, bursitis, depression, multiple chemical sensitivity, and chronic pancreatitis.

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represents the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.