Mmmm, this doesn't surprise me that much. Propofol is used for short procedures, for example colonoscopy, so i'm sure it has uses in other fields too. Not sure what the law is for practising while under investigation though. Murray would have been trained to use short acting anaesthetics, like gastroenterologists do, but not in keeping someone sedated for hours.
Mmmm, this doesn't surprise me that much. Propofol is used for short procedures, for example colonoscopy, so i'm sure it has uses in other fields too. Not sure what the law is for practising while under investigation though. Murray would have been trained to use short acting anaesthetics, like gastroenterologists do, but not in keeping someone sedated for hours.
The State Board of Medicine where Murray is licensed COULD pull his license under an emergency order. Murray would have the right to a hearing to show cause why his license should not be pulled. I believe that the information regarding this case was never given to the Nevada licensing board. If someone were to make a complaint and attach the now public Affadivit in Support of the Search Warrant in the murder investigation, I would expect them to have a hearing.
The affadivit that I read, which was not a certified true copy, stated that Murray admitted to administering 25 mgs of Diprovan (Propofol) around 11 AM. after numerous other sedatives were administered all night. According to some doctors, this additive effect could have caused cardiac arrest. Also, people stop breathing under Propofol and it is dealt with in the hospital. He didn't have the right equipment.
This is not MY opinion, but what is contained in the affidavit from the police and filed in court.
Now, apart from the affidavit, 25 mgs was not a massive overdose, so there had to be something else discovered afterwards or they are counting the other drugs in calling it an overdose. Remember, they were going for probably cause to search the doctor's and MJ's place.
The point here is that you would THINK the licensing authority would have the info, but I don't think the DEA sent it to them. I think a member of the public should and should ask why the man is not considered a risk to the public safety. The DEA revokes DEA numbers on docs every day on the SPOT when they think a doctor is over prescribing narcotics--so why didn't they do something to this guy?
To me, that is one of the more powerful pieces of evidence right there. They DO NOT have to have a conviction yet. If they say they do, then ask the DEA why they didn't revoke his license or if they have done so on any of the docs who wrote RXs under aliases (IF THIS IS TRUE).
I find it disturbing that they are saying that he overdosed a patient yet he is still free to practice. It makes no sense.
This link kind of reiterates what you said (watch the vid on the left too), it is odd that he is still allowed to practise, but who's responsible for that?. Also he lied to the paramedics and team of docs at the hospital. He did not tell them he administered propofol. Is that not negligent when they're trying to save a life?
Comments
The State Board of Medicine where Murray is licensed COULD pull his license under an emergency order. Murray would have the right to a hearing to show cause why his license should not be pulled. I believe that the information regarding this case was never given to the Nevada licensing board. If someone were to make a complaint and attach the now public Affadivit in Support of the Search Warrant in the murder investigation, I would expect them to have a hearing.
The affadivit that I read, which was not a certified true copy, stated that Murray admitted to administering 25 mgs of Diprovan (Propofol) around 11 AM. after numerous other sedatives were administered all night. According to some doctors, this additive effect could have caused cardiac arrest. Also, people stop breathing under Propofol and it is dealt with in the hospital. He didn't have the right equipment.
This is not MY opinion, but what is contained in the affidavit from the police and filed in court.
Now, apart from the affidavit, 25 mgs was not a massive overdose, so there had to be something else discovered afterwards or they are counting the other drugs in calling it an overdose. Remember, they were going for probably cause to search the doctor's and MJ's place.
The point here is that you would THINK the licensing authority would have the info, but I don't think the DEA sent it to them. I think a member of the public should and should ask why the man is not considered a risk to the public safety. The DEA revokes DEA numbers on docs every day on the SPOT when they think a doctor is over prescribing narcotics--so why didn't they do something to this guy?
To me, that is one of the more powerful pieces of evidence right there. They DO NOT have to have a conviction yet. If they say they do, then ask the DEA why they didn't revoke his license or if they have done so on any of the docs who wrote RXs under aliases (IF THIS IS TRUE).
I find it disturbing that they are saying that he overdosed a patient yet he is still free to practice. It makes no sense.
<!-- m -->http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/08/ ... ontentBody<!-- m -->