Purchase this story for only $7.99!
Add to CartFor access to all our articles, check out our subscription options.
May 5-8, 2024
Amplify Your Impact There’s no limit to what you can achieve when you join the global risk managem …
May 13-15, 2024
Join us May 13–15, 2024, for NCCI's Annual Insights Symposium (AIS) 2024, the industry’s premier e …
May 13-14, 2024
The Board of Managers is excited to announce that the CSIA 2024 Annual Meeting and Educational Con …
2 Comments
Log in to post a comment
Steven Chandler Nov 25, 2019 a 4:11 pm PST
Regarding Gurvey's comments about the doctor's best interests, he seems to forget and/or significantly discount the fact that MTUS, ACOEM, ODG and other guidelines are based on research and peer review - not one physician. Sure, I get the benefits of a physical exam to persuade an opinion but really, why can't this be better documented with a discussion as to why this patient doesn't fit into the norm?
As for Young, his reference to doctor-sanctioned care assumes no of us remember the time when the physician was presumed to be correct. This was a boon to applicant attorneys as costs skyrocketed, injuries enveloped other pre-existing, disability was through the roof, TTD was almost endless; businesses closed and left CA; and, of course, attorneys collected the highest in fees ever. Ya that worked out well. I'm curious why the writer chose not to include the opinion of a defense attorney in the story considering she used multiple applicant attorneys.
John Don Nov 25, 2019 a 5:11 pm PST
Instead of 60 tablets - you only need 5 & there's nothing you can do to rebutt this?