SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A surgeon has admitted to branding the livers of two patients using a beam of ionized argon gas:
Bramhall previously worked at Birmingham's Queen Elizabeth hospital, where he gained fame for a dramatic liver transplant in 2010. Bramhall transplanted a liver following the fiery crash-landing of the plane that was transporting the donor liver to Birmingham. Though the pilots were injured, the liver was intact and salvaged from the burning wreckage. The transplant spared the life of Dr. Bramhall's desperately ill patient.
But in 2013, colleagues discovered that he had been initialing his patients' organs. Doctors first spotted the letters "SB" on the liver of one of Bramhall's transplant patients during a follow-up surgery. They later learned of initials on another patient. Bramhall was suspended in 2013 and resigned in 2014 amid an internal investigation into the etchings. Earlier this year, the General Medical Council issued Bramhall a formal warning, saying at the time that Bramhall's case "risks bringing the profession into disrepute, and it must not be repeated."
Bramhall etched his initials using an argon beam—a jet of ionized argon gas—which surgeons use to control bleeding during procedures. Doctors who are part of the investigation don't think the marks are harmful and expect them to clear up on their own.
Also at BBC and The Guardian.
(Score: 2) by crafoo on Thursday December 14 2017, @01:35AM (1 child)
Surgeons are cocky assholes. But it's probably alright. You don't want your hands in the life of a meek, squirmy, second and third guessing people pleaser.
What this guy did was in bad taste. It doesn't sound like it's a permanent mark, and even if it was, had no real effect on organ function.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 14 2017, @04:27AM
Well, speaking from the Engineering side, I have worked with some pretty good engineers - as far as technical stuff went. They weren't "people pleasers", rather their main concern was perfection. Generally, the "leadership" types seemed to hate them, and spent a lot of time trying to figure how to get these people removed from the company, despite the fact their stuff worked.
It was usually pretty easy to get rid of them though... just set them up to insubordinate. Many executives consider the skill to lay off more important than the skills to build something.
Then I have seen the "people pleaser" types. They shot right up the ranks. Sharp dressers. Hand-Shakers. Party-Boys. Technology was not their forte. For them, they tolerated tech-talk as a vehicle to get them what they really wanted: money, prestige, power. And they sure seemed threatened by those who did the engineering because they had a love for it.
Once the company's founder had sold the company off, and the suit-guys were in charge, our engineering department became a clusterfuck. Everyone was looking good, nobody was doing anything. There weren't any minions around anymore to actually design anything. All we could do is sign paperwork prepared for our signatures.
If I had to go under the knife, I sure would want someone of the mental framework as those crusty old engineers who insisted the job be done right, despite what the paper-pushers had to say. It wasn't very easy to find those kind of people long time ago, and I believe its even harder to find them today, given the social pressure of being a people pleaser to get anywhere today.