March 29th, 2007 Lohman wrote ...
A friend sent me an interesting article below which reveals certain surgical procedures to a very private part of a female anatomy ... TODAY Online: Hot News //Friday, December 15, 2006 The Surgical gloves are off. It's doctor versus doctors as gynaecologists take on plastic surgeon Tan Hui Leng.
In a rare public confrontation, a group of surgeons here have crossed scalpets. At one end of the operating table, one of Singapore's most renowned plastic surgeons; at the other end, a group of top gynaecologists in public and private practice. Between them a war of words challenging the competency of a fellow medical professional, and accusations of "protecting turf" erupted - all over two procedures. The dispute arose from a newspaper feature on plastic surgeon Dr. Martin Huang, the executive director of listed Pacific Healthcare Holdings, which runs a clinic at Orchard Road. In the feature, Dr. Huang claimed he was the only plastic surgeon in Singapore certified to offer Designer Laser Vaginaplasty (DLV) and Laser Vagina Rejuvenation (LVR). DLV modifies the appearance of the vagina and LVR tightens loose muscles. The latter is said to be a modified version of a gynaecological procedure to treat loose muscles and its associated symptoms, especially Stress Urinary Incontinence (SUI).
The article evoked a strong response. On Wednesday, five obstetric and gynaecology (O&G) specialists sent a jointly signed letter to The Business Times taking issue with Dr. huang's claims. The doctors were "alarmed" at the fact that an aesthetic specialist - after only three days of training - could claim to be certified to perform the procedures, whereas it takes six years of post-graduaate training and examinations before the Ministry of Health accredits them as specialists. "It's not a procedure you can learn over three days," Dr. Tay Eng Hseon, chairman of KK Women's & Children's Hospital's medical board and president of the Obstetrical & Gynaecological Society of Singapore, told TODAY. "We think that the training Dr. Huang has gone through cannot be good enough to treat SUI." The others are Dr. Roy Ng, chairman of the College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists' urogynaecology department, and three heads of departments at different hospitals.
The man at the centre of the controversy obviously disagreed. He said it did not make a difference whether one is a gynaecologist or a plastic surgeon. "Plastic surgeons are trained to perform technically difficult operations in tight spaces with skill, meticulousness, a high degree of accuracy, and great attention to detail. LVR is exactly that type of operation," he told TODAY. Hitting back at the obstetric and gynaecology specialists, Dr. Huang accused them of being overly protective of their turf, the authors have strangely chosen to remain silent about their O&G colleagues in Singapore, who are openly offering and performing cosmetic surgery procedures such as liposuction." He also said that the authors of the letter had misunderstood the intent of the procedure - he had described in the newspaper feature saying it was not primarily intended as a treatment for SUI.
This is not the first time a spat over turf has erupted between plastic surgeons and mainstream practitioners. Last year, it was the aesthetic specialists that criticised general practitioners for offering simple cosmetic procedures such as botox injections, mesotherapy and fillers for wrinkles. But why wash all this dirty linen in public instead of resolving it behind closed doors? Once again, Dr. Tay pointed an accusing finger at Dr. Huang. Because the plastic surgeon had talked about the procedure in a newspaper feature, the O&G specialists felt the public deserved a different point of view. "I am not aware of any O&G doctors offering aesthetic services who have been featured in a publicity article like this," he said.
Weighing in, the Ministry of Health made a similar point, albeit in a different way. Referring to the Ethical Code and Ethical Guidelines of the Singapore Medical Council, which all doctors have to abide by, the ministry cautioned doctors about what they can say in public. The ministry also highlighted the guideline that a doctor should practise within the limits of his own competence, and said doctors should not persist in unsupervised practice of a branch of medicine without the appropriate knowledge, skill or experience.
A friend sent me an interesting article below which reveals certain surgical procedures to a very private part of a female anatomy ... TODAY Online: Hot News //Friday, December 15, 2006 The Surgical gloves are off. It's doctor versus doctors as gynaecologists take on plastic surgeon Tan Hui Leng.
In a rare public confrontation, a group of surgeons here have crossed scalpets. At one end of the operating table, one of Singapore's most renowned plastic surgeons; at the other end, a group of top gynaecologists in public and private practice. Between them a war of words challenging the competency of a fellow medical professional, and accusations of "protecting turf" erupted - all over two procedures. The dispute arose from a newspaper feature on plastic surgeon Dr. Martin Huang, the executive director of listed Pacific Healthcare Holdings, which runs a clinic at Orchard Road. In the feature, Dr. Huang claimed he was the only plastic surgeon in Singapore certified to offer Designer Laser Vaginaplasty (DLV) and Laser Vagina Rejuvenation (LVR). DLV modifies the appearance of the vagina and LVR tightens loose muscles. The latter is said to be a modified version of a gynaecological procedure to treat loose muscles and its associated symptoms, especially Stress Urinary Incontinence (SUI).
The article evoked a strong response. On Wednesday, five obstetric and gynaecology (O&G) specialists sent a jointly signed letter to The Business Times taking issue with Dr. huang's claims. The doctors were "alarmed" at the fact that an aesthetic specialist - after only three days of training - could claim to be certified to perform the procedures, whereas it takes six years of post-graduaate training and examinations before the Ministry of Health accredits them as specialists. "It's not a procedure you can learn over three days," Dr. Tay Eng Hseon, chairman of KK Women's & Children's Hospital's medical board and president of the Obstetrical & Gynaecological Society of Singapore, told TODAY. "We think that the training Dr. Huang has gone through cannot be good enough to treat SUI." The others are Dr. Roy Ng, chairman of the College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists' urogynaecology department, and three heads of departments at different hospitals.
The man at the centre of the controversy obviously disagreed. He said it did not make a difference whether one is a gynaecologist or a plastic surgeon. "Plastic surgeons are trained to perform technically difficult operations in tight spaces with skill, meticulousness, a high degree of accuracy, and great attention to detail. LVR is exactly that type of operation," he told TODAY. Hitting back at the obstetric and gynaecology specialists, Dr. Huang accused them of being overly protective of their turf, the authors have strangely chosen to remain silent about their O&G colleagues in Singapore, who are openly offering and performing cosmetic surgery procedures such as liposuction." He also said that the authors of the letter had misunderstood the intent of the procedure - he had described in the newspaper feature saying it was not primarily intended as a treatment for SUI.
This is not the first time a spat over turf has erupted between plastic surgeons and mainstream practitioners. Last year, it was the aesthetic specialists that criticised general practitioners for offering simple cosmetic procedures such as botox injections, mesotherapy and fillers for wrinkles. But why wash all this dirty linen in public instead of resolving it behind closed doors? Once again, Dr. Tay pointed an accusing finger at Dr. Huang. Because the plastic surgeon had talked about the procedure in a newspaper feature, the O&G specialists felt the public deserved a different point of view. "I am not aware of any O&G doctors offering aesthetic services who have been featured in a publicity article like this," he said.
Weighing in, the Ministry of Health made a similar point, albeit in a different way. Referring to the Ethical Code and Ethical Guidelines of the Singapore Medical Council, which all doctors have to abide by, the ministry cautioned doctors about what they can say in public. The ministry also highlighted the guideline that a doctor should practise within the limits of his own competence, and said doctors should not persist in unsupervised practice of a branch of medicine without the appropriate knowledge, skill or experience.
3 comments:
faber, on 6 October, 2007 at 12:32 pm Said:
Seng Hong wrote: They are fighting over the rights to modify a (small) piece of “real estate”. No doubt it is a very sensitive area. Most, if not all, of us guys have extremely keen interest in the subject and shall explore it deeply. Maybe smell around first.
faber, on 6 October, 2007 at 12:33 pm Said:
Tony Moo wrote: I couldn’t have put it more succinctly myself. Your choice of such exotic adjectives and nouns is fascinating; words like “real estate”, “sensitive area”, extreme keen interest”, “explore it deeply” “smell around first” are so pertinent to said matter and can only come from a sacrificial, ling and laborious research from you. Such presentation especially carried out in your customary authority makes even the most dubious observations sound like an unimpeachable truth! (Please do not read into any provocative connotation as there is none). May I be bold to suggest that on your next research outing that you consider including me as part of your phalanx for this very exhaustive exercise. Never too late to learn, especially from the MASTER himself.
faber, on 6 October, 2007 at 12:33 pm Said:
Hee Kuan wrote: Everyone is scrimmaging for that pot of GOLD. Doctors are not spared! This should have remained a “professional” issue and handed within the professional body that governs its code of conduct. Obviously, everyone had lost sight of the issue and rushed straight for the pot of GOLD before it gets taken away.
Sad day for “professionalism”. Where are the noble professions today? Lawyers, doctors engineers, CEOs …. Everyone wants their pot of GOLD. The remuneration/income disparity between the head and tail of an organization is so large that it has become ridiculous. A CEO could be paid thousands of times more than the average pay within an organization. (The St Times today carried an article on super earners!) He’s important no doubt but he cannot alone make the organization buzz. Media hype had made them out to be greater than the whole. People have forgotten about team work. The team is lauded only in speeches but not reflected in rewards.
Union revolution that brought in the “welfare” states is no the wane. It is today politically correct to talk about setting up the right environment for the entrepreneurs and industrialists. The pendulum is swinging towards the capitalist’s end. There should be a balance struck so that the spirit of teamwork can flourish. Professionals can return to work to fulfill their professional pledge and make a decent income but not scoop up all the GOLD before others get at it.
All said, this is idealism. The force of greed has been released and no one knows how to lease it again. Good Luck.
Post a Comment