Heimlich Drowning Frauds - Cleveland Cover Story

Tom Kennedy wrote:
> CLEVELAND SCENE (cover story), June 11, 2004
> "Heimlich's Maneuver"
>
> http://www.clevescene.com/issues/200...1/feature.html
>

Naturally Heimlich disagrees with you.
http://www.heimlichinstitute.org/drowningart.html
The difference is that this article has a list of peer reviewed studies and
your article came from a newspaper.

Science is done with peer review.

> Naturally Heimlich disagrees with you.
> http://www.heimlichinstitute.org/drowningart.html
> The difference is that this article has a list of peer reviewed studies and
> your article came from a newspaper. Science is done with peer review.

You're correct that science is done with peer review, but your
conclusion is incorrect.

1) The Heimlich-Splezter article you cite above was not peer-reviewed.
It was a chapter in a non-peer reviewed book by CRC Press.

2) A number of the articles cited in the Heimlich-Spletzer (Quan,
Modell, Ornato, Manolios) are from peer reviewed publications, but all
of these authors have thoroughly denounced the use of the Heimlich
maneuver for drowning. Three of these authors are so quoted in the
Cleveland Scene article denouncing the Heimlich maneuver for drowning
and have all stated that Dr. Heimlich has misused their work for his
own purposes.

3) The Heimlich-Spletzer article cites two articles by Heimlich:

- Heimlich HJ. The Heimlich maneuver saves drowning victims. Certified
Pool Operator Autumn 1996.

I have been unable to locate "Certified Pool Operator." If it is peer
reviewed,
the editorial staff apparently consists of pool maintanance
technicians.

- Heimlich HJ. A life-saving maneuver to prevent food-choking. JAMA
1975;234: 398-401.

The JAMA article is about food choking, not drowning, and was
published in 1975.

4) The Institute of Medicine is the highest medical body in the
country. In 1993, the IOM held a committee to study the use of the
Heimlich maneuver in drowning and examined the entire body of
literature. Per the Cleveland Scene article:

"In 1993, (Heimlich, Patrick, and Spletzer) were invited to give a
presentation to the Institute of Medicine, the governing body of
American health care. They bombed.

Dr. Linda Quan, who made a presentation to the same committee,
remembers the looks on the faces of oncologists who heard Heimlich and
Patrick describe the impossibility of ventilating through fluid, a
feat doctors accomplished with newborn babies every day. Quan chuckles
at the memory of Heimlich and Patrick's desperate attempts to win over
the nation's sharpest medical minds by illustrating their theory with
cartoons that violated elementary science.

Even stranger, reports from that meeting indicate that Heimlich and
Patrick changed the two-year-old drowning victim in Lima from a girl
to a boy.

"The Institute of Medicine is the crown jewel of medical
intelligentsia in the United States," says Admiral Steinman. "They
looked at this issue and said, 'Bad idea.'"

Read the IOM report for yourself:
http://heimlichinstitute.com/IOM_Report_CoverPages.html

5) The Heimlich-Spletzer article includes two citations by Dr. Edward
A. Patrick, both from non-peer reviewed publications and cites a study
by "The Patrick Institute," a made-up organization.

For more on Dr. Patrick - who appears to be the actual inventor of
what came to be known as the Heimlich maneuver - re-read the Cleveland
Scene article:
http://clevescene.com/issues/2004-08...tml/print.html

In conclusion, any bozo can write an article in a non-peer reviewed
publication like the CRC Press book and include as many citations,
peer reviewed or otherwise, as they like. Much more interesting is
that Dr. Heimlich was able to plant the bogus Lima case in a number of
peer reviewed publications:
http://www.heimlichinstitute.com/IOM...s-Griffin.html

Needless to say, a journal calling itself peer reviewed does not
necessarily make for a foolproof system, especially when the authors
are crooks. As the Heimlich-Patrick story develops, it will also be
interesting to see if and when these journals print retractions.

Sincerely,

TOM KENNEDY

Tom Kennedy wrote:
>
> Read the IOM report for yourself:
> http://heimlichinstitute.com/IOM_Report_CoverPages.html
>
This is the only one I got too and you owe me a new pair of glasses.
But thanks. While I don't like finding out that an idea I really like is
wrong, knowledge is always good.

I'm probably biased in his favor after the years of bickering between him
and the Red Cross. (where they still give back blows to babies, although
with gravity working in their favor.)


I did note that footnote 12 on the page I cited says "... No improvement in
pulmonary status by gravity drainage or abdominal thrusts after sea water
near drowning in dogs. Anesthesiology 1982;57 (suppl. 3A):A81.

which seems to contradict the paragraph it comes from.

CLEVELAND SCENE (cover story), June 11, 2004
"Heimlich's Maneuver"

http://www.clevescene.com/issues/200...1/feature.html

-end-

Tom Kennedy wrote:
> CLEVELAND SCENE (cover story), June 11, 2004
> "Heimlich's Maneuver"
>
> http://www.clevescene.com/issues/200...1/feature.html
>

Naturally Heimlich disagrees with you.
http://www.heimlichinstitute.org/drowningart.html
The difference is that this article has a list of peer reviewed studies and
your article came from a newspaper.

Science is done with peer review.

> Naturally Heimlich disagrees with you.
> http://www.heimlichinstitute.org/drowningart.html
> The difference is that this article has a list of peer reviewed studies and
> your article came from a newspaper. Science is done with peer review.

You're correct that science is done with peer review, but your
conclusion is incorrect.

1) The Heimlich-Splezter article you cite above was not peer-reviewed.
It was a chapter in a non-peer reviewed book by CRC Press.

2) A number of the articles cited in the Heimlich-Spletzer (Quan,
Modell, Ornato, Manolios) are from peer reviewed publications, but all
of these authors have thoroughly denounced the use of the Heimlich
maneuver for drowning. Three of these authors are so quoted in the
Cleveland Scene article denouncing the Heimlich maneuver for drowning
and have all stated that Dr. Heimlich has misused their work for his
own purposes.

3) The Heimlich-Spletzer article cites two articles by Heimlich:

- Heimlich HJ. The Heimlich maneuver saves drowning victims. Certified
Pool Operator Autumn 1996.

I have been unable to locate "Certified Pool Operator." If it is peer
reviewed,
the editorial staff apparently consists of pool maintanance
technicians.

- Heimlich HJ. A life-saving maneuver to prevent food-choking. JAMA
1975;234: 398-401.

The JAMA article is about food choking, not drowning, and was
published in 1975.

4) The Institute of Medicine is the highest medical body in the
country. In 1993, the IOM held a committee to study the use of the
Heimlich maneuver in drowning and examined the entire body of
literature. Per the Cleveland Scene article:

"In 1993, (Heimlich, Patrick, and Spletzer) were invited to give a
presentation to the Institute of Medicine, the governing body of
American health care. They bombed.

Dr. Linda Quan, who made a presentation to the same committee,
remembers the looks on the faces of oncologists who heard Heimlich and
Patrick describe the impossibility of ventilating through fluid, a
feat doctors accomplished with newborn babies every day. Quan chuckles
at the memory of Heimlich and Patrick's desperate attempts to win over
the nation's sharpest medical minds by illustrating their theory with
cartoons that violated elementary science.

Even stranger, reports from that meeting indicate that Heimlich and
Patrick changed the two-year-old drowning victim in Lima from a girl
to a boy.

"The Institute of Medicine is the crown jewel of medical
intelligentsia in the United States," says Admiral Steinman. "They
looked at this issue and said, 'Bad idea.'"

Read the IOM report for yourself:
http://heimlichinstitute.com/IOM_Report_CoverPages.html

5) The Heimlich-Spletzer article includes two citations by Dr. Edward
A. Patrick, both from non-peer reviewed publications and cites a study
by "The Patrick Institute," a made-up organization.

For more on Dr. Patrick - who appears to be the actual inventor of
what came to be known as the Heimlich maneuver - re-read the Cleveland
Scene article:
http://clevescene.com/issues/2004-08...tml/print.html

In conclusion, any bozo can write an article in a non-peer reviewed
publication like the CRC Press book and include as many citations,
peer reviewed or otherwise, as they like. Much more interesting is
that Dr. Heimlich was able to plant the bogus Lima case in a number of
peer reviewed publications:
http://www.heimlichinstitute.com/IOM...s-Griffin.html

Needless to say, a journal calling itself peer reviewed does not
necessarily make for a foolproof system, especially when the authors
are crooks. As the Heimlich-Patrick story develops, it will also be
interesting to see if and when these journals print retractions.

Sincerely,

TOM KENNEDY

Tom Kennedy wrote:
>
> Read the IOM report for yourself:
> http://heimlichinstitute.com/IOM_Report_CoverPages.html
>
This is the only one I got too and you owe me a new pair of glasses.
But thanks. While I don't like finding out that an idea I really like is
wrong, knowledge is always good.

I'm probably biased in his favor after the years of bickering between him
and the Red Cross. (where they still give back blows to babies, although
with gravity working in their favor.)


I did note that footnote 12 on the page I cited says "... No improvement in
pulmonary status by gravity drainage or abdominal thrusts after sea water
near drowning in dogs. Anesthesiology 1982;57 (suppl. 3A):A81.

which seems to contradict the paragraph it comes from.