Times have changed for physicians in this age of medicine, marked by large, often monopolistic desirous health systems leading to the practice of medicine by administration and bureaucracy, not to mention the drive for revenue capture over the sacrosanct physician and patient relationship. With ever less leverage in the domain called big medicine, physicians, once highly revered, now increasingly face a “system” that ultimately supersedes individuals, including both doctors and patients. This evolving dynamic is catalyzed by a rapidly federalized model—one where nearly 150 million Americans gain access to medicine via federal insurance (Medicare, Medicaid, VA, DOD, etc.). Meanwhile, the COVID-19 pandemic led to ongoing federal orchestration and direction of all treatment protocols. Federal dollars poured into hospitals and health systems and accepted strict protocols for how to treat patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 ensued. Thus, regardless of what the physician calls for at the point of care, even if potentially beneficial to the patient based on the doctor’s best judgment, a higher authority makes the call—one far away from the traditional local health care transaction. Doctors that don’t line up and align with this hierarchy find trouble—fast. Of the approximately one million physicians in the United States, emerges a small number of restless, energetic, angry, patient-centric, independently-minded firebrands. One such case covered by TrialSite is that of Doctor Mary Bowden, the Houston, Texas-based physician at the sprawling Houston Methodist Hospital who found herself in trouble with the administration that suspended her for public opposition to the COVID-19 vaccine mandate. In today’s climate, such public sentiment, along with the treating of patients with repurposed therapies such as ivermectin get doctors into trouble–quickly.
Resigning in protest due to suspended privileges for “spreading dangerous misinformation,” (20) Houston Methodist on Twitter: “Dr. Bowden, who has never admitted a patient at Houston Methodist Hospital, is spreading dangerous misinformation which is not based in science. (4/5)” / Twitter Dr. Bowden filed a lawsuit against Houston Methodist in the 5th circuit court for not complying with state non-profit corporation transparency laws. Specifically, the activist-plaintiff seeks to compel the large health system with a 2,500-bed hospital and over 300 clinics and satellite locations to share data about COVID-19 patients and associated payments from the federal government.
The doctor went on the record Monday, January 17 disavowing her interest in any pecuniary gain declaring, “I want to make this clear, I’m not seeking any financial gains from this or personal gain, I’m simply seeking the truth, which we all deserve,” said Bowden.
The Team
Dr. Bowden has teamed up with a group of individuals with like-minded interests in what could likely be a David and Goliath-level legal battle. But nonetheless, the group brings fire, passion, and frankly, channeled anger that just might spell trouble for the hospital assuming sound legal arguments. The Houston-based physician has a team including the following:
Sylvia Anderson, one of Bowden’s patients who was successfully treated for COVID-19 using a combination regimen of steroids, Vitamin C, and high doses of ivermectin
Jennifer Bridges, a former nurse at Houston Methodist who was terminated for failure to comply with the health system’s universal employee vaccine mandate. Bridges is part of a lawsuit against the vaccine mandates now pending appeal before the 5th Circuit Court
Wayne Dolcefino, an investigative reporter
The Plaintiff’s Target: ‘Secrecy’
As reported recently in The Texan, the University of Texas and Stanford University-trained ear, nose, and throat (ENT) specialist now strikes back at what some doctors consider “The Empire,” a large health system, exemplifying for other doctors a toughness, resolve, and dedication to ideals perhaps higher than one’s own self-interests. At a recent Houston-based press conference, Bowden declared the target of “secrecy” was taken on because “Medical freedom has been hijacked by hospitals, big pharma, insurance companies, and the federal agencies.”
The Issue
Is Houston Methodist complying with the transparency provisions included in Texas state law applying to non-profit tax-exempt corporations? According to the physician-plaintiff, the health system has thus far failed to provide hospital financial data required since November and December to the plaintiff side, reports Holly Hansen, writing for The Texan.
Specifically, the litigants’ claim filed Monday of this week in state district court states that the hospital needs to share financial data associated with COVID-19 reimbursements and other payments from the government, payers, and patients. Also, the plaintiff pursues to understand relevant ties between the health system and pharmaceutical companies for COVID-19 treatments. For example, this might include information associated with clinical trial deals. TrialSite has learned from multiple hospitals/health systems that entered contracts with Pfizer, for example, to conduct COVID-19 vaccine trials with contractual restrictions potentially inhibiting the hospital from seeking alternative, potentially competitive treatments.
Data Transparency
Among other things, the plaintiff seeks to understand if Houston Methodist benefitted financially from including remdesivir in its COVID-19 protocol. This antiviral was embraced early by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in clinical trials, first granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) in May of 2020 then gained formal approval by October of that year. Mrs. Hansen reminds the reader that the drug failed to produce clinically relevant results in the World Health Organization’s Solidarity trial leading to that agency’s elimination of the product from its COVID-19 recommendations. While the drug is known to carry risks for kidney and liver damage not to mention renal failure, it continues to still be heavily relied upon in American hospitals.
The plaintiff also seeks to understand just how many of the hospital’s patients and employees were involved with so-called breakthrough infections: those fully vaccinated persons that still became infected with SARS-COV-2 and how many of “the 2,879 patients who have died of COVID-19 at the system were denied early treatment protocols,” according to The Texan.
Conclusion
Have hospitals and health systems become more significantly entangled with federal payers and pharmaceutical companies during the pandemic? If so, is this trend to the detriment of physician flexibility and patient choice? For example, is remdesivir overprescribed in acute settings while federal COVID-19 guidelines unreasonably restrict physicians from considering other off-label approaches? How many of the infections and acute cases as well as deaths involved vaccinated patients at Houston Methodist? Are there patterns associated with the COVID-19 deaths (e.g., remdesivir associated with failure to improve)? What does the Medicare and Medicaid payment scheme look like for SARS-CoV-2 infected patients? Is the hospital receiving fixed payments for SARS-CoV-2 acute and then again ICU-housed patients? These are just some of the questions that may be addressed in this lawsuit.
Plaintiff’s counsel Steve Mitby remains upbeat, declaring he expects victory in the courts: “I expect we will get these records. It’s state law.” Meanwhile, Houston Methodist’s spokesperson wouldn’t provide any comment to the local Texas newspaper, rather instructing them to refer to past statements. ‘Personally offended’: Houston Methodist Hospital CEO on doctor who made controversial claims about COVID-19 treatments (click2houston.com)
Note, Dr. Bowden joins fellow Texan Dr. Peter McCullough and other physicians and health care workers from around the USA and beyond at the forthcoming Medical Freedom march on Sunday, January 23 in Washington, DC.