Full statement from Dan Warlick, counsel for Dr. David McCord

  • From: Dan Warlick

    Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 3:21 PM

    To: Eisler, Benjamin

    Cc: 'david mccord'

    Subject: RE: follow up

    Dear Mr. Eisler:

    I am responding to your email of March 11, 2014. Everything is going well with me and Dr. McCord. In your letter, you set forth several paragraphs alleging improprieties and/or improper medical judgment, and it appears in general that you are intent on maligning Dr. McCord and his reputation. As you know, you have been invited and did in fact meet with Dr. McCord and me in his clinic where you saw the equipment that he owns and uses and also had the opportunity to interview several patients, all of whom were greatly benefitted by Dr. McCord's care, as you should be aware. In fact, the vast majority of Dr. McCord's patients are greatly appreciative his efforts and enjoy the results which have improved the quality of their lives immensely.

    Accordingly, it cannot be said that Dr. McCord did not respond to you, and we will not verify many of the misstatements and ill-founded allegations which you seem intent upon reporting in the national media in some shape or form. We have no control over what you choose to publish or how you do it, but you are constrained to producing publically disseminated information to the extent that it must be truthful and that you have made sufficient investigation into the underlying facts to have a legitimate belief of the truthfulness. It is quite obvious that you have no story at all if you were to accurately report that, of the hundreds of patients Dr. McCord has treated, the vast majority of them are much improved. I also suggest that if you have had two surgeons review one patient's records, and they do not, for whatever reason, suggest the same treatment as Dr. McCord, that is a statistically insufficient basis to form any opinions about Dr. McCord's practice. Other matters which are privileged information in peer review seem to be suggested by you in our previous conversations. If you, in fact, have such knowledge, I would like to know what knowledge you purport to have and from whom and how did you receive those reports. I anticipate that I will actually receive nothing back from you in support of what I consider your baseless allegations, but would certainly respond appropriately should you produce such information and a legitimate source.

    Respectfully,

    Dan Warlick

Comments