"The shame of America" fact sheet about Dr. Serafina Corsello and her "war" with the New York State Department of Health — OPMC - Office of Professional Medical Conduct

Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients,  August-Sept, 2002  

• E-mail
• Print
• Link

1. It is extraordinary that OPMC engaged a doctor to review Dr. Corsello's charts who wrote: "Many of the modalities used by Dr. Corsello are foreign to me. It would take massive library research to establish them as non-efficacious and possibly harmful." This language betrays a mindset that Dr. Corsello's approach is not medically viable and appears to be answering the directives of those who are committed to the elimination of alternative medicine.

2. Despite the OPMC expert's total lack of knowledge of the methods of alternative health care, based on his recommendations, a statement of charges was proffered against Dr. Corsello alleging in virtually every case, inappropriate and excessive medical testing, inappropriate and excessive medical treatments, and alleging other problems, the consequence of which is that Dr. Corsello is being charged with fraud, gross negligence, incompetence, negligence on more than one occasion, incompetence on more than one occasion, abandoning a patient, moral unfitness and a variety of other charges. Most of these charges could be brought against any physician in the state who has misdiagnosed or mistreated a patient, and there is not a single physician anywhere in active practice who has not on occasion misdiagnosed or mistreated a patient or mismanaged a patient's records.

3. The 1994 legislation mandated that at least two alternative health care providers be retained on the panel of OPMC. Although OPMC has apparently taken this step, it did not use the expertise of either of its panel members or any other alternative health care providers in connection with the review of the charts of Dr. Corsello, contrary to Dr. Marks' statement of OPMC concerns for alternative therapies.

4. Unless an informed physician reviews her charts as a first step in the investigative process, it appears that the OPMC actions are simply a biased effort to outlaw her therapies and harass her and other alternative practitioners out of business. This effort is reminiscent of the Soviet actions against organized religion in the 1920s. The Soviets may have succeeded for a while in outlawing religion, but ultimately it was the Soviet Union that lost credibility. Similarly, if orthodox medicine succeeds for a while in outlawing alternative/complementary therapies, it failure to consider holistic solutions will no only cost it credibility, but could exacerbate public distrust of contemporary science.

5. If OPMC were committed to truth, would not have acted to employ an orthodox practitioner to critique Dr. Corsello's charts for the purpose of preparing charges against her. This act reminds one of the crusade of the 17th century establishment against Galileo after he published his proof that the sun was the center of the solar system. He spent the last years of his life under house arrest for this heresy. Although the 1994 New York legislation functions in part to encourage the emergence of new truths when medicine is baffled, OPMC has instead stepped into the shoes of Galileo's antagopists and resurrected their crusade against exploring new truths. How? By investigating Dr. Corsello solely within the context of the "truths" of orthodox medicine. Her chances of prevailing in such a context before an OPMC panel are hardly better than were Galileo's chances before the tribunal that judged him.