powered by FreeFind

Updated April 23, 2008

Home Page                                                                                                                                

                 

 

Did US Surgeon General C. Everett Koop manipulate national first aid guidelines as a "buddy favor"?

by Peter M. Heimlich

"I have never been bought. I cannot be bought. I am an icon, and I have a reputation for honesty and integrity, and let the chips fall where they may." - C. Everett Koop MD (New York Times, September 5, 1999)

Back blows are "death blows," Dr. Heimlich declared long and loud as he lobbied for his maneuver's acceptance 30 years ago. In 1985, Surgeon General C. Everett Koop endorsed this view, dubbing backslaps "hazardous."...Peter Heimlich (says) "Koop was an old friend of my father's, and he did it as a buddy favor." (Maneuvering Over Heimlich by Lenore Skenazy, New York Sun/Creators Syndicate, 2/21/07)

 

SUMMARY: From 1974-1985, the medical community was engaged in a protracted debate over which method was most effective to save the life of a choking victim. Should rescuers perform backblows, the Heimlich maneuver (abdominal thrusts), chest thrusts, or a combination of these methods?

From 1976-1985, the American Heart Association and American Red Cross recommended backblows as the first treatment; if the backblows failed, rescuers should then proceed with the Heimlich maneuver. During those years, my father engaged in an aggressive and tireless media campaign. In hundreds of news stories and on national television (such as this 1984 appearance on David Letterman's show), he claimed any method except the Heimlich maneuver was ineffective or dangerous.

Then, in late 1985, US Surgeon General C. Everett Koop took the unusual step of intervening. He issued a public statement which echoed my father's claims virtually word for word, saying backblows and chest thrusts were "hazardous, even lethal." Koop's widely-reported statement, which included no citations or evidence-based rationale as to how he arrived at this opinion, urged the American Heart Association and Red Cross to teach only the Heimlich maneuver. Further, Koop had no expertise in emergency medicine.

Nevertheless, a few months later, the two leading first aid organizations removed backblows from their choking rescue guidelines. From 1986-2006, they recommended the Heimlich maneuver and nothing but the Heimlich maneuver (with exceptions for infants and pregnant women).

20 years later, both organizations revised their guidelines to include backblows and chest thrusts. So why, two decades ago, did Dr. Koop claim these methods were deadly? Based on what evidence? Why did a Surgeon General use his bully pulpit to intervene and perhaps help to stifle an ongoing scientific debate, one which involved the public's right to the best available medical care? Why did Dr. Koop attempt to influence US first aid organizations in a field of medicine in which he had no expertise? When asked such questions, Dr. Koop has refused to respond to inquiries, including from several national media reporters.

Here's another good question: Why didn't Dr. Koop or my father disclose that they had a longstanding personal relationship prior to 1985?

In other words, why did the highest-profile Surgeon General in US history apparently use his influence to attempt to manipulate national first aid guidelines to benefit his old friend Henry Heimlich?

###

After my father, Dr. Henry Heimlich, introduced the Heimlich maneuver in 1974, determining the best treatment for choking rescue became a subject of considerable and often heated debate in the medical community. During the next decade, my father aggressively promoted the Heimlich maneuver over other choking rescue treatments such as backblows and chest thrusts. On national TV and in scores of articles in popular press, he insisted those methods were not only useless, but could even make the situation worse.

The lack of any legitimate data to support his claims did not deter his mission to eliminate all treatments except for the maneuver that included his name.

His determination was expressed in a variety of unconventional tactics. For example, he enlisted his personal secretary to send phony letters to medical organizations and to the journals, he threatened first aid organizations with potential lawsuits, he clandestinely funded a 1982 Yale research study that allegedly proved backblows were dangerous (more below), and other activities designed to "win the choking rescue crown" as one writer has said.

On September 30, 1985, a powerful advocate came to aid my father's cause. The Department of Health and Human Services issued a widely-circulated press release stating that US Surgeon General C. Everett Koop was urging all first aid organizations to adopt the Heimlich maneuver and eliminate all other choking rescue treatments In fact, it read like something my father himself had written:

"Millions of Americans have been taught to treat persons who are choking with back blows, chest thrusts and abdominal thrusts," Dr. Koop said. "Now, they must be advised...and I ask for the participation of the Red Cross, the American Heart Association and public health authorities everywhere...that these methods are hazardous, even lethal." A back slap, the surgeon general said, can drive a foreign object even deeper into the throat. Chest and abdominal thrusts, because they refer to blows to unspecified locations on the body, have resulted in cracked ribs and damaged spleens and livers, among other injuries. "The best rescue technique in any choking situation," Dr. Koop said, "is the Heimlich Manuever."

Then in December, Dr. Koop signed a two-part Public Health Report published by HHS promoting the Heimlich maneuver which was an elaboration of the earlier press release. His report did not include any citations or explain on what basis he arrived at his conclusions. It did, however, include nonsense like this:

For years medical opinion differed on the best way, or ways, of dislodging an object from the throat of a choking victim. Sharp blows to the back, finger sweeps of the throat and manual thrusts to the chest were methods often recommended. Today, there is universal agreement that these methods can be dangerous and should not be performed.

That last sentence is not only false, it's illogical. If indeed there was "universal agreement," then why did Dr. Koop need to issue a statement making a pronouncement in favor of one side? Shortly thereafter, in this letter to the editor, American Heart Association committee chairmen Joseph Greensher MD and William Montgomery MD made that clear in their response to Koop:

The editorial "The Heimlich Maneuver"...by C. Everett Koop, MD, ScD, Surgeon General...was premature and misleading...Because pronouncements by the Surgeon General carry great persuasion and are widely cited as authoritative, it is imperative that the data conveyed be exact.

So why did Dr. Koop choose to interfere in this particular debate? Why did he use the weight of his office to interfere and influence an ongoing scientific debate in a field outside his expertise? And why did he endorse the Heimlich maneuver over other choking rescue treatments?

For one thing, Dr. Koop and my father had a longtime pre-existing personal relationship, a fact neither man has ever made public, but which Dr. Koop admitted in a recent letter (copy on request):

I was a friend of Henry Heimlich for a long time before 1985, but that had nothing to do with my taking a position.

But let's take Dr. Koop at his word and assume their friendship had no bearing on his actions. On what scientific evidence, therefore, did he base his decision?

Koop answered that question in this October 2, 1985 Washington Post article:

Yesterday, as the U.S. surgeon general, Koop endorsed the life-saving Heimlich Maneuver "as the only method that should be used for the treatment of choking from foreign body airway obstruction" and prodded the American Red Cross and American Heart Association to move more quickly in adopting it exclusively...He urged that other methods be dropped immediately as "hazardous, even lethal," particularly the traditional use of sharp blows to the back that he said can drive a foreign object even deeper into the throat. In doing so, Koop jumped into the middle of a long-running controversy in the public health community over the place of the Heimlich Maneuver in first aid procedures.

The technique is named after Dr. Henry J. Heimlich, a physician at Cincinnati's Xavier University who developed the life-saving "hug" in the early 1970s and has since widely promoted it as the best method of saving a choking victim. But the health organizations who advise the public and the medical profession on first aid have been slower to adopt his stance and for the past decade have recommended that four sharp blows to the back be attempted first before the "abdominal thrust."

In July, after a national conference reviewing their guidelines, the American Red Cross and the American Heart Association made a joint announcement that the advisory panel had recommended "exclusive" use of the Heimlich abdominal thrust. Their press releases said that the change was being made to simplify teaching of first aid, but maintained that both back blows and the abdominal thrust are effective.

Yesterday, spokesmen for both groups repeated that view, saying that the recommendation on the Heimlich Maneuver is still under review and is not expected to be adopted officially until early next year. "Dr. Koop and Dr. Heimlich are not giving the process quite the chance it deserves," responded Red Cross senior vice president Dr. Lewellys Barker.

Koop said in an interview that he felt the need to act more quickly after receiving letters from Heimlich and University of Cincinnati professor Edward A. Patrick, as well as his knowledge of the value of the procedure. "I felt that I couldn't stand around and wait." Patrick, who has performed research showing that the back slap can drive a foreign object downward, complained to Koop that the "lives of many Americans are endangered as the result of Red Cross first aid instruction" and said "it is urgent that you inform the public through the media of the back slap danger."

Based on this article, apparently Dr. Koop was motivated to write his PHS after receiving a letter from my father and after reviewing Dr. Edward A. Patrick's research on choking. In a 1993 Cincinnati Enquirer op-ed, my father agreed with that conclusion:

Surgeon General Koop, impressed by Cincinnatian Dr. Edward Patrick's study of 1,600 choking cases, declared backslaps "lethal"....

Who is Dr. Edward Patrick? As it happens, he's been my father's closest associate for the past 30 years and was involved in every aspect of the Heimlich maneuver. In May 2003, Dr. Patrick's "Patrick Institute" issued this press release in which he claimed to be the uncredited co-developer of the maneuver. His choking research was never published in a peer-reviewed journal, but here's what's on the website of "The Patrick Institute":

In the early 1970's the medical community, for the most part, was not prepared to accept that treatments could be evaluated using Statistical Pattern Recognition. Instead, the medical community insisted that Double Blind Studies were needed, but this was not practical in the case of choking.

Patrick indicated that any outcome O could be evaluated for any treatment sequence Ti by computing an estimate of the conditional probability of the outcome O given the treatment sequence. Thus, one needed to estimate: p(O|Ti), for an outcome O for each treatment sequence T1, T2,.... TN.

More precisely, one would need a set of "training samples" x to learn or estimate this outcome probability, so that the above expression should be replaced by: p(O|Ti, x), for an outcome O for each treatment sequence T1, T2,.... TN, given training samples for each treatment sequence.

Using verified training samples from cases sent into talk shows, Patrick was able to estimate needed probabilities....the journals controlled by AHA researchers could publish flawed "peer reviewed" papers while a scientific paper on outcome analysis by Patrick was difficult to publish....

Though "the journals controlled by American Heart Association researchers" may have failed to appreciate Dr. Patrick's mathematical equations, at least one prominent public official was impressed. From Dr. Patrick's website:

Dr. Edward Patrick wrote the surgeon general Dr. C. Everett Koop (August 16, 1985 letter) providing Dr. Koop with the literature and research studies so the United States Department of Health & Human Services could independently review the information. After reviewing the information, Dr Koop called and wrote Dr. Patrick (September 19, 1985 letter) to tell him that he agreed with Patrick and would so inform the American people.

Dr. Koop's 1985 letter to Patrick makes for good reading:

Edward A. Patrick, M.D., Ph.D.
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
University of Cincinnati
Mal Location 30
898 Rhodes Hall
Cincinnati, Ohio 45221

Dear Dr. Patrick:

If you ever make a better mousetrap, the world will have trouble finding your door. I made five calls to the University of Cincinnati, trying to reach you. Although there were some people who knew that you existed, no one seemed to know where. Hence this letter.

All I wanted to do was to inform you that I had taken some action in reference to the Heimlich maneuver versus backslapping. I issued a press release on the matter several weeks ago (a copy of which was mailed to you). There will be a discussion of the matter in my monthly column which appears in weekly newspapers throughout the country. Also, the matter will be discussed in an editorial in the next issue of Public Health Reports.

I called Henry's Office (sic), found he was in New York, but left a message.

Thank you for your letter. It was very much appreciated.

Sincerely yours,

C. Everett Koop, M.D.
Surgeon General

Although Surgeon General Koop was unable to reach "Henry" (Heimlich), Dr. Koop clearly went to considerable efforts to contact Dr. Patrick, including five phone attempts. That would seem to confirm the claims by Dr. Patrick and my father about how impressed Koop was with Dr. Patrick's efforts.

Dr. Patrick also elaborates on those calls and letters he received from Dr. Koop in this excerpt from an April 20, 2007 Federal Court deposition. (For more on Dr. Patrick's background and his relationship with my father, don't miss the 2004 Cleveland Scene cover stories, Playing Doctor and Heimlich's Maneuver.)

Curiously, in a recent letter, Dr. Koop tells a different story about Dr. Patrick (copy of letter on request):

I don't have a problem with long-term or short-term memory, but I certainly do not remember having any discussions with Dr. Edward A Patrick...To the best of my knowledge, I did not use any analysis of Patrick's on 1600 cases of choking....

Curiouser and curiouser. Well, if as Dr. Koop now says, he didn't rely on Dr. Patrick's research, on what scientific evidence did the US Surgeon General rely upon in his efforts to influence the Red Cross and the Heart Association in favor of his old friend's maneuver?

That's where the story hits a roadblock. Koop won't answer that question. When someone tries to ask, including reporters representing ABC News, the New Yorker magazine, and Radar Magazine, Dr. Koop ignores them.

Is he unavailable or ill? If this recent video interview with "Ali G", the hip-hop alter ego of comedian Sacha Baron Cohen (aka "Borat Sagdiyev"), is any indication, Dr. Koop appears quite fit. He also maintains a busy travel schedule. So perhaps he has other reasons for avoiding reporters' questions about this subject.

As for Koop's preposterous claim that backblows and chest thrusts are "hazardous, even lethal":

1) For decades, the European Resusciation Council (ERC), the continental equivalent of the American Heart Association, has taught backblows as the first treatment for choking. ERC guidelines are followed by much of the world. If backblows are "hazardous, even lethal" as Koop claims, why aren't European choking victims dropping dead or filing lawsuits against the ERC?

2) In December 2005, the American Heart Association drastically revised its Foreign Body Airway Obstruction (choking rescue) guidelines. The treatment recommendation in the guidelines state:

Chest thrusts, back blows/slaps, or abdominal thrusts are effective for relieving FBAO in conscious adults and children >1 year of age, although injuries have been reported with the abdominal thrust. There is insufficient evidence to determine which should be used first. These techniques should be applied in rapid sequence until the obstruction is relieved; more than one technique may be needed.

3) In 2006, the American Red Cross revised its choking rescue guidelines and now, once again, recommend backblows as the first treatment for choking rescue. The Red Cross also recommends chest thrusts as part of the treatment sequence.

4) In Australia, first aid for choking rescue now recommends backblows followed by chest thrusts.

5) Besides the previously cited letters, in this 1982 letter to Richard Day MD my father refers to "Ev Koop." This letter also indicates my father was soliciting Koop long before his 1985 PHS, another fact which Koop apparently has never discussed. Jason Zengerle of the New Republic told me that in a recent interview, my father claimed he did not know Dr. Koop. If everything was above board with him and Koop, why would my father lie to a reporter? This behavior, combined with Koop dodging reporters, raises obvious concerns.

6) Further undermining my father's integrity, recent articles in the New Haven Register, Columbus Dispatch, and other publications report that my father and Dr. Day intentionally misled the American Heart Association by failing to disclose that Day's 1982 Yale "anti-backblows" research study - which was presented to an AHA committee reviewing choking rescue guidelines - was funded by my father. When informed of this duplicity, the chair of the 1985 AHA committee stated:

There was never any evidence here. Heimlich overpowered science all along the way with his slick tactics and intimidation, and everyone, including us at the AHA caved in. (Roger White MD, Mayo Clinic, Cincinnati Magazine, 4/07)

In 1985, Dr. Koop used the bully pulpit of the Office of the US Surgeon General to promote a medical opinion which was unsupportable at that time. 20+ years later, that opinion is now proven to be not only false, but tainted by a variety of duplicitous activities orchestrated by my father.

How to proceed? At minimum, Dr. Koop needs to either reaffirm - or revise - his position statement on backslaps and chest thrusts.


For more on Dr. Koop's history regarding public medical policy, interested parties may wish to read, "Public Health Profiteering" by James T. Bennett (George Mason University) and Thomas J. DiLorenzo (Loyola College).

 

Home Page

 

Copyright @ Peter M. Heimlich, all rights reserved. Click here to report broken links or to contact the author.