3 ms·
Probably because he was making an effort to understand the efficacy of his own treatment which any reasonable person would understand to be the opposite of negl
by jschwartzi 8y ago
Probably because he was making an effort to understand the efficacy of his own treatment which any reasonable person would understand to be the opposite of negligent.
- golemotron 8y agoIf you were a patient who paid for something and didn't get it.. this is malpractice. There's a chance that if you were in the 60% that had no positive effect, you might've had the effect if you had the treatment. A reasonable person would sue, and a reasonable jury would compensate.