Originally Posted by REDREAD
How about Kearns' blister?
That was the timeline.
Kearns was allowed to play with the bone spur for quite awhile before the Reds finally decided to operate on it.
I am pretty confident that Doc knew that there was more than just a blister going on, but that's what he told us.. It's kind of hard to dig up detailed info, since this happened in 2004.
But that's the quickest example of Doc lying to us about an injury.
Oddly enough, being "pretty sure" that someone knew something was different than what he was stating is pretty much not proof of it being a recurring instance.
I'm going to guess that no doctor can perfectly evaluate every injury, and somethings that look severe may not be and some things that look minor may be severe.
So he may have misevaluated Kearn's injury, or he may have been lying. Heck, it may not have even been caused by poor care, but rather evaluated the evidence to the best of his ability and changed diagnoses as more facts became available.
Regardless, we'll never know, and imo it's foolish to speculate and even more foolish to rely on that speculation as proof that an otherwise well respected doctor is dishonest, incompetent, or both.