Never contract with the government! GYN cancer doctor faces prison time for working too much.
Today’s political climate’s big focus is healthcare fraud, but in cases like that of Dr. Sanjeev Kumar, this pursuit has gone too far and an innocent, dedicated physician now faces prison time. A double board-certified gynecologic oncologist trained at Mayo Clinic, Dr. Kumar established a thriving women’s health practice in Memphis, Tennessee, specializing in complex pelvic and cancer surgeries. His clinic emphasized accessible, office-based care, including hysteroscopy - a routine, minimally invasive procedure using a thin endoscope to examine the uterine lining. Yet, this standard practice has thrust him into a nightmarish legal battle, highlighting how bureaucratic zeal can criminalize medicine.
Hysteroscopy is the gold standard for evaluating abnormal uterine bleeding and diagnosing endometrial cancer, which has become the fastest-growing cancer in women by death rate between 2018 and 2022. Driven by the obesity epidemic and disproportionately affecting minorities, especially African Americans with fibroids, this disease demands vigilant screening. Dr. Kumar’s office-based approach - often requiring only NSAIDs or no anesthesia - offered patients convenience, lower costs ($1,000–$2,000 versus hospitals’ $14,000–$22,000), and reduced risks compared to sedation or general anesthesia. His clinic maintained an extensive collection of rigid and flexible hysteroscopes and operated with an open-door policy, seeing high volumes of Medicaid patients, including one in four in their dataset. Many procedures went unpaid, reflecting charity-like service rarely sustained in private practice.
In 2025, federal agents arrested Dr. Kumar in handcuffs outside the operating room on shocking charges: rape, sexual assault, human trafficking, and violations of the Travel Act. The government’s theory equated “medically unnecessary” hysteroscopies - determined retrospectively by non-specialist chart reviewers - with fraudulent penetration of female genitalia. Even procedures performed by female physician assistants while Dr. Kumar operated elsewhere triggered personal liability. Initial salacious allegations dominated media coverage for months, devastating his reputation as a “predator in a white coat.” These were later dropped, leaving medical necessity and overutilization claims. A mixed verdict followed a December trial, leaving Dr. Kumar in legal limbo, facing potential prison time despite clearance by the state medical board.
The case exposes profound flaws. Reviewers lacking gynecologic oncology expertise critiqued documentation minutiae while ignoring context like patient volume (nine times peers) and low reimbursement (averaging $320 per Medicare case, under 10% of practice revenue). Data presented skewed comparisons by excluding hospital payments. One reviewer dismissed procedures on patients with rare anatomical anomalies or claimed negative hysteroscopies rule out cancer for six to twelve months - an assertion contradicted by Dr. Kumar’s own cases of rapid progression. Insurance companies had previously praised his work and ended audits favorably.
Dr. Kumar’s ordeal, costing millions in legal fees, has forced clinic closure amid death threats, echoing dangers faced by other physicians. It warns doctors against accepting Medicaid or high-risk patients, potentially worsening access in underserved areas. As endometrial cancer rises, prosecuting vigilant screening as fraud inverts priorities: protecting patients should not endanger healers. Greater transparency, specialist input in reviews, and safeguards against over-criminalization are urgently needed. Dr. Kumar’s fight underscores a vital truth - when government becomes both payer and prosecutor without checks, medicine itself is at risk.
Watch my interview with Dr. Kumar here.
Sickening and disgusting! Thanks for writing this and helping expose the govt corruption Mary!!!!
A SIDE FROM DISHING.OUT the usual bland media content full of stories about celebrities, political scandals, and pety crimes, the mass media gives the public the falseimpression that only experts and medical doctors can
determine what constitutes good health and how to achieveit. Every talk show and newscast turns to an expert from theglobalist-controlled government agencies orcorporationsto present their version of health news. Their advice is
constantly validated by ubiquitous drug advertising,
emanating from the same corporations.
Yet change is in the air. Many people are taking charge
of their own health and seeking alternative means of
ensuring a satisfying and productive life. Even some
medical professionals are turning away from profit-drivencorporate medicine and finding new ways to improve publichealth.Dr. Len Saputo, a practicing physician for more thanforty years, encourages a paradigm shift in how medicineshould be practiced. Over the years, Saputo saw the qualityof health care in the United States sink to new lows as themedical community shifted from concern for the patient to a
concern for profit. In 1994, Saputo founded the Health
Medicine Forum, which changed the outlook and practices
of many health-care practitioners in the San Francisco BayArea. “I entered the profession aspiring to be a healer, as did most of my colleagues,” wrote Saputo in his 2009 book AReturn to Healing. “We wanted to atend to the health andmedical needs of whole persons; we were inspired toserve our patients through our aspiration to provide
genuine healing and to promote healthy living based on science and common sense. Sadly, this ideal has been replaced by the corporate botom line, resulting in a dysfunctional system focused almost entirely on what I prefer to call disease care [original emphasis].
“The physician’s natural focus on the health needs of a unique, living person embedded in his family and societyhas today been largely replaced by a model that reduceseach person to his body, his body to a machine, and his
health needs to a set of symptoms to be treated mainly withdrugs—too often ignoring the patient’s mind, emotions,spirit, environment, and lifestyle.”
Today, Dr. Saputo and many other physicians are turning to natural biochemical solutions to treat health problems. The base premise of this type of treatment lies ina simple recognition—if all of a body’s cells are functioning properly, there is no cause for sickness. “The restoration ofgood health and vitality is accomplished by supporting thebody and allowing the natural healing process to takecharge,” explained Saputo. Those who undertake this typeof progressive medicine “boldly acknowledge theimportance of treating body, mind, and spirit—the
imperative of caring for the whole person, not just the
disease…. They are choosing prevention, wellness, naturalsolutions, and the integrative model—and they are blazingthe path to the integral-health medicine of the future.”Many medical professionals have followed Dr. Saputo’sstandard, asking not how to fund the current Americanhealth-care system but how to find beter ways of securingand maintaining beter health. Instead of asking whic drugs should be used to cure an illness, they are askingwhether or not drugs should be used as primary treatment.
In 2007, the National Health Interview Survey reported thatapproximately four out of every ten Americans had usedsome form of complementary or alternative medicineduring that year. Reportedly, complementary and alternativetherapies now account for 11.2 percent of total out-ofpocket health-care expenses—approximately $33.9 billiona year.