Sunday’s Boston Herald featured a half-page four-color ad that showed (lower right) a German shepherd at a river’s edge, and (upper left) military – yes – dog tags imprinted with this:
I CAN LOCATE A VICTIM SUBMERGED UNDERWATER, BUT I CAN’T FIND MONEY FOR A BULLETPROOF VEST.
At the bottom of the ad:
Help buy a police dog a bulletproof vest. Donate at http://www.mavestadog.org
That would be Massachusetts Vest-a-Dog, which describes itself this way:
In April 2008, *Massachusetts Vest-a- Dog, Inc. was organized as an independent non-profit 501(c)3 organization dedicated to raising funds to provide bullet-protective vests for police dogs throughout Massachusetts. The vest padding also protects against blunt force trauma, from the impact of a shoe, fist or other object.
* Massachusetts Vest-a-Dog was a division of the Barnstable Police Association from May 2000 to March 2008, during which volunteers and donors made it possible to provide 192 bullet/stab-protective vests across Massachusetts in the following law enforcement agencies: local police departments, sheriff departments, MA State Police, MA Dept of Corrections, MBTA (MA Bay Transportation Authority), MA Environmental Police, MA Dept of Mental Retardation, USAF- Hanscom AFB, and USCG Gloucester. The wonderful people – and their pets – we met along the way enriched our lives in ways we could never have foreseen. Thank you!For every K-9 risking his life, day in and day out…and for the peace of mind for the officer by his side.
The President and Director of the organization is Dr. Drew Brodsky who – if he’s the Dr. Drew Brodsky in the Googletron results here – has seen his ups and downs (haven’t we all).
But an admittedly amateur survey of news reports about the organization reveals nothing negative, so the hardworking staff thinks this outfit just might be legit.
We’ll try to dig a little deeper, but any of you splendid readers have something to say about the group?
Thanks.
Campaign Outsider 
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
SUFFOLK, SS. BOARD OF REGISTRATION
IN MEDICINE
ADJUDICATORY NO. 2007-035
In the Matter of Drew A. Brodsky, M.D.
STATEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS
In Board of Registration in Medicine (Board) Docket No. 06-585,The Board has reason
to believe that Drew A. Brodsky, M.D. (the “Respondent”) has violated G.L. c. 94C, has violated
rules or regulations of the Board, engaged in conduct that undermines the public confidence in
the integrity of the medical profession.
BIOGRAPHICAL. INFORMATION
1. , The Respondent was born on April 22, 1957. He is board-certified in anesthesiology and
graduated from New York Medical College in 1983. He has been licensed’to practice medicine
in Massachusetts under certificate number 77178 since 1993. The Respondent holds privileges
at Cape Cod Health Systems.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
2. Tracy Risley, DVM provided veterinary services to the Respondent’s dog. These
services included, but were not limited to, surgical procedures on the dog’s leg.
3. On or about August 2003, the Respondent told Dr. Risley that he had financial difficulties
and offered to provide his own anesthesia in exchange for a discount in services and products for
the Respondent’s dog. Dr. Risley agreed to the arrangement.
4. The Respondent took at least three bottles of Sevoflurane from Cape Cod Hospital. The Respondent then provided these bottles of Sevoflurgne. to either Dr. Risley or her staff.
5. Sevoflurane is used to cause general anesthesia before and during surgery. Although it vaporizes readily, Sevoflurane is a liquid at room temperature and is administered via an anesthetic vaporizer attached to an anesthetic machine. Sevoflurane is used in humans and animals.
6. Sevoflurane is a Schedule VI controlled substance under Massachusetts law.
LEGAL BASIS FOR PROPOSED RELIEF
A. Pursuant to G.L. c. 112 $ 5, tenth par. (b) and 243 C.M.R. 1.03(5)(a)(2), the Board may
discipline a physician upon proof satisfactory to a majority of the Board that said physician has
committed an offense against any provision of the laws of the Commonwealth relating to the
practice of medicine, or any rule or regulation adopted thereunder; specifically G.L. c. 94C $ 9
@assessing a controlled substance not in the course of professional practice and not for the
purpose of patient treatment).
B. Pursuant to G.L. c.112 $ 5, tenth par. (h) and 243 C.M.R. 1.03(5)(a)11, the Board may
discipline a physician upon proof satisfactory to a majority of the Board that said physician has
violated the rules and regulations of the Board. Pursuant to 243’C.M.R. 2.07(5), a licensee who
violates G.L. c. 94C also violates a rule or regulation of the Board.
C. Pursuant to 243 C.M.R. 1.03(5)(a)18, the Board may discipline a physician upon proof
satisfactory to a majority of the Board that said physician has committed misconduct.
D. Pursuant to 243 C.M.R. 1.03(5)(a)10, the Board may discipline a physician upon proof
satisfactory to a majority of the Board that said physician has engaged in conduct that has the
capacity to deceive or defraud.
E. Pursuant to Levy v. Board of Regisfration in Medicine, 378 Mass. 519 (1979), and
Raymond v. Board of Regisfration in Medicine, 387 Mass. 708 (1982), the Board may discipline
a physician upon proof satisfactory to a majority of the Board that said physician lacks good
moral character and has engaged in conduct that undermines the public confidence in the
integrity of the medical profession.
F. The Board has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to G.L. c. 112, $8 5,61 and 62. This
adjudicatory proceeding will be conducted in accordance with the provisions of G.L. c. 30A and
801 CMR 1.01
NATURE OF RELIEF SOUGHT
The Board is authorized and empowered to order appropriate disciplinary action, which
may include revocation or suspension of the Respondent’s license to practice medicine. The
Board may also order, in addition to or instead of revocation or suspension, one or more of the
following: admonishment, censure, reprimand, fine, the performance of uncompensated public
service, a course of education or training or other restrictions upon the Respondent’s practice of
medicine.
ORDER
Wherefore, it is hereby ORDERED that the Respondent show cause why he should not
be disciplined for the conduct described herein.
By the Board of
Registration in Medicine,
Martin – Crane, M.D.
Chairman.
Date: August 22, 2007