The radiology website Aunt Minnie has a piece on Dr. Anna Chacko. (you may need to create user id to read the article)
Incidentally, Congressman Joe Sestak has introduced the Transparency for America's Heroes Act, HR 3843, and in the text of the bill is this,
Until March of 2010, Dr. Pamela Gray was a rheumatologist at the Hampton VAMC. It is her contention that she was subsequently terminated as a VA employee as a result of her actions to stop the over-prescription of Schedule II narcotics. Dr. Gray joins Dr. Anna Chacko formerly of the Pittsburgh VAMC and Dr. Robert Van Boven formerly of the Central Texas Veterans Healthcare System in alleging retaliation for exposing practices they believed negatively affected patient care. I respect the fact that these physicians put their careers and reputations at risk to advance the treatment of our Veterans.
There's no response yet from Congressman Sestak's office about Dr. Chacko's inclusion in the text of the bill. I don't know if Congressman Sestak read my dossier on her before declaring her a hero but here it is anyway.
Finally, Dr. Chacko seems to have a liberal interpretation of our first conversation. In the piece, it's described this way.
The next day she received a phone call from Michael Volpe, a blogger with a self-styled government watchdog website on Blogspot.com called TheProvocateur, who said he was writing an article on Chacko. Chacko spoke with him briefly, but she claims she was shocked when his article appeared, entitled "Clout: Congressman Brad Miller, General Shinseki, and the Pittsburgh VA ."
In her memo, she described the conversation this way.
On September 2nd, a blogger (Michael Volpe) called me at my office and told me that he would be writing up slanderous and very injurious articles about me on the Internet. Since I did not know Mr. Volpe personally, I asked him what his sources of information would be. He claimed and subsequently has stated on his blog that his sources of information would be the VA.
So, to one source she describes the conversation as brief and vague and to another source she claims that I said the piece would be "slanderous." Here's the piece in question.