Search results

Continued discussion from this onwards: https://www.s4me.info/threads/independent-advisory-group-for-the-full-update-of-the-cochrane-review-on-exercise-therapy-and-me-cfs-2020-led-by-hilda-bastian.13645/page-68#post-349086

A perspective that is only relevant to unlawful clinical judgement or decision making is not a mere perspective. It is contributory to that unlawful behaviour, which can also be unindemnified and/or criminal (context dependent). The loose analogy, and the fact, in extremis, is that such a...

Given the specifically habitual and normalised nature of unlawful clinical behaviour and administrative decision-making it is fundamental that this factor be made explicit Malpractice is a norm in this field

Precisely There are zero contexts (outside of criminality) where legal obligations are not absolutely supreme. The remit of this review makes the requirements you outlined necessary for the creation of lawfully implementable conclusions. The mirror image would imply that medics define law...

Ignoring the illiterate is effectively a requirement of law in this context.

The Twitter thread summarises the primary points

Any organisation's work, output or guidelines that facilitates/creates unlawful consequences is either 1) to be ignored as a requirement of the law or 2) is itself open to legal challenge. None of these organisations can transform unlawful decisions/acts into lawful behaviour. Put more...

An appropriate example of dealing with the illiterate on this basis (PG in this case): "Legally unsustainable, which your peers have zero control over Science shoots the message when methods violate basic standards / messenger veers into weak sophistry Reducing the definition of science...

It is extremely important to remember that assuming that Cochrane, NICE, CDC or local medical processes operate in a vacuum is incorrect. Their scope and actions are bound by the law. Full stop. It is the fundamental driver and arbitrator, unless we wish to avoid highlighting it to appease...

It is extremely important to remember that assuming that Cochrane, NICE, CDC or local medical processes operate in a vacuum is incorrect. Their scope and actions are bound by the law. Full stop. It is the fundamental driver and arbitrator, unless we wish to avoid highlighting it to appease...

It is extremely important to remember that assuming that Cochrane, NICE, CDC or local medical processes operate in a vacuum is incorrect. Their scope and actions are bound by the law. Full stop. It is the fundamental driver and arbitrator, unless we wish to avoid highlighting it to appease...

Summary on Twitter: The relative lack of interest in this topic is counterproductively surreal and disturbing. We have become chronically used to persistent lawbreaking and aggressive insistence on malpractice. Neither medics, associations nor bodies of state define the law. Not your GP, not...

Profuse thanks, as always!

Continuing on that basis without those issues addressed does guarantee ongoing failure

The ministerial reply is full of inaccuracies that the post I shared addresses in full

Without this, they will do what they want, whatever that will eventually mean. They need this clarity.

Put otherwise, neither ignorance, prejudice nor willful stupidity can make unlawful policy or judgement lawful This is as central as it gets. The rest is just detail.

The applicability of the law and legal rationales

You really should share this with them too...

Are they being contacted by good orgs? Thus is entirely relevant for them: @Caroline Struthers @Hilda Bastian...