Discussion in 'General ME/CFS News' started by Robert 1973, Jan 15, 2018.
Excellent. Small steps, but vital in paving the way.
To be fair, any such evidence would be devastating to their case. It always is with this lot.
What's the betting the 'evidence' turns out to be opinionated pieces by the authors themselves.
haha i reckon that's exactly what it will be... & I cant wait to see them try to defend it
Obviously they will call in experts, to provide expert opinion to do so.
Imagine the savings in both time and money when they decide that the only experts with the relevant expertise are themselves.
This would appear to be the way that they do things so why would this case be any different?
What does this means? Sorry not sure if it is my English.
I take it to mean that the GMC has been told to produce the written evidence showing why they didn't investigate the PACE authors.
If they can't show with written evidence that there was a correct procedure followed, then Myhill will take the GMC to court for not carrying out a proper investigation.
It would be the "decision not to investigate" which would be taken to court for review. Had they decided to investigate there would have been no need.The language, is at first sight, somewhat confusing.
I wouldn't be surprised if 'they' pointed to the HRA report and said it had already been investigated and found to be all above board.
This GMC page might help. Before they investigate there is the first stage where they decide whether there is anything within their remit to investigate. https://www.gmc-uk.org/concerns/information-for-patients/how-we-handle-concerns
I had to read it twice myself @Seven, because the wording can at first glance seem ambiguous.
I've reworded slightly from ...
"If there is no evidence base, then I will take the decision not to investigate the PACE authors to the High Court for a Judicial Review."
... to ...
"If there is no evidence base, then I will take the [GMC's] decision (to not investigate the PACE authors) to the High Court for a Judicial Review."
Hope that helps a bit.
THank you all. @Barry @NelliePledge @chrisb @Trish
@Barry Superb work on the rephrasing!!!
Dr Sarah Myhill: Update on Dr Myhill's complaint to the GMC about the PACE authors
20 JANUARY 2020 UPDATE AND SUMMARY OF EVENTS SO FAR
I complained about the PACE authors to the GMC
After much time passing, the GMC issued a decision notice stating that it was not going to investigate the PACE authors
I made a Freedom of Information Act data request, requiring that the GMC release their reasons for not investigating the PACE authors
The GMC replied with a short opinion-based document, with no evidence base
I made a second Freedom of Information Act data request, requiring that the GMC either release the evidence base for their decision or admit that no evidence base actually existed
The GMC replied and stated that they considered that they had complied with this second Freedom of Information Act data request within the document supplied as above
I wrote to the Information Commissioner’s Office asking that they review the GMC’s insistence that it had complied with my second data request
On 1 October, [see below] the ICO upheld my point of law and put a Decision Notice on the GMC requiring that they either release the evidence base for their decision not to investigate the GMC or that they state that there is no such evidence base.
The GMC appealed against the above ICO Decision Notice to force such disclosure
In a turnaround of logic, the ICO accepted this GMC appeal
I appealed against the ICO decision to accept the GMC’s appeal against the original Decision Notice
The ICO has accepted my appeal against their decision as noted directly above
I will appear in person at a Hearing [Myhill versus ICO]. I will update you on when and where this will take place.
interesting - I admire Dr Myhill's perseverance.
If this was a sporting event it would go like this:
Sarah Myhill (Roger Federer)
Pace team - (Russian Athletic Doping agency)
GMC Line judge - (Lance Armstrong)
ICO Umpire - (Sepp Blatter)
I've not been following these efforts. What is the hoped for outcome with all of this?
As I understand it, she is hoping that the GMC will investigate the PACE authors, re their flawed research.
Sadly the number of MPs supporting her actions has reduced significantly since the election.
Separate names with a comma.