Excuse my ignorance but who is this (in the non-Twitter world)?
Lou Today
@louise_today
Lou Today
@louise_today
'Specialty Doctor in Oncology'
Yes, she might make the trust's financial figures look good (cancer drugs can be very expensive) but, based on her statements above, not some you'd instinctively trust!That's very worrying. I sincerely hope she doesn't think LP will cure cancer as well?
Her website recommends crowd funding to pay for LP
NauseatingDr. Anna's website states:
"Think creatively about how you could raise the funds, some people have used fundraising such as ‘crowdfunding’ in the past. It may not be as impossible as you think!"
So recovery is possible if you think positively and payment is possible if you think creatively.
Yes Charles Shepherd on behalf of MEAssociation complained to the Advertising Standards Authority about his claims of LP being a cure and he had to change his website wording.I don't know how the rules work these days but I would certainly think the GMC should be concerned about doctors behaving like this.
I gather Phil Parker had complaints previously - I don't know if anyone remembers the details?
I gather Phil Parker had complaints previously - I don't know if anyone remembers the details?
Does anyone wonder whether these testimonials are made up? They don't sound authentic to me because they contain almost no details.
A real patient would have a lot more to say about various aspects of illness and recovery. I could say more but I don't want to help these charlatans appear more authentic.
?I found EzzieD's post on Encounters with Doctors![]()
The Lightning Process Package costs 650 pounds per person, the website says. It mostly consists of "Three consecutive half-day training (3-5 hours per day) these are usually held in small groups of 3-5 people."
So if you take 3 persons per group, then an LP coach can make 650 pounds a day by giving these courses?
Isn't her use of her status as a GP on her commercial site problematic in some way?
While we stand by the need to discuss and debate all these areas, we recognise the legitimate concern that this article offered a platform to an intervention and a commercial interest which hasn’t got a clear evidence base. On reflection, after discussion in the editorial team, and in consultation with some members from the Editorial Board, we have taken the decision to unpublish the article. I’m sorry for any distress this has caused. We will remain a space for lively debate for practising clinicians.
Many thanks for your feedback.