Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2003;327:448 (23 August), doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7412.448-c
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITORThe editorial comment by Smith is characteristic of the worst kind of wrong thinkingin that it is only half wrong and so escapes comment on the basis of the part that is half right.1
He is right that we all consider patient interests of the greatest importance and acknowledge the need to represent their views in clinical issues. He is right that the interests of individual patients have sometimes been placed second to the educational value of presenting them. The recent departures with evolving case histories were interesting, including the patients' contribution. However, he is wrong on all the rest. He is wrong to scorn the NHS on the basis that it does not share the priorities and infrastructure of a commercial supermarket. He is wrong to consider it offensive to patients that doctors write professional letters to each other that contain information that is more complex and
-->
David A de Berker, consultant dermatologist
Bristol Royal Infirmary, Bristol BS2 8HW david.deberker@ubht.swest.nhs.uk
Read all Rapid Responses