Rapid Responses to:
|
|
Rapid Responses: Rapid Responses published:
-
![[Read Rapid Response]](/icons/misc/sectionDOWN.gif)
RCS Response to Institutional corruption allegations
- Patricia Hagan (22 November 2002)
-
Impeding investigations
- Francis J Morrissey (22 November 2002)
-
Policing the profession.
- David Carvel (23 November 2002)
-
Banerjee's papers still not retracted from MEDLINE
- Joseph C. Watine (25 November 2002)
-
Clarification required.
- Peter Gooderham (26 November 2002)
-
Where is the Evidence?
- Michael D Innis (26 November 2002)
-
Letter to the Editor from Professor Barry Ife
- Christopher Coe (27 November 2002)
-
Re: Where is the Evidence?
- eamonn j clarke (27 November 2002)
-
authors response
- Peter T Wilmshurst (28 November 2002)
-
TABLOID PRESS
- shetty s sharat (28 November 2002)
-
NHS fraud allegations and cover-ups
- Nigel Dudley (30 November 2002)
-
action on corruption is essential
- douglas j Buchanan (3 December 2002)
-
Fraudulent research
- graham neale, none (13 January 2003)
-
Corruption and human nature
- Wendy Taylor (2 February 2003)
-
Re: Corruption and human nature
- Mark Struthers (4 February 2003)
-
The Triumph of Evil - Edmund Burke or wishful thinking
- Michael Goodyear (11 June 2003)
-
Re: The Triumph of Evil - Edmund Burke or wishful thinking
- Lars B Backlund (23 January 2004)
|
|
|||
|
Patricia Hagan, Head of External Affairs The Royal College of Surgeons, London WC2A 3PN
Send response to journal:
|
In the light of the article by Peter Wilmshurst in the BMJ (volume 325, 23 November) The Royal College of Surgeons would like to make the following points: · At the time Mr Banerjee was awarded a Hunterian Professorship in 1991 the College had no knowledge of the allegations relating to fraudulent research, which were subsequently investigated by the GMC in 2000. · The College was made aware of this was when the GMC determination was issued in November 2000. · In March 2000 the College was asked to undertake a review of Mr Banerjee's practice by his employing trust. As a result of that review the College recommended to the trust that the case be referred to the General Medical Council and subsequently joined the trust in reporting the matter to the GMC. · Following the determination in that case Mr Banerjee was struck off the medical register in September 2002 and the College has now commenced proceedings under Council’s Regulations relating to the removal of an individual’s Fellowship. The College is intending to submit a fuller response to the article shortly. Competing interests: None declared |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Francis J Morrissey, Senior Lecturer School of Nursing Sciences,James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia, Qld4811
Send response to journal:
|
In Queensland the Nursing Act, (and the Act regulating other health professions including medicine) has the power for the Council to appoint inspectors. Inspectors can require the production of documents etc, and can enter and search for evidence of breaches of the Act. The inspectors can also apply to a magistrate for a warrant, and it is an offence to obstruct an inspector. These are fairly draconian powers, but were born out of an era of widespread corruption if the State government, and the enormous difficulty a subsequent Inquiry had in rooting out offenders. Obviously, the Council does not use these powers as a first recourse. It is also my perception that universities here have a very good relationship with regulatory bodies and would probably cooperate fully with a legitimate investigation. Usually the appropriate Councils will investigate complaints confidentially, and only bring material into the public arena if a matter goes to a hearing. Thus there is generally no damage to an institutions reputation until that stage, by which time they may have deserved the damage. I suggest that if Dr Wilmshurst's complaints are indicative of a common practice, that amendments be made to the legislation regulating medicine along the lines of our Act. The powers don't have to be used, but may be useful in reminding recalcitrants and those who would obstruct investigations that failure to cooperate is not acceptable. With the GMC attempting to improve the reputation of the profession after the scandals of recent years, it doesn't need the behaviours described by Dr Wilmshurst. Competing interests: None declared |
|||
|
|
|||
|
David Carvel, GP Biggar ML12 6BE
Send response to journal:
|
It makes truly depressing reading that fellow doctors have been found guilty of serious professional misconduct for research amd financial fraud. Dr Wilmhurst led a campaign to expose Banerjee and Peters and were it not for his diligence and doggedness their contemptible practises, as described, would probably have continued for longer. Wilmhurst also thwarted Banerjee's nomination to Medical Fellowship of one particular College and is still trying to have a University degree taken from him. Smith praises Wilmhurst for being a "champion whistleblower" and informs us that following his investigations into other doctors "a stream of convictions has followed". (1) I am a little uneasy however that one person has single-handedly rounded up medical miscreants and deposited them at the door of the GMC (if not in the main foyer). It is not for me to judge his motives but where Bolsin was ideally placed to comment on Wiseheart and Dhasmana, Dr Wilmhurst states he does "not know either of them (Banerjee and Peters) personally" and by inference has never worked with them in any capacity. It is perhaps an indictment on our regulatory bodies that the likes of Wilmhurst are required but as the GMC dusts itself down after its perceived shortcomings in the recent past we are likely to have a more efficient and fairer system. Reappraisal will never be so restrictive that dishonest doctors are a thing of the past, and we are always going to require whistle-blowers, but we should thank individuals like Dr Wilmhurst for their tireless actions and let others take over from here. 1 Editor's choice BMJ 2002;325 (23 November) Competing interests: None declared |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Joseph C. Watine, consultant, laboratory medicine Hôpital de Rodez, France
Send response to journal:
|
Thank you Peter Wilmshurst for your most excellent and courageous work. I would like to add that the paper published in the Feb 1992 issue of Gut by AK Banerjee and TJ Peters [1] is still appearing in MEDLINE, as well as eight other papers by the same two co-authors that were published between 1988 and 1991. [1] Banerjee AK, Marway JS, Preedy VR, Peters TJ. Studies of gut mucosal protein synthesis in a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) model of inflammatory bowel disease. Gut 1992;33(2):242-5. Competing interests: None declared |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Peter Gooderham, GP 3 The Huntons, Bayston Hill, Shrewsbury
Send response to journal:
|
In the BMJ this article caught my eye because it began with my favourite quote from Burke. Responses on another website (www.doctors.net.uk) include a reference: Banerjee AK, Rosin MD, Wilmshurst PT. Salmonella endocarditis. Postgrad Med J. 1989 Oct;65(768):801-2. Is there any significance in this? Competing interests: None declared |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Michael D Innis, Director Medisets International Home 4575
Send response to journal:
|
Editor, It is being claimed by some Radiologists that in cases of alleged child abuse that "rib fractures are caused by extremely severe squeezing or compression forces to the chest. The amount of force required to produce them is considerable. It has been likened to the equivalent of an adult standing on the chest of the child" according to one description I have. No thought appears to have been given to the possibility of spontaneous rib fracture caused by: 1.Barlow’s Disease – Infantile Scurvy. Or the modern concept of Vitamin C deficiency in children brought to the attention of Medical Profession by Dr Kalokerinos [1] 2.Brittle Bone Disease whether temporary or permanent 3.Osteogenesis Imperfecta. 4.Osteomalacia 5.Birth Trauma Radiologists fail to state what particular features of Non-accidental Injuries distinguish them from fractures due to Natural causes. Especially they fail to exclude Vitamin C deficiency, partly because the history that the mother observed the child suffering a nose bleed or bruised easily is of no interest to them when sitting in their dark rooms before the image of a fractured rib. Their opinions should be backed by specifying precisely the pathognomonic features of a Non–accidental Injury - if there are any. It is time the Law Courts forced experts to declare categorically the facts upon which their opinions are based - or risk been accused of fabrication and brought to the notice of the GMC. Michael Innis FRCPA; FRCPath. Reference: 1. Kalokerinos A. Every Second Child Thomas Nelson, Australia 1974 Competing interests: None declared |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Christopher Coe, Director of Communications King's College London
Send response to journal:
|
This article has been removed on legal advice.
Tony Delamothe web editor, bmj.com |
|||
|
|
|||
|
eamonn j clarke, gp cambs pe14 9bt
Send response to journal:
|
I am confused. Dr Innis has posted a response to Dr Wilmshurst's article but I cannot see the connection between the two? Both are about serious but apparently unrelated issues. Should Dr Innis's response be attached to a different article? Competing interests: None declared |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Peter T Wilmshurst, consultant cardiologist Royal Shrewsbury Hospital
Send response to journal:
|
At this stage I should like to reply to a few of the responses submitted so far to my article on institutional corruption in medicine. I am sorry to disappoint Dr Gooderham but the A K Banerjee who was the first author of a letter that was published by the Postgraduate Medical Journal in 1989, with me as the third author, was Arpan Kumar Banerjee (currently a consultant radiologist in Birmingham) not Anjan Kumar Banerjee. There are 9 A K Banerjees in the 2001 Medical Directory and 13 currently on the Medical Register. In all cases the K stands for Kumar. There has been an inital response from Patricia Hagan for the Royal College of Surgeons and one from Professor Barry Ife on behalf King's College Hospital. Patricia Hagan and Professor Ife have indicated the intention of their organisation to issue a "fuller response" or "detailed rebuttal" later. Tempted as I am to respond now, I will keep my powder dry until they have finalised their excuses. However I wise to point out that the BMJ's lawyers did see the article and supporting documents and were happy with publication. Competing interests: I am the author of the paper in question |
|||
|
|
|||
|
shetty s sharat, staff grade airbles rd day hospital ml13bw
Send response to journal:
|
Dr Wilmshurst may as well write an obituary. When a man is down there has to be some room for him to get up and make amends ,reform himself, answer questions etc... Why is the pressure to publish so great? Now I am addressing the Bannerji's of this world... Competing interests: None declared |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Nigel Dudley, Consultant in Elderly Medicine St James's University Hospital LEEDS LS9 7TF
Send response to journal:
|
Doctors and academics are not the only group in the NHS accused of institutional corruption. The National Audit Office December 2001 report into Inappropriate Adjustments to NHS Waiting Lists and the Committee of Public Accounts report of their own investigation makes eye-opening reading.[1,2] The allegations of criminal fraud and cover-up made by MPs at the hearing to the Department of Health's senior civil servants should have triggered a full NHS Counter Fraud Service investigation in line with section 5vi of the NHS Counter Fraud Charter.[3]MPs clearly suspected and made allegations about fraud and corruption on 14 January that were ignored and not acted upon by the senior civil servants. Any fraud, whether related to obtaining free medicines by deceit or in the managers' cases falsifying waiting list data that could potentially result in dishonest individual financial gain through increases in basic salary above government guidance, job protection, job promotion, or performance related bonuses should be investigated. Fraud of any kind deprives frontline care of much needed resources.Alan Milburn and Lord Hunt have made this point themselves. Are they being listened to by their Departmental staff? Managerial seniority should not offer inappropriate protection from investigation. These were considered very serious matters by the Department of Health at the hearing yet the Department's website removed a story headlined "Fiddles focus" on 3 October. Cover-up? Look at the evidence that's now left in the public domain for yourself. [1] National Audit Office. Inappropriate adjustments to NHS waiting lists.London:The Stationery Office,2001 [2] House of Common Committee of Public Accounts. Inappropriate Adjustments to NHS Waiting Lists. Forty-sixth Report of Session 2001-02 www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmselect/cmpubacc/517/51702.htm (accessed 25 November 2002) [3]NHS Counter Fraud Charter. www.doh.gov.uk/dcfs/charter.htm (accessed 25 November 2002) The views expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employing organisation whose management is supportive of the important principles of fairness, openness, and honesty. Competing interests: None declared |
|||
|
|
|||
|
douglas j Buchanan, retired 10 Rosemoor Gardens, Appleton, Warrington WA4 5RG
Send response to journal:
|
Wilmshurst has done the profession a great service. I know that the case he quotes is not the only one. I know of a separate case where a university awarded a postgraduate degree to a doctor in spite of being advised by a senior member of staff that the work included plagiarism and that the degree should not be awarded. I would be very surprised if there are not other cases. I was included in the consultation about the founding of the Academy of Medicine and suggested then that fraud and corruption in academic work was something they should take on. One of the founders advised that he did not think this was a serious issue. This view cannot be sustained and it is time for the academy to take real action if they wish to promote the excellence of British academic medicine. Competing interests: None declared |
|||
|
|
|||
|
graham neale, medical tutor Clinical skills centre, Rockerfeller Building, UCL, WC1E 6JJ, none
Send response to journal:
|
This article has been removed on legal advice.
Tony Delamothe web editor, bmj.com |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Wendy Taylor, Consultant neuroradiologist SW5
Send response to journal:
|
This article has been removed on legal advice.
Tony Delamothe web editor, bmj.com |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Mark Struthers, GP Bedfordshire
Send response to journal:
|
“But maybe there is time...." For what I wonder Dr Taylor? To find Peter Wilmshurst dead in a ditch somewhere stabbed through the heart? I really don't see what is unavoidable or inevitable about corruption at any level of society and particularly in medicine. It does happen of course as Peter Wilmshurst has shown - and I hope it is only the tip of a very small iceberg. Surely it can all be minimised without threat to life and limb. It is depressing to think that with knowledge of fraudulent research Dr Taylor would not have the courage to expose it. It would be her professional duty to do so after all. It is astounding that I had never thought for a moment that Peter Wilmshurst might need police protection - but then perhaps I've been naive as to the lengths medical men might go in defence of their reputations. Competing interests: None declared |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Michael Goodyear, Assistant Professor, Department of Medicine, Dalhousie University. Executive Chair, Research Ethics. Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3H 2Y9
Send response to journal:
|
Surprisingly none of your readers have challenged your opening quotation, attributed to Edmund Burke. Since the academic in us is trained to cite accurately, I would be very interested to know if any of them can actually find this quotation in the Canon of Burke's writings. A starting point for the inquisitive might be http://www.tartarus.org/~martin/essays/burkequote.html I suspect your article will be widely cited so it is important to make sure that any attributed comments are in fact accurate. Competing interests: None declared |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Lars B Backlund, Consultant Sabbatsberg Hospital, Box 6401, SE-113 82 STOCKHOLM, Sweden
Send response to journal:
|
It is necessary only for the good man to do nothing for evil to triumph. [attributed (in a number of forms) to Burke, but not found in his writings.] According to: "Burke, Edmund" The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Quotations. Ed. Elizabeth Knowles. Oxford University Press, 2003. Never mind who said it first, the sentiment is admirable. (Wilde: I wish I had said that. Beerbohm: You will, Oscar, you will.) Competing interests: None declared |
|||