Dr MyHill's License in Jeopardy

[fred]

Do you think we could get 3,000 signatures to support a complaint *against* certain doctors? I'm sure there must be a few out there who we'd like to see have their licence removed.

 

[pollycbr125]

Do you think we could get 3,000 signatures to support a complaint *against* certain doctors? I'm sure there must be a few out there who we'd like to see have their licence removed.

i think if we are talking of certain weasels within the establishment im sure we could rally up more than 3,000 signatures

 

[Min]

http://www.drmyhill.co.uk/wiki/Category:My_GMC_Hearing

" Dr Myhill's presentation to the GMC will be available on line at 9.30am Thursday April 29th

Thursday April 29th my presentation to the GMC IOP will be made available here at 9.30 Dr Myhill defends her case at the General Medical Council Interim Orders Panel hearing

Thursday April 29th 1.45 pm Speeches to be made at the Demonstration will be available here at 1.45pm Demonstration speeches: Ruth Myhill, Dr Myhill and Jane Martel

Tim Cutler, Independent film maker, will be making film of the Demo including the Silent Army. This will be available on line as soon as reasonably possible.

GMC Decision has been promised at 2pm

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Vital Statistics on Monday 26 April

Emails to the GMC 630 and not just any old email detailed, logical, to the point. On-line petition 3,166 signatures many accompanied by thoughtful and incisive comments. Face Book - 1,639 entries many heart-warming stories here. This webpage has been accessed 18,105 times in the last 20 days

In addition many letters by post have also been sent to the GMC - they will all be at the Hearing. "

 

[fourecks]

Complaint to GMC about Ben Goldacre:


I propose that we sound out the GMC and draft a multi page complaint about Ben Goldacre to them. If they are prepared to hold a suspension hearing over Dr Myhill because someone wrote a venomous attack of her in their coffee break I am convinced we can top that with our genuine concerns.

I suspect no-one will listen to the following, but it's worth a try:

The full complaint was not done during a coffee break. A speculative email was written to which the GMC said (and I'm paraphrasing here) if you want us to investigate then you need to make a full complaint, which he did. All the evidence for this is on the bad-science thread in the first couple of pages.

Whilst there may have been some venom on the "bad science" thread - I don't see how there is any venom in making a complaint about a Doctor publishing potentially dangerous advice. It is now for the GMC to decide if that advice is potentially dangerous.

PS. I am not Jonas.

 

[lotusflower]

I suspect no-one will listen to the following, but it's worth a try:

The full complaint was not done during a coffee break. A speculative email was written to which the GMC said (and I'm paraphrasing here) if you want us to investigate then you need to make a full complaint, which he did. All the evidence for this is on the bad-science thread in the first couple of pages.

Whilst there may have been some venom on the "bad science" thread - I don't see how there is any venom in making a complaint about a Doctor publishing potentially dangerous advice. It is now for the GMC to decide if that advice is potentially dangerous.

PS. I am not Jonas.

Well it it has resulted and perhaps that was the intention in a public humiliating assault on Sarah Myhill and patients
I cannot see that there can be any justification for anonymity of the complainant/s. because such a process would and has encouraged spurious and malicious complaints to be made.

. In this case from what I have seen on the website Bad Science there is a campaign to attack Dr Myhill from people who have no direct contact with Dr Myhill or her patients simply because she does not fit their perceptions of science.

. It cannot be right that anonymous allegations that are not disclosed to the respondent in advance to enable rebuttal or defence is a valid procedure Except in the case of a minor or incapacitated adult The procedures are seriously flawed and are in direct contravention of Dr Myhill’s right to both natural justice and her human rights

I doubt there is serious dangerous advice on Sarah Myhill site and many other doctors who carry similar advice, but some from BS think vitamin C can kill you, that is ignorant

B12 and magensium are standard treatments for the conditions she treats. The Royal free gives B 12 for fatigue syndromes as do other hospitals around the world

People complaining have no training in nutritional or environmental medicine so are not appropriately qualified to be the judgement of that, it s simply an opinon that is all

and apparently it has happened before that annonymous complaints have come from BG forum and resulted in innocent doctors being dragged up at the GMC

http://ward87.blogspot.com/2010/04/ben-goldacres-crackpot-farm-bad-science.html

I have warned Ben Goldacre once regarding the crazy psychology of his internet forums. There are those in some kind of frenzied state who are egged on by each other to subsequently make complaints to the General Medical Council about doctors. Some doctors are good and some are bad. Ben's negligence in dealing with a case some months ago resulted in the poor doctor being subjected to a harrowing time courtesy of the GMC. That too following the doctor's mothers death. Thanks Ben. You are so caring of your colleagues. Thankfully, the GMC dropped all charges after we mounted a rapid onslaught against the stupidity created on Ben's forums. Ben's forums are filled with pseudo intellectuals who feel they know it all.

I decided at the time, that I needed to raise the awareness of the onset of some disturbing internet psychology appearing on Bad Science. The last time, I spotted this kind of frenzied state was msbp.com. As many people know, I effected the take down on msbp.com . I then wrote about it here. Following this exposure, I was subjected to a GMC complaint that resulted in a court case - now being used against every doctor in the UK. So we can understand the results of crackpot behaviour.

So far two of my friends have gone down due to the Bad Science Forums.

 

[Min]

Please don't feed the trolls by engaging with them here or on Bad Science, it's doing Dr Myhill no favours.

 

[fourecks]

Well it it has resulted and perhaps that was the intention in a public humiliating assault on Sarah Myhill and patients
I cannot see that there can be any justification for anonymity of the complainant/s. because such a process would and has encouraged spurious and malicious complaints to be made.

It is interesting to note that Dr Myhill made a very public song and dance about the complaint *before* Jonas mentioned it, so the publicity is all hers.

Lack of anonymity in making complaints also means that complaints don't get made when they should be for fear of reprisal. The GMC are there or should be there to weed out the vexatious complaints from those with merit. If the complaint is vexatious then it's the GMC's fault for letting it through *not* whoever made the complaint in the first place.

After seeing what's happened in this case I wouldn't dare make a complaint about a doctor to the GMC unless I could guarantee my anonymity would you?

In this case from what I have seen on the website Bad Science there is a campaign to attack Dr Myhill from people who have no direct contact with Dr Myhill or her patients simply because she does not fit their perceptions of science.

The campaign began with Dr Myhill campaign seemingly trying to encourage people to find the identity of the complainant. With the Bad Science forums flooded with people defending her treatment of CFS things perhaps got a little out of hand but the campaign was all Dr Myhill's.

. It cannot be right that anonymous allegations that are not disclosed to the respondent in advance to enable rebuttal or defence is a valid procedure Except in the case of a minor or incapacitated adult The procedures are seriously flawed and are in direct contravention of Dr Myhills right to both natural justice and her human rights.

1. The complaint is not anonymous, it is merely that Dr Myhill does not know their identity.
2. We only have Dr Myhill's word that she does not know what the substance of the complaint is.

If it is true that Dr Myhill does not know the exact allegations she is supposed to defend then that is indeed extremely worrying - but Jonas, on the first page of the Bad Science thread notes that she would have received the 7-page document outlining the substance of the complaint.

 

[Gerwyn]

It is interesting to note that Dr Myhill made a very public song and dance about the complaint *before* Jonas mentioned it, so the publicity is all hers.

Lack of anonymity in making complaints also means that complaints don't get made when they should be for fear of reprisal. The GMC are there or should be there to weed out the vexatious complaints from those with merit. If the complaint is vexatious then it's the GMC's fault for letting it through *not* whoever made the complaint in the first place.

After seeing what's happened in this case I wouldn't dare make a complaint about a doctor to the GMC unless I could guarantee my anonymity would you?



The campaign began with Dr Myhill campaign seemingly trying to encourage people to find the identity of the complainant. With the Bad Science forums flooded with people defending her treatment of CFS things perhaps got a little out of hand but the campaign was all Dr Myhill's.



1. The complaint is not anonymous, it is merely that Dr Myhill does not know their identity.
2. We only have Dr Myhill's word that she does not know what the substance of the complaint is.

If it is true that Dr Myhill does not know the exact allegations she is supposed to defend then that is indeed extremely worrying - but Jonas, on the first page of the Bad Science thread notes that she would have received the 7-page document outlining the substance of the complaint.

she is not aware of the nature of the complaint or the accuser. that has been openly admitted by the GMC so there is no need to take Dr Myhills word.This is against all the principles of natural justice and representative of justice in a dictatorship and not a modern democracy. if someone makes a malicious complaint then the fault entirely lies with the complainant. In English law anonymity is maintained while the police investigate the complaint.once a person is charged however then their representative is entitled to know the name of the accuser so that the charge may be refuted.They are also told the precise nature of the evidence against so that a a defence can be organised.This is called disclosure.Dr Myhill is being denied these basic rights that any citizen of this country has a right to expect.

 

[CheeseOnToast]

Moderator message: I have removed the offending links and the reference to them in this message.

If, by interesting, you mean terribly written and full of nonsense, yes, I agree.

The first, for example, contains threats to harass (illegally) a member of the public for making a perfectly legal complaint via the correct, official channels. Thankfully, the post is full of ridiculous nonsense regarding how the identity of "Jonas" may be found. The author, despite their rabid claims, clearly has absolutely no clue about what's involved in getting someone's identity and address from their internet activity.

The second post contains similar nonsense:

Of course, identification is really easy really, we get the IP, we get the internet company and we get the address. It is about a 48 hour job if I put my mind to it.

What a pile of absolute tripe. Does anyone actually think that a member of the public can just stride up to an ISP and ask for one of their customers' personal details? Really?

Anyway, I have contacted the company hosting the above blogs and informed them that they are being used to make illegal threats of harassment.

 

[fred]

Moderator message: I have removed the offending links and the reference to them in this message.

If, by interesting, you mean terribly written and full of nonsense, yes, I agree.

I find all views on a contentious subject interesting, regardless of who or how they are written and unless they are using prophanities that are aimed at named parties.

Your points of response are also interesting although I would appreciate them more if I did not feel that, somehow, the criticisms are aimed at me too, although this may just be unnecessary paranoia on my part.

@Martlet the moderator: I would have appreciated a PM to alert me to your decision. I personally did not find the posts offensive or I would not have posted them. I find links to ERV's and the Badscience sites far more offensive and yet these are allowed to remain. I obviously have to bow to your judgement but am concerned at apparent censorship of information that other members may wish to see.

I note that one of the links in question, and a quote from the same site, were posted previously at #227 of this thread and that these still remain. I assume that no member has complained of this to the moderators and that, therefore, no offence has been taken and, perhaps, others also found the content interesting.

 

[CheeseOnToast]

I find all views on a contentious subject interesting, regardless of who or how they are written and unless they are using prophanities that are aimed at named parties.

Your points of response are also interesting although I would appreciate them more if I did not feel that, somehow, the criticisms are aimed at me too, although this may just be unnecessary paranoia on my part.

@Martlet the moderator: I would have appreciated a PM to alert me to your decision. I personally did not find the posts offensive or I would not have posted them. I find links to ERV's and the Badscience sites far more offensive and yet these are allowed to remain. I obviously have to bow to your judgement but am concerned at apparent censorship of information that other members may wish to see.

I note that one of the links in question, and a quote from the same site, were posted previously at #227 of this thread and that these still remain. I assume that no member has complained of this to the moderators and that, therefore, that no offence has been taken and, perhaps, others also found the content interesting.

I imagine they were deleted because they contained illegal threats. The Bad Science forum, admittedly, can be rather combative and coarse, but no-one has threatened anyone or done (or threatened to do) anything illegal.

Also, no, the criticism wasn't aimed at you. Your post (as far as I remember) didn't actually say what you thought of the blogs. :Retro smile:

 

[fourecks]

she is not aware of the nature of the complaint or the accuser. that has been openly admitted by the GMC so there is no need to take Dr Myhills word.

This is odd. Myhill's website veers between complaining she doesn't know what the accusations are to complaining that

... the allegations against me are so wide ranging and largely about what a danger the information in my website is to public safety

I'd be grateful if you could point me to where the GMC state that they don't tell her what the allegations are because I've tried to find it but can't.

However, I don't understand what difference it makes as to who her accuser is; if the complaint has substance it should be investigated. If it doesn't the GMC should turf it out straight away.

I ask again, on the basis of what has happened here would you dare complain about your GP without the protection of anonymity if you thought there was a chance they would mount a very public campaign that tried to identify the accuser rather than deal with the accusations?

 

[lotusflower]

Moderator message: The second post contains similar nonsense:


What a pile of absolute tripe. Does anyone actually think that a member of the public can just stride up to an ISP and ask for one of their customers' personal details? Really?

Anyway, I have contacted the company hosting the above blogs and informed them that they are being used to make illegal threats of harassment.

It is an ex doctor NHS with experience in medico legal cases

here is another one she has done which has helped me to understand the process Dr Myhill is being put through

http://ward87.blogspot.com/2010/04/dementors-are-back-sarah-myhill-in.html

and she also has a website http://www.nhsexposed.com/

 

[lotusflower]

This is odd. Myhill's website veers between complaining she doesn't know what the accusations are to complaining that



I'd be grateful if you could point me to where the GMC state that they don't tell her what the allegations are because I've tried to find it but can't.

However, I don't understand what difference it makes as to who her accuser is; if the complaint has substance it should be investigated. If it doesn't the GMC should turf it out straight away.

I ask again, on the basis of what has happened here would you dare complain about your GP without the protection of anonymity if you thought there was a chance they would mount a very public campaign that tried to identify the accuser rather than deal with the accusations?

She knows it one is about B 12 shots which is ridiculous as this is an accepted treatment for fatigue syndromes around the globe and I know someone who had them at the Royal free

But I imagine the others are just not defined clearly as to what they are, I've seen jonas post and they are not clear to me either, what the problem is?

Using magnesium is again an accepted treatment of certain conditions expecially mitochondrial or CFS by doctors using nutritional approaches

If they could define what it is they want her to do, and why I know she would address this

 

[fourecks]

She knows it one is about B 12 shots which is ridiculous as this is an accepted treatment for fatigue syndromes around the globe and I know someone who had them at the Royal free

But I imagine the others are just not defined clearly as to what they are, I've seen jonas post and they are not clear to me either, what the problem is?

My bold: so I take it you don't know that she doesn't know. I would be extremely surprised if she did not know the substance of the allegations. I think the post of Jonas's is quite clear as to what the problems are.

Using magnesium is again an accepted treatment of certain conditions expecially mitochondrial or CFS by doctors using nutritional approaches

May be, but:

1) not at the levels she is recommending:
2) She recommends it for acute chest pain and a 2007 Cochrane review concluded that there is currently not enough evidence to recommend the use of IV magnesium in the treatment of ACS patients and that there are risks associated with its administration:
http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab002755.html

If they could define what it is they want her to do, and why I know she would address this

You see, she knows the problem (if there is one) is with her website even if she claims not to know which bits are problematic, so, until the hearing maybe she should take it offline?

 

[Min]

Cheeseontoast and fourecks are trolling here in order to ridicule us and any answers we give on the BS forum, here's a recent post from there:

"Jeezo. Just read the whole Phoenix Rising thread. With a few exceptions they're all as mad as, like, a bee that's like, the size of a Nissan Micra, and it's only got four legs but they're horses legs, and it's galloping around a field wondering "what sort of creature am I supposed to be, exactly?"

Please do not engage with them, their minds are closed, only the Wesselyite school of thought is not ridiculed on BS.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

back to supporting Dr Myhill:

http://www.drmyhill.co.uk/wiki/Category:My_GMC_Hearing

"Dr Myhill's presentation to the GMC will be available on line at 9.30am Thursday April 29th

Thursday April 29th my presentation to the GMC IOP will be made available here at 9.30 Dr Myhill defends her case at the General Medical Council Interim Orders Panel hearing

Thursday April 29th 1.45 pm Speeches to be made at the Demonstration will be available here at 1.45pm Demonstration speeches: Ruth Myhill, Dr Myhill and Jane Martel

Tim Cutler, Independent film maker, will be making film of the Demo including the Silent Army. This will be available on line as soon as reasonably possible.

GMC Decision has been promised at 2pm
Vital Statistics on Monday 26 April

Emails to the GMC 630 and not just any old email detailed, logical, to the point. On-line petition 3,166 signatures many accompanied by thoughtful and incisive comments. Face Book - 1,639 entries many heart-warming stories here. This webpage has been accessed 18,105 times in the last 20 days

In addition many letters by post have also been sent to the GMC - they will all be at the Hearing."

 

[lotusflower]

My bold: so I take it you don't know that she doesn't know. I would be extremely surprised if she did not know the substance of the allegations. I think the post of Jonas's is quite clear as to what the problems are.




May be, but:

1) not at the levels she is recommending:
2) She recommends it for acute chest pain and a 2007 Cochrane review concluded that there is currently not enough evidence to recommend the use of IV magnesium in the treatment of ACS patients and that there are risks associated with its administration:
http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab002755.html



You see, she knows the problem (if there is one) is with her website even if she claims not to know which bits are problematic, so, until the hearing maybe she should take it offline?

I have a communication disorder ie an ASD spectrum condition and recognised by DSM -1V as mixed expressive receptive language disorder a sensory cognitive disorder as well as mitochondiral dysfunction


I'm assuming you don't understand what that is either

I see the cochrane link is new research 2010 .

This is dr myhill response to the GMC last time, when they dropped the allegations

"The use of magnesium sulphate by injection in acute myocardial infarction is undesirable". There is a huge body of literature about magnesium in the prevention and treatment of cardiovascular disease. Indeed, many hospitals continue to use magnesium sulphate infusions in acute MI. If the correct dose is given, mortality from acute MI is substantially reduced by the use of i.v. magnesium sulphate. Indeed, one could argue that is it medical negligence not to use i.v magnesium sulphate in acute myocardial infarction! I have supplied the GMC with the relevant references

Most people dr Myhill treats do not have IV for magnesium so why is it an issue even, she recommends supplements first if the mito test is positve if they do not work because many people with mito probs cannot metabolise well so she may reccomend injections, she is very careful and thorough

The cardiologist sinatra uses it too

http://www.aminocarnitines.com/articles/MetabolicCardiology.pdf

also the breakspear medical clinic runs a mitochondrial tst based on the magnesium and ATP

so does dr charles forsyth

http://web.mac.com/drcharlesforsyth/Dr_Charles_Forsyth/Mitochondrial_Tests.html


this is what dr myhill said last time,about the scattered allegations

http://thyroid-disease.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=115&Itemid=88



I'm not going to respond further as I 'm not a doctor or scientist I do not know where all the research is but i know other professionals are using magnesium in this way for mitochondrial dysfunction and I also do not wish to be the target of someone playing word games and baiting people with disabilities that they have no understanding of and calling it science, it is not. Jonas has no training in nutrition,

Many people improve with dr myill that is the evidence that you people overlook completely,

 

[jace]

Hey people, this link is appropriate[video=youtube;FMEe7JqBgvg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMEe7JqBgvg&feature=player_embedded[/video]
if it doesn't work, click "watch on YouTube" in the centre of the screen

No apologies for reposting.

 

[fourecks]

I have a communication disorder ie an ASD spectrum condition and recognised by DSM -1V as mixed expressive receptive language disorder a sensory cognitive disorder as well as mitochondiral dysfunction
I'm assuming you don't understand what that is either

You assume too much, one member of my family (likely) has an ASD (had he been born in the last 20 years probably would have been diagnosed as such) and another has CFS. I have reasonable, first-hand understanding of the suffering and frustration that both cause. Though I think that is irrelevant to the points I make.

I'm not going to respond further as I 'm not a doctor or scientist I do not know where all the research is but i know other professionals are using magnesium in this way for mitochondrial dysfunction and I also do not wish to be the target of someone playing word games and baiting people with disabilities that they have no understanding of and calling it science, it is not.

Many people improve with dr myill that is the evidence that you people overlook completely

If people improve with some of what Dr Myhill does, great, but many of these treatments appear to unproven, and some potentially dangerous e.g. chelation. And it's difficult to overlook the bad she may be doing regardless of the good.

There may well be good evidence for using magnesium in the ways you say, I don't know. But there is evidence that it is at best not beneficial and at worst harmful to use in the treatment of acute chest pain which Dr Myhill recommends.

I'm not baiting you or anyone but as there seems to be bad feeling about my presence here, I'll go.

 

[Gerwyn]

You assume too much, one member of my family (likely) has an ASD (had he been born in the last 20 years probably would have been diagnosed as such) and another has CFS. I have reasonable, first-hand understanding of the suffering and frustration that both cause. Though I think that is irrelevant to the points I make.



If people improve with some of what Dr Myhill does, great, but many of these treatments appear to unproven, and some potentially dangerous e.g. chelation. And it's difficult to overlook the bad she may be doing regardless of the good.

There may well be good evidence for using magnesium in the ways you say, I don't know. But there is evidence that it is at best not beneficial and at worst harmful to use in the treatment of acute chest pain which Dr Myhill recommends.

I'm not baiting you or anyone but as there seems to be bad feeling about my presence here, I'll go.

ASD is easy to diagnose take him to a psychiatrist All of Simon Wessellys treatments have actually been disproved.Magnesium is a well documented treatment for acute chest pain. I appreciate that the inhabitants of the BS forum struggle with facts but at least make an effort