Me again!

To continue my rant about NHS Good-Speak, here is a good example:

A recent news article on the BBC describes how Hepatitis C came to Scotland “through the mass treatment of soldiers in field hospitals across the country during WWII. …”

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-34658098

OK, fair enough. Hep-C goes back to WW2. But then the article goes on:

Within Scotland, transmission of the virus began to increase in the 1970s, with different strains being discovered in Glasgow and Edinburgh. … From then until 1991, about 2,500 people were infected with hepatitis C through NHS blood products – mainly those imported from the US – during a contaminated blood scandal described by a Scottish inquiry as “the stuff of nightmares”. Children being treated at Yorkhill Hospital in Glasgow for haemophilia during this time were given plasma products sourced from donors in the US, which were known to be high-risk. As a result, many were infected with HIV and Hepatitis C by the age of five. Lord Penrose launched a six-year inquiry, the conclusions of which were met with cries of ‘whitewash’ from angry victims and their families when it was published in March 2015.

So much for progress. Maybe we can learn something from all that… But the thing that really bothers me is how the authors of the latest study now want to leap into action:

“Lead scientist of the University of Glasgow study, Dr Carol McWilliam Leitch, said: “HCV poses a significant public health challenge in Scotland as well as globally. There is currently no vaccine against the virus and the recently developed antiviral drugs are not only extremely costly, but resistant strains have already emerged. Pinpointing regions of Scotland driving HCV spread will allow us to more effectively target treatments, monitor their effect and track resistant strains. These measures are essential if we are to combat the virus. We now intend to focus our attention on HCV spread in other Scottish regions and to extend the study across the UK.”

OK, Dr Carol McWilliam Leitch works for the University of Glasgow, and not the NHS. But I ask you!!??

“Pinpoint regions of Scotland driving HCV spread…”??? “Track strains…”??? “These measures are essential to combat the virus…”??? “”Focus on HVC spread to other regions…” Extend the study across the UK???

I ask you again! Why is there no mention of actually treating anyone in this article??

WTF!!!

I’m flying to Australia! No, wait. I already did!

Hey LG
Bang on – if I may draw your attention to Appendix 6: Summary of declared interests of members of Guidelines Development Group for the development of WHO HCV guidelines for screening care and treatment of persons with HCV.

http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/133738/1/WHO_HIV_2014.27_eng.pdf?ua=1&ua=1

Hey LG
Bang on – if I may draw your attention to Appendix 6: Summary of declared interests of members of Guidelines Development Group for the development of WHO HCV guidelines for screening care and treatment of persons with HCV.

Makes for some interesting reading and shows the extent of the greedy paws of big pharma

http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/133738/1/WHO_HIV_2014.27_eng.pdf?ua=1&ua=1%5B/quote%5D

Thanks Tina,

It is appropriate that this is posted but I also think that we need to be careful about accusations of attempts to unduly influence by the Pharma’s and being unduly influenced against the guidelines creators.

Part of this issue is that the various government approval processes such as PBAC and FDA require approval trials to be monitored by independent monitors. Usually this will be large hospitals that will not have the funds to divert from their normal budgets and governments are not prepared to cough up the money to support a commercial enterprise. So the Pharma’s provide the drugs and funding for the trials. Other times they provide funds for experts to travel, meet, cooperate internationally for the benefit of many (err….including themselves). In an ideal world it would all be arms length with truly independent arbitrators in the middle. The real world doesn’t work like that so we always have potential for conflict of interest. The intent of these lists is to make us aware of where that potential lies so we can watch for anything untoward. Really a case of “Better the devil you know….”

My declaration of interests: Drugs, health monitoring, parking and pro rata travel costs funded by BMS as participant in clinical trial.

Thanks Tina, I should also have commented that what concerns me more than these open declarations is when you have to dig down into the nitty gritty of annual financial reports to look for funds being provided.

Hi LG,
Good news! On treatment! Yay!
Fingers crossed for the best blood test ever!