Whataboutery! Quack trick no 7,988,771

January 21, 2010
By Richard Lanigan

Yesterdays Guardians front page led with a report accusing NHS hospitals of putting patients lives at risk. Not surprisingly The watchdogs failed to address sceptics concerns regarding the availability of homeopathic remedies within NHS.

Skeptic Andy Lewis believes I am trying to avoid discussing “scientific evidence”. I wonder would Andy have objected to the use of homeopathy by inmates of the concentration camps and dismissed concerns about the extensive scientific research programmes the Nazis used as whataboutery.    

Consider prejudice. Once a person begins to accept a stereotype of a particular group, that "thought" becomes an active agent, "participating" in shaping how he or she interacts with another person who falls in that stereotyped class. In turn, the tone of their interaction influences the other person’s behaviour. The prejudiced person can’t see how his prejudice shapes what he "sees" and how he acts. In some sense, if he did, he would no longer be prejudiced. To operate, the "thought" of prejudice must remain hidden to its holder

Peter Senge

 

NHS hospitals ignore patient safety orders 

Watchdog says failure by trusts to comply with alerts is ‘unacceptable’

Hospitals were accused tonight of putting patients’ lives at unnecessary risk after research revealed they were failing to comply with NHS orders designed to prevent deaths from mistakes involving drugs, surgery or equipment.

Information released by the ­Department of Health after a freedom of information request showed that hospitals were not complying with safety alerts issued by the National Patient Safety Agency (NPSA).

The NPSA’s chairman, Lord Patel of Dunkeld, told the Guardian that the behaviour of the trusts was unacceptable and endangered the health of patients.

"It’s not good enough," he said. "What’s the point of us developing these alerts if they don’t pay any attention to them? Alerts are produced to reduce risk and hopefully avoid many deaths, so not to implement them to me is alarming. If they aren’t implemented then they run the risk of harm occurring and the danger will continue."

The findings were from a FOI request submitted by patient safety charity Action Against Medical Accidents (AvMA). It revealed that:

• 104 hospitals and other providers of NHS care in England have not confirmed they have implemented an NPSA alert issued in March 2007 to ensure that ­injectable medicines are used more safely – even though new systems are meant to be in place by March 2010. The alert came after 25 patients died and 28 others experienced serious harm in 18 months. read rest of article

 

Related posts:

  1. Andy Lewis refuses to offer the quackometer’s $100 challenge to Richard Lanigan. Better be quack than chicken.
  2. Chiropractic sceptic Andy Lewis wants “TRUTH”; Even a crap chiropractor must be better than Co-proxamol as a treatment for arthritis and safer to boot.
  3. Andy Lewis’s response to my questions.

Tags: ,

Topics related to the Art, Science, Philosophy & Promotion of Chiropractic

SafeSubscribe with Constant Contact
For Email Newsletters you can trust

Popular Posts

Chiropractic Associations

Health Regulation

  • Chiropractic Regulator in UK These are the people who regulate chiropractic in the UK
  • CHRE The Council for Health Care and Regulatory Excelence are the quango set up by the Department of Health to “insure” regulators are fullfilling their statutory duty. They seem to meerly rubber stamp information given to them by the regulators and would not
  • General Medical Council Regulates Medical Doctors in the UK
  • Health Professionals Council Because of the diversity of chiropractic practise, I have always believed the chiropractic profession would have been better off being regulated by thei body where the interests of individual chiropractic groups would have been less important
  • Osteopath Regulation in the UK Set up the rear before the chiropractic profession. Do not seem to have the divisions the GCC and seem to balance their statutory duty with the interests of the Osteopath profession

Skeptics

Unorthodox Health Promotion