Douglas:
Reasoned debate indicates a willingness to objectively examine the
information placed 'in evidence'
and objectively and sometimes delicately tease out the underlying meaning.
I would hope
that is exactly what this group is all about.
I agree with Kev that our role should be to provide the basis for reasoned
debate.
Clearly discussion in the US has raised questions regarding health care
that resonate beyond
our system and the discussion will go on for a while. As far as I am
concerned,
I welcome input from everyone as clearly no one has the single correct
universal answer.
And, Douglas, don't get discouraged. Among every group there will always
be
individuals incensed that their present of a bicycle to their local mermaid
is unappreciated.
Bill
>>> "k.hopayian" <[log in to unmask]> 8/24/2009 3:35 PM >>>
Hi Douglas,
Don't take it to heart, mate, Scottish decisions seem to draw
criticism from across the Atlantic ;-)
I think that comment on the evidence relating to the financing and
administration of health care, their impact on processes and health
outcomes and how we appraise and apply such evidence are all within
the remit of this group. So is comment about how evidence is
misrepresented; after all, we have in the past commented on such
issues as pharma influence and conflicts of interest.
While politics and medicine are inseparable, I draw the line at using
the list as a platform to support a partisan policy. That is the point
where we move away from debate about knowledge towards incorporating
values. We do not all share the same values.
Douglas, you have managed this list splendidly over the years. Keep it
up.
Kev Hopayian
GP, England
On 24 Aug 2009, at 16:31, Douglas Badenoch wrote:
> Dear List Members
>
> A message, and a confession, from your list owner
([log in to unmask]
> )
>
> Paul Ash emailed me this morning to ask whether it would be OK to
> post that message to EBH. I must admit I hummed and hawed about it
> for a while, before saying "Yes I think so", along with requesting a
> few changes in the text.
>
> Others can (and, it seems, are) articulating the reasons for this
> far more eloquently than I ever would. Suffice to say that I don't
> think that a profession should be excluded from a debate just
> because the debate is "political".
>
> However, in the best traditions of EBHC I am prepared to believe
> that I could be wrong! For me, the list membership should have the
> strongest say in what is an appropriate topic for discussion. Dr
> Shaneyfeld is absolutely right to express his views regarding the
> appropriateness of the topic for the list. Clearly, many others
> (not just UK residents) have other views.
>
> If anyone has any further strong feelings about whether or not this
> is an appropriate topic for the EBH list, and fears "sticking their
> head above the parapet", please feel free to email me directly at
[log in to unmask]
> . I promise I will treat them in confidence and get back to the
> list with an overview.
>
> I do have one sincere request: Please do not direct your replies in
> personal terms, or in terms that might be interpreted as a personal
> attack. I understand that it is very easy to do in the heat of the
> moment. But it is also very easy for such responses to be
> misinterpreted, and for things to get out of hand. We've managed to
> run this list for 15 years without a "flame war", so let's try to
> keep it that way.
>
> At the risk of teaching my granny to suck eggs, one handy hint is,
> if you are in any doubt as to whether your email will upset, save it
> and review it an hour later before sending it. (If only I followed
> this advice when driving the car, my children would now have a far
> less colourful vocabulary.)
>
> Here's to continued respectful, professional discussions.
>
> cheers
>
> Douglas
>
> Ami Banerjee wrote:
>> Dr Shaneyfelt
>>
>> Your knee-jerk e-mail symbolises exactly what is giving the US
>> healthcare system a bad reputation and bad coverage in the world
>> media
>> at the moment. Just like any other system and any other country, it
>> should be open to criticism and that criticism should be
>> evidence-based.
>>
>> As the world's largest economy and political power, America's state
>> of
>> health and state of healthcare is obviously of interest to other
>> countries, and even more so in a globalised world. To tell a British
>> person not to comment on the US healthcare is ridiculous and shows
>> that you are not open to debate. In that case shall we say that UK
>> scientists should not comment on research done in the US because it
>> is
>> not our business?
>>
>> There has been a lot of misinformed, vitriolic coverage of the NHS
>> with no evidence base from both UK and US politicians and various
>> commentators. That is why those of us who know about EBM and have the
>> ability to read evidence impartially should speak out. If we did not
>> speak out about injustices in other countries because "it was not our
>> business" then we would live in a sorry state of affairs. Nobody is
>> saying that the US should copy the NHS; it will develop its own
>> context-specific solution to good healthcare for its population.
>> However, as I said in a recent blog
>> <http://trusttheevidence.net/ami-banerjee/us-health-reform>, there is
>> evidence to show that the US system is not working.
>>
>> It is very hard to tease apart medicine from politics and perhaps the
>> role of EBM should be to inform politicians and the public of the
>> best-quality data and how to use it.
>>
>> Best wishes
>>
>>
>> Ami Banerjee
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2009/8/24 Shaneyfelt, Terry <[log in to unmask]>:
>>
>>> As an American- please stay out of our business. What do you
>>> people (UK)
>>> care about what we do with our health care system? Asking people
>>> to sign a
>>> petition for some outside group to “inform” congress in the US
>>> about the UK
>>> system. That doesn’t sound biased in any way. Members of your own
>>> parliament
>>> have urged that we don’t change our system.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This board is supposed to be about EMB not politics.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>> From: Evidence based health (EBH)
>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ash Paul
>>> Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 8:50 AM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: Combating misinformation about the NHS: do your bit
>>> for the NHS
>>> which we are all proud of in the UK, inspite of its many faults!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>
>>> You might want to read this and sign this petition (it's the least
>>> we can do
>>> for the NHS!!!!). Please forward it to all your colleagues and to
>>> people,
>>> friends and family you know and trust in the UK:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> HiMovement for change led by Obama in the US is at risk of
>>> collapsing, in
>>> part because of the powerful medical insurance lobby and right-wing
>>> propaganda machine spreading lies about the British health care
>>> system. I
>>> have just signed a petition urging the US Congress and American
>>> people to
>>> ignore the propaganda about the health system in Britain and to
>>> turn the
>>> debate away from fear and lies -- I thought that you would want to
>>> help set
>>> the record straight too! Click the link to sign the petition:
>>> http://www.avaaz.org/en/reform_health_care_uk/96.php?CLICK_TF_TRACK
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Ash
>>>
>>> Dr Ash Paul
>>> Medical Director
>>> NHS Bedfordshire
>>>
>>> 21 Kimbolton Road
>>>
>>> Bedford
>>>
>>> MK40 2AW
>>>
>>> Tel no: 01234795705
>>>
>>> Email: [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Mr Douglas Badenoch
> Director, Minervation Ltd
> -------------------------
> 23 Bonaly Grove
> Edinburgh
> EH13 0QB
> -------------------------
> Tel: +44 131 441 4699
> Web: www.minervation.com
> -------------------------
> Minervation is a limited company registered in England and Wales
> Registered number: 4135916 VAT number: 792674384
> Registered Office: Salter's Boat Yard, Folly Bridge, Abingdon Road,
> Oxford, OX1 4LB
|
