Could someone please tell me again how to be taken off this mailing list?  I did go through the process indicated but it hasn't seemed to work.

Kyle J. Day
Specialist Social Worker
Multi-Agency Support Team
>>> Andrew Duggan <[log in to unmask]> 10 May 2007 15:58 >>>
Rena.

Well this comes as no surprise.

The central question for me is who gathers the evidence and who they ask?

There is in my view a need, in the case of children and families, to begin 
to ask them about what they want researching, what are the questions they 
want to answer and how they define the so called 'evidence base?'

What does the WHO actually represent?

How many of the people it is researching are 'consultants' in the research 
process?

Far to often, well meaning organization like the WHO, set the parameters for 
what is or is not research and evidence base. This is often socially, 
cultuitally and politically biased.

Warm regards

Andrew Duggan

Warm regards

Andrew Duggan
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rena Papadopoulos" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 11:50 AM
Subject: WHO criticized for neglecting evidence


> Here is something which will shock and/or surprise many. It did me!
> Regards,
> Rena.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Social Determinants of Health [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>
> WHO criticized for neglecting evidence
> By MARIA CHENG
> AP Medical Writer
>
> LONDON --
> When developing "evidence-based" guidelines, the World Health
> Organization routinely forgets one key
> ingredient: evidence. That is the verdict from a study published in The
> Lancet online Tuesday.
>
> The medical journal's criticism of WHO could shock many in the global
> health community, as one of WHO's main jobs is to produce guidelines on
> everything from fighting the spread of bird flu and malaria control to
> enacting anti-tobacco legislation.
>
> "This is a pretty seismic event," Lancet editor Dr. Richard Horton, who
> was not involved in the research for the article. "It undermines the
> very purpose of WHO."
>
> The study was conducted by Dr. Andrew Oxman and Dr. Atle Fretheim, of
> the Norwegian Knowledge Centre for Health Services, and Dr. John Lavis
> at McMaster University in Canada. They interviewed senior WHO officials
> and analyzed various guidelines to determine how they were produced.
> What they found was a distinctly non-transparent process.
>
> "It's difficult to judge how much confidence you can have in WHO
> guidelines if you're not told how they were developed," Oxman said. "In
> that case, you're left with blind trust."
>
> WHO issues about 200 sets of recommendations every year, acting as a
> public health arbiter to the global community by sifting through
> competing scientific theories and studies to put forth the best
> policies.
>
> WHO's Director of Research Policy Dr. Tikki Pang said that some of his
> WHO colleagues were shocked by The Lancet's study, but he acknowledged
> the criticism had merit, and explained that time pressures and a lack of
> both information and money sometimes compromised WHO work.
>
> "We know our credibility is at stake," Pang said, "and we are now going
> to get our act together."
>
> WHO officials also noted that, in many cases, evidence simply did not
> exist. Data from developing countries are patchy at best, and in an
> outbreak, information changes as the crisis unfolds.
>
> To address the problem, they said, WHO is trying to develop new ways to
> collect information in poor regions, and has proposed establishing a
> committee to oversee the issuance of all health guidelines.
>
> The Lancet study - conducted in 2003-04 through analyzing WHO guidelines
> and questioning WHO officials - also found that the officials themselves
> were concerned about the agency's methods.
>
> One unnamed WHO director was quoted in the study as saying: "I would
> have liked to have had more evidence to base recommendations on."
> Another said: "We never had the evidence base well-documented."
>
> Pang said that, while some guidelines might be suspect and based on just
> a few expert opinions, others were developed under rigorous study and so
> were more reliable.
>
> For example, WHO's recent advice on treating bird flu patients was
> developed under tight scrutiny.
>
> Oxman also noted that WHO had its own quality-control process. When its
> 1999 guidelines for treating high blood pressure were criticized for,
> among other things, recommending expensive drugs over cheaper options
> without proven benefit, the agency issued its "guidelines for writing
> guidelines," which led to a revision of its advice on hypertension.
>
> "People are well-intended at WHO," Oxman said. "The problem is that good
> intentions and plausible theories aren't sufficient."
>
> It remains to be seen how WHO's 193 member countries will react to The
> Lancet study, released just before WHO's governing body - the World
> Health Assembly - meets next week at U.N. headquarters in Geneva to
> decide future health strategies.
>
> "If countries do not have confidence in the technical competence of WHO,
> then its very existence is called into question," said Horton, the
> journal's editor. "This study shows that there is a systemic problem
> within the organization, that it refuses to put science first."
>
> WHO Director-General Dr. Margaret Chan, who took over the position this
> year, will be under pressure to respond to the study's criticism.
>
> "We need a strong WHO," which in recent years "has seen its independence
> eroded and its trust diminished," Horton said. "Now is a fabulous
> opportunity for WHO to reinvent itself as the technical agency it was
> always meant to be."
>
>
>
>
> -
> 



Want to vote for Hillingdon to be on the new version of Monopoly? 
Place your vote for 'Hillingdon' as a wildcard at www.monopoly.co.uk .

Hillingdon Council routinely monitors the content of emails sent and received via its network for the purposes of ensuring compliance with its policies and procedures. The contents of this message are for the attention and use of the intended addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient or addresses, or the person responsible for sending the message you may not copy, forward, disclose or otherwise use it or any part of it in any way. To do so maybe unlawful. If you receive this email by mistake please advise the sender immediately. Where opinions are expressed they are not necessarily those of the London Borough of Hillingdon. Service by email is not accepted unless by prior agreement.