Hole Ousia - it's Boom time! - Michael Sharpe

Sly Saint

Sly Saint

Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Taken from another thread.
@Hole Ousia

"At this afternoon session Professor Michael Sharpe said: “. . . we live in the greatest of times . . . Mental Health is the rage. This is BOOM time! We have a PRODUCT that is selling like hotcakes everywhere. How are we going to make enough PRODUCT?”

blog here (including clip from 50th Anniversary of Department of Psychiatry at Oxford)

https://holeousia.com/2019/03/21/its-boom-time-in-industry/

full conference available on Youtube (see link on blog)
 
The comments on the full recording are at about 1.46.00. There are difficulties. The comments are made off camera. The person making them is introduced as Mike, so the claim that it is Sharpe may well be correct. It is impossible to see the body language but there is something about the tone of voice which suggests that this is not meant to be taken too seriously and is merely a provocation. You will make up your own minds.
 
chrisb said:
It is impossible to see the body language but there is something about the tone of voice which suggests that this is not meant to be taken too seriously and is merely a provocation.
Click to expand...

I am very familiar with this sort of half-joking chat from medical colleagues who think they belong to the gold-plated establishments. The Hammersmith Hospital used to do it in a way that would make the rest of us cringe. The assumption is that there are no patients or other troublesome people in earshot and that these 'jokes' can be shared between friends.

Many a true word...
 
Reminds me of my cardiologist, who I respect very much, giving a lecture to his peers on POTS & MCAS. He promoted MCAS awareness by casually joking about how 'not all patients are crazy'.

He's undoubtedly on our side and it was obviously said in jest, perhaps to avoid seeming like a crackpot himself - says more about his peers I suppose, that the first expectation when they see someone in anaphylaxis is that they're nuts....
 
Sbag said:
Sharpe's full speech starts at 23.00. Not listened to it yet tho
Click to expand...
It ends around 36:00
Nothing of interest really just goes through the history of Psychiatry at Oxford, how it was separate then they had liason officers between Psych and Medical depts; explained that liason officers in the army
are people who 'run between the forces to co-ordinate their efforts against the energy, er, the enemy".

Goes on to talk about the setting up of the dept, and how now all teams have a psych (iatrist or ologist) as part of their team. Briefly mentions elderly patients in primary care having complex problems including mental health (eg dementia) issues.
That NHS have bought into the idea of this integrated way of doing things.
 
chrisb said:
The comments on the full recording are at about 1.46.00. There are difficulties. The comments are made off camera. The person making them is introduced as Mike, so the claim that it is Sharpe may well be correct. It is impossible to see the body language but there is something about the tone of voice which suggests that this is not meant to be taken too seriously and is merely a provocation. You will make up your own minds.
Click to expand...

André Tomlin CEO of Minervation Ltd (The Mental Elf) was at the meeting and had arranged its recording. I wrote to André to confirm if this was Professor Michael Sharpe speaking. This was the reply I received from André [20 March 2019 08:12]

"He said it in the panel discussion at the end of the day. It was in the context of a question he asked the panel.

Cheers, André"

Whilst I was not there it is my view that this was said seriously. Much of the talk had been about finding partnerships with industry (if in doubt listen to the lecture by Professor John Geddes)
 
Well that clears that up. I must have mistaken the suppressed glee at the prospect of all those spondulicks for ironic self deprecation. I suppose I should have known better. Oxford has always seemed happy to bend over backwards to prostitute itself. It would probably bend over forwards if it thought that would help.
 
chrisb said:
Well that clears that up. I must have mistaken the suppressed glee at the prospect of all those spondulicks for ironic self deprecation. I suppose I should have known better. Oxford has always seemed happy to bend over backwards to prostitute itself. It would probably bend over forwards if it thought that would help.
Click to expand...

I have received an e-mail from Professor Michael Sharpe providing fuller context (I have added it, and my reply, to my original blog post):

"From: Michael Sharpe
Sent: 25 March 2019
Subject: curious misrepresentation

Dear Dr Gordon,
https://holeousia.com/2019/03/21/its-boom-time-in-industry/

Thank you for you (mischievous) interest.

The context: The panel session was about training psychiatrists in general and academic psychiatrists in particular. My comment was intended to be a provocative question to a the panel about how they were going to meet the increasing NHS demand for psychiatrists when the number of academic psychiatrists providing their training is falling. It is absolutely nothing to do with industry.

Interesting that you choose to misrepresent it. No doubt you have good reasons"

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

This was my response [please note I do not know Professor Michael Sharpe]:

"Dear Professor Sharpe,
My interest was not “mischievous”. My interest was as a long term advocate for full transparency of competing interests.

Thank you for providing the context to what you describe as a “provocative question”. The language you used in your provocative question/statement was that of industry/commerce: words like “product” and “boom time”.

I did not “choose to misrepresent” what you said, I shared an unedited clip with my honest reflections on what I heard as a viewer and in the context of listening to a number of the presentations including that of Professor John Geddes.

As to your statement “no doubt you have good reasons”, well I am not sure what you mean? However I am concerned about the lack of full public transparency in relation to the University of Oxford’s Department of Psychiatry and its strategic partnerships with industry (The GMC Good Medical Practice guidelines are the context):

Perhaps you can send me the public link to the declarations of competing financial interests kept by the University of Oxford for all staff along with the public link to the Register of all financial details relating to the University’s strategic partnerships with industry.

Kind wishes

Dr Peter Gordon GMC 3468861"
 
Hole Ousia said:
I have received an e-mail from Professor Michael Sharpe providing fuller context (I have added it, and my reply, to my original blog post):

"From: Michael Sharpe
Sent: 25 March 2019
Subject: curious misrepresentation

Dear Dr Gordon,
https://holeousia.com/2019/03/21/its-boom-time-in-industry/

Thank you for you (mischievous) interest.

The context: The panel session was about training psychiatrists in general and academic psychiatrists in particular. My comment was intended to be a provocative question to a the panel about how they were going to meet the increasing NHS demand for psychiatrists when the number of academic psychiatrists providing their training is falling. It is absolutely nothing to do with industry.

Interesting that you choose to misrepresent it. No doubt you have good reasons"

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

This was my response [please note I do not know Professor Michael Sharpe]:

"Dear Professor Sharpe,
My interest was not “mischievous”. My interest was as a long term advocate for full transparency of competing interests.

Thank you for providing the context to what you describe as a “provocative question”. The language you used in your provocative question/statement was that of industry/commerce: words like “product” and “boom time”.

I did not “choose to misrepresent” what you said, I shared an unedited clip with my honest reflections on what I heard as a viewer and in the context of listening to a number of the presentations including that of Professor John Geddes.

As to your statement “no doubt you have good reasons”, well I am not sure what you mean? However I am concerned about the lack of full public transparency in relation to the University of Oxford’s Department of Psychiatry and its strategic partnerships with industry (The GMC Good Medical Practice guidelines are the context):

Perhaps you can send me the public link to the declarations of competing financial interests kept by the University of Oxford for all staff along with the public link to the Register of all financial details relating to the University’s strategic partnerships with industry.

Kind wishes

Dr Peter Gordon GMC 3468861"
Click to expand...
iT WAs juST a JoKE

or

I was just being provocative

Sure. Those are always lies. Whatever Sharpe meant is known only to him, but him responding with this makes it much more likely the literal interpretation is the correct one.
 


article:

The money is going to improve access for people living with long-term physical health conditions, when getting support for conditions like depression and anxiety disorders.

It means 43 new staff will be recruited including cognitive behavioural therapists and psychological wellbeing practitioners.

They will be based at GP practices, community health centres and hospitals, with patients experiencing depression or anxiety able to refer themselves or be referred by their usual healthcare professional to dedicated Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) support.
Click to expand...
"As new evidence continues to support the better integration of physical and mental health care services, this focus on mental wellbeing provision for those with a long-term health condition is an important step forward in treating a person’s mental and physical health as one.

Those with a long-term health condition are more likely to have a mental health issue than the general population. If their mental health condition is left untreated there is evidence to show it will very likely adversely affect their physical health.

By helping these people access the support and treatment they need we can not only improve their physical and mental wellbeing and quality of life, but also reduce the number of hospital admissions and healthcare interventions and ease the pressure on our already over-burdened NHS staff and finances."
Click to expand...
https://www.heart.co.uk/eastanglia/news/local/over-2-million-invested-into-mental-health/
 
Errr... there is a danger of making a little, ittie bit too much of this.

I've watched his talk and the comment he made and find it entirely uncontroversial. Just, as he said, a slightly provocative joke.

And of course academic departments are going to have partnerships with "industry" - that's how things work - but that wasn't what he was referring to.

I've always found it slightly odd that psychiatry is seen as something separate from the rest of medicine, when is should just be another specialty area like everything else. But they don't help themselves by maintaining the distinction when they talk of liaison psychiatry as being "the interface between physical and psychological health" [RCPsych website]. Why do that? Why not simply say that they deal with the behavioural aspects of disease? Maybe they just like being different.
 
I would like liaison psychiatry to start talking about social issues around chronic illness. How about they start being advocates for social change that would have a positive impact on people with chronic illness.

This of course will never happen. Not with this lot. The psychological factors are important because they are useful to them. It forwards their agenda. The people being served are incidental not very important and don't have a say.

People could be forgiven for thinking I might actually really dislike liaison psychiatry.
 
Boom time for psychiatry

Global Psychiatry Partnering 2014-2021: Deal trends, players and financials
"Global Psychiatry Partnering 2014 to 2021 provides the full collection of Psychiatry disease deals signed between the world’s pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies since 2014.

The report includes deals for the following indications: Akathisia, Anxiety disorder, Generalised anxiety disorder, Panic disorder, Post traumatic stress disorder, Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, Bipolar disorder, Chronic fatigue syndrome, Cognitive impairment, Delirium, Dementia, Alzheimers, Dementia with lewy bodies, Vascular dementia, Depression, Dystonia, Eating disorder, Anorexia, Bulimia, Learning disability, Aspergers, Autism, Mania, Obsessive compulsive disorder, Personality disorder, Schizophrenia, Sleep disorders, Insomnia, Narcolepsy, Sleep apnoea, Tardive dyskinesia, Tourettes, plus other psychiatric indications."

https://www.researchandmarkets.com/...ilestone+and+Royalty+Data&utm_exec=joca220prd
(single pdf access costs £2,740)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom