House of Lords: Govt discussions with NICE on ME/CFS (Main Chamber) Tuesday, 12 October 2021

So what do we think this means? Baroness Thornton is a labour shadow minister who was previously Parliamentary under-secretary for Health? Who answers for the government in the Lords on Health questions? Is it Lord Bethell? Best known for his telephonic difficulties.
 
Wonko said:
The thread title suggests the 12th of October 2021, which is not today yet.

As to good, who knows, I don't.
Click to expand...
chrisb said:
No. Tuesday, 12th October is the date. Nothing happens quickly. Well, not much.
Click to expand...

Lol, thanks! A clear sign I need to take a rest and put my feet up, I knèw it was next month the first time I saw it, and then somehow after the next views I thought it was today. (I even checked it before my post.)

Well, I don't have to explain to you how that happened...:rolleyes:
 
The timing could be quite useful. Isn't the roundtable going to take place during the following week. This should give time for the DoH to establish their position, but close enough to the event to prevent any substantial variation, without very good reason.
 
[QUOTE="chrisb, post: 374884, member: Who answers for the government in the Lords on Health questions? Is it Lord Bethell? Best known for his telephonic difficulties.[/QUOTE]

17.9.2021:

Lord Bethell has either Quit or been Sacked, depending on which article you read



Lord Kamall appointed as a new Undersecretary of State for Health & Social Care in the Lords

 
Just starting at 2:36pm

  • Oral questions: The credibility and integrity of the assessment processes in schools for this summer’s A levels and GCSE examinations

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour)

  • Oral questions: Government discussions with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence about myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome

    Baroness Thornton (Labour)
 
I heard a bit of it. The reason given for the delay was something like: that all sides have to be heard and that there is concern from some (unspecified) about the removal of GET which some patients find unhelpful and some find helpful in managing their condition. Or some such rubbish.

I assume there will be a transcript.
 
They did at least admit that the delay was caused by the protestations of clinicians about removing GET. IF only they could get their heads round the risks of it if (as is the case) they can't work out in advance of treatment who it helps and who it harms.
 
Indeed in typical false balance way he kept hammering on how important "consensus" was like it was a matter of differing opinions instead of analysis of the evidence, science and real-life effect on patients vs. the vested financial and professional interests and unfounded ideology of people delivering GET who don't like that guideline changed. And that NICE wanted to use the roundtable to hear "a wide range of views" like they didn't do exacly that for the last 3-4 years. (and he called patients being "frustrated" because the guidelines were delayed, FFS man, I lived in hell and nearly died because of this crap, as have countless of others)*

But he says he wants to be written to if NICE delays further as he wants to be pushed about it, and he wants to be pushed "to make sure we are addressing the genuine needs of patients and that patients are not ignored", so there's that.


"I will be a champion of patients, and I'll give you that pledge." Lord Kamall, House of Lords discussion about the NICE pause of the guidelines, 12th of October 2021
Click to expand...


ps: He was asked if there was a connection with the treatment being opportune for LongCovid. I would have to look back, but I can't recall that he answered that particular question.


Edited to add *He is new, as he said about 20 times. And he only has the info he has. So maybe it's not that surprising that he just repeats the same superficial arguments that were already made instead of genuinly answer the questions, because that's all he read up about. But I detest political answers and non-answering of unwanted questions, which he did. I'm just so done with people suffering because people who can make a difference don't do their homework. If that is fair on him I don't now, I am going to make a cup of tea to de-grrr.
 
Last edited:
Arvo said:
Indeed in typical false balance way he kept hammering on how important "consensus" was like it was a matter of differing opinions instead of analysis of the evidence, science and real-life effect on patients vs. the vested financial and professional interests and unfounded ideology of people delivering GET who don't like that guideline changed.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that Evidence Based Medicine was introduced in the 90s to get rid of "medicine by consensus" because consensus very often ignored scientific evidence, and just took the opinions of the "leaders" in any field - which is to say the old male doctors who controlled the profession.
 
I am not of the opinion that he answered any questions on this subject - all he did was keep reading out the blurb that's been public domain for quite a while now.

So, no attempt, at all, to actually answer anything (given he must know that the people asking had probably already read all of the blurb).
 
https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2021-10-12

Lords Hansard for 12 October 2021
The House is due to sit on Tuesday 12 October 2021 but no content is available at this time. An uncorrected, "rolling" feed will be updated here throughout the day starting approximately 3 hours after the sitting commences. This will be replaced with a corrected, searchable version by 6am the next working day. Content is available for Monday 11 October 2021.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom