Royal College of Surgeons CSIC farce!
- admin
-
Offline
Topic Author
- Posts: 1160
- Thank you received: 153
Replied by admin on topic Reply to my FOI request
Posted 02 May 2015 08:12
On 17 Apr 2015, at 16:56, Claire Flatt wrote:
"Subject: Request for information under the FOI Act
Dear Ms Rodoy
Further to your request for information under the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act dated 11th and 13th March (which were received by our office on 25th March 2015 due to an incorrect email address being used) I am writing to confirm that the Royal College of Surgeons is not covered by the requirements of this Act.
We are committed to being open and transparent on these matters and to share information. Please find attached an attendance list for the meeting on 10thMarch 2015, along with our invitation to attend this meeting, which was circulated to services on our behalf by the Association of Independent Healthcare Organisations. A note of key points from the meeting will be circulated to attendees and we can share this with you as soon as it is available – we expect this to be in May.
I have also attached a document that provides further information about our project and explains how different groups can contribute to our work, which I hope you will find helpful.
Kind regards
Claire Flatt
Policy and Implementation Manager (Regulation of cosmetic surgery)
Professional and Clinical Standards"
Claire attached the following docs in her email. Strangely Stephen Hannan's name is missing from the attendee list, but he was definitely there - read previous posts!
"Subject: Request for information under the FOI Act
Dear Ms Rodoy
Further to your request for information under the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act dated 11th and 13th March (which were received by our office on 25th March 2015 due to an incorrect email address being used) I am writing to confirm that the Royal College of Surgeons is not covered by the requirements of this Act.
We are committed to being open and transparent on these matters and to share information. Please find attached an attendance list for the meeting on 10thMarch 2015, along with our invitation to attend this meeting, which was circulated to services on our behalf by the Association of Independent Healthcare Organisations. A note of key points from the meeting will be circulated to attendees and we can share this with you as soon as it is available – we expect this to be in May.
I have also attached a document that provides further information about our project and explains how different groups can contribute to our work, which I hope you will find helpful.
Kind regards
Claire Flatt
Policy and Implementation Manager (Regulation of cosmetic surgery)
Professional and Clinical Standards"
Claire attached the following docs in her email. Strangely Stephen Hannan's name is missing from the attendee list, but he was definitely there - read previous posts!
- admin
-
Offline
Topic Author
- Posts: 1160
- Thank you received: 153
Replied by admin on topic Royal College of Surgeons CSIC farce!
Posted 04 Apr 2015 17:55
I am still waiting for my invitation to meet with the CSIC 
Meanwhile, the GMC and ASiT have each published their response to the CSIC consultation online:
www.gmc-uk.org/Cosmetic_Surgery_Interspe...ultatio_59982720.PDF
www.asit.org/assets/documents/ASiT_CSIC_response_.pdf
No mention of refractive eye surgery by GMC or ASiT!
In fact, in agreement with what I have said so many times, ASiT state:
More transparent than the CSIC, but where are the responses from the patients to be found?
According to the CSIC remit:
When I spoke to Jim Fowles @ Dept Health on 19 March, he told me the Committee has another meeting this month.
Perhaps that's the one when Chairman Steve Cannon will say: "We listened to the providers (Moulsdale and Schallhorn at least), they told us what they want, so no need to talk to Sasha Rodoy or any other damaged patients. Job done!"
Meanwhile, the GMC and ASiT have each published their response to the CSIC consultation online:
www.gmc-uk.org/Cosmetic_Surgery_Interspe...ultatio_59982720.PDF
www.asit.org/assets/documents/ASiT_CSIC_response_.pdf
No mention of refractive eye surgery by GMC or ASiT!
In fact, in agreement with what I have said so many times, ASiT state:
More transparent than the CSIC, but where are the responses from the patients to be found?
According to the CSIC remit:
When I spoke to Jim Fowles @ Dept Health on 19 March, he told me the Committee has another meeting this month.
Perhaps that's the one when Chairman Steve Cannon will say: "We listened to the providers (Moulsdale and Schallhorn at least), they told us what they want, so no need to talk to Sasha Rodoy or any other damaged patients. Job done!"
- admin
-
Offline
Topic Author
- Posts: 1160
- Thank you received: 153
Replied by admin on topic Story cont'd from 15 Mar 2015 17:35
Posted 22 Mar 2015 17:49
Having escaped the clutches of Lavinia and Claire, reaching my intended destination I expected they might have locked me out, so I pushed hard and almost fell into the room!
It was a bit like going through the back of the wardrobe into Narnia, except there was no snow - though my welcome was a little frosty.
The size of a classroom, there were approximately five or six rows of connected tables stretching right across the room. With the doors behind me I was standing at the end of the front row, with Chairman Steve Cannon seated to my left facing the room.
This is the room but the square table had been replaced with rows.
David Moulsdale was sitting at the far end of the first row of tables slouched against the wall, with Tweedledum sitting immediately behind his boss in the second row. No-one else shared the row with David, and I don’t know if Steve Schallhorn was there, but think not as I didn’t notice him.
There were perhaps twenty people present, but as I was under pressure I didn’t have time to take mental notes of the finer details. It all happened so fast that I can’t remember everything I said, and unfortunately I wasn’t recording so rely on memory, and the notes I made afterwards.
I began by introducing myself, saying that if anyone present didn't know who I was then they shouldn’t be at the meeting, and those who did know me would understand why I should have been invited, and why I thought it fair that I be allowed to stay.
Steve Cannon argued that the meeting was not just about eye surgery, so I asked him why David Moulsdale was there.
Let’s be absolutely clear here, if there was nothing clandestine going on, why oh why would anyone object to my presence? I should have asked for it to be put to a vote, but as I’ve explained, I was under pressure so it wasn’t the time to get into Socratic debate.
I pointed out that the meeting was being held entirely due to the endeavours of John McDonnell and myself, who had pressured Bruce Keogh to mention refractive eye surgery in his 2013 report, which he would not have done otherwise.
NB: While I adamantly disagree that refractive eye surgery is cosmetic, I was advised at the time that we should push for this simply because the government were not listening, and at least being mentioned in the report would give us a foot in the door.
Yet it appears that the CSIC is nothing more than a conciliatory exercise by the government to demonstrate that they are doing something about the cosmetic surgery industry, and the aims of the CSIC do not address the more complex problems of refractive eye surgery.
Refractive eye surgery is NOT cosmetic and must be investigated singly.
It is therefore even more crucial that the government talk to me asap and understand that the industry needs regulating as a m.a.t.t.e.r. o.f. u.r.g.e.n.c.y.
The remit of the CSIC states:
"Cosmetic surgery is where a person chooses to undergo an operation, or invasive medical procedure, to alter their physical appearance for aesthetic rather than medical reasons."
www.rcseng.ac.uk/surgeons/surgical-stand...mit-of-the-programme
Not wanting to flood this post with links, I suggest anyone in doubt google the definition of “aesthetic”!
Back to the meeting...
I asked why this was being held behind closed doors without transparency. Steve Cannon replied that it was not behind closed doors. He obviously didn’t think that one through, because with a slight turn to my right, I flung out my arm towards the doors behind me and said: "Hellooo!?”
I asked Steve Cannon who was representing the patients’ interests. He replied: “We are.” I’m sure the expression on my face showed what I thought of that!
What hope is there when Cannon claims he and his colleagues are looking out for patients’ interests yet they haven’t talked to any? Not forgetting that Dr Cannon is an orthopaedic surgeon, and an educated guess says I know more about refractive eye surgery than he does!
I replied, as Patient Advocate - and unfortunately the ONLY person that people damaged by this industry have to help them, it is me the CSIC should be talking to, not industry representatives.
I said I wasn’t there to make a fuss or disrupt the meeting, I was prepared to stay as an observer only, without speaking unless asked to - I do admit it would have been hard keeping quiet listening to Moulsdale and Tweedledum regurgitating their hackneyed mantra: “99% of our patents recommend us…”
Cannon repeated a few times that this was a meeting for ”Providers”, at one point gesturing towards Moulsdale to highlight this.
I said I could see that, I was the one trying to clean up their mess, and told Cannon: “You’ll only hear lies from them!”.
Curiously, if it was a meeting for “Providers”, where were the representatives for Optimax, Ultralase, Moorfields, Optegra, and the smaller clinician lead providers?
And, if David Moulsdale was present, as CEO of the 2nd and 3rd largest UK providers (Optimax and Ultralase), why then was Russell Ambrose not there too?
I did consider asking Russell this question, but as we’re in the midst of court proceedings I doubt he’d have answered me. I did however contact a number of surgeons, who all confirmed that they knew nothing about the meeting and had not been invited!
Curiouser and curiouser...
It was of course a lie that there were only providers present, and when I have the attendee list (requested last week under the FOI Act) I will be publishing it.
When I realised Steve Cannon was not going to let me stay, I asked them to listen to me for a few minutes more before I left
I repeated some of what I’d already said to Lavinia Blackett and Claire Flatt, including the fact that Steve Schallhorn is not licensed to practise as a surgeon in the UK.
Perhaps David wished he’d encouraged Cannon to allow me to stay, because what came next was a lot worse than anything I would have said had I been officially invited to address the meeting.
I asked David how much he’d given to the government for their election campaign...
I suggested the Committee ask Moulsdale how many of OE's surgeons were being sued, naming Jan Venter, Andre Oberholster and Dimitris Kazakos as just three examples…
I mentioned Stephanie Holloway’s court case last September, that she had been awarded more than half million pounds, and said she was far from a unique case.
I pointed at Moulsdale, and asked him to tell the people present how many of his surgeons had complaints against them made to the GMC.
I said the GMC were a waste of time, and was about to mention the CQC, but stopped myself and instead asked if there was anyone present from the CQC.
A woman seated immediately next to where I was standing put her hand up, and I told her: “You need to contact me, you know where to find me.”
I believe she was Julie Inggs, CSIC member, and I’ve heard nothing from her. Unsurprising, as the CQC have previously told me over the years that they are not in a position to do much more than make sure the premises are clean etc… saying to me and others who’ve contacted them: “Do keep us updated”.
However, Jim Fowles told me on Thursday that he would contact both Lavinia Blackett and Julie Inggs and ask them to contact me.
Addressing the room I explained that I had launched My Beautiful Eyes campaign after my eyes were irreparably damaged by surgery in 2011.
I added: “As David Moulsdale will be quick to tell you if I don’t, my surgery was at Optimax”. I may have also mentioned that damaged patients who settle out of court generally sign a gagging order.
I said that in 2012, Patrick James Green, OE’s General Ops Director, had approached me and asked how much it would be worth for me to give up my campaign for government legislation.
When I’d told him: “Not for a million pounds!”, he’d offered me a £10,000 bribe on behalf of his employer (Moulsdale) to keep OE out of press interviews.
I said that threats were later made against my life.
David turned his head towards Tweedledum with an exaggerated expression like: “Don’t know what she's talking about!”. This was of course for the benefit of the audience behind him.
I responded: “Take the smirk of your face David, you know it’s true.”
I continued to explain that Patrick James Green is the number one suspect in the 1991 Andrew Elphick murder enquiry (I forgot to mention that he also served a prison sentence for possession of firearms).
I mentioned how OE whistleblowers had told me that when Patrick was about to start working for him, David described Patrick as his new 'secret weapon'.
You could have heard a pin drop, and I noticed David scribble a note, perhaps for one of his legal teams - I understand there're quite a few on retainers at the moment.
I told my attentive audience that the police filed reports for my safety, because of my involvement with a "murder suspect" working for a company I was campaigning against, and that I have copies I was happy to show anyone who doubted the truth of what I was saying.
I told them they should visit the OERML website and ask themselves why David, or anyone else, hasn’t sued me if what I publish is untrue.
It might have been at this point when Steve Cannon decided to take back his control of the meeting. He stood up and stepped forward, put his hand under my elbow and tried to push me back to the door, saying “Bye bye… bye bye…”, like he was talking to a child. I told him to get his hand off me, that I thought he was a very condescending man.
He was naturally a little flustered by now, and replied: “I am”!
I was in the room for possibly ten minutes, and said as much as I could in that time, and I’m sure there’s plenty more I have forgotten.
A few people were smiling broadly throughout, obviously relishing every minute of the unexpected entertainment, and I would love to have heard what David Moulsdale said after I’d gone.
But, no matter what he did say, I left everyone with my question firmly entrenched in their minds, why hasn’t anyone sued me if what I publish is untrue?!
Before walking out of the room, I looked across at Mousdale and said: “You won’t win David!”.
Lavinia then said she'd show me out and got into the lift with me - but it has to be said that travelling with her wasn’t as much fun as it was with The Three Bears!
Meanwhile, John McDonnell had texted me asking what was happening, so we agreed to meet at the House of Commons an hour later to discuss.
Lavinia was obviously desperate to see me gone, but I told her I’d be a while as I intended to sit down and make a few calls before I left. She said she’d wait… I said fine, and proceeded to make a number of calls.
She hung around even though I assured her I was on my way to the HoC with no intention of going back upstairs if that’s what she was worried about. She then changed her words and said she HAD to see me off the premises!
And there was me thinking the Royal College of Surgeons building was open to the public!
She never did get to see me off the premises however, because she was pacing around the large entrance hall impatiently waiting for me to finish my calls. So when I was out of her sight line I slipped through a door and lost her, simply for my amusement.
When I reappeared Lavinia had gone, and I left.
For the record, childish of me perhaps, but had Lavinia not ‘escorted’ me, I’d have been out of there a lot faster!
I went on to meet John at the HoC and he immediately drafted a detailed letter to the Health Minister, questioning (among other things) the lack of transparency and the reason for my eviction from the meeting!
I will of course post updates in due course
It was a bit like going through the back of the wardrobe into Narnia, except there was no snow - though my welcome was a little frosty.
The size of a classroom, there were approximately five or six rows of connected tables stretching right across the room. With the doors behind me I was standing at the end of the front row, with Chairman Steve Cannon seated to my left facing the room.
This is the room but the square table had been replaced with rows.
David Moulsdale was sitting at the far end of the first row of tables slouched against the wall, with Tweedledum sitting immediately behind his boss in the second row. No-one else shared the row with David, and I don’t know if Steve Schallhorn was there, but think not as I didn’t notice him.
There were perhaps twenty people present, but as I was under pressure I didn’t have time to take mental notes of the finer details. It all happened so fast that I can’t remember everything I said, and unfortunately I wasn’t recording so rely on memory, and the notes I made afterwards.
I began by introducing myself, saying that if anyone present didn't know who I was then they shouldn’t be at the meeting, and those who did know me would understand why I should have been invited, and why I thought it fair that I be allowed to stay.
Steve Cannon argued that the meeting was not just about eye surgery, so I asked him why David Moulsdale was there.
Let’s be absolutely clear here, if there was nothing clandestine going on, why oh why would anyone object to my presence? I should have asked for it to be put to a vote, but as I’ve explained, I was under pressure so it wasn’t the time to get into Socratic debate.
I pointed out that the meeting was being held entirely due to the endeavours of John McDonnell and myself, who had pressured Bruce Keogh to mention refractive eye surgery in his 2013 report, which he would not have done otherwise.
NB: While I adamantly disagree that refractive eye surgery is cosmetic, I was advised at the time that we should push for this simply because the government were not listening, and at least being mentioned in the report would give us a foot in the door.
Yet it appears that the CSIC is nothing more than a conciliatory exercise by the government to demonstrate that they are doing something about the cosmetic surgery industry, and the aims of the CSIC do not address the more complex problems of refractive eye surgery.
Refractive eye surgery is NOT cosmetic and must be investigated singly.
It is therefore even more crucial that the government talk to me asap and understand that the industry needs regulating as a m.a.t.t.e.r. o.f. u.r.g.e.n.c.y.
The remit of the CSIC states:
"Cosmetic surgery is where a person chooses to undergo an operation, or invasive medical procedure, to alter their physical appearance for aesthetic rather than medical reasons."
www.rcseng.ac.uk/surgeons/surgical-stand...mit-of-the-programme
Not wanting to flood this post with links, I suggest anyone in doubt google the definition of “aesthetic”!
Back to the meeting...
I asked why this was being held behind closed doors without transparency. Steve Cannon replied that it was not behind closed doors. He obviously didn’t think that one through, because with a slight turn to my right, I flung out my arm towards the doors behind me and said: "Hellooo!?”
I asked Steve Cannon who was representing the patients’ interests. He replied: “We are.” I’m sure the expression on my face showed what I thought of that!
What hope is there when Cannon claims he and his colleagues are looking out for patients’ interests yet they haven’t talked to any? Not forgetting that Dr Cannon is an orthopaedic surgeon, and an educated guess says I know more about refractive eye surgery than he does!
I replied, as Patient Advocate - and unfortunately the ONLY person that people damaged by this industry have to help them, it is me the CSIC should be talking to, not industry representatives.
I said I wasn’t there to make a fuss or disrupt the meeting, I was prepared to stay as an observer only, without speaking unless asked to - I do admit it would have been hard keeping quiet listening to Moulsdale and Tweedledum regurgitating their hackneyed mantra: “99% of our patents recommend us…”
Cannon repeated a few times that this was a meeting for ”Providers”, at one point gesturing towards Moulsdale to highlight this.
I said I could see that, I was the one trying to clean up their mess, and told Cannon: “You’ll only hear lies from them!”.
Curiously, if it was a meeting for “Providers”, where were the representatives for Optimax, Ultralase, Moorfields, Optegra, and the smaller clinician lead providers?
And, if David Moulsdale was present, as CEO of the 2nd and 3rd largest UK providers (Optimax and Ultralase), why then was Russell Ambrose not there too?
I did consider asking Russell this question, but as we’re in the midst of court proceedings I doubt he’d have answered me. I did however contact a number of surgeons, who all confirmed that they knew nothing about the meeting and had not been invited!
Curiouser and curiouser...
It was of course a lie that there were only providers present, and when I have the attendee list (requested last week under the FOI Act) I will be publishing it.
When I realised Steve Cannon was not going to let me stay, I asked them to listen to me for a few minutes more before I left
I repeated some of what I’d already said to Lavinia Blackett and Claire Flatt, including the fact that Steve Schallhorn is not licensed to practise as a surgeon in the UK.
Perhaps David wished he’d encouraged Cannon to allow me to stay, because what came next was a lot worse than anything I would have said had I been officially invited to address the meeting.
I asked David how much he’d given to the government for their election campaign...
I suggested the Committee ask Moulsdale how many of OE's surgeons were being sued, naming Jan Venter, Andre Oberholster and Dimitris Kazakos as just three examples…
I mentioned Stephanie Holloway’s court case last September, that she had been awarded more than half million pounds, and said she was far from a unique case.
I pointed at Moulsdale, and asked him to tell the people present how many of his surgeons had complaints against them made to the GMC.
I said the GMC were a waste of time, and was about to mention the CQC, but stopped myself and instead asked if there was anyone present from the CQC.
A woman seated immediately next to where I was standing put her hand up, and I told her: “You need to contact me, you know where to find me.”
I believe she was Julie Inggs, CSIC member, and I’ve heard nothing from her. Unsurprising, as the CQC have previously told me over the years that they are not in a position to do much more than make sure the premises are clean etc… saying to me and others who’ve contacted them: “Do keep us updated”.
However, Jim Fowles told me on Thursday that he would contact both Lavinia Blackett and Julie Inggs and ask them to contact me.
Addressing the room I explained that I had launched My Beautiful Eyes campaign after my eyes were irreparably damaged by surgery in 2011.
I added: “As David Moulsdale will be quick to tell you if I don’t, my surgery was at Optimax”. I may have also mentioned that damaged patients who settle out of court generally sign a gagging order.
I said that in 2012, Patrick James Green, OE’s General Ops Director, had approached me and asked how much it would be worth for me to give up my campaign for government legislation.
When I’d told him: “Not for a million pounds!”, he’d offered me a £10,000 bribe on behalf of his employer (Moulsdale) to keep OE out of press interviews.
I said that threats were later made against my life.
David turned his head towards Tweedledum with an exaggerated expression like: “Don’t know what she's talking about!”. This was of course for the benefit of the audience behind him.
I responded: “Take the smirk of your face David, you know it’s true.”
I continued to explain that Patrick James Green is the number one suspect in the 1991 Andrew Elphick murder enquiry (I forgot to mention that he also served a prison sentence for possession of firearms).
I mentioned how OE whistleblowers had told me that when Patrick was about to start working for him, David described Patrick as his new 'secret weapon'.
You could have heard a pin drop, and I noticed David scribble a note, perhaps for one of his legal teams - I understand there're quite a few on retainers at the moment.
I told my attentive audience that the police filed reports for my safety, because of my involvement with a "murder suspect" working for a company I was campaigning against, and that I have copies I was happy to show anyone who doubted the truth of what I was saying.
I told them they should visit the OERML website and ask themselves why David, or anyone else, hasn’t sued me if what I publish is untrue.
It might have been at this point when Steve Cannon decided to take back his control of the meeting. He stood up and stepped forward, put his hand under my elbow and tried to push me back to the door, saying “Bye bye… bye bye…”, like he was talking to a child. I told him to get his hand off me, that I thought he was a very condescending man.
He was naturally a little flustered by now, and replied: “I am”!
I was in the room for possibly ten minutes, and said as much as I could in that time, and I’m sure there’s plenty more I have forgotten.
A few people were smiling broadly throughout, obviously relishing every minute of the unexpected entertainment, and I would love to have heard what David Moulsdale said after I’d gone.
But, no matter what he did say, I left everyone with my question firmly entrenched in their minds, why hasn’t anyone sued me if what I publish is untrue?!
Before walking out of the room, I looked across at Mousdale and said: “You won’t win David!”.
Lavinia then said she'd show me out and got into the lift with me - but it has to be said that travelling with her wasn’t as much fun as it was with The Three Bears!
Meanwhile, John McDonnell had texted me asking what was happening, so we agreed to meet at the House of Commons an hour later to discuss.
Lavinia was obviously desperate to see me gone, but I told her I’d be a while as I intended to sit down and make a few calls before I left. She said she’d wait… I said fine, and proceeded to make a number of calls.
She hung around even though I assured her I was on my way to the HoC with no intention of going back upstairs if that’s what she was worried about. She then changed her words and said she HAD to see me off the premises!
And there was me thinking the Royal College of Surgeons building was open to the public!
She never did get to see me off the premises however, because she was pacing around the large entrance hall impatiently waiting for me to finish my calls. So when I was out of her sight line I slipped through a door and lost her, simply for my amusement.
When I reappeared Lavinia had gone, and I left.
For the record, childish of me perhaps, but had Lavinia not ‘escorted’ me, I’d have been out of there a lot faster!
I went on to meet John at the HoC and he immediately drafted a detailed letter to the Health Minister, questioning (among other things) the lack of transparency and the reason for my eviction from the meeting!
I will of course post updates in due course
- admin
-
Offline
Topic Author
- Posts: 1160
- Thank you received: 153
Replied by admin on topic Health Minister's letter to MP!
Posted 20 Mar 2015 15:51
Shamir Ahmed had lens replacement, and according to Dan Poulter, whose letter highlights the fact that he has not got a clue what is going on (or pretends not to know), cataract surgery is cosmetic!
More about Shabir here: www.theguardian.com/society/2015/jan/03/...-but-all-blurred-now
On 17 February ’15, MP Richard Harrington wrote to Dan Poulter:
“After hearing Mr Ahmed’s story, a tragic experience which has ruined his eyesight, I firmly believe that the Government must intervene now to regulate this industry…
“I realise that work is ongoing under the Cosmetic Surgery Interspecialty Committee of the Royal College of Surgeons to look into this, but I do not think that is enough. Please could you explain to me, and the thousands of other people who have been caught out by the unregulated industry, why your department will not formally regulate eye surgeries?"
I also spoke with Jim Fowles yesterday (see previous post) and will be publishing details of our conversation asap.
For the record, Jim told me that Daniel Poulter DID know I was meeting with him last month, that it was a “miscommunication”!
Seems to me there is complete “miscommunication” at every level when it comes to addressing the public’s concerns and complaints against the refractive eye surgery industry!
This was the Health Minister's response to Richard Harrington - one of his own party
More about Shabir here: www.theguardian.com/society/2015/jan/03/...-but-all-blurred-now
On 17 February ’15, MP Richard Harrington wrote to Dan Poulter:
“After hearing Mr Ahmed’s story, a tragic experience which has ruined his eyesight, I firmly believe that the Government must intervene now to regulate this industry…
“I realise that work is ongoing under the Cosmetic Surgery Interspecialty Committee of the Royal College of Surgeons to look into this, but I do not think that is enough. Please could you explain to me, and the thousands of other people who have been caught out by the unregulated industry, why your department will not formally regulate eye surgeries?"
I also spoke with Jim Fowles yesterday (see previous post) and will be publishing details of our conversation asap.
For the record, Jim told me that Daniel Poulter DID know I was meeting with him last month, that it was a “miscommunication”!
Seems to me there is complete “miscommunication” at every level when it comes to addressing the public’s concerns and complaints against the refractive eye surgery industry!
This was the Health Minister's response to Richard Harrington - one of his own party
- admin
-
Offline
Topic Author
- Posts: 1160
- Thank you received: 153
Replied by admin on topic Royal College of Surgeons CSIC farce!
Posted 18 Mar 2015 18:10
CSIC ‘Project Manager’ Lavinia Blackett has not had the courtesy to reply to my emails, therefore I will have to wait for the information to be provided under my FOI request. (see 13 March post for details)
However, Jim Fowles @ DoH has replied to my email (see 15 March post) and I will be calling him tomorrow to discuss my concerns with his response:
CSIC: "Mr Fox, how would you suggest we regulate your industry?"
Mr Fox: “No need. 99% of our patients recommend us to friends and family."
CSIC: “Ok Mr Fox, but what about the many patients Sasha Rodoy claims are damaged by refractive eye surgery?"
Mr Fox: “Och, take no notice of her! Tweedledum will tell you, they all have 20/20 vision and it's their brains that are the problem!"
CSIC: Ok Mr Fox, so you don’t think we should meet with Sasha?”
Mr Fox: “Och, you don’t want to waste your time listening to her crazy ideas... and please, accept this brown envelope in appreciation of your time!"
NB: If you haven’t already, PLEASE send your form to the CSIC see post below:
'URGENT!!! CSIC Proposal Document Yesterday 11:54'
www.opticalexpressruinedmylife.co.uk/…/8382-cosmetic…
And I PROMISE to post the last instalment of The Three Bears story by Sunday - sooner if I can
However, Jim Fowles @ DoH has replied to my email (see 15 March post) and I will be calling him tomorrow to discuss my concerns with his response:
CSIC: "Mr Fox, how would you suggest we regulate your industry?"
Mr Fox: “No need. 99% of our patients recommend us to friends and family."
CSIC: “Ok Mr Fox, but what about the many patients Sasha Rodoy claims are damaged by refractive eye surgery?"
Mr Fox: “Och, take no notice of her! Tweedledum will tell you, they all have 20/20 vision and it's their brains that are the problem!"
CSIC: Ok Mr Fox, so you don’t think we should meet with Sasha?”
Mr Fox: “Och, you don’t want to waste your time listening to her crazy ideas... and please, accept this brown envelope in appreciation of your time!"
NB: If you haven’t already, PLEASE send your form to the CSIC see post below:
'URGENT!!! CSIC Proposal Document Yesterday 11:54'
www.opticalexpressruinedmylife.co.uk/…/8382-cosmetic…
And I PROMISE to post the last instalment of The Three Bears story by Sunday - sooner if I can
- admin
-
Offline
Topic Author
- Posts: 1160
- Thank you received: 153
Replied by admin on topic URGENT!!! CSIC Proposal Document
Posted 17 Mar 2015 11:54
Please go to this link and and submit CSIC response form online:
www.rcseng.ac.uk/surgeons/surgical-stand...tation-response-form
These questions obviously have no relation to refractive eye surgery, and I therefore suggest you tick the 'No' box .
In each comment box write: "There is no mention of refractive eye surgery here so why was David Moulsdale at the Providers meeting on Tuesday 10 March?"
The last question asks: "Do you have any other comments on how we could improve the care provided to patients who choose to have cosmetic surgery?"
I suggest you write: "Refractive eye surgery is NOT cosmetic and these proposals do not address the serious issues and problems occurring routinely and uniquely with this surgery.""
More details here: www.rcseng.ac.uk/surgeons/surgical-stand...tation-document-2015
www.rcseng.ac.uk/surgeons/surgical-stand...tation-response-form
These questions obviously have no relation to refractive eye surgery, and I therefore suggest you tick the 'No' box .
In each comment box write: "There is no mention of refractive eye surgery here so why was David Moulsdale at the Providers meeting on Tuesday 10 March?"
The last question asks: "Do you have any other comments on how we could improve the care provided to patients who choose to have cosmetic surgery?"
I suggest you write: "Refractive eye surgery is NOT cosmetic and these proposals do not address the serious issues and problems occurring routinely and uniquely with this surgery.""
More details here: www.rcseng.ac.uk/surgeons/surgical-stand...tation-document-2015
- admin
-
Offline
Topic Author
- Posts: 1160
- Thank you received: 153
Replied by admin on topic CSIC consultation response form 2015
Posted 16 Mar 2015 17:10
A little more digging and I found this hidden away on the RCS website!!
www.rcseng.ac.uk/surgeons/surgical-stand...tices/csic/documents
It seems the SCIC wanted to keep this as quiet as they did the meeting last Tuesday!
www.rcseng.ac.uk/surgeons/surgical-stand...view?searchterm=CSIC
Why was this not publicly advertised, instead of hidden away where no-one was likely to find it?
Only FOUR days left to have your say - perhaps this explains why the RCS links are blocked on Facebook!
The deeper I dig the murkier the depths
www.rcseng.ac.uk/surgeons/surgical-stand...tices/csic/documents
It seems the SCIC wanted to keep this as quiet as they did the meeting last Tuesday!
www.rcseng.ac.uk/surgeons/surgical-stand...view?searchterm=CSIC
Why was this not publicly advertised, instead of hidden away where no-one was likely to find it?
Only FOUR days left to have your say - perhaps this explains why the RCS links are blocked on Facebook!
The deeper I dig the murkier the depths
Moderators: admin