The Sheriff of Nottingham

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
April 6, 2017 | 13 Comments


  1. Eye-opening and eye-watering all in one post! Your x-ray certainly causes an intake of breath – much as it did at your Hay appearance last year. Your point then, as now, was of course to do with the follow-up letter and its contents. Do you recall the attitude of one young trainee doctor who was not amused at your rejection of the follow-up appointment? From his attitude, I should say that, if he’s now fully qualified, he’ll certainly be feeding the latest brand of smarties to all of a certain age who meet him! I take it that letters, such as the one you received, go out to anyone who trips and causes themselves some damage? They are, as yet, kept as a special delivery for a certain group – the ones most likely to bend to the request as a result of their misfortune, I guess. How long before these letters go out to ALL of a certain age I wonder ? Will they become the next ‘just incase’ tablet? If we dare to refuse, in future, will our choice be discounted by a judge , just as the will of a parent regarding her children’s vaccinations was discounted as explained in today’s news?
    From your swift recovery, maybe your bones are as strong as ever. Maybe it’s a good idea to take water with your drop of whiskey from now on though!
    As for the ‘home treatment’ – it reminds me of ‘care in the community’ on its introduction. I guess ‘home treatment’ does away with the chance that people will compare notes at a clinic setting and come to a realisation that the miracle of modern treatments is not all it’s cracked out to be.

  2. How can medicines be so beneficial if they induce so many sinister diseases?
    I scratch my head, in perpetual disbelief and feel so overwhelmed and so totally perplexed, by what these medicines can induce.
    Being damaged by medicines, my mind is always looking for natural ways on how to treat.
    For many poor people who are on a long list of medicines, they have to be very mindful of what they put in their mouths.
    For example, warfarin is one of those medicines that quickly comes to my mind. Some foods cannot be eaten or moderately eaten, whilst you are on this medicine?
    Withdrawing from certain medicines can be fraught with danger however, if a clinician supports and closely monitors the patient hopefully dangerous side effects can be prevented.
    My brain goes into overdrive, continuously thinking of the long term side effects however, clinicians say the benefits outweigh the risks? How can this be so?
    Yes, Mary, modern medicine is not all it’s cracked out to be.
    If all these medicines made every one of us healthy, many professionals would be out of business.
    What an incredibly deceptive world we live in!
    Many patients who are on meds are also complaining of their teeth becoming brittle.
    Some medications cause dry mouth, which reduce saliva flow and increases the chances of cavities.
    Clinical experience tells me which medicines are inducing problems with teeth and osteonecrosis.
    I think many already know which medicines are likely to cause problems to teeth!
    I can just imagine what some medicines do to the rest of the body.
    I am still grappling with these facts and my head still can’t get around what they are capable of inducing?
    You go to fix up one problem??? and another handful are created in the process.
    This does not sound like healing to me?
    The sad reality is:Too many believe without questioning what is really going on?

    • I reckon that it’s because these problems are not true for ALL patients ALL of the time that they are dismissed so readily. Our son has lost every single tooth due to antipsychotic medications. Three dentists, at different points in his treatment, have told him that his decaying teeth are as a result of the medications he’s on. If dentists realise this – why don’t doctors? Also, since dentists DO realise this, shouldn’t they be speaking out about such cases? We must ALL be working together on these issues if we’re to have any chance of getting to the real truths of the matters. Warfarin is also likely to attack teeth as a friend of mine knows to her cost. In her case, the teeth did not rot, they just dropped out – looking perfect on inspection ( her words not mine!).

  3. Unfortunately, some clinicians believe that ‘Mims’ is the holy grail to all their questions.
    Intellectual property should be shared with patients and if clinicians know that some meds are causing harm, they should speak up.
    Why do people who work in the medical establishment have to be privy to this information? As far as I am concerned, It should be shared.
    If it is not documented and clinicians see patterns forming, it does not mean that if clinicians complain, it will be documented for all to see.
    If a mass of patients complain, it becomes a class action and something can be done to eradicate that particular class of drug, off the market.
    I can’t understand why the same can not be done with other class of drugs that are notorious for causing so much harm.
    If a drug impacts the heart, breasts, lungs or other organs, somehow a class action, assists.
    However, when the delicate brain is impacted, it becomes too damn hard!
    Sadly, many know that something is not right but the processes continues to rinse and repeat the same ongoing cycle.

  4. Deeply betrayed

    “Patients who need to safely withdraw, are withdrawing – or indeed have withdrawn and are still suffering after complete withdrawal – from these prescribed benzodiazepines and antidepressants all need appropriate help (including appropriate professional medical help) where the issues of the drug effects are honestly recognised and taken into full consideration.  Currently the harmful effects of these prescribed drugs are being routinely evaded, and affected patients can be left feeling deeply betrayed. The principle of duty of candour is directly relevant here.

    “Patients are repeatedly told to go back to their GPs and local health boards if they experience problems and are dissatisfied. Individual personal experiences show how far this has got them: if patients cannot get any acknowledgement from their GP that (for example) prescribed benzodiazepine and/or antidepressant dependence or withdrawal is the cause of their wide-ranging, debilitating and confusing symptoms, how can affected individuals hope to get any appropriate advice, care, tests or necessary treatment? It has become abundantly clear that currently patients are consequently suffering very serious harm, disability or even death/suicide. 

    Wherever you are in the World, please sign this petition and join all the others from all parts of the world

  5. @Wessely @Pariante @GSK – still foraging to understand their chosen subject as ‘Health Spectators’ ..

    Simon Wessely Retweeted

    Carmine M. Pariante‏ @ParianteSPILab Apr 19

    Depression, a disease of the mind? Actually our immune system could be the culprit


    The consortium is being led by Professor Ed Bullmore, head of the Department of Psychiatry at Cambridge University, who also works for GlaxoSmithKline.

    ‘In the treatment of depression, we haven’t been making as much progress as we’d like to see over the last 20 years or so,’ he says.

    Understatement of the Century .. ?

    Antidepressants, Benzodiazepines,, overkill, need we say more .. ?


    “that could open the door to new medicines”

    And a whole tranche of what comes after SSRIs sounds reasonably accepting .. ?

  6. Sign yourself up for


    April 2017 
    I wanted to share with you some recent improvements to the RxISK website:
    Consolidated drug information – Added patient experiences from RxISK reports (where they have consented to share these), relevant RxISK guides, as well as blog posts, to consolidate this unique information about a drug all in one place.

    Drug search – Added ability to search not only by drug but also by route of administration. Simplified presentation of available generic and brand names, routes of administration, dosages, and prescribable names.

    Reported side effects – Now using latest openFDA data for reported side effects and displaying “top 100” side effects.

    Product data sheets – Added links to 50,000 FDA-approved labeling by packager and brand.

    We will continue to improve the material available for each drug over the coming months and add additional filters, such as sex, age, and PRR.
    Check out the Paroxetine page to see some of these improvements. 
    Thank you for your support. 
    Your feedback, as always, is greatly appreciated.
     David Healy, MD
    PS. You can find me on Twitter @DrDavidHealy. And you can also follow RxISK on Facebook and Twitter.

  7. Part of my ‘re-education’ includes Dr David Healy’s example. But is open in many fields and levels of human endeavour and culture. But for all the RxISK involved I note that Pharma seems to define the scope of responses here – as if the captured regulated ‘medicine’ is the only ‘real’ approach to health.

    Vitamin K2 – as I have recently found out is very significant for the directing and placing of calcium where it belongs. IE: in the bones and not in soft tissues, arteries and etc.
    I encountered this information when looking at information related to taking significantly larger doses of D3 (calciferol) than the minimum ‘official’ recommended ‘international unit’ levels – (all of such I take with a pinch of sea-salted un-demonized butter – that is to say I believe ‘official’ nutritional information itself is ‘doctored’, in favour of promoting pharma defined and regulated sickness – and some of that is simply the bias of a pharmaceutical training).
    If you want look up information on K2 and calcium it may be helpful for you and others:
    looks like one pubmed example (from searching “K2 and calcium”).

    The synergy of healthy function is much more complex than the mechanistic model that suits (and is retarded to protect) the pharmaceutical approach of external leverage and interventions that of course sets up all kinds of negative synergies that become very complex to break out of – even if waking to the desire to do so.

    The pattern of any negative loop is of a negatively defined sense of life and self – such that our minds are predicated on what we don’t want rather than what we do. This may not seem obvious – but is mirrored in the promotion of fear and guilt that then sells or demand powers to ‘protect’ from. I see this pattern as extremely deep seated and pervasive – and re-enacting itself as fear fulfilling prophecies – that manipulative opportunism exploits.

    Eugenics focuses on the ‘weak and sick’ with intent to eradicate them. This is the primary error of focusing (giving energy) to what you don’t want or hate in self and see in Other – and seeking to pushit down or eradicate it. Likewise the public hatred for eugenics pushed it down as if it had been eradicated – but the more aware I become of the actual human costs of pharmaceuticals and biologics – along with Big Ag/Food – and a cartel of corporate lobbies, the less I am able to dismiss what once would have seemed an absurd or insane agenda. In any case a very destructive network of interests work together to make sanity seem the madman. As without – so within perhaps. For what is culture but the embodiment of ideas held true and valued?
    Lack of foundation is not an externalised sin of random or genetic misfortune – but a Call to recognize and release the false in embrace of the true. Of what resonates true to the best of our current integrity of being – and not just a priesthood of initiate insiders. I expect I wrote overlong – but context is part of content – or it can be mistaken or misused.

  8. For what it’s worth – I reckon abolishing Public Health England (one, seriously money draining arm of our NHS) would help the coffers a great deal. Not sure in Wales, but here all these Public Health screening programmes, invitations to attend clinics etc – and presumably the Home Care initiatives – are the deluded offspring of PHE. (Or NHS England – no one knows which body is which here). I’d have loved to hear your story of trying to explain why you wouldn’t attend the bone clinic David – my attempts to disengage from the diabetic clinic were farcical. I have a twinge of sympathy for the nurse’s demented attempt to force me to take statins now – presumably she was fearful of the consequences if she couldn’t tick all the required boxes. And the surgery was frightened of the repercussions if it didn’t meet the targets imposed by PHE. It is all truly mad. But it’s also scary, going it alone and refusing to engage.

    Part of the scariness is lack of proper information. Not just the drug data – but sensible, straightforward info about diseases. You can’t trust any of the big charity websites like Cancer Research UK, or Diabetes UK because they are all – probably without exception – funded by Big P, albeit at arm’s length. They are in the business of fear-mongering because frightened people take drugs. Thus it becomes impossible for people/patients to make any kind of informed choice about risks and treatments. Rob (husband) asked repeatedly for evidence about the standard post-coronary-bypass cocktail: statin, ACE inhibitor and beta blocker. He wanted to know why he had to take drugs that lowered cholesterol and heart rate and blood pressure when all those measures were normal, despite his blocked tubes. And all of which come with significant unpleasant debilitating side effects. No cardiologist could say anything except – ‘I don’t know’ – because they had never actually seen the detailed data. They had no evidence. Nowhere, but nowhere can anyone get at the heart of the matter: should I take this drug or not? Rxisk is the best source of information ever – but even then it’s still frightening to take a big jump in the dark, in the teeth of medical advice and refuse medication.

    • In the main, Sally, such clinic visits, here in Wales, begin with a letter inviting you to telephone for an appointment – therefore, if you don’t phone you won’t have an appointment! End of story – or is it?

  9. Taking Sally’s and Mary’s point – I’ve just been conferring with other parents who have list together young by prescripticide to RoAccutane-isotretinoin and the inevitable prescribed follow-on of SSRIs and other anti-psychotics. We all feel amazed that, in the light of so much well publicised evidence, dermatologists go on prescribing RoAccutane and GPs keep giving all this the nod, almost denying that terrible damage is occurring, from the anecdotal personal parental reports they are hearing about their patients. I now wonder whether it’s like the statins etc, they HAVE to offer them because it’s being enforced as a recognised ‘effective’ method of treatment, by PHE. It’s a quick fix of course, if a dermatologist has a list of 20 patients to see in a day, if he hands out prescriptions of RoAccutane to them all, mostly their acne will soon improve. And when they drift into psychosis later, and get arthritis so they can hardly work, or lose their colons, or lips, have such boils in their mouths that they cannot eat, or worst of all particularly most obvious in young men, get erectile dysfunction so lose relationships, —– well, hey-ho, it’s not the dermatologists problem, it belongs to other specialities now, if indeed there IS a problem, because if there are mental side effects (which there pretty well always are with this drug, in varying degrees of severity) then all you have to do is make light of them, pat the patient on the head and send them off with either ‘it’s to be expected and it will get better’ or ‘what a lot of fuss about nothing, your acne is better isn’t it, well then…’ Or worst of all, ‘what you are reporting is all in your mind.’ GPs MUST SURELY KNOW what’s going on, so why do they seem to close their ears and avert their eyes from it? Please, can we have an answer here from a GP so we understand. And don’t give us the one about ‘it’s the only effective acne treatment we’ve got’ because we’re heartily sick of hearing this, and there ARE other effective treatments out there, Blue Light for one, special diets for another, geared to each individual and their type of acne, but they take a bit more time. And they don’t kill you.

    Over the last two days, I have heard such ghastly, heartbreaking accounts of suffering, and such ineptitude by medics in the treatment of them, that I frankly feel lost for words and wonder if a really HUGE gesture is needed now. We’ve done all the MHRA reporting and followed the normal reasonable channels for 34 years and yet people are still dying, almost one a month according to MHRA reported figures (which we feel are very conservative). We’ve tried everything we can think of. Is it maybe time for something else? PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE Dr David Healy, tell us what more we can do now because we can’t stand by and watch this going on, and if this is being pushed on us thanks to PHE initiatives, how can we change them? WE PARENTS ARE ABSOLUTELY DESPERATE.

  10. And please note, we don’t have only ‘Dermatology Clinics’ now, if you have acne you are probably sent to the ‘RoAccutane Clinic’ !! Just like going to the Statin Clinic or the Bone Clinic or the Diabetic Clinic. And you are told how lucky you are…..

Leave a Reply