GMC to decide doctor's future
http://www.buryfreepress.co.UK/news/GMC-to-decide-doctor39s-future.4528505.jp
26 September 2008
By Mark Beaumont
A consultant psychiatrist has appeared before the General Medical Council this week over his treatment of a mental health patient from Bury St Edmunds.
Dr Daniel Paul White has appeared before a fitness to practise panel concerning allegations that he increased the patient's medication when there was no clinical need and within a short period of time, which was not long enough to assess his response to the medication.
It is also alleged Dr White did not carry out regular physical checks on the patient, did not document the clinical rationale for increasing his medication or how ward staff should monitor him or when a medication review should take place.
The GMC hearing in Manchester is also looking at allegations he did not explain the increases in dosages of Amisulpride and Haloperidol to either the patient or his mother, did not comply with British National Formulary guidelines, the manufacturers guidelines or the guidelines of the Royal College of Psychiatrists and the National Association of Psychiatric Intensive Care Unit guidance.
It is also claimed Dr White told the mother of the patient that he was pleased with the progress made and planned to transfer the patient from his clinic in London back to Bury St Edmunds – only to change his mind the next day.
It is also alleged he did not record any change in the patient's behaviour in medical records or take into account the observations of nursing staff in the way he managed the patient.
The allegations stem from his treatment of a patient in October and November 2004.
It is claimed he acted inappropriately, irresponsibly and inadequately and should no longer be allowed to practice.
The hearing was scheduled to finish today.
Friday, 26 September 2008
Wednesday, 24 September 2008
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) Clinical guideline
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)
http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/index.jsp?action=byID&o=12061
http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/index.jsp?action=byID&o=12061
drugs such as Ritalin should be avoided - and must not be given to the under-fives.
The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) says drugs such as Ritalin should be avoided - and must not be given to the under-fives.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7630926.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7630926.stm
Tuesday, 23 September 2008
Aim of group in 2003 - Amendment with more detail of the patient information sheet etc etc . PLAYING PHARMA'S GAME
Aims of the Group
Amendment with more detail of the patient information sheet and information to doctors in relation particularly but not exclusively to withdrawal.
http://web.archive.org/web/20030214104839/www.seroxatusergroup.org.uk/who_we_are.htm
Amendment with more detail of the patient information sheet and information to doctors in relation particularly but not exclusively to withdrawal.
http://web.archive.org/web/20030214104839/www.seroxatusergroup.org.uk/who_we_are.htm
Seroxat User Group - Who we are
Seroxat User Group - Who we are
http://web.archive.org/web/20030214104839/www.seroxatusergroup.org.uk/who_we_are.htm
http://web.archive.org/web/20030214104839/www.seroxatusergroup.org.uk/who_we_are.htm
Seroxat Users Group - Mark Harvey
Seroxat Users Group - Mark Harvey
http://web.archive.org/web/20060504041949/http://www.seroxatusergroup.org.uk/about_mark_harvey.htm
http://web.archive.org/web/20060504041949/http://www.seroxatusergroup.org.uk/about_mark_harvey.htm
Seroxat Users Group - Litigation
Seroxat Users Group - Litigation
http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:M1uBQ8ujwhcJ:www.seroxatusergroup.org.uk/litigation.htm+mark+harvey+seroxat&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=uk
http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:M1uBQ8ujwhcJ:www.seroxatusergroup.org.uk/litigation.htm+mark+harvey+seroxat&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=uk
we get Mark Harvey who played right into the hands of GSK & MHRA
c) For the first time in the 13 years of this drug, the manufacturers have agreed to change the Patient warning sheets to deal with the
question of addiction.
question of addiction.
Monday, 22 September 2008
"This is like a living clinical trial"said Mr Harvey - emotional blackmail more like. You wouldn't get away with crap like that in front of a Judge.
I have got 800. I suggested they might listen to the stories my clients tell and accept those as reports."
"They can't continue to say there isn't a problem when I have 800 people," said Mr Harvey. "The World Health Organisation has said there is a problem. This is like a living clinical trial."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2002/sep/16/medicineandhealth.lifeandhealth
800 hooked on drug seek legal actionPatients say warning on side effects inadequateSarah Boseley, health editor The Guardian, Monday September 16 2002 Article historyMore than 800 men and women who have found themselves hooked on the antidepressant Seroxat are seeking legal action against the British manufacturers, increasing the pressure for tougher warnings about the drug's side effects.
The potential litigants want to force Glaxo SmithKline to change the information it puts out to doctors and patients. They want the company to warn that significant numbers of people can become dependent on the drug - an SSRI (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor) like Prozac - which GPs often prescribe for relatively minor depression.
As the numbers of those seeking action in the UK continue to rise, a row is under way in the United States where a federal court judge has ordered Glaxo to pull television advertisements which state the drug is "non-habit forming".
Mark Harvey, of the solicitors Hugh James in Cardiff, who has most of the UK cases, said his clients were most anxious to get an adequate warning on the drug and research into the dependency problems and aggression they say they have experienced. Compensation for their distress, which in some cases is said to have lasted years and wrecked lives, was a lesser priority.
Mr Harvey said the cases were still coming in at the rate of around a dozen a day. The scale of the problem was so great that he believed the medicines control agency (MCA), which regulates pharmaceutical drugs, should take action.
"I have written to the MCA who have continued to say there isn't a problem here because we accept what the companies tell us," he said.
"The system for reporting adverse drug reactions has never been satisfactory. I have got 800. I suggested they might listen to the stories my clients tell and accept those as reports."
Only doctors, and, more recently, pharmacists and some nurses, can send reports of problems with drugs to the MCA through what is known as the yellow card scheme - not the patient who is experiencing the side effects.
Only a few doctors ever send in reports, however, and most experts believe the scale of drug-induced illness is under-estimated.
Seroxat has topped the league for yellow card reports of withdrawal problems by some distance, with 1,281 reports to date.
"They can't continue to say there isn't a problem when I have 800 people," said Mr Harvey. "The World Health Organisation has said there is a problem. This is like a living clinical trial."
The MCA has recently said that it may be willing to consider some way of accepting reports of side effects from patients themselves.
"They can't continue to say there isn't a problem when I have 800 people," said Mr Harvey. "The World Health Organisation has said there is a problem. This is like a living clinical trial."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2002/sep/16/medicineandhealth.lifeandhealth
800 hooked on drug seek legal actionPatients say warning on side effects inadequateSarah Boseley, health editor The Guardian, Monday September 16 2002 Article historyMore than 800 men and women who have found themselves hooked on the antidepressant Seroxat are seeking legal action against the British manufacturers, increasing the pressure for tougher warnings about the drug's side effects.
The potential litigants want to force Glaxo SmithKline to change the information it puts out to doctors and patients. They want the company to warn that significant numbers of people can become dependent on the drug - an SSRI (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor) like Prozac - which GPs often prescribe for relatively minor depression.
As the numbers of those seeking action in the UK continue to rise, a row is under way in the United States where a federal court judge has ordered Glaxo to pull television advertisements which state the drug is "non-habit forming".
Mark Harvey, of the solicitors Hugh James in Cardiff, who has most of the UK cases, said his clients were most anxious to get an adequate warning on the drug and research into the dependency problems and aggression they say they have experienced. Compensation for their distress, which in some cases is said to have lasted years and wrecked lives, was a lesser priority.
Mr Harvey said the cases were still coming in at the rate of around a dozen a day. The scale of the problem was so great that he believed the medicines control agency (MCA), which regulates pharmaceutical drugs, should take action.
"I have written to the MCA who have continued to say there isn't a problem here because we accept what the companies tell us," he said.
"The system for reporting adverse drug reactions has never been satisfactory. I have got 800. I suggested they might listen to the stories my clients tell and accept those as reports."
Only doctors, and, more recently, pharmacists and some nurses, can send reports of problems with drugs to the MCA through what is known as the yellow card scheme - not the patient who is experiencing the side effects.
Only a few doctors ever send in reports, however, and most experts believe the scale of drug-induced illness is under-estimated.
Seroxat has topped the league for yellow card reports of withdrawal problems by some distance, with 1,281 reports to date.
"They can't continue to say there isn't a problem when I have 800 people," said Mr Harvey. "The World Health Organisation has said there is a problem. This is like a living clinical trial."
The MCA has recently said that it may be willing to consider some way of accepting reports of side effects from patients themselves.
Sunday, 21 September 2008
KD Lang's Juno Awards in Winnipeg in 2005
Hallelujah (lyrics)
Words & Music by Leonard Cohen
I've heard there was a secret chord
That David played, and it pleased the Lord
But you don't really care for music, do you?
Well, it goes like this, the fourth, the fifth
The minor fall, the major lift
The baffled king composing Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Well, your faith was strong but you needed proof
You saw her bathing on the roof
Her beauty and the moonlight overthrew you
She tied you to a kitchen chair
She broke your throne, she cut your hair
And from your lips she drew the Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Well, baby, I've been here before.
I've seen this room, and I've walked this floor.
I used to live alone before I knew you.
But I've seen your flag on the marble arch,
And love is not a victory march,
It's a cold and it is a broken Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Well, there was a time when you'd let me know
What's really going on below,
But now you never show that to me, do you?
But remember when I moved in you,
And the Holy Ghost was moving too,
And every breath we drew was Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Well, maybe there is a God above,
But all that I've ever learned from love
Was how to shoot somebody who outdrew you.
It's not a cry that you hear at night,
And it is not somebody who has seen the light
It's a cold and it is a broken Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Hallelujah
Hallelujah
Whilst Fiddaman continues his self-indulgent winge - "ME/CFS - Doctors disbelief kills young woman" Sophia Mirza (1973–25 November 2005)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uksurvivors/message/36120
Saturday, 20 September 2008
uksurvivors : Message:36104 Years after Seroxat (paxil) payout withdrawal centers never materialised
uksurvivors : Message: years after Serox payout withdrawal centers never materialised
"We're going to ask GlaxoSmithKline to set up centres all over the US to help them." Hundreds of thousands are believed to be suffering. said Scientology lawyer Skip Murgatroyd
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/sep/06/medicalscience.businessofresearch
"We're going to ask GlaxoSmithKline to set up centres all over the US to help them." Hundreds of thousands are believed to be suffering. said Scientology lawyer Skip Murgatroyd
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/sep/06/medicalscience.businessofresearch
"litigants want to force GSK to change the information it puts out to doctors and patients"- NOW LESS PEOPLE CAN SUE GSK
800 hooked on drug seek legal action | Society | The Guardian
Mark Harvey, of the solicitors Hugh James in Cardiff, who has most of the UK cases, said his clients were most anxious to get an adequate warning on the drug
Mark Harvey, of the solicitors Hugh James in Cardiff, who has most of the UK cases, said his clients were most anxious to get an adequate warning on the drug
Scientology lawyers Baum Hedlund on the SSRI/suicidal ideation case 1990
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uksurvivors/message/36091
www.baumhedlundlaw.com/10.pdf
[PDF]
Emergence of Intense Suicidal Preoccupation During Fluoxetine ...
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
Emergence of Intense Suicidal Preoccupation. During Fluoxetine Treatment ..... Am J Psychiatry 147:2, February 1990. suicidal ideation while receiving only ...
www.baumhedlundlaw.com/10.pdf
www.baumhedlundlaw.com/10.pdf
[PDF]
Emergence of Intense Suicidal Preoccupation During Fluoxetine ...
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
Emergence of Intense Suicidal Preoccupation. During Fluoxetine Treatment ..... Am J Psychiatry 147:2, February 1990. suicidal ideation while receiving only ...
www.baumhedlundlaw.com/10.pdf
Friday, 19 September 2008
" I dont know how to love him " Sinead O'Connor - the best advert anywhere for avoidance of psychiatric treatment.
YouTube - Sinead O'Connor I dont know how to love him
Sinead on RTE TV may 18 2007
Tags: sinead o'connor I dont know how to love him Theology
URL http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ryCMGSK6slQ
Embed disabled by request
Sinead on RTE TV may 18 2007
Tags: sinead o'connor I dont know how to love him Theology
URL http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ryCMGSK6slQ
Embed disabled by request
Thursday, 18 September 2008
Sinead O'Connor "I dont know how to love him" - the best advert for NOT taking antidepressants I have ever seen
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ryCMGSK6slQ&feature=related
Sinead O'Connor I dont know how to love him
Sinead O'Connor I dont know how to love him
Get a grip FIDDAMAN! “Gail Glaxo”!! Is “Paxil Study 329” the worst GSK crime against children you can find; read this and be ashamed!!!
The House that AIDS Build
http://www.altheal.org/toxicity/house.htm
Orphans On Trial
http://www.altheal.org/toxicity/orphans.htm
AZT, Nevirapine - Children In New York Orphanage Given Toxic Drugs
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2004/11/05/azt_nevirapine_children_in_new_york_orphanage_given_toxic_drugs.htm
http://www.altheal.org/toxicity/house.htm
Orphans On Trial
http://www.altheal.org/toxicity/orphans.htm
AZT, Nevirapine - Children In New York Orphanage Given Toxic Drugs
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2004/11/05/azt_nevirapine_children_in_new_york_orphanage_given_toxic_drugs.htm
Tuesday, 16 September 2008
So if society thinks you are protecting them, you can get away with sitting on your arses and letting the rest of big pharma away with murder !
Whatever the Seroxat lobby might or might not gain, we will note and weigh what they may say to us in any meeting and only take action that we think is in the best interests of society as a whole.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uksurvivors/message/35858
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uksurvivors/message/35858
Seroxat lobby sucked in and blown out in bubbles by totally corrupt MHRA
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uksurvivors/message/35858
From: Watkins, John
Date: 11/04/2008 16:19:57
To: Jeremy Bryce
Subject: RE: Meeting Janice Simmons & others re antidepressants
Dear Jeremy
We treat each request for a meeting on its own merits. With respect to Seroxat we recently had two requests, and the issue is one that has exercised both ourselves and media, conventional or web, for quite some time. It has been a very high profile issue, and our response to the requests is mindful of that.
You will note that I have not promised a meeting with Robert Fiddaman, though I have not ruled it out either. Whatever the Seroxat lobby might or might not gain, we will note and weigh what they may say to us in any meeting and only take action that we think is in the best interests of society as a whole.
Regards,
John Watkins
From: Watkins, John
Date: 11/04/2008 16:19:57
To: Jeremy Bryce
Subject: RE: Meeting Janice Simmons & others re antidepressants
Dear Jeremy
We treat each request for a meeting on its own merits. With respect to Seroxat we recently had two requests, and the issue is one that has exercised both ourselves and media, conventional or web, for quite some time. It has been a very high profile issue, and our response to the requests is mindful of that.
You will note that I have not promised a meeting with Robert Fiddaman, though I have not ruled it out either. Whatever the Seroxat lobby might or might not gain, we will note and weigh what they may say to us in any meeting and only take action that we think is in the best interests of society as a whole.
Regards,
John Watkins
Sunday, 14 September 2008
(UKS 33237) DH/MHRA has no meetings planned with, - "other activists and victims of drugs".
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uksurvivors/message/33237
From: Thyer, Anne
Date: 06/19/08 11:41:53
To: jeremybryce1953@...
Subject: Request for information about the Seroxat User Group
Dear Mr Bryce
MHRA reference: FOI08/216
Your request of 19 June to the Department of Health has been passed to the MHRA for reply. I understand that you have previously contacted the MHRA (FOI08/196) on several of the requests contained in your mail to the DH. I am covering these in this reply for completeness. Addressing each of your requests for information in turn:
(a) How many persons are members of the Seroxat User Group?
The DH/MHRA does not hold that information
(b) [request for] a copy of the articles of association (or other like meaning documents) for the Online Seroxat Support Group.
The DH/MHRA does not hold that information
(c) Has the Dept of Health any plans to meet with other activists & victims of Drugs.....
The DH/MHRA has no meetings planned with, in your words, "other activists and victims of drugs". Any requests for meetings are considered on a case by case basis and in line with any other request to meet with a Minister; for example a request from a Member of Parliament that a Minister should meet with his/her constituents.
(d) of the 128 e-mails produced by Janice Simmons how many of them were verified by the Dept of Health
None - the DH/MHRA saw no reason to undertake any verification.
(e) [request for] exact copies of the e-mails together with source information including isp numbers
The mails held by the MHRA do not contain any ISP information. Section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) provides that public authorities are not required to comply with requests that they judge to constitute an excessive use of their resources. We consider that this provision applies in this instance. To meet your request it would be necessary to consider each of these mails to identify material that may be exempted from disclosure under the FOIA. The resource required to do this work exceeds the relevant limit in the FOIA of £600, calculated at £25 per hour. I do not consider, in this case, that there is a public interest in undertaking this work and we are therefore unable to supply the further information you have requested. If you are unhappy with that decision, you may ask for it to be reviewed. That review will be undertaken by a senior member of the MHRA who has not previously been involved in your request. If you wish to pursue that option please let me know. After that, if you remain dissatisfied, you may ask the Information Commissioner at:
The Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
to make a decision on whether or not the FOIA has been correctly interpreted by the MHRA.
Yours sincerely
Anne Thyer
Anne Thyer
Policy Division
MHRA
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any reading, printing, storage, disclosure, copying or any other action taken in respect of this email is prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by using the reply function and then permanently delete what you have received.Incoming and outgoing email messages are routinely monitored for compliance with the Department of Healths policy on the use of electronic communications.
For more information on the Department of Healths email policy, click
http://www.dh.gov.uk/DHTermsAndConditions/fs/en?CONTENT_ID=4110945&chk=x1C3Zw
The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2007/11/0032.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.
From: Thyer, Anne
Date: 06/19/08 11:41:53
To: jeremybryce1953@...
Subject: Request for information about the Seroxat User Group
Dear Mr Bryce
MHRA reference: FOI08/216
Your request of 19 June to the Department of Health has been passed to the MHRA for reply. I understand that you have previously contacted the MHRA (FOI08/196) on several of the requests contained in your mail to the DH. I am covering these in this reply for completeness. Addressing each of your requests for information in turn:
(a) How many persons are members of the Seroxat User Group?
The DH/MHRA does not hold that information
(b) [request for] a copy of the articles of association (or other like meaning documents) for the Online Seroxat Support Group.
The DH/MHRA does not hold that information
(c) Has the Dept of Health any plans to meet with other activists & victims of Drugs.....
The DH/MHRA has no meetings planned with, in your words, "other activists and victims of drugs". Any requests for meetings are considered on a case by case basis and in line with any other request to meet with a Minister; for example a request from a Member of Parliament that a Minister should meet with his/her constituents.
(d) of the 128 e-mails produced by Janice Simmons how many of them were verified by the Dept of Health
None - the DH/MHRA saw no reason to undertake any verification.
(e) [request for] exact copies of the e-mails together with source information including isp numbers
The mails held by the MHRA do not contain any ISP information. Section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) provides that public authorities are not required to comply with requests that they judge to constitute an excessive use of their resources. We consider that this provision applies in this instance. To meet your request it would be necessary to consider each of these mails to identify material that may be exempted from disclosure under the FOIA. The resource required to do this work exceeds the relevant limit in the FOIA of £600, calculated at £25 per hour. I do not consider, in this case, that there is a public interest in undertaking this work and we are therefore unable to supply the further information you have requested. If you are unhappy with that decision, you may ask for it to be reviewed. That review will be undertaken by a senior member of the MHRA who has not previously been involved in your request. If you wish to pursue that option please let me know. After that, if you remain dissatisfied, you may ask the Information Commissioner at:
The Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
to make a decision on whether or not the FOIA has been correctly interpreted by the MHRA.
Yours sincerely
Anne Thyer
Anne Thyer
Policy Division
MHRA
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any reading, printing, storage, disclosure, copying or any other action taken in respect of this email is prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by using the reply function and then permanently delete what you have received.Incoming and outgoing email messages are routinely monitored for compliance with the Department of Healths policy on the use of electronic communications.
For more information on the Department of Healths email policy, click
http://www.dh.gov.uk/DHTermsAndConditions/fs/en?CONTENT_ID=4110945&chk=x1C3Zw
The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2007/11/0032.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.
(UKS34669) Janice Simmons claimed group represented 10,000 +
[PDF]
We arrived at Canary Wharf at 10
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
Janice said the group represents over 10000 people all of ... Janice Simmons said that as the trials for Seroxat were only ...
www.seroxatusergroup.org.uk/EMEA%20minutes%20April%202004.pdf
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uksurvivors/message/34669
We arrived at Canary Wharf at 10
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
Janice said the group represents over 10000 people all of ... Janice Simmons said that as the trials for Seroxat were only ...
www.seroxatusergroup.org.uk/EMEA%20minutes%20April%202004.pdf
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uksurvivors/message/34669
Saturday, 13 September 2008
(UKS35837) Has the MHRA any plans to meet with other activists & victims of drugs such as Cipramil, Prozac, Lustral & Efexor etc
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uksurvivors/message/35837
From: Jeremy Bryce [mailto:jeremybryce1953@...]
Sent: 11 April 2008 15:55
To: Watkins, John
Subject: Meeting Janice Simmons & others re antidepressants
John.Watkins@mhra.gsi.gov.UK
John Watkins
Communications Manager,
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)
Dear Mr Watkins
I refer you to http://fiddaman.blogspot.com/
Post Friday, April 11, 2008
Headed -MHRA - A small light at the end of this very long dark tunnel
& in particular to text
" We would like to take stock of your request for a meeting in the light of the outcome of the meeting with Janice and those she may bring with her. Indeed you might see that meeting as fulfilling the suggestion in your email that the MHRA and anti-Seroxat/SSRI campaigners should get together to discuss the issues. "
This in my opinion is highly questionable especially
(a) since the members of the Seroxat lobby stand to materially gain by any intervention that the MHRA might ultimately have to take against GSK
(b) the MHRA appears to be offering preferential regulating services to consumers of one brand of SSRI, whilst leaving the field open for obvious substandard supervision & hence public danger, to consumers of other SSRI's & SNRI's such as Efexor.
For example
I would draw your attention to the homicidality issue with Efexor & my earlier question I raised with Miss Shahin Kauser
Ref 21 December 2005 MHRA Reference: LQ05/3453.
Her answer is highly ambiguous at best.
See
http://www.theeffexoractivist.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=471
My question then John
Has the MHRA any plans to meet with other activists & victims of drugs such as Cipramil, Prozac, Lustral & Efexor to name but four but exclude none other ?
Or
Would the MHRA decline such a request and prefer to deal with this letter as previously intimated by me, to you personally, as a complaint of (Regulatory) partiality against users/former users of SSRI/SNRI other than Seroxat ?
Regards
Jeremy Bryce
*** **** ****
***********
*********
*************
See also
[PDF]
1 Effexor XR (venlafaxine hydrochloride) Extended-Release Capsules ...
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
Or suicidal ideation. The efficacy of Effexor (immediate release) in the ...... Facial paralysis, abnormal gait, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, homicidal ...
www.wyeth.com/content/ShowLabeling.asp?id=100 -
This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Cable&Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2007/11/0032.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any reading, printing, storage, disclosure, copying or any other action taken in respect of this email is prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by using the reply function and then permanently delete what you have received.Incoming and outgoing email messages are routinely monitored for compliance with the Department of Healths policy on the use of electronic communications.
For more information on the Department of Healths email policy, click
http://www.dh.gov.uk/DHTermsAndConditions/fs/en?CONTENT_ID=4110945&chk=x1C3Zw
The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2007/11/0032.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.
From: Jeremy Bryce [mailto:jeremybryce1953@...]
Sent: 11 April 2008 15:55
To: Watkins, John
Subject: Meeting Janice Simmons & others re antidepressants
John.Watkins@mhra.gsi.gov.UK
John Watkins
Communications Manager,
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)
Dear Mr Watkins
I refer you to http://fiddaman.blogspot.com/
Post Friday, April 11, 2008
Headed -MHRA - A small light at the end of this very long dark tunnel
& in particular to text
" We would like to take stock of your request for a meeting in the light of the outcome of the meeting with Janice and those she may bring with her. Indeed you might see that meeting as fulfilling the suggestion in your email that the MHRA and anti-Seroxat/SSRI campaigners should get together to discuss the issues. "
This in my opinion is highly questionable especially
(a) since the members of the Seroxat lobby stand to materially gain by any intervention that the MHRA might ultimately have to take against GSK
(b) the MHRA appears to be offering preferential regulating services to consumers of one brand of SSRI, whilst leaving the field open for obvious substandard supervision & hence public danger, to consumers of other SSRI's & SNRI's such as Efexor.
For example
I would draw your attention to the homicidality issue with Efexor & my earlier question I raised with Miss Shahin Kauser
Ref 21 December 2005 MHRA Reference: LQ05/3453.
Her answer is highly ambiguous at best.
See
http://www.theeffexoractivist.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=471
My question then John
Has the MHRA any plans to meet with other activists & victims of drugs such as Cipramil, Prozac, Lustral & Efexor to name but four but exclude none other ?
Or
Would the MHRA decline such a request and prefer to deal with this letter as previously intimated by me, to you personally, as a complaint of (Regulatory) partiality against users/former users of SSRI/SNRI other than Seroxat ?
Regards
Jeremy Bryce
*** **** ****
***********
*********
*************
See also
[PDF]
1 Effexor XR (venlafaxine hydrochloride) Extended-Release Capsules ...
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
Or suicidal ideation. The efficacy of Effexor (immediate release) in the ...... Facial paralysis, abnormal gait, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, homicidal ...
www.wyeth.com/content/ShowLabeling.asp?id=100 -
This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Cable&Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2007/11/0032.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any reading, printing, storage, disclosure, copying or any other action taken in respect of this email is prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by using the reply function and then permanently delete what you have received.Incoming and outgoing email messages are routinely monitored for compliance with the Department of Healths policy on the use of electronic communications.
For more information on the Department of Healths email policy, click
http://www.dh.gov.uk/DHTermsAndConditions/fs/en?CONTENT_ID=4110945&chk=x1C3Zw
The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2007/11/0032.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.
UKS 35834. MHRA (John Watkins) to Fiddaman re meetings
Dear Mr Fiddaman
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uksurvivors/message/35834
You emailed our Information Centre on 18 March requesting a meeting with Kent Woods, and that email has been passed to me.
You will recall that it was on 6 March that we published the results of our investigation into GSK. On that day, Prof. Woods spoke over the phone with Janice Simmons, and she requested a meeting.
Given the timing of the two requests it would of course have been discourteous to Janice to have pursued your request at this stage without considering hers. I have now offered her a meeting with Prof. Woods, leaving it to her to decide who might be best placed to accompany her. She has accepted the offer. I understand you are aware of that.
We would like to take stock of your request for a meeting in the light of the outcome of the meeting with Janice and those she may bring with her. Indeed you might see that meeting as fulfilling the suggestion in your email that the MHRA and anti-Seroxat/SSRI campaigners should get together to discuss the issues.
May I take the opportunity of thanking you for your fairness in acknowledging on your blog that we are trying to being as transparent as we can be in answering some of your requests for information.
Yours sincerely,
John Watkins
http://fiddaman.blogspot.com/2008/04/mhra-small-light-at-end-of-this-very.html
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uksurvivors/message/35834
You emailed our Information Centre on 18 March requesting a meeting with Kent Woods, and that email has been passed to me.
You will recall that it was on 6 March that we published the results of our investigation into GSK. On that day, Prof. Woods spoke over the phone with Janice Simmons, and she requested a meeting.
Given the timing of the two requests it would of course have been discourteous to Janice to have pursued your request at this stage without considering hers. I have now offered her a meeting with Prof. Woods, leaving it to her to decide who might be best placed to accompany her. She has accepted the offer. I understand you are aware of that.
We would like to take stock of your request for a meeting in the light of the outcome of the meeting with Janice and those she may bring with her. Indeed you might see that meeting as fulfilling the suggestion in your email that the MHRA and anti-Seroxat/SSRI campaigners should get together to discuss the issues.
May I take the opportunity of thanking you for your fairness in acknowledging on your blog that we are trying to being as transparent as we can be in answering some of your requests for information.
Yours sincerely,
John Watkins
http://fiddaman.blogspot.com/2008/04/mhra-small-light-at-end-of-this-very.html
great point Fiddaman - has anyone seen the articles of association of Seroxat User Group ?
source - https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgY0p4eXX_ezVtwgt0MwLOEMPwtPgN-SyJzSO3jBWlR3q0s_hPNMdXhfCWFCRCJP_vgkz-N7WdeTwYW-P0pqvkM0gTVatgEf2fIRF_b3DWV2Id2p3LmymNauu-HZdhXBqzrd01_yBlQXuPA/s1600-h/PRAT.JPG
Friday, 12 September 2008
Why is the regulator colluding with people like these?
Are the real victims of SSRI's being stitched up?
Is this just a re-run of tobacco litigation?
Is this just a re-run of tobacco litigation?
and while the real victims of SSRI's are scrimping by - Fiddaman's mate Derek Scott is flogging his P800 for £560 in March 2003
http://www.smartphonetoday.com/articles/2002/3/2002-3-5-Sony-Ericsson-Unveils-uo5.HTML
Sony Ericsson P800 for sale
http://s1.amazon.co.UK/exec/varzea/ts/exchange-glance/Y04X5977721X4594070/026-6275536-7345202
<< I have a Sony Ericsson P800 on offer at £560
Submitted by: Derek Scott
Email: ds010a5436@blueyonder.co.UK
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Date Added: 2003-03-01
Sony Ericsson P800 for sale
http://s1.amazon.co.UK/exec/varzea/ts/exchange-glance/Y04X5977721X4594070/026-6275536-7345202
<< I have a Sony Ericsson P800 on offer at £560
Submitted by: Derek Scott
Email: ds010a5436@blueyonder.co.UK
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Date Added: 2003-03-01
but fit enough to jump off the stage in 2001
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.rock-n-roll.acdc/browse_thread/thread/6afe1483966fe76b/a1e3cd5ccd35d55f#a1e3cd5ccd35d55f
Jul 2 2001, 5:07 pm
Dave wrote in message
news:9hp2ob$f4fqj$1@ID-63323.news.dfncis.de...
> > Say you're out at a wedding function, presentation night, birthday etc,
> and
> > the DJ flips on DC -D'you get up and do the duckwalk?
> Nope....cuz it's usaully YSM that's playing. Everyone then looks at me
cuz
> they know I'm the DC freak...at which point I shake my head as a firm
> believer in Murphy's Law.
Yeah know what ya mean. This year we had a presentation night for our youth
footy team - so half cut I asked (ahem!) demanded that the DJ play some
AC/DC. To my astonishment he plucked out the Who Made Who 12" - I said "Fuck
me - you've got play GFH on the B Side. He promised he'd play it. So I was
mentally figuring out what part of the stage I should jump from etc. About a
pint or so later I heard the dreaded tones of YSMANL. AGGGGH!!!!!!!!!!!!
None the less I still gave it my best shot - much to the bemusement of the
kids and the parents that had turned out for the Presentation that night!
> > Christ the amount of times I've had the dance floor to myself.
> I wouldn't know how to duckwalk to be honest.
You serious? I remember having the floor to myself at the launch of the
Ballbreaker album. Some magazine were offering free shots of rum all night
and there were free t-shirts and a comp to win a Gibson signed by the wee
man himself.
As the album hadn't been released I didn't have a clue of when to do the
duck walk and when not to. To my joy dry Ice was blasted across the floor
and for one milliscule I WAS Angus!
--
And Remember......
KEEP IT STIFF
BOB 'CHAINSAW' FIDDAMAN UK
Remove NOSPAM to reply personally.
http://trak.to/ACDC (NEWSGROUP SITE)
http://2go.it/corinthians/ (CORINTHIANS UNDER 13'S FC)
http://bobfiddaman.123go.cx/ (MY POETRY SITE) Winner of the Poetry Splash
Award
The 'CHAINSAW' reference bears no resemblance to the masked cretin Eminem
Jul 2 2001, 5:07 pm
Dave
news:9hp2ob$f4fqj$1@ID-63323.news.dfncis.de...
> > Say you're out at a wedding function, presentation night, birthday etc,
> and
> > the DJ flips on DC -D'you get up and do the duckwalk?
> Nope....cuz it's usaully YSM that's playing. Everyone then looks at me
cuz
> they know I'm the DC freak...at which point I shake my head as a firm
> believer in Murphy's Law.
Yeah know what ya mean. This year we had a presentation night for our youth
footy team - so half cut I asked (ahem!) demanded that the DJ play some
AC/DC. To my astonishment he plucked out the Who Made Who 12" - I said "Fuck
me - you've got play GFH on the B Side. He promised he'd play it. So I was
mentally figuring out what part of the stage I should jump from etc. About a
pint or so later I heard the dreaded tones of YSMANL. AGGGGH!!!!!!!!!!!!
None the less I still gave it my best shot - much to the bemusement of the
kids and the parents that had turned out for the Presentation that night!
> > Christ the amount of times I've had the dance floor to myself.
> I wouldn't know how to duckwalk to be honest.
You serious? I remember having the floor to myself at the launch of the
Ballbreaker album. Some magazine were offering free shots of rum all night
and there were free t-shirts and a comp to win a Gibson signed by the wee
man himself.
As the album hadn't been released I didn't have a clue of when to do the
duck walk and when not to. To my joy dry Ice was blasted across the floor
and for one milliscule I WAS Angus!
--
And Remember......
KEEP IT STIFF
BOB 'CHAINSAW' FIDDAMAN UK
Remove NOSPAM to reply personally.
http://trak.to/ACDC (NEWSGROUP SITE)
http://2go.it/corinthians/ (CORINTHIANS UNDER 13'S FC)
http://bobfiddaman.123go.cx/ (MY POETRY SITE) Winner of the Poetry Splash
Award
The 'CHAINSAW' reference bears no resemblance to the masked cretin Eminem
" to ill to work in 1996 "
In 1996 I became too ill to continue working. Investigations were made into my ailment and it was found that I was suffering from osteoarthritis of both hips. After a lengthy absence I was placed on the Long Term Absence Register of Associates and there I remained until about 2 months ago!
http://www.labournet.net/ukunion/0109/rover1.html
http://www.labournet.net/ukunion/0109/rover1.html
version of events - "so down (he) thought about suicide" & no mention of Seroxat
"Christine has had a nervous breakdown and my doctor diagnosed me as
depressed. I was so down I thought about suicide."
The tribunal hearing is due to take place in January next year.
"My employment law adviser has tried everything to get me back to work but
with no joy," he said. "The Company just says there are no vacancies for me
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.media.newspapers/tree/browse_frm/month/2001-06?_done=%2Fgroup%2Fuk.media.newspapers%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fmonth%2F2001-06%3F&
depressed. I was so down I thought about suicide."
The tribunal hearing is due to take place in January next year.
"My employment law adviser has tried everything to get me back to work but
with no joy," he said. "The Company just says there are no vacancies for me
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.media.newspapers/tree/browse_frm/month/2001-06?_done=%2Fgroup%2Fuk.media.newspapers%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fmonth%2F2001-06%3F&
source - http://groups.google.com/group/uk.media.newspapers/tree/browse_frm/month/2001-06?_done=%2Fgroup%2Fuk.media.newspapers%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fmonth%2F2001-06%3F&
google cache - http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:GqmAzga50ncJ:groups.google.com/group/uk.media.newspapers/tree/browse_frm/month/2001-06%3F_done%3D%252Fgroup%252Fuk.media.newspapers%252Fbrowse_frm%252Fmonth%252F2001-06%253F%26+LAND+ROVER+fiddaman&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=uk
FIDDAMAN View profile
More options Jun 3 2001, 9:17 am
Newsgroups: uk.media.newspapers
From: "BOB FIDDAMAN"
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 14:06:41 +0100
Local: Sun, Jun 3 2001 9:06 am
Subject: Sunday Mercury
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
Anyone on here know of anyone else of Land Rover's Long Term Absence
Register then could they please get in touch with me via email.
The following are two stories from the Sunday Mercury. The first was in the
26/05 edition and the second in this Sunday's edition.
FORGOTTEN MAN
I've been frozen out of work for two years because of disability, says Bob
Meet Bob Fiddaman - Land Rover's forgotten man.
For 12 years the Birmingham father of three has been employed by the
Solihull motor giant.
But for the past two years Bob, a 36 year old production line worker, has
not done a single hour's work.
Land Rover claim they cannot find him an alternative job after he was struck
down by osteoarthritis.
Now Bob is taking the Company to industrial tribunal - claiming he has been
frozen out because of his disability.
Bob, from Yardley, joined Land Rover as a £14,5000 a year fitter and
assembler on the Defender line in 1989.
In 1996 he was signed off sick by his doctor and was diagnosed as suffering
from osteoarthritis in both hips. He was placed on the Company's Long Term
Absence Register but was declared fit for non manual work in 1999.
But for the past two years, his Land Rover bosses have claimed they cannot
find him a new role.
Crazy Situation
Frustrated Bob has even tried to take voluntary redundancy or early
retirement on ill health grounds - but the applications have been refused.
"This is an absolutely crazy situation," he said. "I am ready and willing to
work yet Land Rover are forcing me to stay at home."
"Although I am not able to do heavy manual work, I would be happy to do
office work or other lighter duties."
"But they just keep telling me they don't have a non manual job for me."
"My family has really suffered. We've had to survive on my wife Christine's
part-time wages because my sick pay stopped in 1998. The only money I
receive is a tiny amount of Incapacity Benefit.
"Christine has had a nervous breakdown and my doctor diagnosed me as
depressed. I was so down I thought about suicide."
The tribunal hearing is due to take place in January next year.
"My employment law adviser has tried everything to get me back to work but
with no joy," he said. "The Company just says there are no vacancies for me.
"If I were to just quit, I would get nothing. But it isn't a question of
money - it's about justice. I can't get on with my life until this is
resolved."
A Land Rover spokesman said: "We are still in discussion with Mr Fiddaman.
At this stage it would be inappropriate to comment further.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
LEFT TO ROT BY LAND ROVER
Car giant leaves 20 employees in limbo.
Midland giant Land Rover was last night accused of freezing out employees
ready to return to work after being off sick.
Solihull Metropolitan Borough councillor John Bramham made the claim after
reading the Sunday Mercury's story last week about Bob Fiddaman - whom we
dubbed 'Land Rovers Forgotten Man'.
We revealed how Mr Fiddaman had not done a single hours work for two years
because the Company claimed it could not find him an alternative job after
he was struck down with osteoarthritis.
Instead, Mr Fiddaman remains on the Company's Long Term Absence Register -
despite being declared fit for non-manual work.
He does not receive any money from Land Rover because his sick pay has run
out and he now relies on Incapacity Benefit. He is now taking the Company to
tribunal claiming discrimination.
Now another employee on the Long Term Absence Register has come forward,
claiming that he has been trying to get back to work at Land Rover for FIVE
years.
David Busst, 49, has been employed by the Solihull motor giant for 12 years.
He worked as a £12,000-a-year semi-skilled fitter on the Discovery line
until 1992 when he was struck down with balance problems.
He was signed off sick by his doctor and it was later discovered Mr Busst
had suffered two minor strokes. He was also diagnosed with arthritis of the
back and knees.
Mr Busst, who lives with his partner just a short distance from the Land
Rover plant, says since 1996 he has felt fit enough for non manual work but
Company bosses claim that cannot find him another role.
Like Mr Fiddaman, he relies on Incapacity Benefit because he no longer
receives money from Land Rover. He has also been refused voluntary
redundancy.
Last night Coun Bramham, whose ward includes the Land Rover plant, accused
the Company of freezing out employees like Mr Busst and Mr Fiddaman.
And he said a Company insider had told him that there had been more than 20
employees on the Long Term Absence Register at one point.
"Land Rover seems to have this register to pigeon-hole people into once
their sick pay has run out." he said.
"It's a bit of a cop-out really because it seems the Company does not have
to take employees back or give them redundancy.
"In Mr Busst's case, he is perfectly capable of doing a job for the Company,
but it appears that he will continue to rot in the same position unless he
is prepared to forfeit all his rights by resigning. Quite a few other people
have been, and still are, in a very similar situation. They are just in
limbo and I don't think it's fair."
BOB FIDDAMAN UK
Remove NOSPAM to reply personally.
google cache - http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:GqmAzga50ncJ:groups.google.com/group/uk.media.newspapers/tree/browse_frm/month/2001-06%3F_done%3D%252Fgroup%252Fuk.media.newspapers%252Fbrowse_frm%252Fmonth%252F2001-06%253F%26+LAND+ROVER+fiddaman&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=uk
FIDDAMAN View profile
More options Jun 3 2001, 9:17 am
Newsgroups: uk.media.newspapers
From: "BOB FIDDAMAN"
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 14:06:41 +0100
Local: Sun, Jun 3 2001 9:06 am
Subject: Sunday Mercury
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
Anyone on here know of anyone else of Land Rover's Long Term Absence
Register then could they please get in touch with me via email.
The following are two stories from the Sunday Mercury. The first was in the
26/05 edition and the second in this Sunday's edition.
FORGOTTEN MAN
I've been frozen out of work for two years because of disability, says Bob
Meet Bob Fiddaman - Land Rover's forgotten man.
For 12 years the Birmingham father of three has been employed by the
Solihull motor giant.
But for the past two years Bob, a 36 year old production line worker, has
not done a single hour's work.
Land Rover claim they cannot find him an alternative job after he was struck
down by osteoarthritis.
Now Bob is taking the Company to industrial tribunal - claiming he has been
frozen out because of his disability.
Bob, from Yardley, joined Land Rover as a £14,5000 a year fitter and
assembler on the Defender line in 1989.
In 1996 he was signed off sick by his doctor and was diagnosed as suffering
from osteoarthritis in both hips. He was placed on the Company's Long Term
Absence Register but was declared fit for non manual work in 1999.
But for the past two years, his Land Rover bosses have claimed they cannot
find him a new role.
Crazy Situation
Frustrated Bob has even tried to take voluntary redundancy or early
retirement on ill health grounds - but the applications have been refused.
"This is an absolutely crazy situation," he said. "I am ready and willing to
work yet Land Rover are forcing me to stay at home."
"Although I am not able to do heavy manual work, I would be happy to do
office work or other lighter duties."
"But they just keep telling me they don't have a non manual job for me."
"My family has really suffered. We've had to survive on my wife Christine's
part-time wages because my sick pay stopped in 1998. The only money I
receive is a tiny amount of Incapacity Benefit.
"Christine has had a nervous breakdown and my doctor diagnosed me as
depressed. I was so down I thought about suicide."
The tribunal hearing is due to take place in January next year.
"My employment law adviser has tried everything to get me back to work but
with no joy," he said. "The Company just says there are no vacancies for me.
"If I were to just quit, I would get nothing. But it isn't a question of
money - it's about justice. I can't get on with my life until this is
resolved."
A Land Rover spokesman said: "We are still in discussion with Mr Fiddaman.
At this stage it would be inappropriate to comment further.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
LEFT TO ROT BY LAND ROVER
Car giant leaves 20 employees in limbo.
Midland giant Land Rover was last night accused of freezing out employees
ready to return to work after being off sick.
Solihull Metropolitan Borough councillor John Bramham made the claim after
reading the Sunday Mercury's story last week about Bob Fiddaman - whom we
dubbed 'Land Rovers Forgotten Man'.
We revealed how Mr Fiddaman had not done a single hours work for two years
because the Company claimed it could not find him an alternative job after
he was struck down with osteoarthritis.
Instead, Mr Fiddaman remains on the Company's Long Term Absence Register -
despite being declared fit for non-manual work.
He does not receive any money from Land Rover because his sick pay has run
out and he now relies on Incapacity Benefit. He is now taking the Company to
tribunal claiming discrimination.
Now another employee on the Long Term Absence Register has come forward,
claiming that he has been trying to get back to work at Land Rover for FIVE
years.
David Busst, 49, has been employed by the Solihull motor giant for 12 years.
He worked as a £12,000-a-year semi-skilled fitter on the Discovery line
until 1992 when he was struck down with balance problems.
He was signed off sick by his doctor and it was later discovered Mr Busst
had suffered two minor strokes. He was also diagnosed with arthritis of the
back and knees.
Mr Busst, who lives with his partner just a short distance from the Land
Rover plant, says since 1996 he has felt fit enough for non manual work but
Company bosses claim that cannot find him another role.
Like Mr Fiddaman, he relies on Incapacity Benefit because he no longer
receives money from Land Rover. He has also been refused voluntary
redundancy.
Last night Coun Bramham, whose ward includes the Land Rover plant, accused
the Company of freezing out employees like Mr Busst and Mr Fiddaman.
And he said a Company insider had told him that there had been more than 20
employees on the Long Term Absence Register at one point.
"Land Rover seems to have this register to pigeon-hole people into once
their sick pay has run out." he said.
"It's a bit of a cop-out really because it seems the Company does not have
to take employees back or give them redundancy.
"In Mr Busst's case, he is perfectly capable of doing a job for the Company,
but it appears that he will continue to rot in the same position unless he
is prepared to forfeit all his rights by resigning. Quite a few other people
have been, and still are, in a very similar situation. They are just in
limbo and I don't think it's fair."
BOB FIDDAMAN UK
Remove NOSPAM to reply personally.
version of events - " attempt at suicide because of the way Rover/Ford have treated " (him) & no mention of seroxat
source - http://www.labournet.net/ukunion/0109/rover1.html
My wife has had a complete nervous breakdown, my three children have suffered and I failed in an attempt at suicide because of the way Rover/Ford have treated me. To recap:
I became ill in 1996
Was deemed fit in the spring of 1999
Was told there were no suitable jobs for me
Was turned down for Ill Health Early Medical Retirement
Was refused a Voluntary Redundancy Package.
My wife has had a complete nervous breakdown, my three children have suffered and I failed in an attempt at suicide because of the way Rover/Ford have treated me. To recap:
I became ill in 1996
Was deemed fit in the spring of 1999
Was told there were no suitable jobs for me
Was turned down for Ill Health Early Medical Retirement
Was refused a Voluntary Redundancy Package.
Letter written to Kingshill Management - Fiddaman plays the victim
http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:f6WV_g-2HwkJ:www.labournet.net/ukunion/0109/rover1.html+ford+fiddaman&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=8&gl=uk
T&GWU, Rover and Disability Discrimination
Report by Bob Fiddaman
Published: 04/09/01
How can a T&G member be treated like this?
I am astounded to read Rover’s stance on Diversity issues when clearly they are failing to adopt the policies that they preach.
We were recently invited to fill in a survey from Kingshill Management Consultants. I filled in the questionnaire and also sent a letter to them regarding my claim of Disability Discrimination against the company.
I have been made aware that there are more than 20 associates currently on the long term absence register, a register that clearly denies them the right to work once they are deemed fit enough to return to work.
Please find a copy of the letter below
Regards
Bob Fiddaman
Letter written to Kingshill Management
Dear Sir/Madam,
http://www.labournet.net/ukunion/0109/rover1.html
I read with interest your survey on ‘Diversity’, which was posted to me on 13th August 2001.
It is with regret that I have to inform you that I have received treatment of a discriminatory manner during the past two years by Rover/Ford management, T&G Union officials, Rover board of Trustees and the Occupational Health based at Solihull.
In 1996 I became too ill to continue working. Investigations were made into my ailment and it was found that I was suffering from osteoarthritis of both hips. After a lengthy absence I was placed on the Long Term Absence Register of Associates and there I remained until about 2 months ago!
Both management and Union officials were made aware that I was deemed fit enough to return to work over two years ago but despite constant requests and the threat of legal action Rover/Ford refused to allow me to return stating that there were no vacancies for me.
The Occupational Health Department, whose role is to help people back into work, requested appointments with me during my time off. Once my sick pay became exhausted they didn’t reassess my situation for a further 11 months!!!
I applied for Ill Health Early Medical Retirement but was refused because I did not meet the Trustees criteria. I appealed against this decision but for some strange reason my appeal was NEVER processed!!
I enquired about a voluntary redundancy package but was told that persons on the Long Term Absence Register whose sick pay had exhausted, could not apply for any form of Voluntary Redundancy packages.
So there I was, ready and willing to return to work but no job could be found for me. I could not apply for VR because the Company have an agreement with the Union that persons whose sick pay has exhausted are not allowed this right. My application for Early Medical retirement was turned down and my appeal was never processed!
It was then that I sought the advice of a Disability Employment Adviser, who telephoned my Personnel Operations Manager and more or less told her that if they didn’t at least look into the prospect of making reasonable adjustments or exploring the P. A. C. T Scheme then they could be contravening the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. No notice was taken so I then sought the Legal advice of an Employment Law Adviser who agreed to take my case on.
During this time my legal adviser liaised with the Solicitor acting for Rover and was told that I could reapply for ill health early medical retirement. I did this and was happy to be told by letter that my retirement date was set for June 30th 2000 and I was to receive a lump sum and an annual pension. You can imagine my delight as I thought at last this nightmare is over. A week or so later my legal adviser telephoned me to say that the Board of Trustees had decided NOT to grant me Ill Health Early Medical retirement after all. On asking them why they just told us (my legal adviser and I) that I did not meet the criteria.
I did everything in my power to get myself back to work but was told that there was no job suitable for me due to my restrictions (Osteoarthritis of the hips).
After an Interlocutory Hearing at the Employment Tribunals I have been made three ‘derogatory’ offers by Rover/Ford regarding a compensation payout due to the way they have treated me. They have kept me out of work for over two years and their first offer was not even a year’s wages!!! More importantly the offer was compensation only and NOT a job back!!!
About 3 months ago my plight was highlighted in The Sunday Mercury and the following week another Rover worker came forward to say that he had been off for 6 years and he had also been trying to get back. Strangely I was offered a job only four days after the second story ran and the other Rover Worker is now also back at work.
Once back at work I learn of Managers taking attractive Voluntary Redundancy Packages only to return to work for Rover some months later under a different Job Title. I also learn that Rover/Ford have a skills centre (commonly known as the pool) where associates are placed if no work can be found for them. This, I believe, could have been a reasonable adjustment. I also learn that there have been a number of jobs that have been filled by employees on the LTAR whose sick pay HAS NOT exhausted.
My Employment Tribunal is due to be held in January 2002, my union do not want to know and I am expected to foot the legal bill, which currently stands at just over £12,000.
Since I have been back at work I have learned about the Diversity programme currently being run and I have made enquiries of how to become more active, as yet I have had no feedback from the HR Department.
So receiving your questionnaire through the post this morning fills me with great sorrow as the very same people who have been discriminatory towards me over the past two years or so endorse it.
Drastic changes need to be implemented within Rover/Ford. An attitude of what a Disabled Person can offer the company rather that what he CANNOT offer the Company needs to be taken. The Long Term Absence Register is a sham; it is basically a heap to cast associates on to. The Union claims that they have reached an agreement whereby no person can get the sack due to lack of jobs, keeping someone on the Long Term Absence Register illegally is far worse than getting sacked.
My wife has had a complete nervous breakdown, my three children have suffered and I failed in an attempt at suicide because of the way Rover/Ford have treated me.
To recap:
I became ill in 1996
Was deemed fit in the spring of 1999
Was told there were no suitable jobs for me
Was turned down for Ill Health Early Medical Retirement
Was refused a Voluntary Redundancy Package.
I have filled in the questionnaire as requested but do not anticipate that anything will change. The Diversity programme is a good idea but as long as you have bigots in the workplace you will not stamp out discrimination in any form.
You may contact me if you wish to discuss this matter further or you can brush it under the carpet. I intend to blow the lid on the way I have been treated by Rover/Ford when my tribunal is heard in January 2002. Then, and only then, will people understand what a bunch of hypocritical bigots are working within Rover/Ford.
Yours sincerely
T&GWU, Rover and Disability Discrimination
Report by Bob Fiddaman
Published: 04/09/01
How can a T&G member be treated like this?
I am astounded to read Rover’s stance on Diversity issues when clearly they are failing to adopt the policies that they preach.
We were recently invited to fill in a survey from Kingshill Management Consultants. I filled in the questionnaire and also sent a letter to them regarding my claim of Disability Discrimination against the company.
I have been made aware that there are more than 20 associates currently on the long term absence register, a register that clearly denies them the right to work once they are deemed fit enough to return to work.
Please find a copy of the letter below
Regards
Bob Fiddaman
Letter written to Kingshill Management
Dear Sir/Madam,
http://www.labournet.net/ukunion/0109/rover1.html
I read with interest your survey on ‘Diversity’, which was posted to me on 13th August 2001.
It is with regret that I have to inform you that I have received treatment of a discriminatory manner during the past two years by Rover/Ford management, T&G Union officials, Rover board of Trustees and the Occupational Health based at Solihull.
In 1996 I became too ill to continue working. Investigations were made into my ailment and it was found that I was suffering from osteoarthritis of both hips. After a lengthy absence I was placed on the Long Term Absence Register of Associates and there I remained until about 2 months ago!
Both management and Union officials were made aware that I was deemed fit enough to return to work over two years ago but despite constant requests and the threat of legal action Rover/Ford refused to allow me to return stating that there were no vacancies for me.
The Occupational Health Department, whose role is to help people back into work, requested appointments with me during my time off. Once my sick pay became exhausted they didn’t reassess my situation for a further 11 months!!!
I applied for Ill Health Early Medical Retirement but was refused because I did not meet the Trustees criteria. I appealed against this decision but for some strange reason my appeal was NEVER processed!!
I enquired about a voluntary redundancy package but was told that persons on the Long Term Absence Register whose sick pay had exhausted, could not apply for any form of Voluntary Redundancy packages.
So there I was, ready and willing to return to work but no job could be found for me. I could not apply for VR because the Company have an agreement with the Union that persons whose sick pay has exhausted are not allowed this right. My application for Early Medical retirement was turned down and my appeal was never processed!
It was then that I sought the advice of a Disability Employment Adviser, who telephoned my Personnel Operations Manager and more or less told her that if they didn’t at least look into the prospect of making reasonable adjustments or exploring the P. A. C. T Scheme then they could be contravening the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. No notice was taken so I then sought the Legal advice of an Employment Law Adviser who agreed to take my case on.
During this time my legal adviser liaised with the Solicitor acting for Rover and was told that I could reapply for ill health early medical retirement. I did this and was happy to be told by letter that my retirement date was set for June 30th 2000 and I was to receive a lump sum and an annual pension. You can imagine my delight as I thought at last this nightmare is over. A week or so later my legal adviser telephoned me to say that the Board of Trustees had decided NOT to grant me Ill Health Early Medical retirement after all. On asking them why they just told us (my legal adviser and I) that I did not meet the criteria.
I did everything in my power to get myself back to work but was told that there was no job suitable for me due to my restrictions (Osteoarthritis of the hips).
After an Interlocutory Hearing at the Employment Tribunals I have been made three ‘derogatory’ offers by Rover/Ford regarding a compensation payout due to the way they have treated me. They have kept me out of work for over two years and their first offer was not even a year’s wages!!! More importantly the offer was compensation only and NOT a job back!!!
About 3 months ago my plight was highlighted in The Sunday Mercury and the following week another Rover worker came forward to say that he had been off for 6 years and he had also been trying to get back. Strangely I was offered a job only four days after the second story ran and the other Rover Worker is now also back at work.
Once back at work I learn of Managers taking attractive Voluntary Redundancy Packages only to return to work for Rover some months later under a different Job Title. I also learn that Rover/Ford have a skills centre (commonly known as the pool) where associates are placed if no work can be found for them. This, I believe, could have been a reasonable adjustment. I also learn that there have been a number of jobs that have been filled by employees on the LTAR whose sick pay HAS NOT exhausted.
My Employment Tribunal is due to be held in January 2002, my union do not want to know and I am expected to foot the legal bill, which currently stands at just over £12,000.
Since I have been back at work I have learned about the Diversity programme currently being run and I have made enquiries of how to become more active, as yet I have had no feedback from the HR Department.
So receiving your questionnaire through the post this morning fills me with great sorrow as the very same people who have been discriminatory towards me over the past two years or so endorse it.
Drastic changes need to be implemented within Rover/Ford. An attitude of what a Disabled Person can offer the company rather that what he CANNOT offer the Company needs to be taken. The Long Term Absence Register is a sham; it is basically a heap to cast associates on to. The Union claims that they have reached an agreement whereby no person can get the sack due to lack of jobs, keeping someone on the Long Term Absence Register illegally is far worse than getting sacked.
My wife has had a complete nervous breakdown, my three children have suffered and I failed in an attempt at suicide because of the way Rover/Ford have treated me.
To recap:
I became ill in 1996
Was deemed fit in the spring of 1999
Was told there were no suitable jobs for me
Was turned down for Ill Health Early Medical Retirement
Was refused a Voluntary Redundancy Package.
I have filled in the questionnaire as requested but do not anticipate that anything will change. The Diversity programme is a good idea but as long as you have bigots in the workplace you will not stamp out discrimination in any form.
You may contact me if you wish to discuss this matter further or you can brush it under the carpet. I intend to blow the lid on the way I have been treated by Rover/Ford when my tribunal is heard in January 2002. Then, and only then, will people understand what a bunch of hypocritical bigots are working within Rover/Ford.
Yours sincerely
(m mag 12420) Which evoked this response from Fiddaman as he ran away from mentalmagazine
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/mentalmagazine/message/12420
Re: [mentalmagazine] Re: Meeting with MHRA
Dear Tuesday,
You are more than welcome to leave comments on my blog.
I have never had a problem with reasoned debate. Once you or your friends start
attacking campaigners, such as myself then I will walk away. Because I am merely
a campaigner who wishes to widen the issue of withdrawal.
My comments are now being moderated but if you wish to leave a comment then
please feel free to do so.
I will not be returning to UK Survivors.
You come play in my back yard.
Bob
Re: [mentalmagazine] Re: Meeting with MHRA
Dear Tuesday,
You are more than welcome to leave comments on my blog.
I have never had a problem with reasoned debate. Once you or your friends start
attacking campaigners, such as myself then I will walk away. Because I am merely
a campaigner who wishes to widen the issue of withdrawal.
My comments are now being moderated but if you wish to leave a comment then
please feel free to do so.
I will not be returning to UK Survivors.
You come play in my back yard.
Bob
(m mag 12419) oops! the question from Tues that Fiddaman wouldn't answer on mentalmagazine @ Thu Sep 11, 2008 8:39 am
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/mentalmagazine/message/12419
Bob
Thank you for widening the issue!
I was intending to post a comment on your blog - but missed your
non-censorship deadline – so will post my reply on uksurvivors –
where you can come and discuss anything I've written.
The `huge flaw' is more that GPs are given no training about
medication or appropriate prescribing and management of patients on
psychotropic drugs - period!
Stepping in and training GPs to get people off SSRI / SNRIs – whilst
their still adding to the problem by indiscriminate and negligent
prescribing – isn't even trying to shut the door after the horse
has bolted – but more apathetically chasing it's tail as it
gallops away into the distance.
Having read the meetings minutes - the MHRA chose to contain the meeting
to discuss only withdrawal – which was your main concern – and
they did listen. But as they said its going to be difficult to address
with a `one size fits all' solution like the Benzodiazepines
withdrawal protocol in the BNF.
Its shame they didn't question - apply the same acknowledged caution
to the `one size fits all' with regard SSRI / SNRI dosage before
license when GPs were given free reign to prescribe the same dose to an
18 st lorry driver, 7 st granny with age related compromised metabolism
or young child!
Just out of interest – did you approach Dr David Healy before you
asked the MHRA if they would talk to him?
Tues
Bob
Thank you for widening the issue!
I was intending to post a comment on your blog - but missed your
non-censorship deadline – so will post my reply on uksurvivors –
where you can come and discuss anything I've written.
The `huge flaw' is more that GPs are given no training about
medication or appropriate prescribing and management of patients on
psychotropic drugs - period!
Stepping in and training GPs to get people off SSRI / SNRIs – whilst
their still adding to the problem by indiscriminate and negligent
prescribing – isn't even trying to shut the door after the horse
has bolted – but more apathetically chasing it's tail as it
gallops away into the distance.
Having read the meetings minutes - the MHRA chose to contain the meeting
to discuss only withdrawal – which was your main concern – and
they did listen. But as they said its going to be difficult to address
with a `one size fits all' solution like the Benzodiazepines
withdrawal protocol in the BNF.
Its shame they didn't question - apply the same acknowledged caution
to the `one size fits all' with regard SSRI / SNRI dosage before
license when GPs were given free reign to prescribe the same dose to an
18 st lorry driver, 7 st granny with age related compromised metabolism
or young child!
Just out of interest – did you approach Dr David Healy before you
asked the MHRA if they would talk to him?
Tues
Thursday, 11 September 2008
(m mag 12422) Well Fiddaman can't hack questions from TUES and runs away from mentalmagazine
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/mentalmagazine/message/12422
Re: [mentalmagazine] Re: Meeting with MHRA
I hardly think this is the place to spout off yet again about your conspiracy
theories with all that is Seroxat related.
UK Survivors is not moderated because it has no owner - He has not been around
for sometime has he?
As regards me reporting Bryce to Yahoo, yes I did. Haven't you wondered why his
profile was removed from Yahoo servers? He now posts under a different 'handle'
If you want me to post snapshots of his offending posts, I will. But I am not
going to use somebody elses forum to do so.
I've been to your place, are you afraid to come to mine? After all you did say
in your original post "I was intending to post a comment on your blog - but
missed your
non-censorship deadline"
Your accusations that I have instigated to have you banned are unwarranted, do
you have any proof of this?
The parrot picture was good [two parrots with images on the chest] However, the
one that came later with my image stuck on the head of a parrot and the headline
'Date Drug Rapist...' was offensive. Something you seem to conveniently forget.
Yahoo removed it, something else you seem to gloss over.
Now Tuesday, are you still intending to post a comment on my blog - despite
missing my
non-censorship deadline?
Sup to you.
I won't be responding to any of your questions in here or UK Survivors.
I will offer you this though. How would you like me or anyone else to conduct an
interview with you or Bryce... I'm still unsure whether you are not the same
person, you certainly sing from the same hymn sheet when slagging off
campaigners. Wouldn't your time be put to better use if you raised awareness
about SSRi's rather than target campaigners?
*To Rosemary [Owner of this group] - I apologise for this latest post. It seems
that Bryce and now 'Tuesday' have some sort of fixation on me. I really don't
think I'm that important, they seem to think I am. It's getting to the stage
where I am followed around the Internet by cyberstalking halfwits who have
nothing better to do than play right into the hands of Pharma.
I hereby unsubscribe from your group Rosemary. Thank you for giving me the
opportunity to put my version of events across. I wish you and your readers all
the best for the future.
Bob
To Tuesday: What are you afraid of? Come post on my blog
Re: [mentalmagazine] Re: Meeting with MHRA
I hardly think this is the place to spout off yet again about your conspiracy
theories with all that is Seroxat related.
UK Survivors is not moderated because it has no owner - He has not been around
for sometime has he?
As regards me reporting Bryce to Yahoo, yes I did. Haven't you wondered why his
profile was removed from Yahoo servers? He now posts under a different 'handle'
If you want me to post snapshots of his offending posts, I will. But I am not
going to use somebody elses forum to do so.
I've been to your place, are you afraid to come to mine? After all you did say
in your original post "I was intending to post a comment on your blog - but
missed your
non-censorship deadline"
Your accusations that I have instigated to have you banned are unwarranted, do
you have any proof of this?
The parrot picture was good [two parrots with images on the chest] However, the
one that came later with my image stuck on the head of a parrot and the headline
'Date Drug Rapist...' was offensive. Something you seem to conveniently forget.
Yahoo removed it, something else you seem to gloss over.
Now Tuesday, are you still intending to post a comment on my blog - despite
missing my
non-censorship deadline?
Sup to you.
I won't be responding to any of your questions in here or UK Survivors.
I will offer you this though. How would you like me or anyone else to conduct an
interview with you or Bryce... I'm still unsure whether you are not the same
person, you certainly sing from the same hymn sheet when slagging off
campaigners. Wouldn't your time be put to better use if you raised awareness
about SSRi's rather than target campaigners?
*To Rosemary [Owner of this group] - I apologise for this latest post. It seems
that Bryce and now 'Tuesday' have some sort of fixation on me. I really don't
think I'm that important, they seem to think I am. It's getting to the stage
where I am followed around the Internet by cyberstalking halfwits who have
nothing better to do than play right into the hands of Pharma.
I hereby unsubscribe from your group Rosemary. Thank you for giving me the
opportunity to put my version of events across. I wish you and your readers all
the best for the future.
Bob
To Tuesday: What are you afraid of? Come post on my blog
(m mag 12421) Another question from Tues - this time on mentalmagazine
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/mentalmagazine/message/12421
Bob –
Still no answers? No comments? Still demanding everything on your
terms?
Is that reasoned debate SUG style or proper reasoned debate?
Also - as in the past you have - on a regular basis and for no other
reason than my showing concern for others, have instigated and had me
been banned from the `back yards' you have frequented – why
the invitation to `play' in yours now?
Although lets face it – its more of a challenge than an invitation
– isn't it?
With regard `my friends' as you put it `attacking' you
– you came to the board and cosied up to them – succouring
support for your side of the dispute you had come to discuss with one
other member. You posted with them – shared a laugh with them –
said you enjoyed their company - even told Silvis you liked his Parrot
parody post.
Had you not encouraged it – the posting on that thread would have
stopped there. Had you at any time voiced your thoughts that enough was
enough – they probably would have apologised and the thread would
have been dropped.
But instead – and seeing an opportunity to go off, use it and them
as a way of succouring support elsewhere - you posted `your'
distorted side of events on your blog, other boards and web sites and
raised complaints with Yahoo and IP providers.
Without - I will point out any recourse being taken against the posters.
What you don't realize is that they're not like SUG members who
would take side's and bay for blood until someone was banned!! They
were not interested I your dispute with Jeremy - and were understandably
somewhat miffed by your turning on them in that manner and using them in
that way.
Then - and only then did they actually say anything slightly derogatory
about you, by way of disbelief that you said you liked the Silvis post -
then complain about it.
Which - you now categorize as them `attacking' you - when you in
true form and for your own means - attacked them first – and are now
using that as an excuse for not returning to the board to answer my
questions and continue the discussion.
I will also point out that I have not attacked you or any other
campaigner! I asked you questions in a reasonable manner – which
you answered by demanding answers to your other questions - which were
nothing to do with the issue I was asking about.
I followed this up with another post to explain that Jeremy - whom you
were accusing of being "up to old tricks on network54" – had
not written the response to your post there – I had.
Then after you gave Jeremy the answer to one of my questions - I wrote
explanatory posts to answer your question and facilitate asking further
pertinent questions – with regard the Seroxat GSK litigation –
the Seroxat activists activities and the Seroxat campaign.
I merely suggested uksurvivors because it is un-moderated, therefore
no-one can be banned or make accusations that their posts are being
blocked – edited – enhanced or adulterated in any way.
Questions you are still reluctant to answer! Why?
Obviously - being totally in control is more important to you than
honest discussion, free speech, a level `playing' field or even
answering pertinent questions to defend your credibility.
Bob you might be `playing' but others aren't – until you
actually appreciate the seriousness of the whole issue and stop behaving
like a school yard / SUG bully - people authority - like those at the
MHRA - will merely keep placating your demands – as one would a
disruptive child's.
Tues
BTW – as a long standing board moderator and joint owner I am --as
most peole will be-- fully aware that IPs are logged every time someone
logs on or visits a board – I have never felt the need nor tried to
hide mine.
Publishing peoples IP and locations on your blogs front page when they
do visit – obviously meant to intimidate – doesn't show you
as being fearful - or scare any-one, its merely making to appear to be
suffering with irrational paranoia!
Bob –
Still no answers? No comments? Still demanding everything on your
terms?
Is that reasoned debate SUG style or proper reasoned debate?
Also - as in the past you have - on a regular basis and for no other
reason than my showing concern for others, have instigated and had me
been banned from the `back yards' you have frequented – why
the invitation to `play' in yours now?
Although lets face it – its more of a challenge than an invitation
– isn't it?
With regard `my friends' as you put it `attacking' you
– you came to the board and cosied up to them – succouring
support for your side of the dispute you had come to discuss with one
other member. You posted with them – shared a laugh with them –
said you enjoyed their company - even told Silvis you liked his Parrot
parody post.
Had you not encouraged it – the posting on that thread would have
stopped there. Had you at any time voiced your thoughts that enough was
enough – they probably would have apologised and the thread would
have been dropped.
But instead – and seeing an opportunity to go off, use it and them
as a way of succouring support elsewhere - you posted `your'
distorted side of events on your blog, other boards and web sites and
raised complaints with Yahoo and IP providers.
Without - I will point out any recourse being taken against the posters.
What you don't realize is that they're not like SUG members who
would take side's and bay for blood until someone was banned!! They
were not interested I your dispute with Jeremy - and were understandably
somewhat miffed by your turning on them in that manner and using them in
that way.
Then - and only then did they actually say anything slightly derogatory
about you, by way of disbelief that you said you liked the Silvis post -
then complain about it.
Which - you now categorize as them `attacking' you - when you in
true form and for your own means - attacked them first – and are now
using that as an excuse for not returning to the board to answer my
questions and continue the discussion.
I will also point out that I have not attacked you or any other
campaigner! I asked you questions in a reasonable manner – which
you answered by demanding answers to your other questions - which were
nothing to do with the issue I was asking about.
I followed this up with another post to explain that Jeremy - whom you
were accusing of being "up to old tricks on network54" – had
not written the response to your post there – I had.
Then after you gave Jeremy the answer to one of my questions - I wrote
explanatory posts to answer your question and facilitate asking further
pertinent questions – with regard the Seroxat GSK litigation –
the Seroxat activists activities and the Seroxat campaign.
I merely suggested uksurvivors because it is un-moderated, therefore
no-one can be banned or make accusations that their posts are being
blocked – edited – enhanced or adulterated in any way.
Questions you are still reluctant to answer! Why?
Obviously - being totally in control is more important to you than
honest discussion, free speech, a level `playing' field or even
answering pertinent questions to defend your credibility.
Bob you might be `playing' but others aren't – until you
actually appreciate the seriousness of the whole issue and stop behaving
like a school yard / SUG bully - people authority - like those at the
MHRA - will merely keep placating your demands – as one would a
disruptive child's.
Tues
BTW – as a long standing board moderator and joint owner I am --as
most peole will be-- fully aware that IPs are logged every time someone
logs on or visits a board – I have never felt the need nor tried to
hide mine.
Publishing peoples IP and locations on your blogs front page when they
do visit – obviously meant to intimidate – doesn't show you
as being fearful - or scare any-one, its merely making to appear to be
suffering with irrational paranoia!
Tuesday, 9 September 2008
(UKS 35528) It seems there are only questions to Bob Fiddaman; never any answers !
posted by Tues
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uksurvivors/message/35528
Bob
Sorry about the delay in finishing these post – my time on the boards has been short this week and the time I did have I prioritised to speak to Sarah about the drugs.
If the MHRA have asked you to come up with a way of helping people get off SSRIs - maybe what I have written to Sarah will be useful – but I should tell you – what I have written is only part of how we get people off the drugs – everyone is different – every withdrawal is different – and the nutritional side plays a big part in controlling symptoms and recovery.
I suspect you thought I wouldn't bother to finish these posts as you've had your meeting with the MHRA – sorry to disappoint you – but your meeting wasn't the only reason I asked the questions, people involved are still wanting answers.
IF the GSK litigation leads to a settlement – I say IF - because Mark Harvey of Hugh James has history of involvement with other drug class actions that have collapsed - before reaching settlement - but after netting considerable funds from the Legal Services Commission (LSC).
But - IF there is a settlement - what will the litigants gain?
We asked this question in 2002 on the Lawyers SeroxatUserGroup (SUG) support forum –
It was obviously considered imperative to the class action, the lawyer and cases credibility for LSC funding - where client numbers count - to keep the answer from the litigants who had and would continue to signed up through the SUG website.
So imperative in fact - when the question didn't go away - the SUG forum and website `owners' response was to move the support board twice to different networks – via "guesting" on another campaigner's forum which suffered as a result.
Because the question still wouldn't go away - the `owner' closed the SUG support forum - although the actual SUG website (meta linked lawyers) is still running.
The Lawyers have never openly answered the question. Neither has the `owner' of the SeroxatUserGroup web site and SeroxatUserGroup support forum - a barrister in her own right.
Derek Scott - owner of the first Seroxat-SeroxatUserGroup now (OSSG) - also liaising with the Lawyers – locked his forum down - allowing only Seroxat affected members and Seroxat related matter to be posted.
They didn't want to tell the litigants that -
If individual lump sums damages are awarded and the recipients are reliant on benefits –
Both IB (Incapacity Benefit) and DLA (Disability Living Allowance) payments will be stopped from the point of award. Previously paid benefits will be subject to the special "Claw Back" provision - whereby any compensation paid for loss of earnings and/or increased care and mobility needs which result in payment of those benefits can be clawed back by the DWP from any award. Whether future DLA claims would be allowed or successful is not known.
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/cru/
Only those granted IB or / and DLA benefits for illness and disability unrelated to (proof required) or prior to taking Seroxat will be unscathed by this. With the myriad of side effects now officially listed against Seroxat --and all SSRI / SNRIs-- proving anything wasn't caused by it - will be very difficult. Maybe - with your long standing depression and OA you will be one of the lucky ones.
IS (Income Support) – Housing (HB), Council Tax (CTB) and other means tested benefits will be impacted - because strict Capital limits apply - dependant on the amount awarded - benefit payments would be reduced or stopped.
Claimants would be able to reapply once award money was reduced below those limits - £6,000 before deductions apply. But they would have to prove they had not just spent the money to achieve this.
Even if they could prove what they spent the capital on - there is no guarantee benefits would be reinstated - and if they were - waiting time rules for some benefit payments to restart would be enforced as a new claimant.
Again - only non Seroxat related DLA claimants receiving the care component middle or higher rate would be relatively unscathed - as being in receipt of this - I think - automatically protects HB and CTB.
In reality only those litigants who are totally financially independent will gain anything - and those who rely on benefits will be considerably worse off – unless the individual awards are large enough to secure financial independence and security for life – unlikely for a faulty product claim.
The only other option is to put a total settlement award into a Trust Fund and pay the litigants as and when from that. This – as far as I can ascertain – is Mark Harvey's intended course of action.
I don't think I need to go any further than to draw comparison to the Thalidomide group action and settlement.
Forty years after the first settlements were paid to victims who withdrew negligence claims against Distillers (Biochemicals) Ltd – victims are still struggling to get adequate funding for their needs from the Trust and many victims have received no compensation or financial support.
The only people to really gain have been the lawyers and those employed to oversee the Trust fund.
Unless you -- as I believe are one of the few named litigants in the GSK Seroxat class action – know any different?
Tues
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uksurvivors/message/35528
Bob
Sorry about the delay in finishing these post – my time on the boards has been short this week and the time I did have I prioritised to speak to Sarah about the drugs.
If the MHRA have asked you to come up with a way of helping people get off SSRIs - maybe what I have written to Sarah will be useful – but I should tell you – what I have written is only part of how we get people off the drugs – everyone is different – every withdrawal is different – and the nutritional side plays a big part in controlling symptoms and recovery.
I suspect you thought I wouldn't bother to finish these posts as you've had your meeting with the MHRA – sorry to disappoint you – but your meeting wasn't the only reason I asked the questions, people involved are still wanting answers.
IF the GSK litigation leads to a settlement – I say IF - because Mark Harvey of Hugh James has history of involvement with other drug class actions that have collapsed - before reaching settlement - but after netting considerable funds from the Legal Services Commission (LSC).
But - IF there is a settlement - what will the litigants gain?
We asked this question in 2002 on the Lawyers SeroxatUserGroup (SUG) support forum –
It was obviously considered imperative to the class action, the lawyer and cases credibility for LSC funding - where client numbers count - to keep the answer from the litigants who had and would continue to signed up through the SUG website.
So imperative in fact - when the question didn't go away - the SUG forum and website `owners' response was to move the support board twice to different networks – via "guesting" on another campaigner's forum which suffered as a result.
Because the question still wouldn't go away - the `owner' closed the SUG support forum - although the actual SUG website (meta linked lawyers) is still running.
The Lawyers have never openly answered the question. Neither has the `owner' of the SeroxatUserGroup web site and SeroxatUserGroup support forum - a barrister in her own right.
Derek Scott - owner of the first Seroxat-SeroxatUserGroup now (OSSG) - also liaising with the Lawyers – locked his forum down - allowing only Seroxat affected members and Seroxat related matter to be posted.
They didn't want to tell the litigants that -
If individual lump sums damages are awarded and the recipients are reliant on benefits –
Both IB (Incapacity Benefit) and DLA (Disability Living Allowance) payments will be stopped from the point of award. Previously paid benefits will be subject to the special "Claw Back" provision - whereby any compensation paid for loss of earnings and/or increased care and mobility needs which result in payment of those benefits can be clawed back by the DWP from any award. Whether future DLA claims would be allowed or successful is not known.
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/cru/
Only those granted IB or / and DLA benefits for illness and disability unrelated to (proof required) or prior to taking Seroxat will be unscathed by this. With the myriad of side effects now officially listed against Seroxat --and all SSRI / SNRIs-- proving anything wasn't caused by it - will be very difficult. Maybe - with your long standing depression and OA you will be one of the lucky ones.
IS (Income Support) – Housing (HB), Council Tax (CTB) and other means tested benefits will be impacted - because strict Capital limits apply - dependant on the amount awarded - benefit payments would be reduced or stopped.
Claimants would be able to reapply once award money was reduced below those limits - £6,000 before deductions apply. But they would have to prove they had not just spent the money to achieve this.
Even if they could prove what they spent the capital on - there is no guarantee benefits would be reinstated - and if they were - waiting time rules for some benefit payments to restart would be enforced as a new claimant.
Again - only non Seroxat related DLA claimants receiving the care component middle or higher rate would be relatively unscathed - as being in receipt of this - I think - automatically protects HB and CTB.
In reality only those litigants who are totally financially independent will gain anything - and those who rely on benefits will be considerably worse off – unless the individual awards are large enough to secure financial independence and security for life – unlikely for a faulty product claim.
The only other option is to put a total settlement award into a Trust Fund and pay the litigants as and when from that. This – as far as I can ascertain – is Mark Harvey's intended course of action.
I don't think I need to go any further than to draw comparison to the Thalidomide group action and settlement.
Forty years after the first settlements were paid to victims who withdrew negligence claims against Distillers (Biochemicals) Ltd – victims are still struggling to get adequate funding for their needs from the Trust and many victims have received no compensation or financial support.
The only people to really gain have been the lawyers and those employed to oversee the Trust fund.
Unless you -- as I believe are one of the few named litigants in the GSK Seroxat class action – know any different?
Tues
Friday, 5 September 2008
unemployed Fiddaman "New business venture - personalised poems" in the google cache !!
http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:QM2R8RqAFjcJ:groups.google.com/group/uk.local.surrey/browse_thread/thread/bea41df0cd28838e+fiddy64+For+that+unique+gift+try+a+personalised+poem&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=uk
Personalised Poems Options
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
Standard view View as tree
Proportional text Fixed text
1 message - Collapse all
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
fiddaman64 View profile
More options Apr 5 2005, 4:52 am
Newsgroups: uk.local.surrey
From: "fiddaman64"
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 08:52:25 GMT
Local: Tues, Apr 5 2005 4:52 am
Subject: Personalised Poems
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
For that unique gift try a personalised poem for that special person. New
business venture.
http://fiddy64.tripod.com/
Sorry for spamming your newsgroup
Bob
Personalised Poems Options
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
Standard view View as tree
Proportional text Fixed text
1 message - Collapse all
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
fiddaman64 View profile
More options Apr 5 2005, 4:52 am
Newsgroups: uk.local.surrey
From: "fiddaman64"
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 08:52:25 GMT
Local: Tues, Apr 5 2005 4:52 am
Subject: Personalised Poems
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
For that unique gift try a personalised poem for that special person. New
business venture.
http://fiddy64.tripod.com/
Sorry for spamming your newsgroup
Bob
Fiddaman two holidays in Auz - in google cache
Calling Korean Workers - Glaxo Want to 'Help' You [Archive ...I have saved this past month for my train fare to London. I have been to Australia twice for holidays, totally unrelated to my campaigning. ...
www.antidepressantawareness.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-291.html - 15k - Cached -
www.antidepressantawareness.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-291.html - 15k - Cached -
Fiddaman boasts to a lady "I have been to Australia twice for holidays, totally unrelated to my campaigning"
source -
http://www.antidepressantawareness.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1198#post1198
*********** etc etc -
Have you been to Australia? When you say you are paying your own travel expenses, to where are you travelling? And how do you fund yourself - if that is not too tricky a question????
Curious to know, Lara
__________________
Lara
LARA THOMPSON
View Public Profile
Send a private message to LARA THOMPSON
Find all posts by LARA THOMPSON
#9 08-19-2008, 06:50 AM
fiddy64
Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Birmingham, UK
Posts: 13
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The MHRA are the Medicines regulator here in the UK as the TGA are there in Australia. I have saved this past month for my train fare to London.
I have been to Australia twice for holidays, totally unrelated to my campaigning.You may want to check out the following story too
http://fiddaman.blogspot.com/2007/09...sufferers.html
__________________
Fid
http://fiddaman.blogspot.com
"I think patients have nothing to fear from taking Seroxat".
Dr. Alastair Benbow, GlaxoSmithKline’s European Medical Director 6/13/2002
fiddy64
View Public Profile
Send a private message to fiddy64
Visit fiddy64's homepage!
Find all posts by fiddy64
#10 08-19-2008, 07:09 AM
LARA THOMPSON
Bronze Member Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Elwood, Victoria
Posts: 186
Vested Interests in Research Funding in Australia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fidde and others may be interested in these pages
http://home.vicnet.net.au/~thinkmh/m..._notes%201.htm
etc etc - ****************
http://www.antidepressantawareness.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1198#post1198
*********** etc etc -
Have you been to Australia? When you say you are paying your own travel expenses, to where are you travelling? And how do you fund yourself - if that is not too tricky a question????
Curious to know, Lara
__________________
Lara
LARA THOMPSON
View Public Profile
Send a private message to LARA THOMPSON
Find all posts by LARA THOMPSON
#9 08-19-2008, 06:50 AM
fiddy64
Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Birmingham, UK
Posts: 13
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The MHRA are the Medicines regulator here in the UK as the TGA are there in Australia. I have saved this past month for my train fare to London.
I have been to Australia twice for holidays, totally unrelated to my campaigning.You may want to check out the following story too
http://fiddaman.blogspot.com/2007/09...sufferers.html
__________________
Fid
http://fiddaman.blogspot.com
"I think patients have nothing to fear from taking Seroxat".
Dr. Alastair Benbow, GlaxoSmithKline’s European Medical Director 6/13/2002
fiddy64
View Public Profile
Send a private message to fiddy64
Visit fiddy64's homepage!
Find all posts by fiddy64
#10 08-19-2008, 07:09 AM
LARA THOMPSON
Bronze Member Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Elwood, Victoria
Posts: 186
Vested Interests in Research Funding in Australia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fidde and others may be interested in these pages
http://home.vicnet.net.au/~thinkmh/m..._notes%201.htm
etc etc - ****************
Tuesday, 2 September 2008
Bob Fiddaman Dip.Couns MOC & MSFTR, proprietor of Ballbreaker Records, with his client Arun Bhanot.
Click on image to enlarge-
detail source - https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGWVOqNUhnsBkxEBBV0dPB-LB8RnFtVErl-I7G3x5vJ5ZJaYPLV4oYNx4BNIZoLnmixcdnd61KDbbiTwQGJzZpwn8nbLGuo5q8YtY3fdPd0-gCruL3HNrMfOLiIv8_Pm3MJ93zwAJwGJA/s1600-h/arun+fid.jpg
from Arun Bhanot blogspot
http://arunbhanot.blogspot.com/2008/04/arun-bhanot.html
not much wrong with Fiddaman who runs Ballbreaker Records.
http://www.thefutureisdigital.co.uk/digital/img_big/donnasman_ARUN_BHANOT_aruncover.jpg
Pertinent questions on UKsurvivors (see post 35278)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uksurvivors/message/35278Re: A message for Bob Fiddaman
Post 1
**********
--- In uksurvivors@yahoogroups.com, "Bob" wrote:
>"......
>
> On this issue of Seroxat Tub whatever...
>
> I write about Seroxat, I have a meeting because I requested a meeting.
> What is your issue with this?
>
> I do not know enough about Efexor or any other SSRi apart from Seroxat.
>
> If you or 'Tuesday' have a grip about other SSRi's why don't you do
> something constructive and start campaigning instead of slagging off
> other campaigners.
>
>......."
Bob
The issue with the meeting is that you have the opportunity to actually achieve a great deal - IF - you don't do what they are expecting you to do – which is bang on about Seroxat.
If preparing for your meeting with the MHRA is trawling through archives - like the lists of Seroxat/Paxil articles and statement you copied from PaxilProgress onto your Blog - without giving the author/owner open credit - is anything to go by.
It would appear you have nothing new to present to the MHRA!
The lists lead article declaring "Antidepressant Seroxat tops table of drug withdrawal symptoms" – is impressive - unless you know it was written by Sarah Boseley, health editor of The Guardian in July 2002 –
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/2002/jul/27/uknews
at the height of Mark Harvey and GoodRelations "shaking the tree" - publicising the problems with Seroxat to those taking it and shocking GP's (always litigation wary) into actually reporting Seroxat side effects on the Yellow Card (YC) Adverse Reaction report system.
The resulting increase in YC registered complaints about Seroxat - only served to distort total adverse drug reaction (ADR) report figures. Ensuring they were even less accurate than they were/are – due to its voluntary status and many GPs complacency in using it.
The MHRA - already know all the issues you will raise – have all their answers and reply's off pat – you are the easy option – straightforward, uncomplicated, minimum effort for maximum coverage …
the lawyers PR Co. will make sure it's covered by the media, and you will go away and crow about your `meeting', all over the internet – good or bad - they won't be bothered! They have been seen to do the right thing - again.
They can put the file away – no doubt hoping the GSK Seroxat litigation reaches conclusion - before they need to see anyone else who wants to discuss what is now undeniably - a very well aired and publicised issue.
As I said earlier the MHRA are playing with you – by seeing you – THEY are being seen to listen and be doing something on the SSRI/SNRI issue and can ignore what is really happening!!
It's a rerun of the tobacco litigation!
The regulators, government, the industry and the lawyers colluded behind the scenes – work out a deal that show's positive action taken - whilst encompassing damage limitation to all parties involved … with one exception –
the tobacco product users they had allowed to become hooked since the product was shown to cause illness and death.
All tobacco products now carry a warning box too. The government and regulators took action - whilst protecting the industry they rely on for considerable revenue - the lawyers made a fortune – result – even though a tad dented - business as usual.
In all honesty Bob – apart from hopefully getting to the court steps, obviously wanting to see GSK nailed - where do you see the campaign going from here?
Tues
Post 1
**********
--- In uksurvivors@yahoogroups.com, "Bob"
>"......
>
> On this issue of Seroxat Tub whatever...
>
> I write about Seroxat, I have a meeting because I requested a meeting.
> What is your issue with this?
>
> I do not know enough about Efexor or any other SSRi apart from Seroxat.
>
> If you or 'Tuesday' have a grip about other SSRi's why don't you do
> something constructive and start campaigning instead of slagging off
> other campaigners.
>
>......."
Bob
The issue with the meeting is that you have the opportunity to actually achieve a great deal - IF - you don't do what they are expecting you to do – which is bang on about Seroxat.
If preparing for your meeting with the MHRA is trawling through archives - like the lists of Seroxat/Paxil articles and statement you copied from PaxilProgress onto your Blog - without giving the author/owner open credit - is anything to go by.
It would appear you have nothing new to present to the MHRA!
The lists lead article declaring "Antidepressant Seroxat tops table of drug withdrawal symptoms" – is impressive - unless you know it was written by Sarah Boseley, health editor of The Guardian in July 2002 –
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/2002/jul/27/uknews
at the height of Mark Harvey and GoodRelations "shaking the tree" - publicising the problems with Seroxat to those taking it and shocking GP's (always litigation wary) into actually reporting Seroxat side effects on the Yellow Card (YC) Adverse Reaction report system.
The resulting increase in YC registered complaints about Seroxat - only served to distort total adverse drug reaction (ADR) report figures. Ensuring they were even less accurate than they were/are – due to its voluntary status and many GPs complacency in using it.
The MHRA - already know all the issues you will raise – have all their answers and reply's off pat – you are the easy option – straightforward, uncomplicated, minimum effort for maximum coverage …
the lawyers PR Co. will make sure it's covered by the media, and you will go away and crow about your `meeting', all over the internet – good or bad - they won't be bothered! They have been seen to do the right thing - again.
They can put the file away – no doubt hoping the GSK Seroxat litigation reaches conclusion - before they need to see anyone else who wants to discuss what is now undeniably - a very well aired and publicised issue.
As I said earlier the MHRA are playing with you – by seeing you – THEY are being seen to listen and be doing something on the SSRI/SNRI issue and can ignore what is really happening!!
It's a rerun of the tobacco litigation!
The regulators, government, the industry and the lawyers colluded behind the scenes – work out a deal that show's positive action taken - whilst encompassing damage limitation to all parties involved … with one exception –
the tobacco product users they had allowed to become hooked since the product was shown to cause illness and death.
All tobacco products now carry a warning box too. The government and regulators took action - whilst protecting the industry they rely on for considerable revenue - the lawyers made a fortune – result – even though a tad dented - business as usual.
In all honesty Bob – apart from hopefully getting to the court steps, obviously wanting to see GSK nailed - where do you see the campaign going from here?
Tues
back to the questions Fiddaman refuses to answer on open board UKsurvivors (see post 35277)
Re: A message for Bob Fiddaman
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uksurvivors/message/35277
--- In uksurvivors@yahoogroups.com, "Bob" wrote:
>".......
>
> On this issue of Seroxat Tub whatever...
>
> I write about Seroxat, I have a meeting because I requested a meeting.
> What is your issue with this?
>
> I do not know enough about Efexor or any other SSRi apart from Seroxat.
>
> If you or 'Tuesday' have a grip about other SSRi's why don't you do
> something constructive and start campaigning instead of slagging off
> other campaigners.
>
> ........"
Bob
Thank you for replying to my second question with frank and honest answers.
Although - I am wondering why you don't/won't actually respond directly to me?
Is it because –
1 If you do – you're acknowledging that `Tuesday' does exist - and that would void your insinuations that I'm Jeremy's "alter ego" –
or
2 That you really do believe that I am a figment of his imagination?
Or perhaps there's another – more significant reason to avoid/delay answering my questions and for choosing not to disseminate my posts across the internet?
Because the complexities of the "`issue' with this" does not lend itself to short sentences answers without explanation - to necessitate clear understanding and for the benefit of those who don't know the history – I will reply in several posts.
I also feel another extremely long post about Seroxat/you on the internet wouldn't be fair on the lurkers and members here on uksurvivors – to whom I again apologise for continuing this thread.
Also before I continue I would like say that the following posts are not intended as an attack on you Bob or other `fellow campaigners' or the litigation and those involved.
It's merely observations made from the periphery as the campaign started, has unfolded and progressed - and questions that have arisen from those observations.
Some, possibly won't be comfortable reading for those involved – but hopefully you will take is as constructive insofar as the Seroxat campaign seems to be grinding to a halt – the 'Aims of the Group' – 6 years down the line no nearer fruition that when written.
Apart from the Seroxat Blogs, and the lawyer or SUG website using the litigants own stories, leaking them out about one a month to keep coverage - there is no media interest. Other than possibly making it to the court steps – the campaign seems to have nowhere to go - unless you/they change tack and widen the issue.
Tues
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uksurvivors/message/35277
--- In uksurvivors@yahoogroups.com, "Bob"
>".......
>
> On this issue of Seroxat Tub whatever...
>
> I write about Seroxat, I have a meeting because I requested a meeting.
> What is your issue with this?
>
> I do not know enough about Efexor or any other SSRi apart from Seroxat.
>
> If you or 'Tuesday' have a grip about other SSRi's why don't you do
> something constructive and start campaigning instead of slagging off
> other campaigners.
>
> ........"
Bob
Thank you for replying to my second question with frank and honest answers.
Although - I am wondering why you don't/won't actually respond directly to me?
Is it because –
1 If you do – you're acknowledging that `Tuesday' does exist - and that would void your insinuations that I'm Jeremy's "alter ego" –
or
2 That you really do believe that I am a figment of his imagination?
Or perhaps there's another – more significant reason to avoid/delay answering my questions and for choosing not to disseminate my posts across the internet?
Because the complexities of the "`issue' with this" does not lend itself to short sentences answers without explanation - to necessitate clear understanding and for the benefit of those who don't know the history – I will reply in several posts.
I also feel another extremely long post about Seroxat/you on the internet wouldn't be fair on the lurkers and members here on uksurvivors – to whom I again apologise for continuing this thread.
Also before I continue I would like say that the following posts are not intended as an attack on you Bob or other `fellow campaigners' or the litigation and those involved.
It's merely observations made from the periphery as the campaign started, has unfolded and progressed - and questions that have arisen from those observations.
Some, possibly won't be comfortable reading for those involved – but hopefully you will take is as constructive insofar as the Seroxat campaign seems to be grinding to a halt – the 'Aims of the Group' – 6 years down the line no nearer fruition that when written.
Apart from the Seroxat Blogs, and the lawyer or SUG website using the litigants own stories, leaking them out about one a month to keep coverage - there is no media interest. Other than possibly making it to the court steps – the campaign seems to have nowhere to go - unless you/they change tack and widen the issue.
Tues
'Cause nothing compares ... Nothing compares to you ... Bob
It's been seven hours and fifteen days
Since you took your love away
I go out every night and sleep all day
Since you took your love away
Since you been gone I can do whatever I want
I can see whomever I choose
I can eat my dinner in a fancy restaurant
But nothing ...
I said nothing can take away these blues,
'Cause nothing compares ...
Nothing compares to you
It's been so lonely without you here
Like a bird without a song
Nothing can stop these lonely tears from falling
Tell me baby where did I go wrong?
I could put my arms around every boy I see
But they'd only remind me of you
went to the doctor guess what he told me
Guess what he told me?
He said, girl, you better have fun
No matter what you do
But he's a fool ...
'Cause nothing compares ...
Nothing compares to you ...
All the flowers that you planted, mama
In the back yard
All died when you went away
I know that living with you baby was sometimes hard
But I'm willing to give it another try
'Cause nothing compares ...
Nothing compares to you
Monday, 1 September 2008
You walked into the party
Like you were walking onto a yacht
Your hat strategically dipped below one eye
Your scarf it was apricot
You had one eye in the mirror
As you watched yourself gavotte
And all the girls dreamed that they'd be your partner
They'd be your partner, and
You're so vain
You probably think this song is about you
You're so vain
I'll bet you think this song is about you
Don't you? Don't you?
You had me several years ago
When I was still quite naive
Well, you said that we made such a pretty pair
And that you would never leave
But you gave away the things you loved
And one of them was me
I had some dreams they were clouds in my coffee
Clouds in my coffee, and
You're so vain
You probably think this song is about you
You're so vain
I'll bet you think this song is about you
Don't you? Don't you?
I had some dreams they were clouds in my coffee
Clouds in my coffee, and
You're so vain
You probably think this song is about you
You're so vain
I'll bet you think this song is about you
Don't you? Don't you?
Well, I hear you went up to Saratoga
And your horse naturally won
Then you flew your Lear jet up to Nova Scotia
To see the total eclipse of the sun
Well, you're where you should be all the time
And when you're not, you're with
Some underworld spy or the wife of a close friend
Wife of a close friend, and
You're so vain
You probably think this song is about you
You're so vain
I'll bet you think this song is about you
Don't you? Don't you?
"nobody could tell me how to slowly taper "- BOLLOCKS Serox O'Prat Fiddaman was given advice on O.S.S.G & Network54
A few months went by and my GP had prescribed me the liquid form of Seroxat, a sickly orange liquid administered with an oral syringe. As I recall, I think I had told him that I wanted [needed] to come off Seroxat as it was making my life a complete misery. I think I had tried tapering by halving the tablets or taking one instead of two. It's all quite blurry. Basically, I had no guidance, nobody could tell me how to slowly taper and what programme to follow. The manufacturer [GSK] offered no guidance on the patient information leaflet, I think the only guidance they offer to day is that 'you must taper slowly' or words to that effect.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)