Review of Medicines Act 1968: Informal consultation on issues relating to the product licences of right (PLR) regime and homeopathy
There was an invitation to respond to this consultation. Here's the email I sent:
--
Professor David Curtis
Consultant and Honorary Professor in Psychiatry
Dept Adult Psychiatry
3rd Floor Outpatient Building
Royal London Hospital
Hi.
This whole project is lunacy. Why are you wasting tax-payers money on it? Why don’t you waste your time licensing sunlight and lettuce?
Even thinking about thinking about licenses for homeopathy is an insult to every hard-working NHS professional trying to alleviate people’s suffering using evidence-based practice. Anybody involved in such an endeavour should go take a long hard look at themselves in the bathroom mirror and then flush themselves down the toilet.
There, that’s what I think.
Regards
- Dave Curtis
Professor David Curtis
Consultant and Honorary Professor in Psychiatry
Dept Adult Psychiatry
3rd Floor Outpatient Building
Royal London Hospital
Ha! Strikes just the right tone of increduloous fury!
ReplyDeleteSuccinct, accurate and to the point!
ReplyDeleteExcellent.
They aren't wasting taxpayers' money. The MHRA say that the regulation of homeopathic remedies is funded entirely by registration fees. Not sure I believe that.
ReplyDeleteThe MHRA's proposals would generate considerable revenue. Homeopathic remedies with PLRs would need to be re-registered. This will cost the homeopathic pharmacies money. It may well be the case that the costs are too great to justify rarely sold remedies being re-registered. Some products might come off the market.
But the MHRA say they would 'not charge the normal fees' (paragraph 14 of the consultation document).
ReplyDeleteIt seems highly unlikely that the whole of the National Rules scheme has been paid for by their one successful application!
Terrific email. Hope there are loads more like it.
ReplyDeleteExcellent.
ReplyDelete