Dr Andrew John WRIGHT
GMC Reference Number: 2825184
Area of practice: Lancashire
Planned dates: 17 October to 25 November 2011
St James’s Building, 79 Oxford Street, Manchester, M1 6FQ
The Fitness to Practise Panel will meet at St James’s Building, 79 Oxford Street, Manchester, M1 6FQ to consider a new case of impairment by reason of misconduct.
The Panel will inquire into the allegation that between 2003 and 2006, Dr Wright, a General Practitioner, ran a private practice specialising in the management of fatigue disorders. It is alleged that Dr Wright instructed the Bowen Research and Training Institute, Florida, to test samples of six patients’ blood despite the Institute not being licensed for clinical laboratory testing. It is also alleged that in respect of a number of patients Dr Wright made diagnoses which were based upon inadequate evidence and subsequently initiated treatment.
The above reflects the allegation as it stands at the start of the hearing. The allegation may be amended as the hearing proceeds and when findings of fact are made by the Panel. If you require up to date information regarding the allegation throughout the course of the hearing, please contact the GMC’s Press Office.
In accordance with Rule 41(2) of the General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules 2004, the Panel may decide to exclude the public from the proceedings or any part of the proceedings, where they consider that the circumstances of the case outweigh the public interest in holding the hearing in public.
There has been a concerted effort by our HPA to take out any doctor that dares to diagnose or treat patients for Chronic Lyme Disease regardless of whether patients have benefited from that treatment.
D of H reply to me recently ‘The Department is well aware of certain medical practitioners in the UK whose diagnosis and inappropriate treatment for Lyme disease puts patients at risk.’ Seems to me decisions were made even before these doctors come before a GMC hearing.
I was one of the fortunate patients who was given a clinical diagnosis of Lyme Disease (not by AW) and treated on long term antibiotics in line with International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society. I have recovered from painful debilitating arthritis and muscle weakness which was initially diagnosed as Fibromyalgia and then ME/CFS and later Polymyalgia Rheumatica until a chance course of antibiotics led to significant improvements. I was retired early on the grounds of ill health from the Civil Service but now I have my health and my life, with no pain and no disability.
Our Health Authorities are disregarding the wealth of research that shows this illness like other Borrelia to be a relapsing remitting illness capable of evading our immune system and short courses of antibiotic treatment. Visit the ILADS website for more information and Lyme Disease Action Website for information related especially to us here in the UK.
Last year the Institute of Medicine held a workshop on Lyme Disease and other tick borne illnesses their findings ‘Significant Gaps Remain In Understanding of Lyme Disease.’
Dr S O’Connell presented at that workshop and her presentation is still available to watch and listen to on their website. Dr O’Connell says in her presentation ‘we all agree we need improved diagnostic tests for all the tick-borne diseases.’
Current NHS tests for Lyme Disease can, according to some research, miss 50% of cases, they are antibody tests and the makers of those test kits used by our NHS – Trinity Biotech says that a ‘Negative results (either first or second-tier) should not be used to exclude Lyme disease.’
Dr O’Connell reported our doctors specialising in treating patients with Lyme Disease to the GMC, she will be called as the ‘expert’ witness, she is very well aware of the controversy that shows this disease to be far more complex than HPA accept following the restrictive and discredited IDSA guidelines.
At the IDSA review hearing the final report threw out any research that was done in Europe for the reason that in Europe we have several different species of Borrelia than in the USA, because they presented differently and had different illness patterns – information can be found on LDA website. We need clinical guidelines that are appropriate for us here in the UK.
For further reading see ILADS website for presentations given to IDSA review hearing in particular Steven Phillips presentation of 25 studies on seronegativity and persistent infection on 18 occasions the authors of the IDSA contested guidelines were involved in those studies and yet chose to ignore them in their restricted guidelines.
The GMC are being mislead into thinking they just have a bunch of wayward doctors out to make a fast buck- in reality we will find one day that they are very courageous doctors realising that this is the biggest medical disgrace of all time and struggling against all odds to find ways to help their patients get better and get their lives back.
We don’t know all the answers and they will be the first to acknowledge that, but we do know that some of us do respond well to long term antibiotic treatment.
If those denying this disease in it’s Chronic form would put as much effort into looking at the thousands of research papers (over 19000) then science could move on and make a significant contribution in helping patients who have an antibiotic responsive illness following a tick bite.
I hope others will comment on the ME Associations website and tell it as it is for patients with chronic Lyme Disease. here
My further post to ME association
ReplyDeleteI wasn't sure if I was allowed to post links on this forum but see that others have on comments on other posts. so related to my previous comment.
Lyme Disease Action website www.lymediseaseaction.org.uk
on the IDSA review findings
http://www.lymediseaseaction.org.uk/press-releases/lyme-disease-hiding-behind-the-panel/
International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society
http://www.ilads.org/
presentations to IDSA review hearings including Steven Phillips
http://www.ilads.org/lyme_disease/lyme_slides.html
Institute of Medicine Workshop
http://www.tvworldwide.com/events/iom/101011/
A good summary of the IOM report is on Nat Cap Lyme
http://www.natcaplyme.org/press-releases/iom-report-significant-gaps-remain-in-understanding-of-lyme-disease.html
There have been studies on patients with ME/CFS and Lyme here is one by an infectious diseases doctor Sam Donta.
http://www.iacfsme.org/BULLETINWINTER2011/Winter2011ShorCFSinLyme109123/tabid/458/Default.aspx
This is just a fraction of what is being ignored by our Department of Health.
all the above information can be found through this blog.
"It is also alleged that in respect of a number of patients Dr Wright made diagnoses which were based upon inadequate evidence and subsequently initiated treatment."
ReplyDeleteYes, but what was the outcome of treatment? Did patients improve? Did they return to their previous health? Are they even investigating therapeutic outcomes or just looking at which lab he used and clinical diagnosis vs. test-based diagnosis? There are a number of medical conditions which are diagnosed by a process of elimination and there are no objective tests for them. Yet there's less or no controversy over them.
"Dr O’Connell says in her presentation ‘we all agree we need improved diagnostic tests for all the tick-borne diseases.’
Current NHS tests for Lyme Disease can, according to some research, miss 50% of cases, they are antibody tests and the makers of those test kits used by our NHS – Trinity Biotech says that a ‘Negative results (either first or second-tier) should not be used to exclude Lyme disease.’"
I think that it's particularly crucial to note that early test results after a known tick bite are unreliable and even the IDSA itself says this. Dr. O'Connell knows this. But she might not agree about the lack of reliability of testing in late stage cases - which is problematic, and the area where chronic Lyme begins to become an issue.
"At the IDSA review hearing the final report threw out any research that was done in Europe for the reason that in Europe we have several different species of Borrelia than in the USA, because they presented differently and had different illness patterns – information can be found on LDA website. We need clinical guidelines that are appropriate for us here in the UK."
No one should throw out any of this research for either region. It needs to be cross-correlated, and over time more closely examined because there is evidence migrating birds are spreading strains and it's not even clear where entirely as funding for surveillance has been cut and in some areas, cut dramatically.
At the Institute of Medicine workshop last October, one thing was mentioned that was notable regarding the differences in strains: People who left the UK and went to the US on holiday and came back to the UK were equally as likely to have suffered from neuroborreliosis as those who stayed at home and contracted Lyme disease from the European-based strains. Even Dr. Benach has written that the literature has overemphasized that European Lyme disease = neuroborreliosis and American Lyme disease = Lyme arthritis.
I understand the desire to have different guidelines for Europe because there are different clusters of symptom presentation for different strains. However, I am concerned that this ongoing labeling of "European Lyme disease causes neurological symptoms and American Lyme disease only causes arthritis" has been a problem for American patients in getting proper diagnosis and treatment.
So somehow, everyone's need for better diagnosis and treatment on both sides of the Atlantic must be addressed.