I have not been able to establish what is meant by the claim that CCSVI is recognised as a medical condition by 46 countries. I believe there are half a dozen or so countries where you can have Liberation done privately and one, Kuwait, where it is available more widely. But certainly CCSVI is not recognised as a condition by the authorities in the UK.
Dear Mr Sullivan
Thank you for your comments. I am sorry you were disappointed with your programme. I am happy to address your concerns.
I am not aware of any independent research which has reproduced Zamboni’s findings. I am, however, aware of research which has questioned and contradicted it. The experts I have spoken to say it is therefore too early to say CCSVI/Liberation is “verified by real science” as you suggest; they say such verification would take many more years of scientific research.
Regarding unpublished research you appear to refer to, I am sure you will agree it is not wise to rely or comment on research before it has been peer-reviewed and published in a reputable scientific journal.
I do not believe it is possible to say how many people have had Liberation since there is no official tally. I do not agree that the involvement of large numbers of people automatically confers legitimacy on any belief or treatment.
There was no “journalistic fakery” about our Egypt filming. Dr Tariq did not wish to be filmed operating because he is not licensed to practice medicine in Egypt. Doctors practising unlicensed in Egypt can be jailed. Your suggestion that Egypt would gratefully accept such behaviour is most surprising.
Dr Gilhooly, the Essential Health surgeon Mr Donald Reid and the sonographer Mr Vic Fernando were offered several opportunities to do a pre-arranged interview for our programme and explain why they thought the procedure was appropriate and worthwhile. Dr Gilhooly declined; Mr Fernando and Mr Reid did not personally respond to our invitation. Since Dr Gilhooly is promoting and charging for an unproven procedure, which is prohibited by the NHS, and refused to answer our questions about it, we felt it was appropriate to approach him directly. The decision to do this was made in accordance with the BBC’s editorial guidelines and procedures. Even at that stage he could have declined to answer; it was his decision to engage in an interview at that point.
Thank you once again for your comments and if I can help you any further please don’t hesitate to get in touch.
NB This is sent from an outgoing account only which is not monitored. You cannot reply to this email address but if necessary please contact us via our webform quoting any case number we provided.
AMcG wrote:What I think we should do is send her very thorough and detailed crits of her show in as gentle and considerate a tone as possible but dealing with all her misconceptions.
She offers to respond to further correspondence so let's give her it. Lots of it.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users