They removed it after myself & lots of friends had lots to say about it. They couldn’t delete our comments (truth) quick enough so removed the post altogether. That’s guilt for you
-
-
The crowd funding was initiated for the GMC challenge, not the trial and GNM conviction. And the Court of Appeal overturned...clearly there were grounds for the challenge and the premises of the crowdfunding. Yet continued dubiety about why GNM conviction so contentious...?
-
I may be wrong, but I think several people expected that fund to be used to appeal her conviction. I'm not familiar, but the court of appeal judgement struck me as being a technical decision, based upon whether it's right for the High Court to replace a tribunal decision.
-
What they didn't do was address the question as to whether MPTS was right to assume public confidence in the medical profession was unaffected by allowing
#BawaGarba to continue as a doctor. They just ruled MPTS have the right to decide. Public opinion remains untested, imho.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
An evidence based profession making sweeping statements and dangerous assumptions based on little evidence. Very worrying.
-
Very, I agree. Has far broader implications for confidence in the medical profession, imho.
-
You haven’t even finished reading the transcripts (and do you even have any of the other relevant reports such as SUI and coroners reports) and you‘re throwing accusations re: ‘evidence-based‘ and implications for medical practice around? -
That‘s direct evidence of pre-exeisting bias. You‘ve made up your mind & are now trawling court transcripts for ‘evidence’ to support your argument...that‘s called positive bias, and is dangerous. I don’t give a rodent’s derrière what you come up with now.
-
Oh sod off Cathy. I'm not in the mood.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.