Report to the Minister for Health and Children: Independent Examination related to the Medical Council and South-Eastern Health Board (Dr John Harding Price)

The Minister for Health and Children has requested that an independent review be carried out of the circumstances surrounding the employment of a UK based Consultant Psychiatrist, Dr John Harding-Price, to a locum psychiatrist position with the South Eastern Health Board (SEHB) while he was suspended by the General Medical Council (GMC) in the United Kingdom and consequently the subject of legal proceedings by the Medical Council in Ireland. The Consultant was continuously registered with the Medical Council since 1968. Download the document here

John Fitzgerald Letter

John Fitzgerald Letter Click here to download PDF 39kb

Methadone maintenance treatment and St. John's Wort - a case report.

St. John's wort, a popular over-the-counter drug for treatment of depression, might reduce concentrations of drugs such as cyclosporin and indinavir and lead to drug resistance and treatment failure. No studies as yet have examined its influence on methadone plasma levels. The trough methadone plasma levels were measured in four patients (2 males, median age: 31 years; range 19 - 40 years) in methadone maintenance treatment just before the introduction of St. John's wort (900 mg/d) and after a median period of 31-day treatment (range 14 - 47). The study was proposed to addict patients about to start an antidepressant therapy. Introduction of St. John's wort resulted in a strong reduction of (R,S)-methadone concentration-to-dose ratios in the four median patients included, with a median decrease to 47 % of the original concentration (range: 19 % - 60 % of the original concentration). Two patients reported symptoms that suggested a withdrawal syndrome. Thus, prescription of St. John's wort might decrease methadone blood levels and induce withdrawal symptoms which, if not correctly identified and handled (by changing the antidepressant or by increasing the methadone dose), might cause unnecessary discomfort to the patient, lead to resumption of illicit drug uses, or be a risk factor for discontinuation of the methadone or antidepressant treatment.

Why Public Health Agencies Cannot Depend on Good Laboratory Practices as a Criterion for Selecting Data: The Case of Bisphenol A

In their safety evaluations of bisphenol A (BPA), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and a counterpart in Europe, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), have given special prominence to two industry-funded studies that adhered to standards defined by Good Laboratory Practices (GLP). These same agencies have given much less weight in risk assessments to a large number of independently replicated non-GLP studies conducted with government funding by the leading experts in various fields of science from around the world. OBJECTIVES: We reviewed differences between industry-funded GLP studies of BPA conducted by commercial laboratories for regulatory purposes and non-GLP studies conducted in academic and government laboratories to identify hazards and molecular mechanisms mediating adverse effects. We examined the methods and results in the GLP studies that were pivotal in the draft decision of the U.S. FDA declaring BPA safe in relation to findings from studies that were competitive for U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding, peer-reviewed for publication in leading journals, subject to independent replication, but rejected by the U.S. FDA for regulatory purposes. DISCUSSION: Although the U.S. FDA and EFSA have deemed two industry-funded GLP studies of BPA to be superior to hundreds of studies funded by the U.S. NIH and NIH counterparts in other countries, the GLP studies on which the agencies based their decisions have serious conceptual and methodologic flaws. In addition, the U.S. FDA and EFSA have mistakenly assumed that GLP yields valid and reliable scientific findings (i.e., "good science"). Their rationale for favoring GLP studies over hundreds of publically funded studies ignores the central factor in determining the reliability and validity of scientific findings, namely, independent replication, and use of the most appropriate and sensitive state-of-the-art assays, neither of which is an expectation of industry-funded GLP research. CONCLUSIONS: Public health decisions should be based on studies using appropriate protocols with appropriate controls and the most sensitive assays, not GLP. Relevant NIH-funded research using state-of-the-art techniques should play a prominent role in safety evaluations of chemicals.

Select works of the emperor Julian, and some pieces of the sophist Libanius, translated from the Greek, with notes from Petau, La Bleterie, Gibbon, etc., to which is added the History of the emperor Jovian from the French of the abbé de La Bleterie, by John Duncombe...

Comprend : The History of the emperor Jovien