In February 2014, the Independent, revealed, a leaked report, that showed, NHS bosses, allowed, the world’s biggest drugs firms’ lobbying company, to draft a report, shaping, future health policy.
62 Tory MPs have links with private health, many with pharmaceutical companies.
With 200 parliamentarians elected, and non elected, with private interests in private health companies.
Pharma, is our third largest industry, main booster of economy, and, the power house, of our new, privatised NHS.
And, a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, effectively,allows private corporations, to dictate our laws, and remain unaccountable.
We must, therefore realise that, despite, expensive altruistic PR, healthcare, is now, driven, mainly, by profit.
And, dangerous to the public.
We are bombarded with cures, and tests, for cancer, Alzheimer’s, autism, self- harm, PMT, anxiety, depression, shyness.
The Emperor’s Clothes of preventative medicine is the future.
‘Addiction’, is now a mental disease.
All ‘socially unacceptable’ behaviour has, potentially, a future chemical ‘cure’, and, is a future income earner.
Universities now have faculties of ‘Community Medicine’.
Autism, is a godsend, as no one knows, what it is.
Its symptoms, and, mismanagement, and push to help the ‘disabled’s mental health.
Has allowed, the diagnosis, of a plethora of different mental disorders, ADH, OCD, depression, anxiety, psychosis, self- harm.
All, in need of a, different ‘magic bullet’.
But, not only, are the MCA ‘incapable’, voiceless, permanent, forced consumers, of any drug.
They are also, the perfect ‘subjects’, to use, if you want, favourable drug trials.
And such trials, are essential, to create new magic bullets, to sell to GPs, and the NHS.
The statutory ‘incapable’, are both impotent, and, encaged.
So trials, can be strictly controlled, in favour of the outcomes, the pharma industry need.
How can the incapable, communicate side effects ?
Particularly, as they are deemed, unable to retain information, and, effectively insentient.
The pharmaceutical company, then finance, publication of these trials, in journals, and conferences.
Incapables’ consent, to such a clinical trial, can be given by a legal representative, by The Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations, 2004.
A legal representative, is a person,’ who is suitable to act as a legal representative’
So likely, to be an official solicitor, and, not a relative WHO hAS only consultation rights in best interests decisions ie no right to take part in them..
The only safeguard is, that they, must not be’ involved’, in the actual conduct of the trial.
What constitutes ‘involvement’?, and would this not cause a conflict of interests?.
Drug trials involving adults, who lack capacity in Scotland, a legal representative, is any guardian, or welfare attorney, who has power to consent, or the adult’s nearest relative.
But, in England and Wales, were the Mental Capacity Act operates, the Court of Protection, override Lasting Powers of Attorney, and Deputyships.
And the court or, a doctor, not connected with the conduct of the trial, but, who is responsible for the medical treatment of the adult.
(an on message GP, for private state care provision, profiting from prescriptions and pharma perks), or,
‘a person nominated by the relevant healthcare provider’ (anyone), can be approached.
Not only are the incapables, invaluable, for drug trials, they are also,the perfect lab rats.
As they can legally, be used for any research, the list in the The Mental Capacity Act Rules, being non-exhaustive, social, psychological, physical, therapeutic
If an ‘appropriate body’ (normally a state funded Research Ethics Committee), agrees;
that the research is safe, relates to the ‘person’s condition’.
How could this ‘condition’ be ascertained, for autism/learning disabled?
and cannot be done as effectively using people who have mental capacity,
‘why not ?.
The research must produce a benefit to the person that outweighs any risk or burden.
How can any benefit/risk, be weighed, before the research into it is done?
And how, can these be weighed, in the subjective, ephemeral world of autistic/ learning disabled ?
if the research is to derive new scientific knowledge, it must be of minimal risk to the person, and be carried out with minimal intrusion or interference with their rights.
What is deemed ‘minimal’ ?
And, who oversees the Research Ethics Committee?
Carers, (will not be relatives, as the incapables, are all now in state care, but, those dependent upon the state for their income ), or
nominated third parties must be consulted and agree that the person would want to join an approved research project.
How could they possibly know this, if a person is incapable, indeed, how could anyone judge this, objectively?
If the person shows any signs of resistance, or indicates in any way that he or she does not wish to take part, the person must be withdrawn from the project immediately
How could they, when any non-compliant behaviour, is deemed part of their mental incapacity, and in any event, they have been deemed incapable of any objection and any resistance, can be avoided by medication.