Medial Ultrasex

May 3, 2021


Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , ,

first_imgAn Oxford doctor used hospital equipment to enhance his love life, the General Medical Council heard this week. Jane Sullivan, representing the GMC, told the professional conduct committee hearing that Euan Laird began an affair with a woman, who was only identified as Mrs N, in 1991. The couple had sex on a number of occasions at hospital premises. The hearing was informed that Laird used the ultrasound scanning machine at the Horton Hospital in Banbury for his own “sexual gratification”. Laird, who was senior house officer in obstetrics and gynaecology at the John Radcliffe Hospital when the relationship began, is accused of “abusing” his professional position, unnecessarily performing smear tests and other intimate examinations on the patient. The relationship continued for a number of years before Mrs N “began to find the nature of his desire invasive and for that and other reasons stopped seeing him in 1997.” Laird was not present or represented at the hearing but is aware that it is taking place. Sullivan said that Laird, who became a consultant during the affair, denied the allegations: “Not only did he say he had had no dealings with her at the time, he denies, and continues to deny emotional or sexual relationship with her, saying that their relationship was a strictly professional doctor-patient relationship”. The hearing continues. Two weeks ago, Cherwell reported that a Queen’s College lecturer, Doctor Henk Giele, had allegedly been conducting a sexual affair with one of his patients at the JR hospital. His case has been adjourned until December. The GMC are unable to comment on either case since both are ongoing.ARCHIVE: 5th week TT 2004last_img read more

Consultation outcome: Cost effectiveness methodology for vaccination programmes

April 20, 2021


Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , ,

first_imgBetween 26 February 2018 and 28 June 2018, the government ran a consultation on the recommendations by the Cost-Effectiveness Methodology for Immunisation Programmes and Procurement (CEMIPP) group.The independent CEMIPP group was set up by the then Department of Health to consider whether the method for appraising the cost-effectiveness of vaccination programmes should change.The outcome document provides a summary of the consultation responses and sets out the government’s response to the CEMIPP group’s recommendations.,The report sets out recommendations from the independent CEMIPP group that was set up by the government to consider whether the method for appraising cost effectiveness of vaccination programmes should change.We are looking for views from organisations and committees that appraise cost effectiveness within the health and care sector, as well as specialists with an interest in health economics, including: To allow respondents time to review this additional document we have also extended the deadline by 6 weeks.Please use the link above for more information on submitting a response. health economists based in academia public health practitioners epidemiologists charities and patient groups clinicians and vaccine industry professionals Update 17 MayIn response to feedback received so far, we have published additional information (‘Cost effectiveness methodology for immunisation programmes and procurement report: a lay explanation’), which explains in more simple terms: what the main recommendations in the CEMIPP report are what they could mean for different vaccination programmeslast_img read more