I received no replies to my last two emails, however, I did receive two read receipts for each so presume that Mr Gregor and M-s Smith both read them, the receipts can be published if anyone wants to see them; as I did not receive any guidance from the MHRA with regard redactions the emails have been published in tact other than redaction of my details.
I will answer the hovering question - “why redact my details?”
Quite simply I don’t see the need for them to be there, if a question or issue is raised that is pertinent and of concern to the wellbeing of the whole population – who asks that question or raises that issue is immaterial - as long as they're asked and raised.
_
Also - I have no vested interest for personal or financial gain in collecting or disclosing facts and information.
I did not become involved with the prescription drug boards or any other issue for self promotion – something another person involved just can’t seem to get their head round.
Although from what has transpired since I published my first Blog “Tuesday1st UK: SSRI / SNRI Antidepressant Statistical Politics” and my name was brought into the MHRA PPES arena - his 'need' to know personal details is blatantly nothing to do with the subjects raised.
Now the informal correspondence between Mr Gregor and myself have been published,
_
once Mr Gregor is back in office I intend, on a more formal footing, to raise with him the areas and issues of concern referred to in my opening post and acceptance; these will cross link to dialogue already instigated with pharmacovigilance and FoI questions I have asked.
_
NB – Before someone passes comment. I know there is an error in my last email which should have read Correspondence not ‘Conversations’, there are others too throughout the correspondence, but that’s dyslexia for you!
No comments:
Post a Comment