You know that poem that starts ‘First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out because I was not a communist’ and ends with ‘Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out’? Well, I’m feeling a bit like that.
I don’t know if you’ve been following the Simon Singh libel case, but this link to the excellent Sense About Science site will give the background to Simon’s problems with the chiropractors.
And having come for Simon, they came next for Dr Peter Wilmshurst. He was involved in a trial to test whether closing atrial septal defects using a device manufactured by the American company NMT Medical would reduce the incidence of migraine. The results of the trial were negative, and Dr Wilmshurst suggested several ideas to explain the findings, as a result of which he is now being sued by NMT.
Note that an American company are suing him in an English court, for a libel allegedly perpetrated in Washington. That’s because their chances of success in an American court would be significantly less, and because any settlement in an English court will be two orders of magnitude greater than in the States.
And then they came for me. Well, not me exactly, but as someone who edits a radiology journal, it’s getting uncomfortably close to home. They (General Electric Healthcare in this case) actually came for Dr Henrik Thomsen. He now faces financial ruin as a result of remarks made to a small number of radiologists at a meeting in an Oxford hotel, as outlined in this recent Sunday Times story.
In addition to selling MRI contrast media, GE are one of the big three or four manufacturers of imaging equipment, and decisions on which CT, MR or PET/CT scanner to purchase are frequently very finely balanced, being swayed by such apparently minor factors as a recent bad experience with the servicing of existing equipment by a particular company.
However, GE have clearly decided that pursuing a radiologist for an alleged libel only heard by a handful of his contemporaries makes commercial sense, so we must assume that they consider Dr Thomsen’s remarks to be far more damaging than is suggested by media reports and the recollection of radiologists who were present at the meeting.
Still, the Sunday Times editorial was supportive, and it now looks as if the campaign to reform libel law is getting somewhere, with Jack Straw professing to see the need for change.
Something is badly wrong when researchers and editors are afraid to publish and comment on the results of research, just because the libel laws in this country favour the interests of big business over those of individual scientists.
Having read the background to this on the Sense About Science site, I hope as many of you as possible will follow the embedded link to sign the libel law reform petition.
Tags: Libel
I find it amazing that companies can’t see that they do more damage to their image by taking the doctors to court for libel than rising above it (or, dare I say, listening to it).
I’ve signed the petition!
It’s not often that I agree with the Daily Mail - but we really are the “censorship capital of Europe” - Scientists should not be intimidated by fear of financial ruin.
I’ve just signed the petition too.
“apparently minor factors as a recent bad experience with the servicing of existing equipment by a particular company”.
Not a minor factor but a major headache. If the vendor provides poor post sales service not much point in buying their kit.Experienced this in 2 countries with 2 major vendors (dutch and german)
I agree Iain - but I did say ‘apparently’!
I was making the point that it isn’t always major differences in equipment specification that decide the outcome of tendering processes, because often there aren’t any. Given that, it’s hard to see, as Mark says, just what’s in it for GE in this situation. Hardly anyone would have heard about the remarks Henrik Thomsen made at this meeting if they hadn’t taken him to court.
I was there when Henrik Thomsen gave his talk and I thought it was a good presentation.
Judge for yourself: You can see the slides here
http://documents.propublica.org/ge-v-thomsen-a-british-libel-case#p=1
It’s getting a bit scary if people are getting sued over an innuendo that no-one else can remember. I’ve signed the petition too.
Thanks Peng - you’re the second person I’ve heard from who attended the meeting, and the consensus seems to be that Henrik said nothing untoward. In fact, the only potentially inflammatory comment was simply a quote from a Danish newspaper headline which he used to illustrate the pressure his department was coming under as a result of an adverse drug reaction.
Glad so many of you are signing the petition - that was my chief aim in writing this.
Looks like another thalidomide coming. Are equipment companies perhaps less risk averse than pharma has leaned to become? Thomsen’s responses appear entirely reasonable and backed up by the facts. He (and your petition) should be supported.
There is a line from a song……
“if we tolerate this, then our children will be next”
Here are some graphics, courtesy of Wordle
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/1496187/thomsen_ge
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/1496204/THOMSEN_GAGGED
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/1496207/THOMSEN_SILENCED
;-P
Stifling science is bad for everyone. The law needs to be changed to allow the truth and scientific reason to be aired.