The Royal College of Psychiatrists: Who is wagging the dog’s tail?

The following post was written by me exactly 2 years ago. I was reminded of it when peacefully protesting, once again, outside the International Congress of the Royal College of Psychiatrists.

Time passes, but still this vital question remains unanswered. If the College puts financial considerations first [and is able to hide this] how can we be sure that the College is taking patient safety seriously?

---

Before I retired as an NHS psychiatrist I made a ‘Subject Access’ inquiry to the Royal College of Psychiatrists. The heavily redacted response revealed that the College operates in dark corridors of power rather than in the natural light of day.

I have been a grassroots campaigner for Sunshine legislation in the UK for more years than I can remember and have found this to be a most isolating experience. Alas, I even encountered “gas-lighting” by a most senior member of the Royal College of Psychiatrists. It was after this experience that I decided to retire from Medicine at the early age of 52 years.  I am now an artist, gardener and volunteer worker.

The partly redacted communication [above] relates to a question that I put in the autumn of 2018 to all the Royal Colleges in the UK: “Do you support Sunshine legislation?

The content of the Royal College of Psychiatrists response was completely redacted as was who had sent it. However those not redacted [in the circulation list] included the [then] President, Professor Wendy Burn, and the CEO, Paul Rees. If the President and the CEO were not involved in compiling this response, who were? Who is wagging the dog’s tail?

---

On Monday of this week [20 June 2022] I peacefully protested outside the 2022 International Congress of the Royal College of Psychiatrists:

The declarations of competing interests for those involved in this Congress can be found here.

You will find an incomplete evidence-base, as a number of the accredited-educators have a blank box where their ‘declaration’ should be. Here is an example:

I have chosen this example [it is one of many] as this speaker was part of this “educational session” at the International Congress:

At the International Congress [#RCPSYCHIC22] Professor Lawrie provided these “FACTs:“

“Antipsychotic treatment saves life across all risk factors”
and
“Antipsychotic medication reduces relapse by around 37%”

Professor Lawrie has a long career record of working with the pharmaceutical industry and, like all Paid Opinion Leaders, will have been reimbursed for doing so.

I would not wish to isolate Prof Stephen Lawrie as an example of a Paid Opinion Leader. It is after all,  legal [and indeed widely accepted by us all] for influential educators on the prescribing of drugs to omit [FACTS] on their ‘relationship’ with Industry.

Lecturing at the same International Congress session was Prof Allan Young, another career long paid opinion leader], who provided these “FACTS” [as shared on#RCPSYCHIC22]:

Professor Young provided these declarations of competing interests to the Royal College of Psychiatrists. It is an extensive list:

---

Back to that idiom: True science is disinterested. No tail needs wagged.

---

Related posts [click on each image to get the relevant post]:

---