MAGICAL MEDICINE: HOW TO MAKE AN ILLNESS ... - Invest in ME

92
• “I am a consultant immunopathologist and before retirement worked at St James’ University Hospital, Leeds.
A key area of my professional interest was and remains myalgic encephalomyelitis and I have carried out
research into the disorder. For a number of years I ran clinics specifically for patients with ME. In my
opinion NICE guidelines overemphasise the usefulness of CBT and GET to the detriment of patients. I have
no hesitation in stating that in my opinion, the situation for ME/CFS patients is worse, not better, since the
publication of the NICE Guideline” (Dr Layinka Swinburne, Leeds, 22 nd October 2008)
• “As my clinical freedoms were progressively eroded, it meant that I was becoming ineffective and indeed
possibly dangerous as a practitioner. All that patients could be offered was CBT coupled with GET, which I
consider not to be appropriate for many of my patients and in the case of GET potentially damaging for
some” (Dr Sarah Myhill, General Practitioner specialising in ME/CFS, Powys; Secretary of the
British Society for Ecological Medicine, 10 th November 2008).
Unfortunately the High Court Judge before whom the unsuccessful Judicial Review of the NICE Guideline
on “CFS/ME” was heard (Mr Justice Simon) remained unmoved by these Statements and it is not known if
he even read the ones that were provided for him.
They were certainly not mentioned in Court and there is no mention of them in the official transcripts or the
Judgment, and CBT/GET remain the national “treatment of choice” for people with ME/CFS.
Seemingly untroubled by actual evidence, the Wessely School and UNUMProvident’s control over the lives
of ME/CFS patients and their families continues unabated.
For UK agencies of State to be involved with a company with the public track record of UNUMProvident,
especially given the number of legal judgments against it, ought to be a matter of pressing disquiet for those
in Government, but all attempts to bring these legitimate concerns to the attention of Ministers have been
ignored.
UNUMProvident has been found guilty in numerous high profile legal cases of unwarranted delays in
the processing of claims and of wrongful denial of claims, resulting in awards of punitive damages
against the company for its improper refusal to pay legitimate claims, for example:
• In a claim against UNUM brought by Dr Joanne Ceimo (who was unable to work as a cardiologist
following a neck injury), UNUM faced $84.5 million damages for “mistreating an injured policy
holder”, including $79 million in punitive damages. Dr Ceimo’s lawyers said that evidence from
previous policyholder cases against UNUM helped pave the way for this verdict
• In another case against UNUM, Judge O’Malley Taylor criticised UNUM, saying: “There is clear and
convincing evidence that (UNUM’s) bad faith was part of a conscious course of conduct firmly grounded in
established company policy”
• A federal lawsuit filed in New York sought to represent tens of thousands more UNUM
policyholders as part of a class action against the company, and in another case, the State of
Georgia recently fined UNUM $1 million over its claims handling practices
• UNUM’s own former medical director, Dr Patrick Fergal McSharry, has filed a lawsuit against the
company, claiming that the company’s “primary purpose and policy” was to deny disability claims
• He also stated that company medical advisers were encouraged to use language in their reports
that would support claim denials, and that if too many medical opinions favoured the
policyholder, the doctors would be reprimanded or sacked