I wonder why Molly Courtney is talking about a subject she knows little of and I further wonder why one of the RCGP substance misuse unit's GP's have not been asked to provide a quote. I don't know Dr.Kennedy, anyway here it is.
http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=23&storycode=4115281&c=1

"Addicts are a particularly high-risk group, with particular pitfalls around prescribing". Oh dear, I never knew that.

I think I'll just stop reading anything that's not a refereed journal. News reports never ever seem to get facts right or ask questions of the right people (by which I mean those who actually know what is happening).

Pulse, of course is up there with The Sun in terms of journalistic integrity (by which I mean pandering to its readers' established prejudices)

I did reply but has to be approved by the editor. The GP's are so bothered nobody so far has replied.
I can't wait for next weeks read on say contingency management.
Thank heavens for the Asylum attendents weekly and the Nursing Mirror.

Don’t be quick to trust peer reviewed journals Jim – remember Wakefield and MMR.
There have been some rather naïve comments on the site recently about journalists – their raison d’etre is to create a story and increase circulation not contribute to the literature.

It is the almost complete lack of accountabilty that bugs me. If I made the mistakes in my teaching or practice that journalists do on a daily basis I would quite rightly be out of a job. If they would admit that their purpose is to fill the space between adverts I wouldn't mind, but they lay claim to be guardians of the public's right to know and can only be told to back off by strongly fought legal cases rather than any appeal to reasonableness or even the truth.
What we have seen in this instance are serious errors in factual reporting, the abuse of their power in harangueing a civil servant (that I would not have tolerated from a man I met under usual circumstances without resort to the law on assault) and serious damage to the reputation of all drug services. I see reporting on a range of topics of which I have some knowledge and see error after error, usually biased in favour of the sensational. What can I make of reports on areas in which I have little knowledge? I can only assume it is as full of errors as the rest.

Sometimes a story breaks and there is not time to thoroughly check all the facts, fair enough. In the case of the NTA report however, it was published in April for goodness sake, plenty of time to check facts, ask for clarification and set up a meeting that does not require the ambushing of an official.

Wakefield and MMR was a rare exception and was created by the wilful concealment of important facts in a system that relies on integrity. The complete reverse applies to all mass media now. I think the thing that upsets me most is that it was the BBC (again).

Now who did HM The Queen get to knock spots off the BBC when she was misrepresented, maybe the NTA should get in touch with them?

I would suggest that all the users we prescribe for in Primary Care should be regarded as a high risk group. Their chance of dying espescially if they use IV is far greater that their non-user peers. They do have particular pitfalls around prescribing and as prescribers we should always remember that. As a GP prescribing for users we should always remenber that it only has to go wrong once........... In my opinion to not regard the user group as high risk is negligent if you are a prescribing doctor. James.

James, that is exactly my point. It's lke a Police Magazine interviewing a traffic cop who gives the quote, "driving very fast in foggy weather is dangerous". It's so obvious that anyone who needs it pointing out should not be in the business. Pulse magazine reminding nurse prescribers that drug misusers are high risk is offensive in my view. (Unless it's their way of reminding GPs of course)

PULSE is a magazine aiming at GPs. I am sure they are not trying to pretend to remind Nurse Prescribers of anything. However they should be reminding our less experienced GPs that prescribing to users needs to be done safely. It is not obvious to busy GPs always and they should be reminded that unless they know what they are doing problems could arise. Their world is different from the experienced GP prescribing with the support of exprerienced workers.