-
Sir Bradley's TUE passes the first test once he has established that he has a chronic medical condition and that the substance is an appropriate treatment.
Except it's not (an appropriate treatment). Lots of people suffer with hayfever, if intramuscular injections fixed it we'd all be rushing out to get them. He still hasn't provided any justification for the intramuscular injection element so the Marr interview hasn't changed my view at all: within the letter, but not within the spirit.
Fox-
Actually, if you're hayfever is bad enough, it can happen. A friend of mine had such an injection the year he did his A-levels (this was about 20 years ago, mind) and he was cleared of symptoms for over a year.
-
Except it's not (an appropriate treatment).
It is. It's not the only possible treatment, and it might not be the best treatment for everybody, but his doctor concluded that it was the best treatment for his condition given his lifestyle. Somebody else might get different advice, e.g. avoid holidaying in France in July to avoid the triggers so that you don't have to risk the side effects of this powerful drug.
What might look dodgy would be shopping around until he found a doctor who came to that conclusion, because he wanted that treatment in preference to others for reasons not connected with therapeutic effectiveness. Nobody seems to have offered much evidence that this is what happened, but if it was then it certainly would be the first time somebody has done that.
The_Kindness_of_Trees
gbj_tester
[citation needed]
Most medication for chronic illness is not to make it better but to stop it getting worse. In other words, it's preventative. Prophylaxis is a normal part of chronic disease management. Sir Bradley's TUE passes the first test once he has established that he has a chronic medical condition and that the substance is an appropriate treatment.
There are question marks over the second and third tests, but the TUEC thought they had been passed.