The following is email correspondence I had with Dr Charles Warlow, regarding my complaint about the PACE trial that had been published in the Lancet, which had not been addressed (and remains unaddressed):
http://pacedocuments.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/complaint-to-editor-of-lancet-regarding.html
PLEASE NOTE: This email correspondence proceeds in reverse chronological order.
----- Original Message -----
From: "ANGELA KENNEDY"
To: "Charles Warlow"
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2011 5:09 PM
Subject: Re: Your failure to respond to my complaint about the Lancet publication of the PACE trial
Dear Professor Warlow,
Thank you for the information. However, please note I did not request you to
recuse yourself from this investigation.
Also- you surely do understand that being a co-author of one of the authors
of a trial that is being complained about is a key Conflict of Interest?
Sincerely
Angela Kennedy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Warlow"
To: "ANGELA KENNEDY"
Cc: Richard Turner
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2011 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: Your failure to respond to my complaint about the Lancet
publication of the PACE trial
Richard Turner is the Lancet Editor who deals with communications to
the Ombudsman, his email is............ which should
have been on the emails I sent to you and copied to him, including
this one. The Ombudsman role is to investgate complaints not about
editorial policy but about process in the dealings the Lancet has with
authors and others such as yourself. I am not taking your comments
personally, but clearly you think I am in some sort of opposing camp
to yourself and under the circumstances the Lancet will have to find
someone else to deal with your complaint. So yes, I am formally
excusing myself from this investigation, at your request. Charles
Quoting ANGELA KENNEDY on Tue, 4 Oct
2011 16:32:01 +0100:
Dear Professor Warlow,
With the greatest of respect, your lack of reimbursement for your
professional duties cannot be my concern. My concern is to have my
complaint, and the concerns that generated that complaint,
investigated promptly, fairly and accurately, with correct procedure
and transparency. So far, this does not appear to have happened.
This is very worrying.
I do not know who Richard Turner is. Would you please enlighten me?
Would you please also give me his email details, so I may write to
him? Would you also provide me with the relevant information about
the duties of a Lancet Ombudsman, and how these have been agreed and
formalised? I presume these will have been explained to you when you
took up this post?
I am hoping that you are not taking my concerns about your Conflict
of Interest personally. This is a well-known professional issue. I
myself am an academic, and am fully aware of the need for
consideration of Conflicts of Interest for ethical and scientific
probity. Indeed I have to abide by such considerations myself. I am
concerned that you do not appear to understand your own Conflicts of
Interest in this case, and seek reassurance that you do. I reproduce
here my comments from my original complaint to you:
You are a co-author with at least one of the co-authors of the PACE
trial (Michael Sharpe) that I am aware of, for example, from your
profile page at the CCBS:
http://www.dcn.ed.ac.uk/pages/profiles/profiles.asp?ProfileId=10
Systematic review of misdiagnosis of conversion symptoms and
hysteria. Stone J, Smyth R, Carson A, Lewis S, Prescott R, Warlow C,
Sharpe M. BMJ (2005) 331:
You also appear to support psychogenic explanations for illnesses of
uncertain aetiology, and therefore your views are likely to be in
harmony with the known and published views of key PACE trial authors
and assistants about illnesses such as ME or CFS, for example, your
above profile states:
"I have also had passing interests in motor neuron disease, multiple
sclerosis and nowadays in the large number of patients whose
neurological symptoms are not explained by any disease (sometimes
called somatisation or functional)."
I take it, from your comments here, that you will therefore be
formally excusing yourself from this investigation because of your
Conflicts of Interest, and informing the Lancet accordingly, and
will look forward to receiving that formal communication.
Best wishes
Angela Kennedy
----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Warlow"
To: "ANGELA KENNEDY"
Cc: Richard Turner
sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2011 4:02 PM
Subject: Re: Your failure to respond to my complaint about the
Lancet publication of the PACE trial
Not yet, but if you have any doubts about any conflict of interest on
my part then there is absolutely no point in me taking this any
further forwar. I will copy this to Richard Turner at the Lancet
because they will have to find an alternative person - I supsect this
may not have happened before, it certainly has not in my time, so you
will I fear have to be patient until the Lancet sort this out. It is
in everyone's interests, not least the patients, that whoever looks at
your complaint is acceptable to all parties. Clearly you feel, for
whatever reason, that I am not so I will have to drop out now. I am
sure you understand that I do not want to work on your complaint for
several hours if not days and then have my judgement dismissed for
being conflicted. Charles
Quoting ANGELA KENNEDY on Tue, 4 Oct
2011 15:55:27 +0100:
Dear Professor Warlow,
Have you read my initial complaint? It is clear you have a conflict
of interest. How, in the interests of transparency, good science,
and ethics, are you going to address that conflict of interest, in
order that I may be confident that my complaint will be investigated
with the requisite fairness and objectivity?
Surely as an Ombudsman you must be aware that these issues sometimes
crop up? What is normal procedure in cases like this?
Best wishes
Angela Kennedy
----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Warlow"
To: "ANGELA KENNEDY"
Cc: Richard Turner
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2011 3:38 PM
Subject: Re: Your failure to respond to my complaint about the
Lancet publication of the PACE trial
But what about your view that I have a conflict of interest? I don't
want to do a whole lot of work on this (unpaid by the way) to have you
reject my views as being biased. I need to know very clearly that you
will accept my judgement as being unconflicted, or failing that the
Lancet will have to find someone else to look at this. Charles
Quoting ANGELA KENNEDY on Tue, 4 Oct
2011 15:16:03 +0100:
Dear Professor Warlow,
Thank you for getting back to me so promptly. I wrote to you at the
email address ombudsman@lancet.com , after being informed by Zoe
Mullan that this was the address to send my complaint to. I have
never received any indication that my emails were not delivered to
this address.
I am now going to send you over, by separate emails to your
personal address:
1. Zoe Mullan's email to me demonstrating the above.
2. My initial email to you of 9th June 2011.
3. My second email to you of 7th August 2011.
I will also be sending over other correspondence related to this
subject as appropriate.
Notwithstanding your apparent confusion about this issue, I am
presuming that you, when you read this evidence, will now understand
what an extremely serious situation this is? I have written to you
in good faith. I do now expect you, as the Lancet Ombudsman, to
attend to this issue urgently, objectively, in good faith and
without prejudice.
Many thanks
Angela Kennedy
----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Warlow"
To: "ANGELA KENNEDY
Cc: Richard Turner
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2011 1:16 PM
Subject: Re: Your failure to respond to my complaint about the
Lancet publication of the PACE trial
I am sorry but I have absolutely no idea what complaint you are
talking about. Did you email me personally or via the Lancet? Either
way I have heard nothing. I think you are being a little premature
in summoning your lawyers. Also perhaps you get let me know what you
mean by my conflict of interest, again I have no idea what you are
referring to. I am copying this to Richard Turner at the Lancet, he
looks after the ombudsman's post box. Charles Warlow
Quoting ANGELA KENNEDY on Tue, 4 Oct 2011 11:58:23 +0100:
Dear Professor Warlow,
I note that you have failed to respond, in any way, to either my
initial complaint of June 9th, 2011, or my second email to you of
August 7th, 2011, about the above topic.
Your failure to respond indicates you have failed to act correctly
as an Ombudsman.
In light of this this failure, I now have no option but to seek
legal advice with a view to legal action in order to pursue my
legitimate complaint, and to make public both your failure to act
correctly, and your conflict of interest in this matter.
Yours sincerely
Angela Kennedy
