« back · exit frame · back to frame · www.benzo.org.uk »
JOHN PERROTT CORRESPONDENCE
From April 2010
Email John Perrott
• Second Letter from John Perrrott to Dr June Raine, MHRA, June 9, 2010
• Letter from Dr June Raine, MHRA to John Perrrott, June 3, 2010
• Letter from Dora East (DoH) to John Perrott, May 28, 2010
• Third Letter from John Perrott to Dora East, Dept of Health, May 20, 2010
• Second Letter from John Perrott to Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, May 20, 2010
• Letter from John Perrrott to Dr June Raine, MHRA, April 26, 2010
• Email from John Perrott to David Cameron, April 25, 2010
Dear Mr Cameron,
You seem to have missed the point entirely; it is not an issue regarding educating doctors regarding other therapies. There have been countless guidelines sent to them by the CSM, CRM and the Dept Health since 1980 and doctors are still prescribing them; but doctors are not the cause of the problem.
The problem is that Wyeth and Brother received their license for Ativan in 1972 using a flawed clinical trial; they knew then that 2 patients out of 30 suffered seizures on withdrawing from therapeutic doses after 3 weeks. The MCA (now MHRA who I am just writing to now) sat on this evidence until 1990 by which time hundreds of thousands of patients were being made into drug addicts by their doctors. The complacency and buck passing has continued to date and the people coming last in this equation are the patients. The MHRA has been recently and rightly accused of being biased in favour of the pharmaceutical industry. It should be an independent body whose purpose is to assure patient safety, but it is full of people with ties to the industry.
It needs government intervention. It beggars belief that you do not consider this issue important enough to grasp these facts; my Lab and Lib Dem PPCs who I have spoken to recently already have more understanding of this huge problem than your entire health team.
I am currently in head on correspondence with the Commons and Lords and the Dept Health who all seem to understand something needs doing because nothing has for 40 years. There is currently a Dept Health review going on and has been for 9 months. Your health team's ignorance is staggering. I will pass on your comments to the APPG (running now for 8 years!). I am sure none of them will be voting for you.
Very Disappointed,
John Perrott
• Email to John Perrott from David Beal on behalf of David Cameron, April 25, 2010
Dear Mr. Perrott,
I am writing on behalf of David Cameron to thank you for your email of 19th April.
Thank you for getting in touch, we are aware of the concerns about these drugs.
We need to make sure that doctors are properly trained to work with people with mental health problems. It is important that GPs understand how best to deal with different forms of mental distress so that they can make the right decisions about diagnosis, provide help early on, and offer treatments such as talking therapies, which can often be more effective than medication.
Thank you, once again, for taking the time to write.
Yours sincerely,
David Beal
David Cameron’s Correspondence Unit
Conservative Campaign Headquarters
David.Cameron@Conservatives.com
• Letter from Earl Howe to John Perrott, April 22, 2010
• Letter from John Perrott to to Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, April 21, 2010
20 Greenacre Court
Lancaster
LA1 4LE
21st April 2010
Dear Ms Clarke,
Further to my telephone conversation of yesterday I am writing to describe in more depth my complaint regarding one of Wyeth's former products, Ativan, which has seriously damaged my health.
I was first prescribed Ativan 35 years ago in 1975 for mild anxiety. I have not been able to discontinue the drug until last year due to the crippling nature of the withdrawal symptoms. I finally succeeded by switching to Diazepam and tapered off completely this year. I suffered horrendous withdrawal symptoms during this period and I am still very unwell.
I have since found out that Wyeth sponsored a trial of the drug in 1972 carried out by Dr René De Buck. This showed that 2 patients out of 30 both suffered convulsions after withdrawing from therapeutic doses of lorazepam for less than a month. This information about a major withdrawal reaction to a new benzodiazepine was not mentioned in the summary i.e. the all important part that everyone reads.
This means that my initial prescribing doctor would not have been aware of the dangers and neither would the licensing authorities in the UK at the time. Also, during my first 8 years on Ativan, the UK data sheet for it carried this warning only:
'It is advisable to avoid abrupt discontinuation of Ativan as some sleep disturbances may result. This applies especially when high doses have been given for prolonged periods'
It is 10 times stronger than Diazepam and I can assure you that it causes a lot more than 'some sleep disturbances.'
It seems to me that Wyeth were only too fully aware of the addictive nature of Ativan prior to its application for a UK licence so that my suffering and dependence were inevitable and also avoidable.
Wyeth have to date denied any responsibility for this and, reading their subsequent statements regarding Ativan's safety to date, have ceded only enough information, little by little, to avoid complicity in causing mass drug addiction.
I am not sure what price, if any, Wyeth puts on 35 years of one's life spent in an unnecessary drug induced cocoon, followed by a year of hell trying to discontinue.
My addiction was originally caused by Ativan prescribed by a doctor who was denied critical information regarding its safety.
I am already in head on correspondence with the Dept of Health and a number of MPs regarding their response to the wider issues of benzodiazepine addiction and I would like your explanation.
Yours sincerely,
John Perrott
• Email from John Perrott to to Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, April 21, 2010
I have been severely damaged by Ativan prescribed in 1975 to which I became almost immediately addicted and only managed to stop this year using a Valium taper. That's 35 years addiction. The withdrawal pushed me to near insanity. I have read that Wyeth knew about its addictive nature in 1972 and did not disclose this in the prescribing information. I have also read that Wyeth continued to supply Ativan whilst it was obvious millions worldwide were getting addicted and could not discontinue due to the crippling withdrawal symptoms. I hope the profits were worth it. Regards, John Perrott
• Letter from Dora East, Dept of Health to John Perrott, April 15, 2010
• Email from John Perrott to his Prospective Parliamentary Candidates, April 7, 2010
Below is an email written by Lancaster constituent and benzo victim John Perrott to the prospective candidates in the forthcoming May 2010 General Election. Perhaps you might like to follow John's example and write to the candidates / elected MP in your constituency. John sent a similar letter to Rt Hon David Cameron MP on April, 19 2010 and is waiting for replies.
April 7, 2010
Dear Messrs Grunshaw (Lab), Ollerenshaw (Con), Armistead (Lib Dem),
I have spent the last year discontinuing diazepam and lorazepam tranquillisers. These have been prescribed liberally by doctors since the 1960s and have caused untold hell for users and have cured nothing. I was prescribed them for 35 years on repeat prescriptions mostly without the need to see a doctor. I finally came off the last dose 4 weeks ago. The withdrawal symptoms have been crippling.
I am now currently working with an All Party Parliamentary Group Inquiry into Involuntary Tranquilliser Addiction. I find myself in robust correspondence with the Dept. of Health and also MPs responsible for Health and the Shadow Health team. Unfortunately the election has made progress come to a halt.
This has been an ongoing battle for 30 years for a number of people prescribed these drugs. I initially wrote to all concerned with health in the Commons and Lords. Surprisingly few seem to grasp how long this has been going on or are unaware that an APPG has been campaigning for years and some just seem to be in denial. I was most disappointed by the current Shadow health team's response. I don't think they really realise the history of this issue. I suggest that you look at www.benzo.org.uk to see the misery these drugs have caused. The APPG work so far is also there.
It seems to be a very hard slog getting help for the 1.5 million people who are dependent on tranquillisers in the UK, and the Dept of Health has stonewalled victims for over 20 years. They are currently conducting a review to assess future policy. I attach my last correspondence to them. I have further correspondence and information should you require it.
Perhaps you read the double page investigation in the Daily Mail last week about the whole issue? There have been many attempts by the media to highlight the problems; BBC Panorama 'The Tranquilliser Trap', BBC Wales, 'That's Life' and many others.
As my prospective MP in Lancaster I would like to ask what your views are with regard to helping the 1.5 million involuntary benzodiazepine dependents discontinue these dangerous drugs safely and to stop doctors prescribing them.
Regards,
John Perrott
Email John Perrott
• Letter from John Perrott to Dora East, Dept of Health, April 7, 2010
7th April 2010
Your Reference TO00000491274
Dear Ms East,
Thank you for your response to my letter of 10th March about benzodiazepine dependency. I assume this reply was in response only to my letter of 10th March and not to my letter to Anne Grosskurth of 21st March to which I am still awaiting a reply. I enclose a copy of this, however, your letter of 23rd March does rather move things forward into new questions. Ironically, Ms Grosskurth would probably have received her letter on the same day the Daily Mail printed a double page investigation into iatrogenic tranquilliser addiction on 23rd March.
I note that one of the aims of the review is to determine the real extent of the problem. We are now 9 months into the review and the Dept has already decided, it seems, not to allow PCTs to commission specialist services without solid evidence of need. This begs 2 questions:
How can the Dept on one hand have already decided not to provide PCTs with specialist services when, on the other, it is admitting it does not have statistical evidence to back up this decision?
The statistical evidence the Dept needs is easily obtained from doctors' computers so why didn't the Dept get these figures at the outset of the review 9 months ago. It simply involves totalling prescriptions for benzodiazepines and 'Z' drugs given for periods greater than one month?
I have interviewed a number of GPs in my area including my own and they have all said the same thing. They find it very uncomfortable dealing with BZ dependents because they went into this profession to help people. The patients are too scared to even talk about the subject, and the doctors do not dare mention tapering off the drugs because this would unleash large numbers of high maintenance patients on a Community Mental Health Team unprepared for this sort of specialist work and who are already overburdened. In short, it is easier just to let things stay as they are. My GP said that I was doing good work in trying to do something about this problem because somebody needed to.
Also, some were not conversant enough with the NHS Clinical Knowledge Summaries 'benzodiazepine and z-drug withdrawal' as this area only constituted a very small part of the scope of their care. This has been proved not only by my own experience but many others as well.
This means that patients are being denied good health and are trapped. I am now 4 weeks off and feeling so much better by the day and so could many others which leads on to the next question – numbers.
The research to support the claim that 1.5 million people are addicted to BZs has come from a number of sources and I am surprised that the only body that has not made efforts to establish the extent of the problem is the DofH. These sources have included the BBC Panorama programme 'The Tranquilliser Trap', BBC Wales' programme estimating 180 per surgery making 90,000 in Wales alone, 5000 in Oldham thus pro rata totalling 1.5 million in the UK, Prof Ashton's research, evidence from yearly totals of prescriptions recently totalling 11.5 million BZs and 5.5 million 'Z' drugs giving 17 million of which nearly half were for 4 weeks or more, etc etc.
There is more evidence pointing towards a figure of 1.5 million than the Dept has to refute this claim. I have not actually seen any evidence to show that the Dept has made a serious effort to quantify this problem at all which leads to my next question. What evidence does the Dept have to support its claim that there are insufficient numbers to justify the commission of specialist treatment centres?
Yours sincerely
John Perrott20 Greenacre Court
Lancaster
LA1 4LE
• Letter from Ben Wallace MP (Lancaster & Wyre) to John Perrott, April 1, 2010
APPGITA Main Page · The Ashton Manual
