Mhr ...........Who??????

The MHRA’s mission is ‘to enhance and safeguard the health of the public by ensuring that medicines and medical devices work and are acceptably safe’. The MHRA is, by its own admission, unable to fulfil this mission -

Other health agencies seem similarly unbalanced. MHRA, the medicines and healthcare products regulatory agency,  is the body that has been criticised for failing adequately to regulate breast and hip implants, with grim consequences for some patients. 

While the board contains retired senior executives from AstraZeneca and Merck Sharp & Dohme, it includes no one from a patient group, or any other body representing people whose health could be damaged by its decisions

MHRA – Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency 
Governmental agency with responsibility for standards of safety, quality and performance. Start looking in the mirror before pointing at the Europeans.

The BMJ has said our regulators are not ‘fit for purpose’ because of their failure to act in patients’ interests.

‘In fact, it seems to be acting as a rather secretive negotiating agency between the government and the pharmaceutical industry. ‘It is certainly too close to the pharmaceutical industry,’ adds Herxheimer.

But for Paul Flynn, Labour MP for Newport West, this does not go far enough. The problem, he suggests, is that the MHRA is ‘an organisation whose activities are entirely financed by a levy from the pharmaceutical industry’.

There appears to be a revolving door with people who have previously worked in the pharmaceutical industry coming to work inside the MHRA. ’MHRA – Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency ..

Governmental agency with responsibility for standards of safety, quality and performance. Ummmm....last time I checked, UK means England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Take yer pick, Charlie. Blaming it all on idiots abroad while avoiding the morons at home says a lot about you, not the least your ability to read and comprehend.
"  MPs have also been worried by the agency’s behaviour. In 2005, a highly critical report by the Commons health select committee objected to a lack of openness and the MHRA’s closeness to the pharmaceutical industry. It warned that scandals on the scale of Vioxx would happen again because the regulators were not sufficiently independent. In response,the agency said: ‘Since November 2005 all staff and immediate members of their families are not allowed to have any financial or other interests in the pharmaceutical industry."

 MHRA!I am glad that this issue has exposed the incompetency and impotency of this agency. What is the purpose of making us fill in all those forms or report concerns if there is not going to be any responsible reaction?

Ludgate is a yes man she goes back a long way with this issue and trust me she is not fit for practice just like her agency the MHRA. I think they are responsible for this and lawyers should start looking to them for answers.