Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Dr Ah Kahn Syed's avatar

Actually Rebekah what Dr Price should do is that she should file a criminal complaint against AHPRA under the Public Interest Disclosure Act. There will be a duty to investigate AHPRA for threatening a person affiliated with a public entity (AHPRA) for raising concerns in the public interest.

She should first write back to the individual who wrote the letter to her and outline that she has not re-registered because she has strong reason to believe that AHPRA are acting to intimidate her into withholding any commentary on the dangers of the COVID-19 vaccines which are outlined clearly in the TGA's adverse event reports. On that basis she now feels intimidated to express her views in the public interest purely due to the letter that [named individual at AHPRA] has sent her. She requests that a response is sent within 3 working days outlining why AHPRA believed that raising concerns in the public interest about a potential danger to the public, in good faith, would be cause for investigation. Finally, in the absence of an apology a correction and an assurance that this will never happen again she will be left with no alternative but to file a criminal complaint against [named individual]. To reiterate, either the individual writing the letter an acting on behalf of AHPRA, or in their absence an alternative officer with sufficient authority, must clearly and unambiguously - without reservation - reply clearly that AHPRA supports and encourages doctors to raise safety concerns in the public interest, including but not limited to vaccines and investigation products marketed as vaccines. That in the absence of such a response she will proceed to impose her lawful protections as an Australian citizen against intimidation from AHPRA or its members under both the public interest disclosure act (as doctor whilst registered with a public entity) and under section 9.4AAA of the corporations act. That to clarify, to avoid any doubt:

(i) that she acted in good faith drawing attention to the public's concerns about the safety of an investigational product

(ii) that she felt extremely intimidated by the letter from AHPRA intended to stop her raising safety concerns in the public interest

(iii) safety concerns that were raised in the specified public forum were scientifically valid and confirmed by the TGA and therefore it was both her right and duty under the AHPRA code of conduct and the Australian Public Interest Disclosure Act to highlight those concerns using social media

(iv) failure to clarify that raising safety concerns, including the method used that started the investigation, conjoined to an apology for the mistake made by AHPRA in sending the letter, would indicate to her that a criminal act has been committed and as an Australian citizen and doctor registered at the time she would have an obligation to report this to the Attorney general for a full investigation under the acts specified.

Just my suggestion, but help is available should it be needed.

Note also that AHPRA were already notified that they must not take these actions as per the letter contained here:

https://gerardrennick.com.au/are-sacked-medical-professionals-protected-as-whistleblowers-ahpra-is-on-notice/

Expand full comment
AwakeNotWoke's avatar

The Supreme Court submission that can be accessed at the link below is lengthy but worth reading. There are reports of AHPRA having driven doctors to suicide and they have never been held accountable. Unfortunately, individuals with the personality disorder known as OCPD tend to rise to the top of such organisations. It's a very serious PD found commonly in serial murderers. They tend to dominate in ethics councils, professional associations and regulatory bodies. Hitler is believed to have had the condition. Overconcern with ethics might have contributed to his vegetarianism and to the Aktion T4 Nazi euthanasia program. Idaho murders suspect Bryan Kohberger also fits the picture. A Royal Commission into AHPRA would not be sufficient. AHPRA needs to be abolished. By contributing to suppression and distortion of factual information, they may have caused untold numbers of deaths. They are a menace to patient and public safety.

Dr William Bay, Supreme Court Application

https://qpp.life/legal

Expand full comment
29 more comments...

No posts