Last November I was a guest on the BBC Radio Wales phone-in.
We were discussing smoking in cars. Also on the programme was Dr Brendan O'Reilly, a retired GP and a member of the British Medical Association. I wrote about it here:
Brendan (a smoker) was extremely critical of the British Medical Association and its extreme anti-tobacco agenda. The gist of what he was saying was that the BMA is not only wrong to call for a ban on smoking in all private vehicles, but the union's behaviour could seriously damage the doctor-patient relationship.
I supported Brendan's commonsense attitude and said that, in my experience, he was far more representative of most GPs than the organisation that claims to represent them.
See: Doctors losing faith in the BMA
This morning I read that, 'A retired GP has been suspended from the BMA Welsh Council until 2014 after he questioned the evidence behind the BMA's campaign to ban smoking in vehicles on BBC Radio.'
The retired GP was Dr O'Reilly.
Full story: Retired GP suspended after questioning BMA stance on smoking
Bizarrely, hours after the Radio Wales programme was broadcast, the BMA itself admitted getting its facts wrong. In a press release issued on Thursday November 17 the BMA confessed that its claim that smoking in cars generates 23 times more toxins than you would find in a smoky bar was incorrect:
"Further studies demonstrate that the concentration of toxins in a smoke-filled vehicle could be up to 11 times greater than that of a smoky bar. We apologise for this error."
See: Smoking in cars: BMA admits error
See also: Thanks to the BMA, doctors can no longer be trusted to tell the truth
At the time I also reported an email sent to my old colleague (and former MSP) Brian Monteith in which a former GP admitted that:
"the use of unchecked and erroneous data by those apparently representing all doctors is unforgivable; indeed a public retraction for the use of this would not be out of order"
but added that:
"Whilst the BMA's pronouncement is based on erroneous data, the sentiment behind the health prevention message is sound."
See: Erroneous data "unforgivable" but message "sound"
Conclusion? So much for free speech. The end justifies the means and woe betide any doctor who dares criticise his own union.
What a fine, principled group of people. Not.