Have you ever helped a charity raise money to buy a hospital a scanner? Hospitals have a lot of other things to spend money on besides diagnostic equipment – accreditation, managers, translators, overpriced drug contracts, negligence claims…
UKAS’s Imaging Services Accreditation Scheme is here to undo the work of diligent radiology staff and charity donors. Patients can now distract themselves from worry during long waiting times with the knowledge that the imaging their diagnosis relies on is accredited.
Being accredited won’t change the outcomes for patients because the staff spend years qualifying and maintaining their expertise. And spending substantial sums of their own money to other compulsory professional registration schemes. Reliable diagnosis relies on the experience of healthcare teams, not the visits of inspectors.
You can read how the time and money will be wasted to support the UKAS inspectorate in their ISAS 1 document below. But wouldn’t you rather your tax money and charitable giving went to help patients rather than employing staff to provide fodder for hungry inspectors?
Accreditation is like the halal tax for healthcare. Will the western inspection cartel ever manage to squeeze a tax from the corrupt halal racket which even islamic leaders are now criticising? Click the link and see how much halal and ISO certification have in common. ISO could make halal respectable. They could share the loot.
Click below for the UKAS document:
The ISO has initiated the Royal Statistical Society into the inspection cartel. Its role will be to certify those who wish to be recognised as Six Sigma and Lean practitioners to ISO 18404:2015: Quantitative methods in process improvement – Six Sigma – competencies for key personnel and their organizations in relation to Six Sigma and Lean implementation.
This is the latest example of the ISO’s embrace-extend-extinguish strategy against ideas that don’t pay tax to the cartel. Through it, the cartel can shift income from competitors, even in cases where their methods are superior to the ISO’s.
Read more here.
Is President Trump up to the job nobody else will take on?
In the public service, in all its wide ramifications, we live in an era of the inept, the square peg, the careless and the bluffer. And, as bluffers in turn appoint bluffers, the system becomes self-perpetuating.
The “whistleblower” is ostracised. Authority is eroded. Nobody takes responsibility. Nobody is accountable. Somebody else is to blame.
Few things, even simple things, seemingly straightforward ones, go smoothly. Things creak. What once took days now takes weeks, months and longer.
We have become a nation of “box-tickers”, form-fillers and report-writers. To little avail. Who reads these mountains of papers, one may ask? Actual work and performance gets buried in the “bumph”.
Unfortunately a “mindset” appears to exist nowadays as the right and proper way to get things done. On all-too-rare occasions, quick and professional efficiency appears to be something of the past. Rules and regulations take over from personal initiative. There is an inbuilt fear of stepping out of line.
Society, particularly those responsible for shaping it, needs to have a good long look at itself.
J CRAIG WALLACE
The Emperor’s New Clothes is a recurring theme with ISO management standards.
Researchers, Bozena Poksinska and Jens J.Dahlgaard, published ISO 9001:2000 – The emperor’s new clothes? describing their investigation of three companies.
“The managers interviewed had difficulties linking organisational improvements with the QMS. It was found that ISO 9001 requirements weren’t a reason for making improvements.
The QMS helps to keep order in an organisation and this may affect quality to a small degree. But ISO 9000 is not a “cause” of some considerable, measurable changes.
“If I were to be honest, I think, there are not many benefits, which I see from ISO. Some things became really good, but I can’t say it was because of ISO. It is because we have thought and recognised that this needs to be done…”(Quality manager, GAMMA ).”
More gently than some, these authors reached the conclusion that ISO 9001 really wasn’t much good for improving quality. While they noted peer-pressure as the main reason for gaining certification, they did not enquire more deeply into the ethics and role of marketplace coercion for the inspection cartel.
How long must this thing go on?
Arturo Casadevall and co-authors reported A Framework for Improving the Quality of Research in the Biological Sciences. doi: 10.1128/mBio.01256-16 30 August 2016 mBio vol. 7 no. 4 e01256-16
The American Academy of Microbiology convened a colloquium to discuss problems in the biological sciences, with emphasis on identifying mechanisms to improve the quality of research. Participants from various disciplines made six recommendations: (i) design rigorous and comprehensive evaluation criteria to recognize and reward high-quality scientific research; (ii) require universal training in good scientific practices, appropriate statistical usage, and responsible research practices for scientists at all levels, with training content regularly updated and presented by qualified scientists; (iii) establish open data at the timing of publication as the standard operating procedure throughout the scientific enterprise; (iv) encourage scientific journals to publish negative data that meet methodologic standards of quality; (v) agree upon common criteria among scientific journals for retraction of published papers, to provide consistency and transparency; and (vi) strengthen research integrity oversight and training. These recommendations constitute an actionable framework that, in combination, could improve the quality of biological research.
Also, Rigorous Science: a How-To Guide. doi: 10.1128/mBio.01902-16 8 November 2016 mBio vol. 7 no. 6 e01902-16
Proposals to improve the reproducibility of biomedical research have emphasized scientific rigor. Although the word “rigor” is widely used, there has been little specific discussion as to what it means and how it can be achieved. We suggest that scientific rigor combines elements of mathematics, logic, philosophy, and ethics. We propose a framework for rigor that includes redundant experimental design, sound statistical analysis, recognition of error, avoidance of logical fallacies, and intellectual honesty. These elements lead to five actionable recommendations for research education.
Conspicuous by its absence is ISO accreditation. ISO 9001 which some apply to contract research. ISO 17025 to laboratory work or ISO 15189 for diagnostic laboratory work.
While these products of the inspection cartel grow in importance in the UK and countries of the surviving EU, the USA can do fine, and improve further, without them. The experts who attended this colloquium saw no need to mention accreditation for the improvement of quality.
The Centers for Disease Control is central to public health in the USA. According to the CDC SPIDER (Scientists Preserving Integrity, Diligence and Ethics in Research) Group of scientists, it hasn’t been living up to the standards of probity the taxpayer would expect.
Jon Rappaport has reported on their letter to the organization’s chief of staff. The allegations include burying data that doesn’t fit the official story, mishandling data to obfuscate the causes of disease and deaths, overlooking the absence of favoured staff, spending domestic funds on research and overseas missions, staff with relationships too close to vaccine companies, and unjustified support for a large-scale ‘flu vaccination programme that lacks data to support it.
Anti-vaccination groups delight to see this. However, while the scientists wish the corruption of their organization to be accounted for, they are not endorsing a general anti-vaccination ideology. Neither does the ISOwatch blog. Like any test or treatment vaccination may do harm. It generally does less harm than infectious diseases.
We need similar honesty from those inside the accreditation industry which is based on a corrupt ideology that political and even professional leaders are happy to accept.
Retirees, those who have improved themselves beyond the inspectorate, and those as brave as the SPIDER scientists, do publish how and why the third-party inspection scam doesn’t work!
What benefit really comes from wealth-transfer schemes accrediting the “excellence” of individuals?
Show us the before and after distribution curves for doctors’ performance change.
“My latest subs tally was the equivalent of almost a quarter of my salary.”
Another study has found that most new cancer medicines are massively expensive and rather useless. Read it here: Harrison P. Another Analysis Questions Efficacy of New Cancer Drugs.
That’s better evidence of a stronger effect than is available for ISO accreditation. Other cancer studies cited in the article enable authors to say that most of the drugs are inappropriate, unethical and should be stopped.
Just like UKAS accreditation.
Salas-Vega S, Iliopoulos O, Mossialos E. Assessment of Overall Survival, Quality of Life, and Safety Benefits Associated With New Cancer Medicines. JAMA Oncol. Published online December 29, 2016. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.4166