|
medpundit |
||
 |
 |
|
Tuesday, May 07, 2002"A delegation from the British Medical Association was at the EFMA meeting. The representation of events in your article is inaccurate. A statement on the Israeli- Palestinian conflict was tabled at the meeting, having not been circulated to delegates beforehand. The British delegation suggested amendments to be made to the statement, which were discussed and agreed with our colleagues from the Israel Medical Association. It was agreed that these made it more consistent with international law and ethics, and our understanding was that we had reached an amicable compromise." Some sort of resolution was clearly being considered that had to be debated and amended. Furthermore, the Post had this update on the WMA on May 5: "In a resolution at its council meeting in France today, the WMA, which represents 80 million doctors around the world, stressed the need to achieve a balance between the assurance of the delivery of services and security need, and called on those in positions of authority to place the interests of patients at the center of decision- making. Israel Medical Association chair, Dr. Yoram Blachar, and its ethics committee chair, Prof. Avinoam Reches, said they consider the resolution a great accomplishment for Israel and the IMA. They said they had been concerned the IMA would be suspended from the organization." Me thinks the WMA was protesting too much on its web site. I guess 20,000 angry emails a day got them thinking about their position. The power of the internet is just plain amazing. As for the WMA, it will be a very long time before I trust them again. posted by Sydney on 5/07/2002 08:18:00 AM 0 comments 0 Comments: |
|
