Is it likely given the functioning of the MHRA that this will be honest or plausible? That seems almost inconceivable.
I have carefully read the original documents on one part of this problem involving paediatric study 329. It seems to me that four years would not be required to state the obvious. I am wondering why the General Medical Council has not been involved and why it has taken no steps to deal with the company clinicians or the involved medical members of the MHRA itself. After all it does seem likely that patients will have died as a result. This "investigation" has been a joke and a charade from the start. It is almost five years since the first "expert team" assembled by the medicines regulator dissolved after it was discovered that two of the four members held shares in GlaxoSmithKline (The Guardian 26 March 2003).
I am wondering what possible truth can emerge from this all.
It is most unusual that Gordon Brown should invite a company undergoing criminal investigation to join his new International Business Advisory Council. That alone would seem to have preempted any plausible examination.
I think it is time to call this terrible disgrace and coverup by its real name. Again, where are our medical leaders in all this.