I have noticed an up tick in PA anons and PA supporting accounts coming to give an opinion-on my feed- about my views on @lengreview PA protocols. To help you, I have 3 things to say. 1. I don't have any influence in the system, I am not part of Council @RCPhysicians (powers that be terminated my time). I have no voice that anyone takes much note of- especially in @NHSE_WTE @NHSEngland circles. There's a reason I am not in the @HSJnews Non-white influential people list- it's because I don't have influence. That is a fact. So don't worry at all about my view. 2. Making references to my recent loss in a derogatory way is more a reflection of your upbringing or lack of it. I spend enough time nowadays in darkness- you can't make it worse. Avoid it- you never know what happens in your own life in the future 3. You should have the same approach as I do to pro-PA views. I literally don't care at this point. I believe the way in which many have tried and are trying to use PAs is dangerous to the public. You don't agree. Fine- it's a democracy. But I will say what I believe to be true. Also- if you bring heat to a conversation? Don't flounce off when you get smoked in return. Refer to point 3- I don't care about your opinion at this point I hope that helps Thanks and much love Partha

Comments on the protocol for PAs: Regards the people who have done this. It's no different to what I saw when RCP was making their interim document of scope. A few of us stopped it from a complete slide at that point- and this panel doesn't have a dissenting voice- so it's mostly an echo chamber IMO. FWIW? I respect Gill Leng- and she has been-IMO- bench pressed by a skewed group. It is why she is asking for as many people as possible to comment on this. If we-as doctors- we want to support her and @lengreview recommendations, we support her through organisations as best as we can. First the good news: 1. With the @TheBMA having put the PA protocol document in the public domain? The @RCPhysicians is saved the hassle of mulling over whether to open it up formally. Now that it's open, let Members & Fellows decide whether they want to take this level of supervisory responsibility. Let the wider democracy give their views 2. It's a national scope work- so we are finally moving away from the nonsense of 'local scope' Now the rest: 1. My personal view? It's a flat No from secondary care perspective No one has that level of supervisory capacity as stated in document due to job plan constraints. And we have the 'Medical Education & Training Review' yet to land @DacreJane Which means- we will have lesser trained people seeing undifferentiated patients- and cause harm. 2. In my opinion, it should be rejected by RCP et al- but I don't speak for all. Write to your College. If you- as a Resident Doctor- or Senior- feel this is ok? Write too. That is my view- and I will not want any of my loved ones to be seen by a PA as per this protocol. I have the privilege to avoid that. Question is- do you. This document goes nowhere without support of @TheBMA @RCPhysicians @rcgp et al I can guarantee you that @DHSCgovuk will not take on a pitched battle if all doctor organisations- the ones being asked to be the liability sponge- says 'No' Over to all of you. I know it feels tiring sometimes- battling the machine- while trying to improve patient safety Yet- You only lose when you give up. @mmamas1973 @djnicholl @Mumtaz_Patel_1 @OGMustafa @VictoriaTzB @SwordsFrankie