Panorama. Monday 8.30 BBC

1

117katie

Guest
To Hazel, Emj And Andrew

And of course, to all others interested enough to read this:

As I see it, that is exactly where we all should be heading, namely ..... LISTEN TO ALL OF US ... and IF YOU DON'T ASK US ... THEN HOW CAN YOU HEAR WHAT OUR VIEWS ARE.

Regardless of what I consider to be a RUBBISH Panorama programme, which did not for one moment live up to my own personal standards and expectations of BBC Panorama,.... (and I may well need an awful lot of convincing to move forward from that privately held opinion/view), .... I am prepared to listen and to learn and hopefully to MOVE ON and to be advised on where we all may perhaps go from here.

So, Andrew, if you can suggest how we all MOVE ON, then please let us know your suggestions.

Thanks to EMJ, because deep down that is where I understood your heart to be, so my apologies if I had not cottoned on to that earlier.

And Skye, I know you are always lurking!! And encouraging and getting stuck in, which sounds just like me!

Over to you guys and gals, tell me what to do and it shall be done!

Katie:cool::confused:
 

Ashburton

Registered User
Feb 19, 2007
99
Firstly like others I would like to send my sympathies to Cheryl and Nigel. I have just watched the Panorama episode online. These are my own thoughts. Firstly anything that raises AD has to be welcomed. It has been my opinion these last few years that AD is really low down on the priority list of terminal illness.I personally think though it will make little difference, but hope to be proved wrong, we can only kepp raising the issue until AD is taken seriously.

I plan to watch it again as for me it often takes a couple viewings to get to grips with something. However before I watched it my expectations were that I would see some evidence that these drugs have an adverse effect on patients. To me I didn't really get this. AD is progressive and all of the symptoms shown on Panorama from my understanding are all part of the illness or so I have been led to believe by my mums specialist, Panorama didn't show me that these drugs actually caused these symptoms. After watching I now feel very confused as to the drugs my mum is currently on. She is on Aricept and Ebixa for AD and Solian for behaviour with Lorizapan when needed.

I am now very confused and wondering if these drugs have caused my mums sudden deteriation. Up until July this year my mum was able to travel by plane with me every second week to London and all that this involved without any adverse effect. My mums only problem was that she was starting to wake up in the night and when she did wake up she could become a bit aggressive for a very short period of time. For this she was put on Molipaxin, and this seemed to make the aggression 100 times worse. She was put on quite a high dose of valium for a month and then the Solian and has never been the same since. We no longer travel to London, we don't even go into town now. Is she like a zombie? No although when she was on the valium she was. Her speech is very poor, she stutters and still has temper outbursts, though not very bad, and like in Panorama, she does walk around the house constantly. So is this just the normal course of AD or is her medication having a negative impact? Panorama didn't provide any answers, no real evidence imo, however I am concerned enough to look into my mums drugs more and if she should still be on it.
 

Margarita

Registered User
Feb 17, 2006
10,824
london
Up until July this year my mum was able to travel by plane with me every second week to London and all that this involved without any adverse effect
My mother only ever been on Ebixa, since last year I also can not take mum on a plane like I use to , because she became so confused so distressed with fear that she can't walk up down those flight stairs because she scared of falling as her balance in her brain going , also wont go into s wheelchair to get up in to the plane so know she panic get angry with the frustration confustion can hurt me or anyone around her in her confusion

her perception how she perceive walking in open spaces has gone, but at home she fine very slowly going up stairs , so like my mother it could be the AD is progressing .

Mum does not walk around the house constantly, she only walk up down open
front door , when she worry get confused about the days of the week thinking day center people are coming when they not .

but if she not confused knows she not going anywhere she sit , sleep only getting up to go to the toilet


I have just watched the Panorama episode online. These are my own thoughts. Firstly anything that raises AD has to be welcomed. It has been my opinion these last few years that AD is really low down on the priority list of terminal illness.
Well said Ashburton
 
Last edited:
1

117katie

Guest
If only that research had been the main focus of the Panorama programme, Andrew!

I have just read the research doc that you pointed us towards in the above link, and I now realise why I was so bitterly disappointed by the Panorama programme, which I really do feel has done more harm than good.

Many thanks for the info.

Katie
 

Skye

Registered User
Aug 29, 2006
17,000
SW Scotland
If only that research had been the main focus of the Panorama programme, Andrew!
Hear hear!

The research report is documented and convincing, which the programme was not. I realise that modern reporting relies heavily on vox pops, but the focus on one case, and that a dubious one, smacks too much of tabloid journalism.

Thanks for the link, Andrew.
 
Last edited:

Margarita

Registered User
Feb 17, 2006
10,824
london
So many if only Katie :) I just been reading that link thanks Andrew, Katie they so much to read on that link how could they have coved that in Just half an hour of Air time . we where lucky to get any Air time on TV, when it come to Drugs for AZ

interesting to read that since 04, doctors in UK have know about anti-psychotic drugs negative effect on people with dementia
 
1

117katie

Guest
I could not agree more, Hazel. This was a shabby programme.

Nothing to do with Vox Pops - it might have been better if they had included a few, meaning - GO OUT TO THE STREETS AND STICK YOUR MICROPHONE IN FRONT OF AS MANY OF THE VOICES (= VOX) OF THE POPULATION (= POP) YOU CAN FIND AND TELL US WHAT THEY SAY.

Failed, Panorama. Missed a Golden Opportunity. Yes, I know I've said that before, boring old f... that I am, but

PANORAMA MISSED A GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY.

I will try hard - very hard - not to say that again!!! Promise.

Katie
 

Margarita

Registered User
Feb 17, 2006
10,824
london
How Katie if it was not for the courage of Eric daughter to come forward to the people of panorama , none of this would of been highlighted so much . Don't forget it was Eric story .

Not a miss OPPORTUNITY for Eric Family to have him included in that half hour so not taken up with all the research
 
Last edited:
1

117katie

Guest
Sorry, Folk,s, I Said I Wouldn't But I Have No Choice ....

Quote from Margarita:
So many if only Katie I just been reading that link thanks Andrew, Katie they so much to read on that link how could they have coved that in Just half an hour of Air time . we where lucky to get any Air time on TV, when it come to Drugs for AZ

Dear Margarita

That research should - and could - so easily have been the main focal point of that short programme.

Prof Ballard featured for less than 2 minutes - and yes, I have since read the complete transcript of the programme available on the Panorama webiste.

It would have been so easily to have featured the whole of that research, not in pictures, but in essence - rather than the Hollingworth family. Spy camera and Marks and Spencer handbag added nothing whatsoever to our knowledge or understanding of the effects that drugs have.

Was that "spy footage" shown to any of the Expert featured? Did it really show anything? I could have shot the same shots of my relative with my camcorder - and she's not taking any anti-psychotic drugs.

Trust me, Margarita, it truly would have been so simple.

Professor Ballard, I would guess that you are no happier than I am about the fact that your research was highlighted at the BEGINNING of the programme, but was not featured until about 22 minutes into a 26 programme. And then only for a couple of minutes.

Final point to Margarita and anyone: millions of people will have been frightened - NEEDLESSLY and UNNECESSARILY and WITHOUT SUBSTANTION IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE - and that can only do more damage to RELATIVES and CARERS and VIEWERS OF TELEVISION.

Personally, SHABBY AIRTIME is worth nothing at all. And I personally would prefer NO AIRTIME to SHABBY AIRTIME, because SHABBY AIRTIME DOES NOTHING TO HELP US.

And the BBC and Panorama should want to have nothing to do with SHABBY AIRTIME.

That is why I feel so distressed by that programme. That is why I still would like someone to tell us how long that programme took in the making; who approached whom to make that particular programme; was there any undisclosed influence by any family member, and I suspect there may have been.

That was a truly shoddy programme.

Sorry, folks, I know I said I would retreat quietly into the background about this particular programme, but I cannot do so.

Katie:eek::mad::mad::mad::eek::eek::eek::mad::mad::mad:
 

Brucie

Registered User
Jan 31, 2004
12,413
near London
My view, as a member, is that anything that gets dementia discussed is fine by me.

The situation of the family is not an issue; the issue is the use of these medications.

The family was merely illustrative, but courageous.

If you haven't put yourself on the line in bringing the pains of dementia to the world at large, perhaps it is a good thing just to concentrate on the main issue - the medication. :)

...just posted as a member... :)
 

Skye

Registered User
Aug 29, 2006
17,000
SW Scotland
Nothing to do with Vox Pops - it might have been better if they had included a few, meaning - GO OUT TO THE STREETS AND STICK YOUR MICROPHONE IN FRONT OF AS MANY OF THE VOICES (= VOX) OF THE POPULATION (= POP) YOU CAN FIND AND TELL US WHAT THEY SAY.

Katie, I do understand vox pop. I'm a linguist for goodness sake, and actually taught Latin!

My point was that the programme only portrayed one vox, and that one very biassed. The programme would have been better if other views had been included.

Maggie, you're right, the family's view was valid. What I'm saying is that others have different experiences, and to show only one was to was to give a skewed picture.

Panorama used to be known for its honesty of reporting.
 
1

117katie

Guest
Don't agree, Bruce, but you probably knew I wouldn't!

If we accept a rubbish presentation of our problems then we are destined to lose each and every fight we are all involved in.

We DEVALUE the PROBLEM.

We DEVALUE the STRUGGLE.

We DISCREDIT our relatives.

WE DEVALUE THE STRUGGLE THEY ARE FACING.

I would never wish to have anything to do with a programme which USED one family's fight with NUMEROUS ISSUES, IF IT WAS USED ONLY TO just to bring the subject to the screen.

There was absolutely nothing TRANSMITTED IN THE PANORAMA PROGRAMME which gave any indication that Eric's problems were DIRECTLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE MEDICATIONS AND THE DURATION OF THOSE MEDICATION-TAKINGS.

Nothing whatsoever.

There was no mention made of any of the other MAJOR PERSONAL FAMILY ISSUES BEING FOUGHT AND ONGOING by one particular family.

Please ALz Soc: tell me what Prof Ballard and the 2 other Experts (whose names I cannot for the moment cite) feel about the total and complete presentation of the medication issues, and whether they feel happy that the programme did justice to the issues we are all/may be all facing.

And if they are totally comfortable with the programme, then I will RETIRE, possibly but not guaranteed!!!!

Katie
 
1

117katie

Guest
Sorry, Dear Heart, Did Not Mean To Offend!

I was not drawing attention to the meaning of VOX POPS for your benefit, I promise you, because nobody uses the words VOX POPS unless they understand those words.

I was merely drawing attention to them for those who might not understand them. Vox Pops mean something special in the television world, as demonstrated by Esther Rantzen, who trawled the streets with her microphone doing VOX POPS - TALKING TOT HE PEOPLE.

Perhaps that is what we need to do, go out and DO VOX POPS WITH OUR MICROPHONE! I WOULD VOLUNTEER TO DO THAT, bearing in mind the earlier post about The Voiceless Ones!!

I too an a trained linguist!!! But not always a trained keyboard-operator!

Shall GO GIRL GO!

Katie
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Skye

Registered User
Aug 29, 2006
17,000
SW Scotland
If you haven't put yourself on the line in bringing the pains of dementia to the world at large, perhaps it is a good thing just to concentrate on the main issue - the medication. :)
I have, Bruce, many times over the last few years; radio, TV and press, both local and national, and I know how 'exposed' it makes you feel.

That is why I have attacked the programme-makers, not the family.
 

Margarita

Registered User
Feb 17, 2006
10,824
london
What I'm saying is that others have different experiences, and to show only one was to was to give a skewed picture.

I do get your point, but mine is that people have to want to have they live open and aired on TV about the benefits of those drugs or not for they love one with dementia , if you want that side of the story to be know you just cant intruded into people lives when they caring for someone with dementia and just stick a microphone in they face.

with all due respect I understand where your coming from as I know your John on anti-psychotic drugs
 
Last edited:
1

117katie

Guest
Skye, I Am Not Attacking The Family ....

I am attacking the PROGRAMME MAKERS, and I have sent a formal complaint to THE PROGRAMME MAKERS, because unless I know the basic function/ethos of the PROGRAMME, then I will still have questions to ask.

Believe me, please, I have no axe to grind with the family - well, perhaps a few mini-axelets, because having read all the press coverage that I can find over the last few days, ands which they have acquired since 2005, which I was unaware of until AFTER WATCHING THE PROGRAMME, I have enormous questions to ask about that with which we are being asked to empathise, and sympathise, and in which we are being asked to place our trust.

I may change my name to PITA.

KATIE
 

Brucie

Registered User
Jan 31, 2004
12,413
near London
Skye said:
I have, Bruce, many times over the last few years; radio, TV and press, both local and national, and I know how 'exposed' it makes you feel.
Hi Hazel, I wasn't referring to you - I know the work you have done.

Speaking entirely as a member - 117katie, will you please stop flicking your caps lock on, it's annoying and unnecessary, and something I always recommend to my grandson that he not do. :) A few less bolds and underlines might not go amiss as well. If the words are valid they don't need embellishing as we all read English here.:) Sorry, but I have a background in design of documents

Perhaps you should be addressing the BBC and its Panorama team, since they put the programme together?
 
1

117katie

Guest
Sorry

Sorry, but I don't have a background in design, nor do I have a background in alzheimers or dementia, or in anything other than being a human being.

I can only apologise TO ALL OF YOU TP PEOPLE if I have not yet learnt all the rules of the TP.

I will try harder.

But why the heck it should matter whether I hit the caps lock or the bold or the red button or the whatever else I CHOOSE TO DO WITH MY POSTS should affect the content is beyond me.

But then I guess, if the APPEARANCE is more important than the CONTENT, then I may have to go and take lessons.

Sorry, Guys and Gals, I am a beginner at this game, so if APPEARANCE really is more important than the CONTENT, than shall think again about the world we all live in.

Sorry Bruce to have upset you.

Katie