Hacker News Reader

Comment by threezero | Hacker News Reader

The surprise is that hospitals are allowed to act this way. Patient privacy is one thing, but this is attempting to suppress information to the public about deadly infections.

View on HN

Act in what way? Is there some obligation for hospital staff to talk to journalists?

The answer is in the post you're replying to... Public health is a reasonable priority to expect from a hospital.

Without a public conversation about resistant bugs, the causes (drug overuse) will never be addressed.

There's lots of work and discussion going on regarding drug resistance.

Funny, I've been to plenty of conferences and talks about it and I've never seen a journalist.

They just want to churn out articles like this one: FIND OUT ABOUT THIS ONE DEADLY BUG THAT NOBODY WANTS TO TALK ABOUT. No surprise they get few responses.

I don't think that's a fair characterization. The linked article is a "Times Insider" article, so an article about the reporting that went into a much longer article. It focuses on the difficulties the reporter had researching the topic, and I don't think that any of it is fear-mongery like your all-caps title.

The article whose reporting this one focuses on [0] is quite long and strikes me as being well-researched, thorough in its explanations, and not over the top in its take on the issue. Sure, there's a little bit of intrigue, but that just makes for interesting reading.

[0] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/06/health/drug-resistant-can...

That's a really fascinating thought. We often hear and talk about "public health" in the US - but also have serious issues with approving "public" health organizations and care providers. It's ironic how we want our private businesses to take care of our public health.

Their obligation is to keep the authorities informed (and these to inform the public).

At least someone is not doing their job, it seems, which is when journalism is most important.

In England there's several duties here.

1) Nolan Principles of Public Life https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-7-principles-...

> 5. Openness

> Holders of public office should act and take decisions in an open and transparent manner. Information should not be withheld from the public unless there are clear and lawful reasons for so doing.

> 6. Honesty

> Holders of public office should be truthful.

2) The Professional Standards Organisation's Standards for members of NHS boards and Clinical Commissioning Group governing bodies in England

> Honesty: I will act with honesty in all my actions, transactions, communications, behaviours and decision-making, and will resolve any conflicts arising from personal, professional or financial interests that could influence or be thought to influence my decisions as a board member

> Openness: I will be open about the reasoning, reasons,and processes underpinning my actions, transactions, communications, behaviours,and decision-making and about any conflicts of interest

We could argue that the principle of "Duty of Candour" applies. https://www.cqc.org.uk/guidance-providers/regulations-enforc...

In England I'd be pushing hard for these hospitals to be more open about what's happening and what they're doing to fix it.

I forgot the link to the PSO document. Here it is, it's just four pages and it's pretty good: https://www.professionalstandards.org.uk/docs/default-source...

It's also a paradox to their oath. You come to an hospital to get better, not leave worse. Hiding this mislead people coming in. It's sensitive, I'm not advocating for information spreading panic but still.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com