Sikora & al-Megrahi

The Guardian are reporting today that the British Government regards the release of the Lockerbie bomber, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, as a ‘mistake’, but a matter for the Scottish Government.  This is consistent with their views in opposition.  Hilary Clinton is also reported as looking into claims by Democrat senators that BP lobbied Libya.  This is politics, the US is rapidly expanding its business ties with Libya and it is incoherent to criticise the release of a terrorist while doing business with the government under whose instruction he acted.  But that is not my interest.  The Guardian state that:

New York Democrat senators Frank Lautenberg, Kirsten Gillibrand and Charles Schumer and New Jersey Democrat senator Robert Menendez called for an inquiry, after reports that a cancer expert, who backed the three-month prognosis, now believed Megrahi could live for 10 or 20 years.

But yesterday, professor Karol Sikora, medical director of CancerPartners UK, said his words were taken out of context, and that the chances of Megrahi surviving for a decade were “less than 1%”.

He said: “There was a greater than 50% chance, in my opinion, that he would die within the first three months then gradually as you go along the chances get less and less.

“So the chances of living 10 years is less than 1%, something like that.”

Sikora was one of the doctors who originally examined Megrahi and claimed last year that his 3 month estimate was made on the request of the Libyans.  This was not the first time Sikora has found himself in trouble.  Imperial College sought legal advice to prevent Sikora from erroneously claiming he was an honorary professor at the instituition.  He was also Dean of  the Faculty of Integrated Medicine until it has its contract terminated by the University of Buckingham, where Sikora is also Dean of the Medical School.  Sikora was also involved with the Prince’s Foundation for Integrated Health, Prince Charles’ pro-quackery charity until it collapsed due to financial fraud.

With respect to the claims above about the chances of living 10 years as being less than 1%, according to Cancer Research UK (CRUK), in England & Wales (Scotland is similar) 10 year survival rates are approximately 70%.  The one year survival rates are close to 90%.  Sikora’s claims appear to be inconsistent with this.

It remains a mystery to me why figures such as Sikora are employed by governments and universities.

*Update*

A commentator has pointed out that al-Megrahi had metastatic prostate cancer with a Gleason score of 9 so the figures I quoted above do not apply.  This is quite correct.  Men with metastatic prostate cancer at the time of diagnosis and with a Gleason score of 9 have a 20% chance of surviving for 10 years for someone of Megrahi’s age.  Sikora is still out by a factor of 20 and my criticism stands.

Just another point, I do not intend to let the comments descend into conspiracy theories and will delete those that persist in posting them.  My focus here is on the public credibility of Sikora, not the wider detail surrounding the Lockerbie bombing or the politics behind the extradition of al-Megrahi.

Related Posts

Comments are closed.