Tears before Bedtime
In the arse-about-face-under-the-arm world of Gordalf the Hobbit, it is important to put out bizarre press-releases about eyesight - even if they (a) mystify everyone (b) contradict what the PM said a mere three weeks ago on the telly and (c) clearly bear nothing beyond a tangential connection to medical reality. (As if to prove that the whole Establishment is as daft as a special-needs brush, Liam Fox praised the statement from The Far Side for 'displaying commendable transparency'. The only grounds upon which anyone could possibly offer agreement with that silly remark is to confirm that the new 'update' is indeed as easy to see through as a newly-vinegared window).
To enlarge on each point in turn - first, why reassure everyone at six pm on a Saturday night that something they've already been told is just as true today as it was when they first heard it? The very clear and obvious answer is that the Trouser Snake was caught by the media going into Moorfields. This is what one might call post-cognitive transparency. (By the by, to date nobody has caught the bugger running so much as a book on the election, let alone three miles a day)
Second - in keeping with Number Ten's track record of factual inexactitude - far from confirming their account, the statement supports the original nby story of September 4th. That is, it says quite clearly that the May 2009 examination of the Prime Ministerial eye displayed new tears on the retina. The bottom line is that Brown told viewers both here and in the US last month that there had been no change at the last eye examination: Saturday's statement proves that this was porker.
Third, to dismiss the new tears as 'insignificant' in the case of a patient with progressive retinal detachment is too ridiculous to merit sane criticism. One of my original surgical sources told me yesterday that "if a procedure to stop retinal detachment has been successful, you expect to see the patient once - not every three months".
As for Liam Fox's remark that harping on about a disability is 'unkind', the bloke must be soft in the head. The nby revelations focused on the ruthless, depressive nature of Gordon Brown (and failing eyesight) as clearly in combination ruling him out of such a vital public position - as well as the disgraceful Establishment collusion in covering this up.
We stand behind that analysis: the latest gobbledegook from Downing Street has confirmed the wisdom of our view rather than scotching it....and left the public once again unwilling to accept denials about the Prime Minister's alleged use of medication to improve his mental health.