The reply came back (02:21 BST 21/05/2014)

“[ .. .. ]

“Both episodes of Catalyst’s ‘The Heart of the Matter’ were reviewed by Audience and Consumer Affairs, an independent unit that reviews ABC programs to assess whether they meet our editorial standards. These standards are necessarily high, consistent with what Australian audiences expect from their national broadcaster.

“Following a thorough review of the programs, Audience and Consumer Affairs concluded that there had been a failure to meet these standards.

“The decision to remove the programs was made by senior management and the Board having regard to the seriousness of the subject matter and the possible health implications. There has been no diminution of the ABC’s editorial independence and I have in fact encouraged our science journalists to continue to investigate and report on this subject in accordance with our editorial policies.

“Yours sincerely,

“Mark Scott

“Managing Director

So that last sentence is encouraging, perhaps people power has had Mark Scott capitulate in mind, or maybe he was a sympathiser all along, anmd since he’s an MD we never get to know which.

The injustice remains mind, higher ‘editorial standards’ are being exerted upon the rightful expression of dissent than were ever applied to promotion of a totally aberrant fat/cholesterol hypothesis and the prescription guidelines (or practice) that rise(s) above it.

The consensus on fat and cholesterol emerged without ever meeting ‘editorial standards’ (even those supposedly involved by peer review) yet now it has become nigh on impossible to challenge it through channels either within peer review or outside of the process without being subjected to retrospective censorship.

What a world we live in.

https://web.archive.org/web/20131114132733/http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/3881441.htm

Appears to have gone.

Zoe Harcombe has investigated Rory Collins’ ties to statin-makers. Here is the link and find the heading ‘Funding’

http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2014/05/its-not-about-statins-its-about-censorship/#comments

Thank you Zoe

Agree wholeheartedly with your sentiment.
With the recent changes in US health insurance and the government access to all medical records through EHRs, I too fear that the insurance companies/government will enforce the doctors’ prescription orders. And the orders will, of course, be mandated to adhere to the current guidelines, which in turn, will be based on Big Pharma’s manipulated data.
As the old saying goes, just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get you…

I have many Russian and other European work colleagues and it is always they, not us British, who get most concerned about secrecy, censorship and corruption.

Pendulum testing? This sort of pseudoscientific rubbish is manna from heaven for people like Collins, who wish to portray sceptics as nut-jobs. Thanks!

No need to resort to idiotic woo when questioning statins: merely learn about the Mevalonate pathway and how statins throw a spanner into it. Sure, it’s more involved than relying on the idiometer reaction of a pendulum, but you’ll not be (deservedly) laughed out of the debating chamber.

“More troubling to me than the statin issue is the soft censorship that this action — and others like it — represent.”

Another possibility that I find very frightening is the possibility that insurance companies (in the US anyway where there is no national health insurance) will start enforcing the Dr.’s orders by dropping anyone who refuses to take statins (or any other medication) as per Dr.’s orders. This would effectively complete the Big Pharma control over our medical system. They could count on the people acting like baby birds in the nest with our mouths open wide ready to accept any drug that Pharma puts out regardless of how bad the science is for this drug.