Dr. Kadiyali Srivatsa made a protected disclosure after he collected evidence to prove wrongdoings he observed and identified the reason for in a pilot nurse-led practice in Woking. He was the salaried GP where nurses were allowed to consult registered patients, examine if necessary, and offer advice or treatment. The project aimed to see if the NHS could adopt this model and create an independent nurse-led practice that provides medical advice to citizens within the NHS.

Dr Srivatsa identified numerous problems because the patient was managed by nurses in the same practice and at the three local Walk-in clinics established in Woking by Surrey PCT as a “Pilot project”. Dr Srivatsa was employed as the trainer and assessor of nurse prescribers in this pilot project.

Once he was convinced that this method was unsafe, because there was a delay in making the correct diagnosis and providing the appropriate treatment. This is unethical because the first duty of a doctor is to make the correct diagnosis early to prevent complications, and not to "Save lives" as people have been brainwashed to believe.

Doctors know all about drugs, dose and how they work. The only drug that cured bacterial infection was Antibiotics, but now they don’t work as they used to. Drugs rarely cure and mainly offer symptomatic treatment, such as anti-inflammatories, antidepressants, antivirals, and steroids to mask symptoms, but they are not designed to eliminate the cause.

Allowing nurses to be the first point of contact gave patients the false impression that they have the knowledge and experience to diagnose, leading them to trust that the treatment will cure their illness. This is what he calls a false sense of security. Simple illnesses like a throat infection can result in a tonsillar abscess when the antibiotic dose is too low and serious illnesses are missed, requiring emergency care, as in many cases HE has shared.

Once he was convinced, he collected information to prove his concern, and made a protected disclosure, assuming the Chairman of Surrey PCT would contact me, discuss, and see my evidence, but he did not.

Three months later, he received an email informing him that the message had been passed on to the Manager of the Walk-in Clinic and the Pilot Nurse-led Practice. Unfortunately, the complaint was detrimental to them because they were the ones making the clinical errors, known as "Negligent Care."

NotebookLM AI reviewed the documents he shared, explaining cases and reports of enquiry, and illegally removed his name from the Performers list, preventing him from working as a doctor. His case was reviewed in the Grievance Proceedings, but they did not respond to the 99 points he listed because the BMA representative told them it is not necessary to conceal the truth to protect the NHS. All she was insisting on was reinstating his name on the performers’ list. The PCT also appointed a doctor, paying him £1000 to access my confidential notes without my or the patient's consent, in violation of the "Colldicot Principle." He reported this to the GMC, but no action was taken, and the doctor was appointed as a board member.