Oh, I'm afraid you misunderstand me. I wrote that I cannot say anything about the training, since I have not attended or visited St. Christopher's.
However, I CAN say some things about the school's accreditation, or lack of same - and yes, I do think there's a link between accreditation and legitimacy:
FACT: No med school in Senegal, not even the state-run university, is certified as being US equivalent by Texas.
http://www.tsbme.state.tx.us/professionals/docinfo/STDNHPSE.rtf
FACT: Despite having it's main campus in England, St. Chris is NOT accredited by the GMC.
http://www.chms.ac.uk/fschlweb.html
FACT: St. Chris is NOT recognized by California (and thus Arizona). Nor is ANY school in Senegal.
http://www.medbd.ca.gov/Approved_Schools.htm#S
FACT: St. Chris IS on the WHO directory of medical schools. however, please note that WHO clearly states that:
"Readers are reminded that WHO has no authority to grant any form of recognition or accreditation to schools of medicine or other training institutions. Such a procedure remains the exclusive prerogative of the national government concerned. WHO limits itself to publishing information on medical schools that has been provided or confirmed by the governments of its Member States."
http://www.who.int/hrh/wdms/en/
SO what we have left is any accreditation carried out by the Senegal gov't. (would that be in Senegal or the UK, under what circumstances, when and by whom??). And in fact Senegal as so far been unable to convince ANYBODY that the country's own medical traning is acceptable. However, they can of course, as a sovereign nation, put anybody they want to on the WHO list. A priviledge which is also fully exploited by a number of Caribbean island-nations.
BUT if bts4202 can provide independent verification of training standards, I'd of course be happy to see them. Since bts4202 probably hasn't attended a US or established European medical school, I would venture that it's a bit hard to compare medical training on such a basis..