Public service unions like CUPE might fight to protect their members from getting headaches from perfume, but they do so in a way that manufactures consent for ploughing under and killing patients with undiagnosed sensitivities in health facilities where their members work.
Institutions charged with addressing attitudes betray their constituencies by remaining silent while their funder promulgates lethal misconceptions. At Women's College Hospital, for instance, long-known mainstream knowledge is obscured behind revisionist models. Persons with sensitivities are robbed of their history. Separate health issues are arbitrarily confused.
For every 100 professionals who offer to help, 98 will want to use you as needs substantiation for flaky theories, dangerous clinical practices or the unethical sale of treatments and medicine. The Canadian Society for Environmental Medicine has replaced the actual history with a self-aggrandizing revisionist version that invisibilizes patients' right to protection.
When human beings gather in groups such as the Environmental Health Associations in various provinces, they adopt ideas that violate people within and outside the group. Such violations are nearly always disguised as statements of concern that invisibilize the people who are being violated. The most seriously affected are betrayed by people with disposable time and income. The dead are betrayed by the living. By subjecting themselves to a reverse onus, by eclipsing their own history, the "cult of environmental medicine" does the same to all persons with sensitivities.
Journalists ignore information that completely refutes damaging allegations, and bully people by forwarding defamations that have been found, in official process, to be "clearly untenable." They do this even when provided with corroborable information about how they are contributing to isolation, denial of services, injury and deaths.
Some academics quite openly ridicule vulnerable persons by subjecting them to a reverse onus and then forwarding arbitrary hypotheses. This abusiveness is defended by people who confuse hatefulness and academic freedom. Abusers like Barry Beyerstein of SFU are often otherwise the most affable and caring amongst their peers.
Researchers at the University of Toronto accepted money and pretended that things already known were not known. They accepted money to research things they knew or ought to have known were impossibly defined. They allow the damaging misinterpretation of their work by funders.