Documents attached to bibliography entries

CBC journalists, along with others, have contributed to the daily unnecessary killing of persons with sensitivities by insisting that the theories of doctors of environmental medicine should be imposed in stories in such a way that eclipses the actual, long, mainstream history of sensitivities. CBC journalists have made a sport out of the health and security of persons with sensitivities, encouraging physicians to subject persons who experience repeatable, controllable circumstances to a reverse onus, contrary to the ethical guidelines of the Canadian Medical Association and human rights law.

The City of Ottawa once ensured the accommodation of swimmers who are sensitive to chlorine by disinfecting pool water with other methods. This accommodation lasted for a few years, until bigotry and consequent exclusion returned to City Hall.

Chemlawn was willing to give notice to persons with sensitivities about spraying fully thirteen years earlier than public health officials in Ottawa.

While CHRC staff were encouraging physicians to subject patients to a reverse onus, contrary to the ethical guidelines of the Canadian Medical Association, five senior officials, including Yalden, were trying to protect the human rights of persons with sensitivities. Once Yalden was replaced by Michelle Falardeau Ramsay, every one of the supportive senior policy persons left the CHRC, and the bigotry and abusiveness of Commission middle management reasserted themselves. Since Yalden left the commission, more than 50,000 Canadians with undiagnosed sensitivities have been unnecessarily killed in health care.

McCourt ignores a publicly insured method of diagnosis, not to mention three hundred years of clinical history and scientific literature. She ignores a clinician's responsibility to listen to patients, and not to subject them to a reverse onus about their experience of repeatable, controllable circumstances. She eclipses the history and rights, not to mention her own professional and ethical responsibilities behind debate about the theories of so-called "doctors of environmental medicine." What a horror she must live with, with so many tens of thousands of Canadians unnecessarily killed since she imposed her sloppy, bumbling opinion!

CMHA Ottawa branch became informed about the effects of sensitivities on the central nervous system in some persons, and the warnings of Ashford and Miller that in ambiguous cases sensitivities should be ruled out before treatments that could hurt people with sensitivities are embarked on. Deadwood Ed Pennington and CMHA Ontario head Howard Richardson ignored the concern and current CMHA leadership has demonstrated an astonishing arrogance and irresponsibility concerning these consumers.

CMHC was once addressing the housing needs of persons with sensitivities, about 11% of the population according to 2010 US National Council on Disability housing study

Program to upgrade rental properties to accommodate disabilities.

Tragically, the CPA pretends that the effects of sensitivities on the central nervous system is a new idea, and ignores the existence of a legally obligating, publicly insured method of diagnosis. They ignore sources as famous as the classic textbook on mental health written by the Father of American psychiatry, Benjamin Rush. They ignore the 1985 literature review by Garfield. And they ignore professional ethics and human decency.

The complaint, which was that CBC was replacing the actual history of persons with sensitivities with a debate about the approaches of clinical ecologists was not dealt with by the CRTC. Instead, they decided they knew what the complainant was complaining about better than he did, investigated a different complaint, and dismissed it.

CRTC process sends complaint to respondent for response.

CBC tried to stonewall, CRTC asks again that they respond.

The Ontario coroner wrote after a suicide in June, 1989, in Timmins. The victim had been denied benefits on the basis of a hateful article by Donna Stewart and Joel Raskin in the CMAJ. It would take this second article before the three DM's the coroner wrote would do anything, and then it was only the Ministries of Community and Social Services and Housing that responded. The Ontario Ministry of Health continued to lie about the fact that the 1985 Thomson report had identified an existing, publicly insured method of diagnosis, and that the OMA felt that the social needs of patients should be addressed.

US Lawyer Earon Davis responds to arbitrary hatefulness from author who ignores centuries of history, clinical and professional ethics, right of persons with sensitivities to freedom from arbitrary interference.

Hateful response to the nonsense of the cult of environmental medicine.

JAMA makes a sport out of the personal security and well being of persons with sensitivities, ignores history, focuses on debate about doctors of environmental medicine instead of abuse and killing by physicians.

Wilson wrote several letters supporting concerns about psych patients whose problems are caused or exacerbated by environmental sensitivities.

Description of how Fresh Air Brick was used to help move federal government forward on concerns about environmental sensitivities.

In 1986, Brown could have made a human rights complaint against any of dozens of parties that came under the jurisdiction of the Ontario Human Rights Code. He chose the DHC because it was a group of people, and because if you can't get into planning you can't get in anywhere. The DHC organized one conference about sensitivities, and then ignored the concern as locals with undiagnosed sensitivities were unnecessarily killed weekly. Nearly a decade later, they promised to write a report about the abuse of persons with sensitivities in local health care, but then disbanded.

Pages one and two only.

In the case of pesticides affecting health, there is not necessarily the repeated, controlled circumstances of a person reporting sensitivities. The same arguments that apply to persons with sensitivities do not apply when arguing about the onset of sensitivities. i.e. human rights and clinical ethics require us not to subject persons who experience repeatable controllable circumstances to a reverse onus, but identifying a one-off exposure as the cause of developing sensitivities is more complicated.

This was the first of two articles written by Christie McLaren of the Globe and Mail. What can one deduce when the DM of a Ministry claims not to have received a letter from the province's chief coroner concerning a death to which the ministry contributed?

List of human rights concerns, supportive acts by government so far.

Health Canada was working to protect persons with sensitivities and had, by this point, identified attitudes in medicine as a problem. However, management in the department was still focusing on debate about the ideas of doctors of environmental medicine instead of looking at more than a hundred years of supportive science and clinical experience with sensitivities affecting the central nervous system. Some of this experience was detailed in the bibliography of "Healthy Environments for Canadians" (1987), in Eugene Garfield's excellent 1985 literature review, and in references provided by Ashford and Miller. The fact that the concern had become associated with the smoetimes whacko and unethical ideas and practices of doctors of environmental medicine was (and is) a huge distraction.

The fact that Health and Welfare was having a conference on the subject of sensitivities was very welcome in 1990. It was the first of two conferences they organized, the second being in December 1992.

Ashford and Miller recommended that, in ambiguous cases it is important to rule out sensitivities before administering treatments that could be harmful to a person with sensitivities and before labelling a patient in such a way as to make it difficult for them to obtain reasonable accommodation for disabling sensitivities.

Thanks to Bruce Halliday, MP, and many others, Perrin Beatty acted on the position first supported by Jake Epp, and instructed Health and Welfare to address attitude problems that were (and now again are) contributing to the unnecessary injury and killing of persons with sensitivities in health care.

Ashford and Miller recommended that, in ambiguous cases, where symptoms could be caused by sensitivities or by some other factor, sensitivities should be ruled out before subjecting the patient to treatments that could be injurious to persons disabled by sensitivities, and labelling that could interfere with their ability to get reasonable accommodation.

List of critics in official opposition...missing page 4

Although MCSS Ministers claimed to provide equal services to persons disabled by sensitivities, regional offices were denying benefits, again because the Ontario Ministry of Health was lying about the existence of a publicly insured method of diagnosis, and others were focusing on debate about doctors of environmental medicine instead of on the actual history of persons with sensitivities.

Several social assistant applicants/recipients had suicided after abused by MCSS officials. Beer ignores this. The Ontario Ministry of Health was lying about the availability of a publicly insured method of diagnossis. Beer ignores this. More than 30,000 Ontario residents with undiagnosed sensitivities have been unnecessarily killed since.

MCSS minister completely misses the point about abuse and killing of persons with sensitivities, continues Liberal deceit of discussing clinical ecology while ignoring history of persons with sensitivities. (page one only)

Danson had been asked to ensure that persons whose central nervous system dysfunction is caused or exacerbated by environmental sensitivities were identified, given proper care, and protected from treatments that could injure of kill them. Instead of asking the question he was asked, he reframed the discussion to avoid issues of ongoing abuse, and attitudes concerning persons with CNS problems caused or exacerbated by sensitivities. His reframing appears to have been worked out in conjunction with the abusers about whom he had been approached, so as to give them a way of answering that avoided issues related to the ten percent of Ontario suicides that result from psychiatrists ploughing under such patients.

It may seem a minor point in this letter, but here a clinical ecologist forwards the crazed notion that people with sensitivities suffer from a single syndrome rather than a compendium of disorders.

Porter was one of dozens of MP's and cabinet ministers who referred the concern to the health minister.

Ashford and Miller warned that it is important to rule out sensitivities in patients where symptoms might be caused by sensitivities or by something else before subjecting the patient to treatments that might harm a person with sensitivities.

Public Works, Justice and Treasury Board have decided to finally come to make federal buildings accessible to persons disabled by environmental sensitivities at least a dozen times since 1990. Each time policies are implemented inconsistently across departments, and eventually "forgotten." Public servants health, careers and families have been adversely affected by hatefulness in this area, and sabotaged by bigotry in CHRC managers, staff and commissioners after Max Yalden.

Public servants were being blocked from advancement, excluded from jobs, having their careers ruined, and consequently losing their families, because Health and Welfare officials were dismissing their sensitivities on the inane basis of handwriting analysis and other bizarre and unethical methods. Because the medical profession was and is invisibilizing the unnecessary killing of patients with sensitivities in health care, it was necessary to approach the issue by asking non-medical entities for reasonable accommodation under human rights laws. Bonnie Cham, the Chair of the Ethics Committee of the Canadian Medical Association in 2009 is still invisibilizing the contribution of CMA members to the daily unnecessary killing of Canadians with undiagnosed sensitivities in health care.

Psychiatrists and gastroenterologists may kill the greatest numbers of persons with sensitivities. Those who were approaching Health and Welfare in the early 1990's agreed with Ashford and Miller that special attention was needed to protect persons whose central nervous system dysfunction is caused or exacerbated by sensitivities. The CPA found two negative articles, ignored supportive science and clinical experience dating back more than a hundred years, and still, despite approaches from others including Health Canada, hatefully encourages its members to lethally abuse patients in this group.

With the exception of two letters clarifying the fact that the CMA has never expressed scepticism about the health complaint of persons with sensitivities, the CMA has remained silent as its members contribute to the daily killing of Canadians with undiagnosed sensitivities.

Axworthy was a hole-in-the-pocket socialist (who eventually became a Liberal) who was willing to ask gentle questions, but chickened out when it came to more serious questions, such as the unnecessary killing of patients in health care. With social democrats like him, who needs neo-cons?

Walker and his staff were very helpful until the Liberals were elected to government. He had a firm grasp of the human rights issues, but did not know the history of sensitivities except for the controversy around the cult of environmental medicine. He understood that, for persons with sensitivities, attitudinal pollution was more important than pollution itself.

Ashford and Miller warned that, in ambiguous cases, it is important to rule out sensitivities before embarking on treatments that could hurt a patient if they have sensitivities.

Ashford and Miller referenced literature back to 1880, and provided an important warning that Health and Welfare came to support. It was that, in ambiguous cases, where symptoms could be caused by sensitivities or by something else, it is important to rule out sensitivities before doing something that could cause harm to the patient if the symptoms result from sensitivities.

John Manley was quick to criticize Mulroney's government for not acting when it was actually working to protect persons with sensitivities from being caused preventable harm. When Manley's party got into office, they threw out the work the health department was doing, and so the people who were supposed to be protected are being injured or killed, instead. Manley literally turned his back on complaints that public officials under Chretien were lying about the work that had been done previously, and about possessing the legally obligating knowledge on which that work was based. See http://ages.ca/content/manley-knew-0

Good-hearted Marlene Caterall puts forward the official line of provincial Liberals, ignoring the fact there is and always has been a publicly insured method of diagnosing sensitivities, and that the controversy is about the silly ideas of clinical ecology, not about the health complaint of persons with sensitivities. Her irresponsible assumption that there is a lack of science and a lack of clinical experience exemplifies, as well as anything, how prejudice and mythology in the hands of well meaning people who make irresponsible assumptions contributes to the unnecessary exclusion, injury and killing of person with sensitivities across Canada.

McLeod was informed about sensitivities but ignored the unnecessary injury and killing of persons with sensitivities when she became Liberal leader. Perhaps it is because her campaign manager was from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, certainly the most negligent party in the medical community concerning the ongoing unnecessary killing of persons with sensitivities in health care.

1990 Accessibility guidelines for NAC ignore persons with sensitivities.

Mary Lamielle is the most sensible American activist on the subject of chemical injuries and environmental sensitivities. Like myself, they adopted an approach that used disability rights to get around the power that even abusive physicians have in health care. Their group was also instrumental in getting New Jersey to commission a report on the effects of low level exposure to chemicals, a report which won a Macedo award and was a great help in arming constructive forces in Canada.

Kehoe misses the point about whether the new city hall will accommodate persons with sensitivities, focuses on immediate effects of construction work, an issue that was not raised. Politicians often miss the point on things that are clearly expressed to them. Fortunately, others at City Hall ensured that consultants were involved who could advise on measures to accommodate persons with sensitivities. Unfortunately, these measures were immediatly compromised when city staff took over the newly constructed City Hall. Hatefulness and breaches of the Ontario Human Rights Code by City of Ottawa officials, including pulic health officials, continue through 2009.