You are here
Documents attached to bibliography entries
“Ontario Minister of Labour Bob Mackenzie ignores responsibilities, history, rights of persons affected, denies protections normally available to workers”. 1994.,
When there is a cliche way of thinking and dealing with an issue, you can count on politicians and public servants to adopt it, no matter what the costs to the people affected, no matter what their rights, no matter what the public officials' responsibility. One should compare Mackenzie's letter with that of former Ontario DM of Labour, George Thomson.
“Ontario Ministry of Health announces clinic for persons with sensitivities”. 1994.,
A decade (and several thousand unnecessary deaths) after the findings of the Report of the Ad Hoc Committee recommended efforts to address attitudes in health care, the Ministry of Health announces a clinic that does not meet the standard recommended. At the same time, the Ministry of Health invisibilizes the actual history, rights and needs of persons with sensitivities, instead putting forward a discussion about the "new" ideas of doctors of environmental medicine. The clinic was not implemented until another government was elected. Ontario politicians and public servants continue to refuse to address their contribution to the unnecessary injury and killing of persons with sensitivities in health care.
“Ontario Ministry of Health backgrounder eclipses history of sensitivities behind debate about environmental medicine”. 1994.,
Despite warnings in official reports, from medical educators and organized medicine, the Ontario Minsitry of Health continued to equate the consideration of the assertions of doctors of environmental medicine with the centuries old needs, rights and history of persons with sensitivities. This approach resulted in thousands of preventable deaths and assisted a fringe group of professionals in appropriating the voice of persons whose health complaint had long been known to science, medicine and civil health authorities. Some day someone should study how a long-existing, well known problem for which there was a publicly insured method of diagnosis could be eclipsed behind the irresponsible assertions of a small group of physicians!
“Ontario Ministry of Health Jodey Porter refers request for conference funding to Katy Nau, MoH”. 1994.,
The Ministry of Health did help fund the National Conference on Children with Sensitivities, but they did not and have not stopped contributing to the daily unnecessary killing of persons with sensitivities in health care.
“Ontario Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister responsible for disabilities, Gary Malkowski, defers to bigotry in Ministry of Health”. 1994.,
It would be hard to question Mr. Malkowski's commitment to disability rights, but he turned a blind eye on his own government's abuse of persons disabled by sensitivities. No one is immune to stereotypical thinking, or to betraying other human beings on the basis of cliches and selective perception.
“Ontario Public School Teachers' Federation invites letter to editor criticising Nature of Things program”. 1994.,
Suzuki program eclipses history of chemically induced sensitivities behind debate about the supposedly new ideas of doctors of environmental medicine, encouraging equivocation as children across Canada are being abused.
“Ontario Solicitor General David Christopherson ignores criminal abuse of patients, endangerment by Ministry of Health officials”. 1994.,
Bob Rae's government refused to see the rights of people with sensitivities, denied them protections that are normally available to the public, instead immersed themselves in debate about the approaches of so-called "doctors of environmental medicine."
“Sensitivities in the Classroom”, 1994.,
Article outlines some of the concerns about learning and behavioural sequelea of sensitivities, health concerns in classroom, need to accommodate children with these disabilities through environmental changes.
“Something in the Air”, 1994.,
Supportive article about chemically induced sensitivities in Gulf war vets. Ignores history, treats clinical ecologists as discovers of these age old problems.
“AEHA Branches 1995”. 1995.
In 1995, AEHA was a national organization, and had branches across Canada. After everyone who had a consumer perspective left the organization in the late 1990's, the organization fractured into fragments across the country.
“AEHA National Board 1995”. 1995.
In 1995, AEHA had representation from across Canada.
“AEHA National forms committee to look into abuse”. 1995.
It is almost unbelievable that, 15 years ago, the attached committee was formed, and the attached motion was passed by AEHA National at AGM Board meeting. Neither were acted on, as Featherstone, Maclennan, Molot, Marshall, Krop, Armstrong crap, pulled the group back to being only a fan club for doctors of environmental medicine. It was a good committee, and a good motion, but absolutely no follow through. ALL of the speakers at the AGM were physicians, except one guy at the end of the day who talked about housing renovations. Jerry Ross actually said that the critics of environmental medicine were all saying that it was all in peoples' heads, which was not my experience at all. The function of Ross's comments were to unethically scare consumers into the environmental medicine fold. It is the meeting where I met Joffres, by demanding an apology from him for saying that sensitivities were not accepted, and that we needed research before they could be accepted. I was so incredibly offended to see that everything that had moved forward before 1993 was being sabotaged, not by the enemy, but by a chapter in NS and others who, in 1995, were where the Ottawa Branch had been in 1983. Nothing invisibilizes history like fanaticism. There was an incredibly goofy naturopath who had everyone under his spell, convincing them that what they needed, first and foremost, was an acceptance of naturopathy. I sat across from him at lunch and, just before we left, when finished, I asked him to get out of our faces, that he was using us for needs substantiation and setting us back in the process. I think he could tell the level of rage that was behind my quiet but very terse dressing down of him. Eventually he was out of the picture. At one point, a doctor in the audience whose wife had sensitivities got up and gave me a dressing down for criticising Joffres. He said that "the way things work" was that we needed research, just like we needed Lister before we dealt with infection. I wish I'd known then that the words "infective" and "pestilential" predated Lister by centuries.
“AEHA National VP writes Ontario MPP about abuse of children with consequent learning and behavioural disabilities”. 1995.,
Many school boards still think it is appropriate to horrifically abuse children by only dealing with the results of their reactions, not preventing them.
“AEHA President Greg Booth to HC Diane Marleau about using currently available information to protect people”. 1995.,
Diane Marleau ignored this appeal and dozens of others, and she threw out the work that Health and Welfare had done before 1993, so the people who were supposed to be protected are being injured or killed, instead. Tens of thousands of Canadians with sensitivities have been unnecessarily killed in health care since.
“AEHA Rotor to CHRC John Dwyer emphasising extent of abuse”. 1995.,
Let it be known that many people with sensitivities have suffered serious damages as a result of abuse by persons in positions of authority, including, but certainly not limited to people within the Canadian and provincial Human Rights Commissions. When even Chris Brown who has devoted his life to trying to get justice done is unable to be heard, you can be quite sure that desperate people are going to focus on survival methods which are more practical than spending years persisting in a process in which they are further discredited and emotionally abused.
“AEHA Update - Premiere Edition”. 1995.
AEHA had professional editor for national publication for a while before the national board and organization imploded. This was the first issue.
“AEHA VP Elizabeth Stutt writes AEHA President Greg Booth indicating that need for research is not excuse not to end abuse”. 1995.,
At one time, AEHA was not afraid to speak out about the ongoing abuse of persons with sensitivities in health care.
“Backgrounder on sensitivities from Nova Scotia Environmental Health Centre”. 1995.
NS Environmental Health Centre focuses on one manifestation of sensitivities, perhaps doing a disservice by giving the impression that all persons with sensitivities have the same problem, cause, mechanism.
“Brown to Canadian Senators after Health Minister Diane Marleau fumbled the ball”. 1995.,
After a half decade of acting to protect persons with sensitivities from being killed in the health care system, and excluded or injured there and elsewhere, Diane Marleau fumbled the ball. Abusive attitudes returned to the federal health department.
“Brown to District Health Council Denise Albrecht about DHC's failure to keep commitments made in an OHRC settlement”. 1995.,
In a 1990 OHRC settlement, the Ottawa Carleton District Health Council promised to keep sensitivities in mind in health planning. They did not do so. Hundreds of local persons with sensitivities have been unnecessarily killed in local health care since. This note was written in 1995, with the hope that the DHC would start keeping its commitment. Even in its subsequent manifestation as the Champlain District Health Council, it never did.
“Brown to OMA John Krauser about attitude of OMA rep to Ministry of Education Special Education Advisory Committee”. 1995.,
It is extremely important to note that Dr. Mahoney became an advocate for children with learning and behavioural disabilities resulting from sensitivities, and spoke at the 1996 National Conference of Children with Sensitivities in 1996. He is an example of a physician, medical leader, who was able to learn and help protect children.
“Can't you care enough to stop the poisoning?”, 1995.,
When preventable harm occurs because of attitudes, it is usually a result of misconceptions. In 1995, Health Canada officials were lying about work they had done prior to the 1993 election and, more importantly, they were lying about possessing the information on which that work was based.
“Correspondence with Assembly of First Nations about children with sensitivities”. 1995.,
AFN has lots of issues to deal with. Meanwhile, there can be no doubt that, with housing and nutrition conditions, sensitivities are affecting the health of First Nations people across Canada, including a contribution to suicides.
“HRDC Minister Lloyd Axworthy refers concern to Health Minister, ignores responsibilities in his own department”. 1995.,
HRDC has several responsibilities concerning human rights and disabled persons, but it is easier to pass the buck.
“MP Beryl Gaffney raises issues with HWC Marleau, while invisibilizing previous work done by the federal health department”. 1995.,
Gaffney had invited input to a Liberal committee task force on disabilities, she had discussed the issues, she was familiar with the fact that Health and Welfare had been encouraging the protection of persons with sensitivities until 1993. Why did she not mention any of this when raising the issue with a Liberal health minister who was invisibilizing this previous work?
“MP Mauril Belanger recommends Brown to Parliamentary health committee”. 1995.,
Belanger was helpful, but there was little he could do as Liberal cabinet ministers covered up lethal mistakes made by former health minister Diane Marleau.
“Ontario AG Ministry dodges abuse issues, refers concern to lawyer for abusers in Ministry of Health”. 1995.,
The Attorney General of Ontario and public servants in his ministry turned a blind eye on criminal endangerment of children and other vulnerable persons with sensitivities in Ontario.
“AEHA Newsletter Editor warns Ottawa Branch about Rose Featherstone”. 1996.,
A very wise warning from Nova Scotia. Rose Featherstone sabotaged the position taken by AEHA's official representatives with federal political parties, sabotaged the constitutional operation of AEHA's national board and was, almost as much as doctors of environmental medicine, responsible for the demise and fragmentation of the national organization of persons with sensitivities in Canada.
“AEHA Ottawa points out that consumer protections are more important than supporting "enviromental medicine"”. 1996.,
Joe Krop's supporters helped turn the media against us. They told the media that CPSO did not believe sensitivities were real, which was false. They were parroting the lie that was often told by doctors of environmental medicine, who told their patients that any criticism of their methods was done only because the CPSO did not believe the health complaint was real. The damage that was done by the berserk mob that was supporting doctor Krop is incalculable. Journalists believed what they were told by Toronto area consumers, despite the fact that the CPSO had written to every Ontario MPP to tell them that their concerns about Dr. Krop did not reflect a lack of concern about persons with sensitivities, but merely concern about the methods used by doctors of environmental medicine. It would be hard to calculate the damage that has been done to persons with sensitivities by the cult of environmental medicine.
“AEHA Pamphlet on students with sensitivities”. 1996.
Between 1991 and 1998, the Ottawa Branch of AEHA had several professionals on the board who had experience with other issues and organizations. A lot of educational materials were produced and distributed, many of them picked up by other branches across Canada.
“AEHA Pamphlet on workplace accommodation”. 1996.
In the mid 1990's, AEHA Ottawa produced some excellent educational materials. This one was designed to encourage the accommodation of workers.
“Brown complains to health minister David Dingwall about involvement of bigot Arthur Leznoff in Gage Institute research concerning persons with sensitivities”. 1996.,
Leznof was well known for subjecting persons with sensitivities to a reverse onus in clinical settings, i.e. placing the presumption on the wrong side with respect to their experience of repeatable, controllable circumstances.
“Brown sends mail merge into Health Canada concerning innappropriateness of involving Gage Institute's Arthur Leznoff in related research”. 1996.,
Arthur Leznoff had made a significant contribution to the exclusion, injury and unnecessary killing of persons with sensitivities. His arbitrary dismissal of environmental sensitivities had no place in publicly funded research. On the other hand, Health Canada had contributed to the unnecessary killing of thousands of Canadians with sensitivities. For bigots who had reasserted control of the issue in the federal health department, Leznoff's involvement was welcome.
“MPP John Baird ignores existing, publicly insured means of diagnosis, lists positive things being done to help persons with sensitivities”. 1996.,
Baird confuses fact of sensitivities not being caused by one disease with fact that sensitivities have been known to medicine for centuries, and with existence of publicly insured method of diagnosis. Then, after getting the basics wrong, he lists a number of positive things that are being done by government to help persons with sensitivities.
“Brown - Memo to self concerning Mac Harb's confusion”. 1997.
Mac Harb has been said to have sensitivities. If he does, he is identifying with a subgroup, ignoring the actual history of sensitivities, putting forward revisionist information from the cult of environmental medicine. Certainly his understanding is less than that demonstrated by fellow MP Paul McCrossan.
“SolGen Any Scott refers negligence and endangerment concerns to RCMP”. 1998.,
Health officials were making statements they knew or ought to have known were contributing to injuries and deaths, directly in contravention of direction from the DM of health in 1987, not to mention various studies, reports and consumer representations.
“Thomson introduces Accommodation Guide, comments on officialdom backsliding on protections”. 2001.,
Thomson reiterates findings of 1985 Ontario Ministry of Health report, comments on how progress had been made, but that things have slipped back to where they were before his committee's report was written. He forwards the idea that protection issues are hidden behind a legitimate but separate debate.
“Provincial Issues”. 2008.,
List of questions which, if asked, will reveal where provinces and territories are violating or not enforcing laws related to persons with environmental sensitivities. These questions were first developed for the people in the federal government who claim to encourage conformity, within Canada, to international commitments Canada has made.
The State of Housing in America in the 21st Century: A Disability Perspective. 2010.
In addition to modifications to make the physical environment more accessible, there is a need to consider the overall built environment, given the growing number of people affected by environmental exposures—a physical condition that is triggered by the environment. Symptoms include neurological, respiratory, muscular, cardiovascular, and/or gastrointestinal problems. Known triggers include the following: ● Pesticides: weed killers, bug sprays, treated wood products ● Solvents: paints, glues, gasoline, nail polish/remover ● Indoor air Volatile Organic Compounds: new carpet, formaldehyde, plasticizers, chlorine, fragrances and fragranced products ● Cleaners: bleach, ammonia, phenolic disinfectants, air fresheners ● Combustion-related: auto and diesel exhaust, tobacco smoke, natural gas, tar/asphalt ● Drugs/medical devices: anesthetics, antibiotics, implants, vaccines ● Electrical devices: microwaves, transformers, high-tension wires, fluorescent lighting, cell towers, cell phones These triggers can be in the housing unit, elsewhere in the building if a multifamily unit, and/or outside it in the immediate community as well as in locations the person needs to or would like to visit in daily life. While some of these products are used in development of housing (and buildings in general), many are introduced by people through the care and maintenance of buildings as well as by people being in the building (e.g., someone wearing perfume). Current estimates suggest that 11 percent of the population has some sort of chemical sensitivity. For people with environmental sensitivities, accessible housing must be free of these environmental triggers. However, unless the housing is universally designed to accommodate all the different sensitivities, for some it is better to live in segregated housing that assures control over potential exposures.