Documents attached to bibliography entries

Ashford and Miller's work was enough to convince the federal health department to act to protect persons whose central nervous system dysfunction is caused or exacerbated by sensitivities, but it was not enough for the people responsible for delivering health care in Ontario to protect them. Based on mapping prevalence of sensitivities against suicide stats, there have been a couple of thousand consequent suicides since, just in Ontario.

Health Ministers of the Bob Rae government, including Mary Lewis's boss, Ruth Grier, got lost in a consideration of the "new" ideas of so-called "doctors of environmental medicine" while ignoring their own officials' unethical and at times dishonest contribution to the exclusion, injury and unnecessary killing of persons with environmental sensitivities.

Health Ministers of the Bob Rae government, including Marie Lorenzo's boss, Ruth Grier, got lost in a consideration of the "new" ideas of so-called "doctors of environmental medicine" while ignoring their own officials' unethical and at times dishonest contribution to the exclusion, injury and unnecessary killing of persons with environmental sensitivities.

Christopherson ignored concerns about the contribution of his cabinet colleagues to the exclusion, injury and unnecessary killing of persons with environmental sensitivities. Now a federal MP. Christopherson and his NDP colleagues are silent about the daily unnecessary killing of a dozen Canadians with sensitivities in health care.

Queen's Park reporters still, today, eclipse the actual history, rights and needs of persons with sensitivities behind debate about the ideas of so-called "doctors of environmental medicine." The OMA and the Ontario Ministry of Health have done little to address abuse by physicians or others. Making venues scent free hardly touches the issues, becomes a form of trivialization.

Donna Stewart (like Susan Abbey to follow) had arbitrary opinions that contributed to broken families, ruined careers, denial of services, millions of dollars damages and thousands of deaths. However, as Kin-Yip Chun was to learn on an unrelated matter, appealing to Robert Prichard on an ethical issue was a waste of time.

Federal officials had been moved to act by this suicide. Ontario officials basically ignored it, even after the Chief Coroner wrote to three deputy ministers (Housing, Social Services, and Health). After the Globe and Mail published two stories, Social Services addressed their policies, but the Ontario Ministry of Health continued to ignore the unnecessary killing of persons with sensitivities in health care.

Public education was recommended in government reports, by public health groups and by Health and Welfare prior to the 1993 election. By the time this proposal was submitted, Health Canada had abandoned promoting the protection of persons with environmental sensitivities. The project was not approved. The people who were supposed to be protected by measures encouraged prior to 1993 are being injured or killed, instead.

This is just one week of faxes, provides evidence of who had been contacted concerning the exclusion, injury and unnecessary killing of Canadians with sensitivities.

This is a list of contacts in phsych hospitals owned and operated by the Ontario Ministry of Health who were contacted to find out 1) How many suicides had there been in their hospital in the past 10 years, and 2) of the people who suicided, how many had been assessed to see if sensitivities were a cause or exacerbating factor in the central nervous system dysfunction.

The Ontario Medical Review published several articles that trivialize the issues facing persons with sensitivities. Susan Abbey's 1993 article in the Ontario Medical Review was one of the worst, but not the only article she published that overtly encouraged the abuse of persons with sensitivities, that confused psychiatric sequelea with cause without providing data. It is amazing that such irresponsible and hateful persons have maintained credibility amongst their peers for so long, and in the face of hundreds of years of literature not to mention concerns expressed by human rights officials and generations of consumers! The OMA's irresponsibility in continuing to publish what amounts to hate literature must also be mentioned. By 1993, I had given up on approaching the bigots at the Ontario Medical Review and instead wrote the attached letter to the provincial coroner. It is ironic that, at the same time the OMR was invisibilizing the daily killing of persons with sensitivities by physicians, and trivializing associated needs, the OMA's ethics staff member, John Krauser, was helping us address attitudes in the Ontario government! Krauser mysteriously left the OMA in the late 1990's, shortly after he convinced the OMA's representative to the Ministry of Education to include sensitivities in assessments of learning and behavioural disabilities (as was already being done by several school boards).

George Thomson is a good example of someone who is so committed to "taking the high road" that he is willing, even when he has mandated responsibilities, to overlook ongoing serious, even criminal, abuse.

Marleau abandoned the protection of persons with sensitivities from preventable harm in health care. More than 90,000 Canadians with sensitivities have been unnecessarily killed in health care since.

Gowanlock stymied efforts made by Bruce Halliday, MP, and John Davies, a chronic disease epidemiologist in Health and Welfare.

The CPA has actively encouraged psychiatrists to think of sensitivities as being caused by mental illness, obscuring centuries of literature, consumer experience, recommendations by various authorities. Mapping prevalence against suicide rates suggests that there are more than 400 unnecessary Canadian suicides annually, of persons with central nervous system dysfunction that is caused or exacerbated by sensitivities who have been ploughed under by abusive attitudes encouraged by the CPA.

The CPSO has not protected the public or guided the profession, as the history, rights, needs and well being of persons with sensitivities have been eclipsed behind consideration of the flaky ideas of so-called "doctors of environmental medicine."

Under Rosemary Brown, the OHRC was preoccupied with racism, ignored the exclusion, injury and killing of persons disabled by environmental sensitivities. OHRC staff were encouraging physicians to subject persons with sensitivities to a reverse onus concerning their experience of repeatable, controllable circumstances.

Krauser was helpful, but others at the OMA advocated astonishingly irresponsible and abusive positions, with the exception of Carole Guzman and, in 1996, William Mahoney, the OMA's representative on the Ministry of Education's advisory panel on special needs.

Grier focused on a legitimate but separate debate about environmental medicine instead of protecting persons with sensitivities from being unnecessarily injured or killed in health care.

Grier did not address abuse issues, focused instead on legitimate but separate debate about doctors of environmental medicine.

Mottershead did not address the contribution being made by Ontario public servants to the ongoing exclusion, injury and unnecessary killing of persons with sensitivities.

Jamieson was an apologist for, or at least an invisibilizer of, lethally abusive attitudes at the Ontario Ministry of Health.

Bob Rae turned his back on concerns about how his officials were contributing to the exclusion, injury and unnecessary killing of persons with sensitivities in Ontario.

Outlines some of the myths, provides corrections.

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."

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.

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.

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.

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 has several responsibilities concerning human rights and disabled persons, but it is easier to pass the buck.

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.

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.

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.

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.