The Story

Some percentage of deaths by adverse drug reactions are of people with undiagnosed sensitivities. Some percentage of people who suicide don't realize their moods are affected by foods. Studies on prevalence suggest it's 15%. Meanwhile, negligent politicians and health officials encourage a stereotype that does not represent the group as a whole, but distracts from their errors.

Health Minister Ginette Petitpas Taylor is silent about a mistake similar to the blood scandal, resulting in unnecessary deaths by adverse drug reactions.The federal and Ontario governments have known for several decades that Canadians with undiagnosed environmental sensitivities are being unnecessarily hurt and killed by acts of commission in health care. They know and have known how to prevent that harm. In some situations (kids, psych patients) they had and have a duty of care. For a limited period, from 1988 to 1993, several federal departments were acting to protect people with sensitivities in health care and other venues, especially the built environment.

Catherine McKenna is hiding a mistake similar to the blood scandal. Thousands of Canadian children who are disabled by their environments are being abused as a result.While people hiding abuse say it's three percent, the US National Academy of Science, the National Council on Disabilities, and many others estimate the prevalence at 10-15 percent. The central nervous system is usually affected, along with other systems. Where it's a factor, people are not being screened out of the psych population, with horrific but buried consequences, even though Health Canada was advocating checking for sensitivities in ambiguous cases under health ministers Perrin Beatty and Benoit Bouchard. Based on prevalence, children with central nervous system sequelae are being horrifically abused in schools, by inappropriate responses.

The same concerns exist for children in care, and about the family dysfunction that puts them there.

Jane Philpott is silent about a mistake contributing to suicides. Perhaps 12,000 people whose brains were affected by sensitivities have suicided since Diane Marleau made a serious mistake.As consumers had warned the Ontario Ministry of Health since 1985, Nicholas Ashford (MIT) and Claudia Miller (UofTexas) warned that harm can be caused if patients with ambiguous symptoms are subjected to inappropriate measures before being checked for sensitivity. They won a Macedo Award from the American Association for World Health for their 1989 report to the New Jersey State Department of Health. It references clinical and scientific literature since 1880.

Former Health Minister Perrin Beatty supported those protections in September and December 1990. The subsequent health minister, Benoit Bouchard, also worked towards the protection of psychiatric patients whose problems are caused or exacerbated by sensitivities. Then opposition MP John Manley was in good company when Manley supported such protections in 1991. For more about Health Canada, check here.

Knowing of this abuse for decades, CMHA is the Red Cross of our 'blood scandal'. They invisiblize us in communities and, based on prevalence, they abuse clients whose problems are caused or exacerbated by sensitivities, some of whom then commit suicide.

Psychiatrists are our 'Christian Brothers', except they do it to our communities and to our minds, with misconceptions and chemicals respectively. Members of the Canadian Psychiatric Association continue to abuse during three decades of protest, and after being approached several times by the federal health department. Note that Canadian psychiatrists responded to humans protesting real life abuses by referring the matter to a 'scientific' committee. What astonishing arrogance!  What belligerence!  What cruelty!

Again, based on prevalence, perhaps one of Canada's dozen daily suicides is someone whose central nervous system dysfunction is caused or exacerbated by sensitivities, and who may have been ploughed under by inappropriate care.

Chris Brown


Background Notes

All parties have been given an opportunity to respond. Each of the links is a supportive document. Because of the seriousness of the complaint, the supportive documents are very important.

Coverage of this issue is usually fraught with mistakes and omissions. Misconceptions abound, and journalists are not free of them.

Despite education efforts, most people confuse discussion about environmental sensitivities with discussion about the more controversial theories and practices of doctors of environmental medicine. They put forward those flaky physicians as the only ones who support us. They replace our history with a self-aggrandizing revisionist one provided by those physicians. Meanwhile, as you might guess about something that affects 12-15% of the population, medical knowledge dates back centuries.

There are so many mistakes, I made a list of them.  Some are specific to journalism, but all may be important when doing stories.