Follow us!

    Re: Class Action Defamation Suit against Barret/Fumento/Mill

    Posted by JD on 3/02/05

    At last! What a relief. Cowgirl Mary is both "speachless" and
    "speechless"... Double the pleasure!


    On 3/01/05, mary wrote:
    > See? And Speechless too...
    > On 3/01/05, mary wrote:
    >> Wow...... I'm speachless....
    >> Mary
    >> On 2/28/05, Patrick wrote:
    >>> Question: Which law firm can find the legal foundation upon
    >>> which to file a class action defamation suit against the
    >>> duly noted Barrett/Fumento/Milloy/Gots/Stossel and company
    >>> propaganda machine? Such a lawsuit would be on behalf of
    >>> every Chemical Sensitivity sufferer in the States, including
    >>> those Chemical Sensitivity sufferers formally diagnosed with
    >>> the following titles:
    >>> 1a] Occupational Asthma due to low-molecular weight agents.
    >>> 1b] Irritant-induced Asthma.
    >>> 2] Chemical Worker's Lung.
    >>> 3] External Allergic Alveolitis, aka Hypersensitivity
    >>> Pneumonitis "due to chemical sensitization."
    >>> 4] Reactive Airway Dysfunction Syndrome.
    >>> 5] World Trade Center Cough.
    >>> 6] Sick Building Syndrome; a diagnostic title which is
    >>> even recognized in the Merck Manual.
    >>> 7] Stevens-Johnson Syndrome.
    >>> 8] Acute Generalized Exanthematous Pustulosi.
    >>> 9a] Chronic Actinic Dermatitis.
    >>> 9b] Occupational Dermatitis.
    >>> 10] Phthalic Anhydride Hypersensitivity.
    >>> 11] And of course, the Multiple Chemical Sensitivity which
    >>> is now recognized by name, by the following
    >>> licensed & accredited entities, in each one's
    >>> Occupatonal & Environmental Medicine Programs:
    >>> I] Johns Hopkins.
    >>> II] Mt. Sinai Hospital.
    >>> III] Yale.
    >>> IV] Cambridge Hospital (affiliate of Harvard Med. School.)
    >>> V] Northeast Specialty Hospital (also Harvard affiliate.)
    >>> VI] University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey.
    >>> VII] HealthPartners-Regions Hospital, Minneapolis
    >>> (affiliate of the NIOSH Educational Resource Ctr.)
    >>> VIII] Central New York Health Occupational Clinical Center.
    >>> IX] Marshall University.
    >>> X+] a number of board certified and licensed physicians.
    >>> Plus, there is the technologically advanced nation of
    >>> Germany which coded MCS as "an allergic condition."
    >>> And there are also a notable number of licensed entities
    >>> which recognize the titles:
    >>> "Indoor Air Quality Assessment", "Building-related Illness",
    >>> "Sick Building Syndrome", "Environmentally-related
    >>> Diseases", "Chronic Chemical Exposure", "Chemically-induced
    >>> Illness", "Occupationally-induced Illness", etc.
    >>> And this includes the world renown Duke, as well as Iowa
    >>> Univ., Boston Medical Ctr., the Univ. of Maryland, and the
    >>> Univ. of Pittsburgh (home of the polio vaccine and first
    >>> liver transplant.)
    >>> Of course, there is the matter of including CFS sufferers
    >>> and GWS sufferers. Of course, GWS sufferers have apparently
    >>> suffered the most defamation of all the Chemical Sensitivity
    >>> sufferers.
    >>> Perhaps, and only perhaps, a subset of patients who were
    >>> diagnosed with the following 'medically accepted' diagnostic
    >>> titles can be included:
    >>> 1] Chemically-induced Hepatitis, 2] Chemically-induced
    >>> Aplastic Anemia (Bone Marrow Suppression).
    >>> The subset, of course, would consist in those who suffered
    >>> lingering sensitivity beyond the acute stage.
    >>> Such a lawsuit would not be against any licensed practicing
    >>> physician, it seems. After all, Barret was never board
    >>> certified at anything in his life, and he never praticed
    >>> "physical" medicine since his internship days, ending in
    >>> 1957. Gots hadn't had a patient in decades, so say the
    >>> reports. As well, neither Fumento nor Stossel nor Milloy
    >>> have ever been doctors in any medical discipline. And of
    >>> course, the only non-licensed (or non-Doctorate-bearing)
    >>> person qualified to give sound & valid evidence into the MCS
    >>> matter is one who has suffered from the physiological
    >>> medical condition for years.
    >>> Nor would such a lawsuit be against the pharmaceutical
    >>> industry, unless of course, discovery would should that the
    >>> pharmaceutical industry funded any of the defamatory
    >>> propagandists for producing the defamatory things which they
    >>> did. That would be a subsequent filing and joinder.
    >>> The Barret/Fumento/Milloy/Stossel & company propaganda
    >>> machine employed slight-of-hand semantics & convenient
    >>> evidence omission in asserting to the inexperienced public
    >>> that Chemical Sensitivity is entirely a process of mental
    >>> illness, instead of a physiological process accompanied with
    >>> the following physiological medical findings:
    >>> 1] Inflammation Scenarios, such as Turbinate Hypertrophy
    >>> & Interstitial Inflammation.
    >>> 2] Failing the Arterial Blood Gases Test.
    >>> 3] Dermatitis scenarios and similar.
    >>> 4] Enzyme QPon-1 Deficiency.
    >>> 5] Erythema, even internally.
    >>> 6] Over Production of Leukotrienes, such as LTD4.
    >>> 7] The Production of N-acetyl-benzoquinoneimine in
    >>> excess of the Mercapturate which neutralizes it.
    >>> 8] Elevations of Alanine Aminotransferase,
    >>> aka Serum Glutamic Pyruvic Transaminase.
    >>> 9] Hyperactive Conjugations and Deficient Conjugations.
    >>> 10] Visible and Measurable Wheals during Skin Testing.
    >>> etc., etc., etc.
    >>> And then there is the matter P-300 Waves, IgA immunoglobins,
    >>> T-Cells, porphyira, and the observable and non-deniable
    >>> symptom of Profuse Dry Heaving, as well as that of
    >>> Blacking-Out. All in all, the smoking gun was the Fiber
    >>> Optic Rhinolaryngoscopic Exam and the medical findings thereof.
    >>> The defamatory propaganda resulted in the deprivation of
    >>> research funding. Furthermore, how many ignorant persons in
    >>> America believed the conclusions of Barret/Stossel/Fumento
    >>> and refused to accomodate a chemical sensitivity sufferer in
    >>> a time of crisis? How much suffering has that propaganda
    >>> machine caused? In as much, all Chemical Sensitivity
    >>> sufferers have suffered triply:
    >>> 1] at the hands of the illness,
    >>> 2] at the hands of a ruthless form of defamation,
    >>> 3] at the hands of abandonment for years, due to
    >>> little research funding and outrightly lazy physicians
    >>> who make lots of money upon one nitch repetitively,
    >>> steamlining their practices to a comfortable laziness.
    >>> At this point in time, the plaintiff-class of Chemical
    >>> Sensitivity Sufferers would have mainstream medicine on it's
    >>> side. After all, the AMA, AAAAI, and American Lung
    >>> Association all recognize Chemical Sensitivity as it applies
    >>> to the ASTHMA symptom. And the AAAAI & AMA recognize it as
    >>> it applies to Dermatitis, Aspririn/Salicylate Senstivity,
    >>> Ramin Wood Allergy, Acetaminophen Intolerance, Red Cedar
    >>> Allergy, Peruvian Lily Allergy, Isocyanate Sensitivity,
    >>> Phthalic Anhydride Hypersensitivty, etc.
    >>> Moreover, the AMA, AAAAI, & ALA all advocate the practice of
    >>> AVOIDANCE as a necessary part of treatment for the
    >>> chemically sensitive, as it applies to asthmatics. Their
    >>> official literature enumerates the same chemical-bearing
    >>> agents that MCS patients has been avoiding for years, out of
    >>> instinct. And remember, Barrett condemned the practice of
    >>> AVOIDANCE as detrimental, while Fumento called the practice
    >>> "nonsense." Thus is the proof that Barrett is the real
    >>> quack, speaking contrary to the AMA & AAAAI. (Fumento is
    >>> simply a pushy-shovey brat who needs to be put his place, as
    >>> all bully-brats picking on helpless people need to be.)
    >>> Furthermore, comdemning the practice of AVOIDANCE, while
    >>> asserting that Chemical Sensitivity patients must be placed
    >>> in direct encounter with the triggers that torment them, is
    >>> the act of inciting a crime known in some jurisdictions as
    >>> TOXIC BATTERY. Thus, Fumento and Barret have publicly
    >>> advocated the committing of crimes.
    >>> Proof that the AMA, AAAI, & ALA recognize Chemical
    >>> Sensitivity, at least as it applies to the ASTHMA symptom,
    >>> can be found at the following mainstream medical sites:
    >>> AMA Report 4 of the Council of Scientific Affairs (A-98),
    >>> found at
    >>> The other ones are found at:
    >>> http://bdapps/ama-assn/org/aps/asthma/manage.htm
    >>> The propaganda mahcine fraudulently went about, claiming
    >>> that the AMA & AAAAI condemned MCS as non-existent. This is
    >>> a lie. The AMA & AAAAI merely declined to recognize the
    >>> specific title, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, as a
    >>> case-specific diagnostic title of its own medical code.
    >>> This is because MCS is too vague and non-case-specific of a
    >>> name. The AMA & AAAAI merely said that more research was
    >>> needed to be done, in order them to encapsulate MCS into a
    >>> meticulously defined and analysed "case definition". And
    >>> though they did not recognize Multiple Chemical Sensitivity
    >>> by name, they still recognized the phenomenon of Sensitivity
    >>> of Chemicals.
    >>> Mainstreams Medical Science has long since recognized the
    >>> process of "sensitization." And it has long since
    >>> recognized the phenomenon of hypersensitivity to
    >>> chemical-bearing agents when encountered by susceptible
    >>> persons, at commonly encounter levels (at low to moderate
    >>> levels).
    >>> The MCS debate has been game of semantics. The anti-MCS
    >>> lobby went beyond the sound barriers of obsecenity. All
    >>> contributing members must be held accountable.

    Posts on this thread, including this one

  Site Map:  Home Chatboards Legal Jobs Classified Ads Search Contacts Advertise
  © 1996 - 2013. All Rights Reserved. Please review our Terms of Use, Mission Statement, and Privacy Policy.