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

More | Report Post

That in turn makes me speachless. Must be a first time for
everything.

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 http://ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/13603.html
>>> The other ones are found at:
>>> http://bdapps/ama-assn/org/aps/asthma/manage.htm
>>>
>>
>
http://aaaai.org/patients/publications/publicedmat/tips/asthmatri
ggersandmgmt.stm
>>>
>>
> http://www.lungusa.org/site/apps/s/content.asp?
c=dvLUK9O0E&b=34706&ct=67442
>>> http://www.merck.com/mmhe/sec04/ch044a/html
>>>
>>> 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.