Follow us!

    Re: suppression/repression bias - make a difference

    Posted by johncodie on 6/27/03

    On 6/27/03, ff wrote:
    > Johncodie:
    > Would you please provide the name of the attorney you reference, if this is
    > recent? (Above)
    > My first post on this board referenced false assumptions you made based on
    > fragmented information. I believe Dr. Hudnell also pointed this out. This
    > is understandable and not a criticism. In reviewing your posts, you have
    > combined several separate events into one. The one that I am familiar with
    > needs to be extracted from your combination. Once you understand that, if
    > you have any questions, may we can clear it up, provided you don't ramble on
    > into more false assumptions.

    Did Dr. Shoemaker ever come to Florida to give CVS test to evaluate toxins
    witin the State of Florida. You state he came to your property concerning
    Dupont product spraying. Huddell states he has never been in Florida
    concerning Dupont. Jacksonville FL reporter quoted Shoemaker as saying that
    Florida residents should not conclude Dupont was responsible as it may be other
    sources. My point is he should have remained neutral if he had not been in the
    state and was not an attending physician of any of the individuals of that
    > A couple of things in particular, regarding one event:
    > 1.) You keep implying Dr. Shoemaker was working for me and/or DuPont.

    I pointed out that Dr. Shoemaker has commented concerning Dupont and per the
    pervious post of the Sally that you know will now not comment on his treatment
    with regard to Dupont.

    You apparently reached this conclusion after reading a quote in a Delaware
    > newpaper. No it was a Jacksonville Florida Quote that I posted.

    Not the case Mr. Codie, Dr. Shoemaker was hired by FDEP. Ok, My understanding
    is that the investiation, (money) has been closed.

    I knew Dr. Shoemaker prior to this, ok
    and my relationship was completely independent of the FDEP event in which a
    neighborhood coincidentally read about Dr. > Shoemaker's work, symptoms
    associated with environmental exposures, and contacted him directly.
    Eventually FDEP was called in to investigate, and
    > also contacted Dr. Shoemaker. ok

    So was Dr Shoemaker ever on your land which was being tested for exposure to
    dupont chemicals.
    > 2.) VCS Testing in that event was conducted locally by local physicians that
    > the neighborhood residents visited. ok These were VCS test that Dr.
    Shemaker had developed for the local Doctors.

    I was not a part of this, so that's all
    > I know, and it is their business, not mine or yours. Respect Dr. Client Priv.

    > If you have any (appropriate) questions for events of which I have knowledge,
    > feel free to contact me via email. If you have questions regarding other
    > events, please go to the appropriate source. Above all, we can save a lot of
    > time and space, and return to meaningful discussion, if you will simply get
    > the facts straight rather than to speculate and confuse.
    > I hope this clears up the confusion.

    I have already posted Sally's account and some of the accounts from Dr.
    Shoemaker. She went to a man's house to be tested rather than an attending
    physican and they called in Dr. Shoemaker for a treatement. She identifies her
    self as well educated, and your recollection of her as having links with the
    govermnets activities of the polution there. My most recent reading from the
    associated press story another town where a settlment is being reached with
    dupont, where the people retain the right to sue if they get cancer. Under the
    clean water act, I believe all the citizens of Florida have a right to know
    better what politics is working against them.
    > ff
    > On 6/27/03, johncodie wrote:
    >> State of Florida should take note of recent court rulings. Local plantiff
    >> attorney has come forward with his political contributions because it is
    >> good for the public to know. If local politicians would take note, it
    >> might put an end to the suppression/repression bias. Are there any
    >> individuals that won't agree that Wingate was telling the truth. Why
    >> should a man telling the truth have to lose his family and become a high
    >> school chemistry professor? I think it has something to do with the fear
    >> of losing control as a middle man, and thus be outside the money flow. I
    >> will leave the term "attending physicain" alone until a better place and
    >> time.

    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.

The Counsel.Net ChatBoardsm. All Rights Reserved.