<
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> From: "Mark Probert-March 10, 2004" <Mark
[email protected]>
> Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative Sent: Thursday, March
> 11, 2004 3:32 AM Subject: Re: Fraudulent acahf (Australian
> Council against health fraud)
> >
> > <
[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > I am not condoning what anyone else has done (or may
> > > still do). However at this time I am concerned with a
> > > different situation, one which _also_ impairs the
> > > ability of some people to be able to post freely to
> > > mha.
> > >
> > > > Now, has anyone who is a proponent of fact based
> > > > medicine reported any
> >> > of the Alties in a similar manner? Is it documented
> >> > anywhere?
> > >
> > > I submit the following as evidence (my snip):
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Bowditch"
> > > <
[email protected]> Newsgroups:
> > > misc.health.alternative Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004
> > > 11:51 AM Subject: Re: Dr. Sandra Cabot
> > >
> > > [snip to relevant section]
> > > >
> > > > Here is the message I sent to the NSW Medical
> > > > Registration Board
> > > >
> > > > Is there any way to find out if a person is
> > > > registered as a medical practitioner in Australia?
> > > > Also, if someone has had their ability to practice
> > > > terminated due to disciplinary action is it possible
> > > > to
find
> > > > out any details?
> > > >
> > > > I ask these questions because supporters of an
> > > > Australian doctor who is selling suspect medical
> > > > advice from a web site (and claiming
false
> > > > qualifications) have challenged me to a) prove that
> > > > the person was ever a doctor in Australia and b)
> > > > prove that the person has had registration revoked.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you.
> > > >
> > > > And here is the reply:
> > > >
> > > > Dear Mr Bowditch,
> > > >
> > > > I refer to your query regarding information abot
> > > > Medical Practitioners:
> > > >
> > > > The NSW Medical Board only registers doctors who are
> > > > licensed to practice in NSW. Each state has it's own
> > > > separate registering authority with which a Medical
> > > > Practitioner must be registered to practice in that
> > > > state.
> > > >
> > > > The NSW Medical Board can confirm if a given doctor
> > > > is registered or otherwise, however requests for any
> > > > further information must be made in writing.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Peter Bowditch Australian Council Against Health
> > > > Fraud www.acahf.org.au
> >
> > Dr. Cabot is not a poster here,
>
> If she so wished, she should be free to post as are all
> others. She has been slandered, and worse, here on a
> discussion group.
Since the facts are that she lied about her degree 9note the
singular) there was no slander. She claimed to have a degree
that she did not have. In the US,the M.D. degree is awarded
by an educational institution after completion of the course
of study,. Since she did not attend school in the US, she
cannot claim that she had a US issued degree.
Also, in Australia a degree of MD can be issued as a
*graduate* degree in medical research. However, IIRC, she
did not attend any school offering such a degree.
Thus, there is no slander, with the facts she has provided.
> > thus, it is not an analogous situation.
>
> I referred to her in a 'Net discussion. Consequent to
> that, she has
somehow
> become under investigation. That does not limit my ability
> to speak
freely
> here on the 'Net?
Nope, since you fail to realize that anything you say is
subject to people chekcing for validity. It happens to
everyone, regardless of their point of view. It is part and
parcel of the free marketplace of ideas.
> Again, consequent to what has happened during what
> appeared to be an innocent internet discussion, several
> people's actual lives have been affected.
In what manner? Are they no longer posting? Are they
cowering under their mouse pad, afraid to type a word? I see
nothing like that. Thus, they are still free to engage in
the free marketplace of ideas.
> If you wish to fuzzy the edges, that's how it will be
> for you.
I am not doing any such thing. It is you, and the others who
whine about other people expressing themselves, that play
the fuzzy game.
> I, however, will accept NO trespass across the 'Net /
> actual life line, consequent to any of my posts, without
> following up on it to whatever extent I am able.
As you should. If you are uspet with something, say it. No
one told you in response to your postings that you di dnot
have the right to say what you
did. You have the absolute right to be wrong, as you were.
> > However, Peter was not *reporting* anyone,
>
> You are correct that it was not "reporting", but only
> because the allegations are false. He wrote: "an
> Australian doctor who is selling suspect medical advice
> from a web site (and claiming false
qualifications)"
Wrong. She is an Australian doctor, she has a website where
she sells, and she is claiming false qualifications as I
pointed out above.
> He wrote FROM ACAHF!!!!!!!
As he may. Some people post from their "Foundations" where
they solicit donations. Big deal.
> Now, that is supposed to be a responsible position,
> answerable to the Australian people, who's tax dollars
> were put into funding acahf. So somewhere around there,
> this all starts to turn dodgy.
Only in your mind.
> > but was inquiring whether certain information is
> > available.
>
> Had he written as an ordinary citizen, and had he only
> asked for the information, then this discussion would not
> now be happening.
Somehow, I am not so sure. I believe that you would have had
concerns regardless.
> > Note that he did not mention Dr. Cabot.
>
> He referred to "an Australian doctor" and made certain
> allegations,
signing
> it as from an ACAHF representative. How is the Med Board
> supposed to respond to that? If they fail to follow up on
> the allegations, they could be accused of negligence of
> similar. And he has brought that situation about.
The MedBoard is to respond to that with facts. Since he made
no specific allegation against an identified person, they
have no need to follow-up.
> The wheels are in motion for some form of investigation,
> arising from an MHA 'Net discussion.
It has happened before and wil lhappen again. Lawsuits have
arisen from discussions on the net.
> > The alties go right to the reporting.
>
> Given that his role on acahf should require his acting
> with full responsibility, this present situation is
> far worse.
Nope. Not at all.
