Fraudulent acahf (Australian Council against health fraud)

Discussion in 'Health and medical' started by tobyjones, Mar 8, 2004.

  1. tobyjones

    tobyjones Guest

    What is a representative (and main "sponsor") of the acahf
    doing here on an Internet discussion group?

    --
    -------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
    Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
     
    Tags:


  2. David Wright

    David Wright Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    <[email protected]> wrote:
    >What is a representative (and main "sponsor") of the acahf
    >doing here on an Internet discussion group?

    1) This is usenet, not "the internet."

    2) Why shouldn't someone from acahf be here?

    -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my
    opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If I
    have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were
    standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)
     
  3. Rich.

    Rich. Guest

    On 09 Mar 2004 04:15:14 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

    >What is a representative (and main "sponsor") of the acahf
    >doing here on an Internet discussion group?

    Uh, trying to discuss alternative health care issues?

    Just a guess.

    Aloha,

    Rich

    -------------------------------------------------
    -------------------------------------------------

    The best defense to logic is ignorance
     
  4. Jan

    Jan Guest

    >Subject: Fraudulent acahf (Australian Council against health fraud)
    >From: [email protected]
    >Date: 3/8/2004 8:15 PM Pacific Standard Time
    >Message-id: <[email protected]>
    >
    >What is a representative (and main "sponsor") of the acahf
    >doing here on an Internet discussion group?

    The usual. LYING.

    Jan
     
  5. <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > What is a representative (and main "sponsor") of the acahf
    > doing here on
    an
    > Internet discussion group?

    Exercising his right of free speech.

    I know that it is shocking, but merely being a member of any
    group does not limit one's right to speak his mind.
     
  6. <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > What is a representative (and main "sponsor") of the acahf
    > doing here on
    an
    > Internet discussion group?

    I spent some time thinking about this post, and Jones'
    concerns.

    From past experience, we know that:

    1. Jan Drew, a proponent of alt medicine, has
    reported Joel Eichen to Yahoo for what she
    perceived as wrongs.
    2. Jan Drew, a proponent of alt medicine, has reported
    Joel Eichen to an employer.
    3. Debbee, a proponent of alt medicine, has reported
    me to Bolen for my of what a third party did with
    his claims.
    4. Both Debbee and Jan Drew, both proponents of alt
    medicine, have never condemned
    The_Woman_Whose_Name_I_Will_Not_Type when she sent
    email to Andrew langer's wife to complain about him.
    5. Both Debbee and Jan Drew, both proponents of alt
    medicine, have never condemned
    The_Woman_Whose_Name_I_Will_Not_Type when she
    threatened by implication to contact my wife.
    6. Debbee and Jan Drew, both proponents of alt medicine,
    justified reporting Karuan to her ISP.

    Now, has anyone who is a proponent of fact based medicine
    reported any of the Alties in a similar manner? Is it
    documented anywhere? Not to my knowledge, and I am willing
    to be proven wrong.

    And, now, Ms./Mr. Jones comes along and is worred that
    Peter is a member of the ACAHF, when no proponent of fact
    based medicine has a track records like the above
    referenced Alties.

    Thus, to Mr./Ms. Jones, your worry is misplaced. Just do not
    piss off the members of your own camp.
     
  7. Rich.

    Rich. Guest

    On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 22:03:38 GMT, "Mark Probert-March 9, 2004" <Mark
    [email protected]> wrote:

    >
    ><[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:[email protected]...
    >> What is a representative (and main "sponsor") of the
    >> acahf doing here on
    >an
    >> Internet discussion group?
    >
    >I spent some time thinking about this post, and Jones'
    >concerns.
    >
    >From past experience, we know that:
    >
    > 1. Jan Drew, a proponent of alt medicine, has reported
    > Joel Eichen to Yahoo for what she perceived as
    > wrongs.
    > 2. Jan Drew, a proponent of alt medicine, has reported
    > Joel Eichen to an employer.
    > 3. Debbee, a proponent of alt medicine, has reported me
    > to Bolen for my of what a third party did with his
    > claims.
    > 4. Both Debbee and Jan Drew, both proponents of alt
    > medicine, have never condemned
    > The_Woman_Whose_Name_I_Will_Not_Type when she sent
    > email to Andrew langer's wife to complain about him.
    > 5. Both Debbee and Jan Drew, both proponents of alt
    > medicine, have never condemned
    > The_Woman_Whose_Name_I_Will_Not_Type when she
    > threatened by implication to contact my wife.
    > 6. Debbee and Jan Drew, both proponents of alt
    > medicine, justified reporting Karuan to her ISP.
    >
    >Now, has anyone who is a proponent of fact based medicine
    >reported any of the Alties in a similar manner? Is it
    >documented anywhere? Not to my knowledge, and I am willing
    >to be proven wrong.
    >
    >And, now, Ms./Mr. Jones comes along and is worred that
    >Peter is a member of the ACAHF, when no proponent of fact
    >based medicine has a track records like the above
    >referenced Alties.
    >
    >Thus, to Mr./Ms. Jones, your worry is misplaced. Just do
    >not piss off the members of your own camp.
    >

    You forgot how Jan Drew and Debbee repeatedly complained to
    my ISP falsely accusing me of stalking in an effort to have
    my ISP terminated.

    I agree that it is the alties that act to stifle free
    expression here. Let us see what Toby thinks of this
    behavior and whether Toby agrees that it does serve to
    restrict free speech and the quest for the truth. We shall
    see how truthful Toby is in the search for *truth*.

    Aloha,

    Rich
    >

    -------------------------------------------------
    -------------------------------------------------

    The best defense to logic is ignorance
     
  8. <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:pfgs401t6q39ugdhbeer[email protected]...
    > On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 22:03:38 GMT, "Mark Probert-March 9,
    > 2004" <Mark [email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >
    > ><[email protected]> wrote in message
    > >news:[email protected]...
    > >> What is a representative (and main "sponsor") of the
    > >> acahf doing here
    on
    > >an
    > >> Internet discussion group?
    > >
    > >I spent some time thinking about this post, and Jones'
    > >concerns.
    > >
    > >From past experience, we know that:
    > >
    > > 1. Jan Drew, a proponent of alt medicine, has
    > > reported Joel Eichen to Yahoo for what she
    > > perceived as wrongs.
    > > 2. Jan Drew, a proponent of alt medicine, has
    > > reported Joel Eichen to
    an
    > >employer.
    > > 3. Debbee, a proponent of alt medicine, has reported
    > > me to Bolen for
    my
    > >of what a third party did with his claims.
    > > 4. Both Debbee and Jan Drew, both proponents of alt
    > > medicine, have
    never
    > >condemned The_Woman_Whose_Name_I_Will_Not_Type when she
    > >sent email to
    Andrew
    > >langer's wife to complain about him.
    > > 5. Both Debbee and Jan Drew, both proponents of alt
    > > medicine, have
    never
    > >condemned The_Woman_Whose_Name_I_Will_Not_Type when she
    > >threatened by implication to contact my wife.
    > > 6. Debbee and Jan Drew, both proponents of alt
    > > medicine, justified reporting Karuan to her ISP.
    > >
    > >Now, has anyone who is a proponent of fact based medicine
    > >reported any of the Alties in a similar manner? Is it
    > >documented anywhere? Not to my knowledge, and I am
    > >willing to be proven wrong.
    > >
    > >And, now, Ms./Mr. Jones comes along and is worred that
    > >Peter is a member
    of
    > >the ACAHF, when no proponent of fact based medicine has a
    > >track records
    like
    > >the above referenced Alties.
    > >
    > >Thus, to Mr./Ms. Jones, your worry is misplaced. Just do
    > >not piss off the members of your own camp.
    > >
    >
    > You forgot how Jan Drew and Debbee repeatedly complained
    > to my ISP falsely accusing me of stalking in an effort to
    > have my ISP terminated.

    I am sorry to have left that out. Making false claims of
    stalking for merely disagreeing with them.

    > I agree that it is the alties that act to stifle free
    > expression here. Let us see what Toby thinks of this
    > behavior and whether Toby agrees that it does serve to
    > restrict free speech and the quest for the truth. We shall
    > see how truthful Toby is in the search for *truth*.

    I hope that Toby does not take this opportunity to prove she
    is a hypocrite like all of the other Alties have
    consistently done.
     
  9. tobyjones

    tobyjones Guest

    "Mark Probert-March 9, 2004" <Mark [email protected]> wrote:
    > <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > What is a representative (and main "sponsor") of the
    > > acahf doing here on an Internet discussion group?
    >
    > I spent some time thinking about this post, and Jones'
    > concerns.
    >
    > From past experience, we know that:
    >
    [late snip, as the NewsReader alert sign read, "Too much
    quoted text vs new text"]

    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

    --
    -------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
    Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
     
  10. <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > "Mark Probert-March 9, 2004" <Mark Probert03-09-
    > [email protected]>
    wrote:
    > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > What is a representative (and main "sponsor") of the
    > > > acahf doing here on an Internet discussion group?
    > >
    > > I spent some time thinking about this post, and Jones'
    > > concerns.
    > >
    > > From past experience, we know that:
    > >
    > [late snip, as the NewsReader alert sign read, "Too much
    > quoted text vs new text"]
    >
    > 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, thus, it is not an analogous
    situation. However, Peter was not *reporting* anyone,
    but was inquiring whether certain information is
    available. Note that he did not mention Dr. Cabot. The
    alties go right to the reporting.
     
  11. tobyjones

    tobyjones Guest

    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.

    > 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?

    Again, consequent to what has happened during what appeared
    to be an innocent internet discussion, several people's
    actual lives have been affected.

    If you wish to fuzzy the edges, that's how it will be for
    you. 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.

    > 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)"

    He wrote FROM ACAHF!!!!!!!

    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.

    > 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.

    > 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 wheels are in motion for some form of investigation,
    arising from an MHA 'Net discussion.

    > 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.

    --
    -------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
    Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
     
  12. <[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.
     
  13. [email protected] wrote:

    >From: "Mark Probert-March 10, 2004" <Mark Probert03-10-
    >[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.

    But the Executive Officer of the ACAHF should not be allowed
    to post here? Should Dr Cabot post under that name or the
    other name you said she uses?

    >> 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?

    I first mentioned Dr Cabot's deceit on my web site on
    November 22, 2003. You were not here at that time, unless
    you were lurking and gathering information without telling
    us. She is no more under investigation than anyone else I
    talk about.

    >Again, consequent to what has happened during what appeared
    >to be an innocent internet discussion, several people's
    >actual lives have been affected.

    Mine, for one, because I have had to waste time with
    your drivel.

    >If you wish to fuzzy the edges, that's how it will be for
    >you. 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.

    What trespass has occurred? Are you suggesting that
    mentioning or criticising a real person on Usenet is not
    permissible?

    >> 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)"

    Which is not reporting, or are you suggesting that there is
    only one doctor who fits those words?

    >He wrote FROM ACAHF!!!!!!!

    Indeed I did. That is what happens when I use the ACAHF
    computer to send email. You have yet to explain how
    revealing my affiliation is simultaneously concealing it.

    >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.

    I believe that at one stage you mentioned the sponsors of
    ACAHF. Perhaps you should read that page again and then get
    back to us with details of the government funding. The
    office staff at ACAHF are eagerly awaiting the arrival of
    the tax dollars.

    >> 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.

    Are you suggesting that generic information about medical
    registration should not be available to organisations, only
    individuals? Had I written as an ordinary citizen, you would
    be accusing me of hiding my affiliation.

    >> 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.

    Which allegations are you talking about? As you saw, the
    registration board responded by telling me what the
    policy was.

    >The wheels are in motion for some form of investigation,
    >arising from an MHA 'Net discussion.

    How are these wheels in motion?

    >> 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.

    What is my role on ACAHF and why is it not responsible of me
    to make generic enquiries?

    --
    Peter Bowditch
    The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
    The Green Light http://www.ratbags.com/greenlight
    and The New Improved Quintessence of the Loon with added Vitamins and C-Q10 http://www.ratbags.com/loon
    To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
     
  14. tobyjones

    tobyjones Guest

    From: "Mark Probert-March 10, 2004" <Mark [email protected]>
    Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative
    Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 8:48 AM
    Subject: Re: Fraudulent acahf (Australian Council against health fraud)

    > <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > > 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.

    There is more than enough evidence of slander or libel, of
    defamation. (Your attempt to cloud what was said,
    notwithstanding)

    (And in case he may be thinking of removing any posts, I do
    have copies, if the relevant person reading this should have
    need of them. I will be most happy to compile them, whether
    according to date of posting or other)

    --
    -------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
    Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
     
  15. Jan

    Jan Guest

    >Subject: Re: Fraudulent acahf (Australian Council against health fraud)
    >From: [email protected]
    >Date: 3/10/2004 5:27 PM Pacific Standard Time
    >Message-id: <[email protected]>
    >
    >From: "Mark Probert-March 10, 2004" <Mark Probert03-10-
    >[email protected]> Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative
    >Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 8:48 AM Subject: Re:
    >Fraudulent acahf (Australian Council against health fraud)
    >
    >> <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> > > 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.
    >
    >There is more than enough evidence of slander or libel, of
    >defamation. (Your attempt to cloud what was said,
    >notwithstanding)
    >
    >(And in case he may be thinking of removing any posts, I do
    >have copies, if the relevant person reading this should
    >have need of them. I will be most happy to compile them,
    >whether according to date of posting or other)
    >
    Good for you Toby!!! It is wasy past time this was stopped.

    Sinko Mark Probert is doing his usual. He has no
    morals, IMHO.

    Jan

    Jan
     
  16. [email protected] wrote:

    >From: "Mark Probert-March 10, 2004" <Mark Probert03-10-
    >[email protected]> Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative
    >Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 8:48 AM Subject: Re:
    >Fraudulent acahf (Australian Council against health fraud)
    >
    >> <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> > > 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.
    >
    >There is more than enough evidence of slander or libel, of
    >defamation. (Your attempt to cloud what was said,
    >notwithstanding)
    >
    >(And in case he may be thinking of removing any posts, I do
    >have copies, if the relevant person reading this should
    >have need of them. I will be most happy to compile them,
    >whether according to date of posting or other)

    If you are talking about me, I have never removed any post
    of mine and I don't anticipate removing any in the future.
    Unlike alties and anti-vaccination liars, I am not ashamed
    of what I say.

    By the way, feel free to use my name when talking about me.
    I realise that my name has a powerful juju, but it is
    possible to use it without risking perdition.

    --
    Peter Bowditch
    The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
    The Green Light http://www.ratbags.com/greenlight
    and The New Improved Quintessence of the Loon with added Vitamins and C-Q10 http://www.ratbags.com/loon
    To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
     
  17. Jan

    Jan Guest

    >Subject: Re: Fraudulent acahf (Australian Council against health fraud)
    >From: Peter Bowditch [email protected]
    >Date: 3/10/2004 7:57 PM Pacific Standard Time
    >Message-id: <[email protected]>
    >
    >[email protected] wrote:
    >
    >>From: "Mark Probert-March 10, 2004" <Mark Probert03-10-
    >>[email protected]> Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative
    >>Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 8:48 AM Subject: Re:
    >>Fraudulent acahf (Australian Council against health fraud)
    >>
    >>> <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >>> > > 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.
    >>
    >>There is more than enough evidence of slander or libel, of
    >>defamation. (Your attempt to cloud what was said,
    >>notwithstanding)
    >>
    >>(And in case he may be thinking of removing any posts, I
    >>do have copies, if the relevant person reading this should
    >>have need of them. I will be most happy to compile them,
    >>whether according to date of posting or other)
    >
    >If you are talking about me, I have never removed any post
    >of mine and I don't anticipate removing any in the future.
    >Unlike alties and anti-vaccination liars, I am not ashamed
    >of what I say.

    Like who???????? The two here who have nuked there posts are
    Andrew Kingoff and Richard H Jacobson, and you know it.

    Do show us which alties or those who are concered about the
    adverse reactions of vaccines are ashamed of what they say.

    Oh, that's right, I forgot you make things up as you go
    along.

    Then lie about it.

    Jan

    Rich is a cyberstalker and he has been stalking Jan for a
    long time. John Bain

    Just watch *;*
     
  18. <[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 8:48 AM Subject: Re: Fraudulent acahf (Australian
    > Council against health fraud)
    >
    > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > > > 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.
    >
    > There is more than enough evidence of slander or libel, of
    > defamation. (Your attempt to cloud what was said,
    > notwithstanding)

    MY attempt to cloud? Sorry, sweetums, but I posted facts.
    Show me where what I posted was not amply discussed.

    > (And in case he may be thinking of removing any posts, I
    > do have copies, if the relevant person reading this should
    > have need of them. I will be most happy to compile them,
    > whether according to date of posting or other)

    You have that all wrong. Advocates for RealMedicine and
    Opponents Against Health Fradu, like having the messages
    available, as the messages are excellent examples of the
    despicable tactics that Alties engage in to stifle
    reasonable inquiry and the free speech of those with whom
    they disagree.

    You really have got to have your paranoia looked into.
     
  19. <[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 8:48 AM Subject: Re: Fraudulent acahf (Australian
    > Council against health fraud)
    >
    > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > > > 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.
    >
    > There is more than enough evidence of slander or libel, of
    > defamation. (Your attempt to cloud what was said,
    > notwithstanding)

    MY attempt to cloud? Sorry, sweetums, but I posted facts.
    Show me where what I posted was not amply discussed.

    > (And in case he may be thinking of removing any posts, I
    > do have copies, if the relevant person reading this should
    > have need of them. I will be most happy to compile them,
    > whether according to date of posting or other)

    You have that all wrong. Advocates for RealMedicine and
    Opponents Against Health Fradu, like having the messages
    available, as the messages are excellent examples of the
    despicable tactics that Alties engage in to stifle
    reasonable inquiry and the free speech of those with whom
    they disagree.

    You really have got to have your paranoia looked into.
     
Loading...