Question asked on Quora “Who should be responsible for cancer research – Government, Pharmaceutical Companies or University researches?” I don’t understand your question, responsible? Do you mean control?! There are more people employed by Cancer, than have it. The High … Continue reading Cancer Research
Republished article follows, from Wisemindhealthybody is powered by eatlocalgrown.com Source article – We Won’t Back Down: 22,000 Nurses Refuse “Mandatory” Vaccinations = by Nick Meyer Even though the effectiveness of vaccines for preventing transmission of disease to patients has been strongly questioned if not outright … Continue reading More Nurses refuse flu-shots
Well, it’s October 22, 2018, here’s a surprise, Quora Moderation sent you a message, actually, Quora Moderation sent you several messages, now that you snubbed our “partners program” even as you broke the million view mark. This happened, oddly, directly after my answers were sent to a pack of shills, a herd of smarmy gang-stalkers, again, and my good real answers, were used to sell these ghost-written or bot-generated advertisements that are used a vehicle to disperse pure unfettered bullshit, Quora is much like silk-road, depending on how much you pay to control the content me-thinks. Check out the email I just received – This answer, btw, not … Continue reading Quora Moderation sent you a message!
🙂 I think I may know just the person, they might truly get a kick out it!!! Perhaps we can strike some sort of a deal, yup, still laughing! I’d like something close to that building the County of Simcoe … Continue reading Property for my Barrie billboard!
I’ve set up a new website, I’m getting organized for the next round, https://kuebervroyalvictoriaregionalhealthcentre.wordpress.com I read, and I studied, I even saw, how others have published their factums, I didn’t see any reason why I couldn’t publish the factum for … Continue reading Kueber v RVH and The Gang
Canadians, have you read the labels on your cheeses, your ice creams, your milk, your butter… Does it say 100% Canadian Milk? Does it say Hormone-Free? Does it say Antibiotic-Free? Republished article follows// Source http://www.planetinperil.ca/2015/11/a-retired-professor-takes-newspaper.html A Retired Professor Takes a … Continue reading Monsanto Puss-Milk invades Canada
“Doctors and their organisations should consider carefully whether they find it ethically acceptable to receive money that may have been partly earned by crimes that have harmed those people whose interests doctors are expected to take care of. Many crimes would be impossible to carry out, if doctors weren’t willing to participate in them.” Continue reading Corporate Crime$ and Fine$
“(T)he elements of predominant purpose conspiracy require the plaintiff to establish that: (1) the defendants acted in combination, that is, in concert, by agreement or common design; (2) the predominant purpose of the defendants was to intentionally harm the plaintiff; and (3) the defendants’ conduct caused harm to the plaintiff.” Continue reading Civil Conspiracy Definition:
Meet the researcher with 13 retractions who’s trying to sue PubPeer commenters: Fazlul Sarkar – Retraction Watch at Retraction Watch November 9, 2013: A PubPeer commenter starts a discussion regarding the images for Sarkar’s paper “Down-regulation of Notch-1 contributes … Continue reading Meet Fazlul Sarkar
“The purpose of an independent investigation is to discover what led to an adverse event and to audit the standard of care provided to the individual. An independent investigation may not identify root causes or find aspects of the provision of healthcare that directly caused an incident but it will often find things that could have been done better.” Continue reading The Pill that Steals
Source http://www.globaljustice.org.uk/resources/ceta-ttips-ugly-brother CETA: TTIP’s ugly brother August 2016 This is a guide to the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between the EU and Canada. Millions have signed a petition calling on the EU to stop negotiations on TTIP (the … Continue reading BRIEF – CETA: TTIP’s ugly brother
I write today about RANJIT KUMAR CHANDRA, a disgraceful creature who masquerades as both a doctor and a researcher. So, here’s my question, why isn’t this “doctor” stripped of his license and held liable to every researcher and patient who … Continue reading When is enough, well, enough?
Republished in full // Image(s) added // Emphasis added Posted by Vera Sharav | Saturday, April 23, 2016 | Categorized Corrupt Practices, FDA Tainted Approval, Lawsuits Former FDA Commissioner Charged in RICO Lawsuit A Federal Lawsuit charges Dr. Margaret Hamburg, former … Continue reading Former FDA Commissioner Charged in RICO Lawsuit
“China said that reports of the “massacre” in Tiananmen Square were a fabrication created both by Western media and by the protest leaders who used a willing Western media as a platform for an international propaganda campaign in their interests.” Continue reading The massacre that wasn’t
“The Committee also noted that chart alterations were done deliberately to mislead College investigations. This is a significant aggravating factor, as it undermines the integrity of the profession and the ability of the profession to regulate itself.” Continue reading Physician Guilty of Altering Patient Records
“How does a thoughtful libertarian address the potential issue of high social costs generated by legalization of hard drugs?” “Update: I see from the initial answers that many of you believe the social costs of hard drug use do not … Continue reading Social costs generated by legalization of hard drugs?
“After trying various high cbd to thc ratios of cannabis to treat my Crohn’s disease, and failing, should I try a high THC-only strain? Not only are there thousands of strains of cannabis, there is a wide assortment of modes … Continue reading Cannabis for Crohn’s
J.W. Quinn J.: ─
 We have a marvellous legal system in Ontario. Anybody is permitted to walk into a courthouse and commence a civil law suit about anything. The court will patiently provide all of the time and services reasonably (and, sometimes, unreasonably) necessary. The matter may go on interminably (and, usually, does) but our accommodating nature does not abate; our patience persists; we listen, we sit and we listen some more. However, when the law suit ends, the idioms arrive: the chickens come home to roost; the jig is up; the second shoe is about to drop;the cat is out of the bag; the fat lady sings; one sows what one reaps; and, here, so aptly, the cacophonous wail in the background is that of a piper, warming up and waiting to be paid – the sum of $1,316,535.16, to be precise.
 The costs of this action are now to be determined.
- PERSONAL LIABILITY FOR COSTS
 This brings me to the hottest issue on this costs hearing: whether, along with the plaintiff, Fridriksson and Klassen, non-parties to the action, should be jointly and severally responsible for the costs of the defendants.
 If this issue is not decided in favour of the defendants, any costs order may be rendered meaningless. Counsel for the defendants submit that the plaintiff is a shell corporation. Evidence on the receivership motion (first mentioned at paragraph  above) shows that the assets of the plaintiff consist of the following; a bank balance overdrawn by $41,631.13; leasehold improvements valued at $2,971.00; the business lease itself, of unknown value; and some audiometric and office equipment, with an unknown value. However, the impecuniosity of the plaintiff is not relevant. This is a costs hearing not a judgment debtor examination. Impecuniosity is not a factor in reaching my costs decision (but it may have practical implications in implementing my decision).
131(1) Subject to the provisions of an Act or rules of court, the costs of and incidental to a proceeding or a step in a proceeding are in the discretion of the court, and the court may determine by whom and to what extent the costs shall be paid.
 Do the underlined words “by whom” include non-parties? Or should they be interpreted to mean “by which of the parties”? I would not restrict my interpretation to the latter but, instead, give to the underlined words in s. 131(1) their plain and ordinary meaning. Section 131(1) has its origins in the Ontario Judicature Act, 1881, c. 5 which means that 134 years have passed without that plain and ordinary meaning having been amended. It is my view that “by whom” includes non-parties.
 There is ample authority for the court to award costs against a non-party who is the real litigant and who has put forward someone else, a “man of straw,” in whose name proceedings are commenced: see, for example, Sturmer v. Beaverton (Town),  O.J. No. 184, 25 O.L.R. 566 (Div. Ct.) at paras. 15 and 17; Curry v. Davidson,  23 O.W.N. 3 (Div. Ct.) at para. 5; and Rockwell Developments Ltd. v. Newtonbrook Plaza Ltd., 1972 CanLII 531 (ON CA),  3 O.R. 199 (C.A.) at paras. 33-37. However, this is not the situation before me. Neither Fridriksson nor Klassen, in their personal capacities, had legal standing to commence proceedings against the defendants. The plaintiff is not a “man of straw.” The fact that, of the $1,000,000.00 purchase price for the Niagara Falls Clinic, $250,000.00 came from the personal savings of Fridriksson (and the balance consisted of a loan guaranteed by Fridriksson personally and by his professional corporation), does not mean that Fridriksson could have commenced the within action in his own name. It only means that he is interested in the outcome and has a connection to the action. The same can be said of Klassen.
 Counsel for the plaintiff understandably place great reliance upon paragraph 26 of Rockwell Developments Ltd. v. Newtonbrook Plaza Ltd., 1972 CanLII 531 (ON CA),  3 O.R. 199 (C.A.):
It is my view that a literal interpretation of the words . . . ‘and the court or judge has full power to determine by whom and to what extent the costs shall be paid’ would lead to obvious absurdities, and that the decisions to which I have already referred correctly held that such a literal interpretation should not be given to the words in question. In my view the words ‘by whom’ should be interpreted to mean ‘by which of the parties to the proceeding before the court or judge.’
 With the greatest of respect to the Court in Rockwell Developments Ltd. v. Newtonbrook Plaza Ltd., the suggestion that a literal interpretation of s. 82(1) of the Judicature Act, R.S.O. 1970, c. 22, now s. 131(1) of the Courts of Justice Act, “would lead to obvious absurdities” is not sufficient reason to avoid a literal interpretation. The solution? Avoid the absurdities, not the literal interpretation. The law is never advanced by holding that words do not mean what they say.
 A case that is more factually relevant than any provided on behalf of the plaintiff, is Oasis Hotel Ltd. v. Zurich Insurance Co., 1981 CanLII 433 (BC CA),  B.C.J. No. 690, 124 D.L.R. (3d) 455 (B.C.C.A.), relied upon by the defendants. There, a corporation owned a hotel that burned down under suspicious circumstances and the insurer denied the claim. An individual named Surowiec, along with his wife, were the sole directors, officers and shareholders of the corporation. The trial judge found the testimony of Surowiec to be patently untrue. In affirming the personal costs ordered by the trial judge, Lambert J.A., writing for the Court, held, at para. 23:
I conclude that there is no authority in Canada that either binds me or persuades me to the conclusion that in a case where the court is made the instrument to perpetrate a fraud, the court cannot award the costs of the proceedings that are instigated as part of the fraud to be paid by the active mind that put the fraud into effect and directed the institution of the court proceedings.
and at para. 29:
. . . I do not regard this case as a case about the piercing of the corporate veil . . . I am satisfied that the [personal costs] order made by [the trial judge] does not violate the sanctity of the corporate personality. This was a case of fraud. In such cases the individual who conceives and carries out the fraud cannot shield behind a corporation that he controls.
 Although I have not received any submissions on the matter, I should think that the defendants (absent relevant offers to settle) would be entitled to their costs of the costs hearing on a partial indemnity basis. In the event that common sense continues to boycott this case and the parties cannot agree on those costs, counsel should contact the trial co-ordinator for further instructions.
The Honourable Mr. Justice J.W. Quinn
Summary: The daughter of a deceased patient made a request to the hospital for access to records of a meeting between the daughter and the hospital to discuss its treatment and care of her mother. The hospital denied access to two records, in full, on the basis of solicitor-client privilege.
In this decision, the adjudicator finds that the records contain the personal health information of the complainant’s mother, to which the complainant exercises a right of access, on her mother’s behalf, under section 52(3) of PHIPA. The records also contain the complainant’s own personal information, to which she has a right of access, on her own behalf, under section 47(1) of FIPPA. However, the adjudicator concludes that both the personal health information of the complainant’s mother and the complainant’s own personal information are exempt on the basis of solicitor-client privilege. In the result, the adjudicator upholds the hospital’s denial of access to the records, in full.
Statutes Considered: Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004, SO 2004, c 3, Sched A, as amended, ss 2 (definitions), 3, 4, 5(1), 8(1), 8(4), 23(1)4, 25, 52; Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, RSO 1990, c F.31, as amended, ss 2 (definitions), 19, 47(1), 49.
Decisions Considered: PHIPA Decision 17, PHIPA Decision 27.
 The daughter of a patient of Mackenzie Health (the hospital) made a request to the hospital for a number of records relating to her deceased mother’s care. This complaint addresses the portion of the daughter’s request seeking the notes of a May 10, 2013 meeting between hospital staff and the daughter, along with two individuals who accompanied the daughter, held after her mother’s death.
 In response to this aspect of the request, the hospital issued a decision under the Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004 (PHIPA), denying access to the records on the basis of the exemptions at section 52(1)(c) (continuing proceedings) of PHIPA and sections 13(1) (advice or recommendations) and 19(b) and (c) (solicitor-client privilege) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), available to the hospital through section 52(1)(f) of PHIPA.
 The daughter complained about the hospital’s denial of access to this office, becoming the complainant in this matter.
 As the parties were unable to resolve the issues through mediation, the complaint was transferred to the review stage of the complaint process under section 57(3) of PHIPA. During the course of my review, I sought and received representations from the hospital and the complainant on the complainant’s right of access to the records under PHIPA or FIPPA, or both.
 By the end of the review process, the hospital had revised its position. It continues to deny access to the records in full. The hospital submits that the records contain only snippets of personal health information of the complainant’s mother, which it is not required to release to the complainant, and that the remainder of the records are protected by solicitor-client privilege.
 In this decision, I find that the records contain both the personal health information of the complainant’s mother and the personal information of the complainant, and that the complainant is entitled to request access to both kinds of information under PHIPA and FIPPA, respectively. I conclude, however, that the records are exempt in full on the basis of solicitor-client privilege. As a result, I uphold the hospital’s decision to deny access to the records, in full.
“DDT vs Polio (1945-1953) In the graph below, I provide confirmation of Biskind’s observations for 1945-1953, in terms of polio incidence and pesticide production. I have utilized pesticide data from Hayes and Laws which they had derived from US Tariff Commission data. Polio incidence data was gathered from US Vital Statistics.” Continue reading Everything You Learned About The Cause of Polio Is Wrong
“Mr. Big confessions are also invariably accompanied by evidence that shows the accused willingly participated in “simulated crime” and was eager to join a criminal organization. This evidence sullies the accused’s character and, in doing so, carries with it the risk of prejudice.” Continue reading Mr Big Operations, still preying on dumb-asses
“Practically everyday, we hear about a new medical industry “miracle” – many of which later have to be removed from the market because they prove to be unsafe.” Continue reading The other pharmacy | Plant Wisdom
July 1, 2016 – Correction – Dr. Ranjit Kumar Chandra or whatever variation he is currently using, was not convicted of being a liar, I don’t … Continue reading Meet Dr Ranjit Chandra, NOT convicted LIAR, still published?
“The results of a 1980 clinical trial on heart drug Lorcainide were not published until a decade later. Doctors didn’t know that more people died in the trial who were given Lorcainide than who were taking the placebo. It has been estimated that over 100,000 people died avoidably because they were prescribed drugs in the same class. Read about how the researchers were able to get the results of the study published.” Continue reading AllTrials – Videos – Webpage repost
Santa Clara, CA: A consumer fraud class action lawsuit has been filed in California against UniRush alleging its prepaid Visa cards, called RushCards, denied account holders access to funds held in customer accounts, misappropriated funds held in those accounts and … Continue reading RushCards Face Consumer Fraud Class Action Lawsuit
“According to the Los Angeles Times (4/4/16), on April 4 the US Supreme Court declined to hear Wells Fargo’s appeal of a $203 million award handed to Wells Fargo customers.” Continue reading Wells Fargo Loses Overdraft Fee Appeal
“We’ve never heard of places like Ferguson, because the race wars there never happened and literally hundreds of thousands of families have fathers, instead of visiting hours.” Continue reading What would the world be like had the drug war not been waged? – Quora
“Patent US20130059018 – Phytocannabinoids in the treatment of cancer” Continue reading What are the arguments of cannabis products as pharmaceutical products and not natural? – Quora
What do you think about the failure of Research Institutes and Drug Companies to follow the law? All results are required to be published, not just the best ones they could find and let’s face it, many of their best … Continue reading 2 minutes to help? Research institutes ignore the law…
“ I conclude that actual jail time is the only realistic option in this case. It is completely unacceptable that the court process and its orders be deliberately, blatantly and continuously flouted as Mr. Sidhu has done. An exemplary custodial sentence should have the effect of deterring Mr. Sidhu specifically and also members of the public as a matter of general deterrence. Those who might be inclined to breach court orders, regardless of whether the orders are made within a matter of commercial litigation, or in a family or estate dispute or otherwise must realize that showing such disregard for the law and the court will not be tolerated. Likewise, it would be completely inappropriate for parties subject to court orders to assume that the penalty for a breach will be dealt with in some lenient way so as to give what amounts to a license for disobedience.” Continue reading
“As long as the public doesn’t realize that one in 13 people coming into the hospital will experience some kind of adverse event — and that’s the conservative estimate — then there isn’t any pressure to say, ‘Listen, fix these damn things.’ Continue reading Inside Canada’s secret world of medical error: ‘There is a lot of lying, there’s a lot of cover-up’ | National Post
“• In the view of many scientists and environmental experts, the Zika virus is being used to conceal the horrendous damage caused by pesticides in a large-scale human experiment.
• To position the virus as a miniature terrorist opens the doors to a blind obedience to the dictates of the pharmaceutical-agrochemical-biotechnology industries, through their puppet governments.” Continue reading Microcephaly: Zika, pesticides, and profits
” According to court documents, plaintiffs say they would not have taken Levaquin had they known about the risks and they would have been able to seek appropriate medical treatment once they suffered side effects if they had been made aware of the possible side effects.” Continue reading Johnson & Johnson Faces $800M Levaquin Lawsuit
EXCERPT: Under the law, sanctions for campaign finance disclosure violations can include a penalty equal to the amount not reported as required. If the court finds that the violation was intentional, that penalty amount can be tripled. Continue reading Court: GMA unlawfully hid donors’ identities from public
“… once the alleged spoliator’s action resulted in another party being deprived of the ability to prove or disprove some part of the case, the burden of proof with respect to intent was to be born by the alleged spoliator as the creator of the predicament…” Continue reading …spoliation required intentional destruction indicative of fraud or an intent to suppress the truth…
“…mentally ill people and would produce mentally ill people through infection, which in turn would be transmitted to the genes. Thus, this group would have to be studied and controlled as a contagious social disease. Police, hospitals, government, and schools would need to use the correct psychiatric authority to stop mental contagions from spreading” Continue reading Dear ARCH, Disability Law Centre…
“…Dr. Weaver’s office was broken into twice within three days in 2008. He did not say the fossil fuel industry might be responsible for that break-in; nor did he implicate them in the other break-in incidents at the University of Victoria.” Continue reading …is this what you want?
Barb Kueber, Engaged in the War on Drugs……. 131 Views • Upvoted by Kyle Channel Another collapsed answer, the Shills have been busy! If the failed War on Drugs was finally called to a halt, the one that still sees … Continue reading Who wins the “War on Drugs”
“The evidence on vaccine protection was scarce.” Continue reading Seasonal influenza vaccine policy… review
“AllTrials: Medicine is broken” Continue reading AllTrials – Videos
Google Inc.” Continue reading The Law Chases Google Inc.
“Do you guys ever listen to yourselves?” Continue reading DEAR PREPAID MASTERCARD…..
“Those judges further found that Janssen had information suggesting patients taking Risperdal were at an increased risk of developing diabetes mellitus and only shared results of a favorable study to the FDA, rather than sharing results of all studies…” Continue reading US Supreme Court Won’t Hear Risperdal Appeal
From an article by Tara West “The prosecution relied on testimony from Josh Ryen, who initially said Cooper was not the one who killed his family but later recanted and said it was Cooper. The child’s testimony changed throughout, with … Continue reading Is State Sanctioned Murder Ok?
“Patients were given massive doses of LSD either orally or injected intramuscularly and at times administered in combination with Methedrine (a drug of the amphetamine group. Also known as methamphetamine, it is used as a stimulant).” Continue reading Comfortable? Tell me a bit about yourself…
Yesterday was a good day for Google and Twitter users. It was a good day for science. And it was a good day for the Internet. Why? Because these two technology companies, along with prominent scientists and a public advocacy group, added their voices to the growing consensus that the constitutional right to speak anonymously on the Internet requires special protection in defamation lawsuits brought against anonymous Internet users. via Google and Twitter Speak Up in Support of the First Amendment Rights of Their Users | American Civil Liberties Union. Continue reading Google and Twitter Speak Up in Support of the First Amendment Rights of Their Users | American Civil Liberties Union
PubPeer’s attorneys responded: We are deeply troubled that a scientist who exercised his or her right to anonymously report anomalies in scientific research is being threatened with possible liability. The First Amendment protects the right to speak anonymously precisely so … Continue reading Lawsuit involving PubPeer unmasks commenter as pseudonymous whistleblower Clare Francis – Retraction Watch at Retraction Watch