Support this site with a donation.
Eve Hillary spends her time frightening children and uninformed adults about all the chemicals that are around us. I can only assume that the computer she typed this nonsense on had no plastic components and had not been made in a factory which produced any industrial waste. The electricity used to power her computer must have been drawn directly from the zero-point energy of the universe, as even pure, renewable hydroelectric power would have needed wires (with all that EMF radiation) to bring the volts to her house, and wires are made from metals which have to be chemically processed from ores. I see that she has written a book. I hope that it was printed on unbleached paper made from recycled unbleached other paper and that the inks used did not contain any chemicals. I assume that she also makes these demands of purity and goodness before she accepts any royalty cheques from her publisher, and immediately destroys any cheque which is not up to standard. I know she won't accept cash because Australian bank notes are made of plastic, and everyone knows that plastics are chemicals and nobody should go near them. What a kook. What a hypocrite.
|Ms Hillary wrote
fabulous piece of fiction which mentioned me and which was
published on several web sites around the world, including that of
Davide Icke (who believes that the British Royal Family are
lizards). It contained this wonderful comment about me:
Bowditch also has a link to a restricted access discussion group that is only open to "approved" members. The discussion group, QuackbustersOfTheIlluminati, states its purpose as being: "This is a meeting place for the anti-alternative-medicine committee of the Illuminati, where we can meet and consider our attack on health freedom within the broader agenda of world domination." It is not known what relationship Bowditch has with this group, why it is secretive or why it was formed.
I have offered to let Ms Hillary join this secret society, but she has not replied.
This rubbish was posted to several mailing lists on 20 November, 2002.
Bogus Watchdogs At the Helm?
The Big Stink in Health Industry
By Eve Hillary
According to NSW Health Minister Mr. Craig Knowles, patients are spending 2 billion dollars annually on alternative health products and procedures. That means the general public increasingly uses the services of complementary health care practitioners including medical doctors with a special interest in holistic, nutritional and environmental medicine. Why? This is a particularly important question given the fact that thousands of patients are killed and permanently disabled through standard medical care, including infections and drug errors. Dr. W. Runciman, President of the Australian Patient Safety Foundation states " …at least 10% of [hospital] admissions are associated with a potentially preventable adverse event, and that such adverse events are associated with as many as 50,000 permanent disabilities and 10,000 deaths each year in Australia."
The first quack who cited Dr Runciman's paper to me said the number was 14,000, but there seems to be some flexibility as Ms Hillary says 10,000 and Mr Jones says 18,000 (or sometimes 19,000).
Instead of government regarding this statistic as an incentive to investigate the efficacy and safety of the orthodox health industry or indeed determining why patients are turning to natural therapies where adverse events are uncommon - it is setting its sights on holistic practitioners.
Perhaps if Ms Hillary had bothered to read the rest of Dr Runciman's paper, she would have seen that it is all about investigating "the efficacy and safety of the orthodox health industry". Actually, I suppose she did read it but it would not suit her agenda to admit the truth.
Meanwhile the holistic trend seems to be rattling the cages of the orthodox medical profession and other interests, who appear to have already begun a systematic shakeout of holistic practitioners.
Professor John Dwyer, a Sydney immunologist, was quoted in the Australian Doctor as saying "doctors who offer miracle cures will be deregistered as part of a crackdown on shonky medical practices". Professor Dwyer claims he is involved in efforts to "create structural reform" within the Australian health care delivery system. The professor is a member of the Sceptic's society along with retired nurse Ms Cheryl Freeman who has assumed a supporting role in Professor Dwyer's objective of structural reform. Although both appear to have been actively pursuing this goal for quite some time, it has been only recently that they were considered for membership on a special committee, set up by the NSW Health Minister, Craig Knowles. The minister has been quoted in The Australian as commencing a crackdown on "unsafe and unproven health products" and dangerous procedures. Professor Dwyer has been nominated to chair the special Health Claims and Consumer Protection Advisory Committee and it appears is ideally suited to the task, "We are going to make it much harder for the mongrels who sell this stuff" professor Dwyer was quoted as saying in the article. The professor however was not referring to the unsafe health products and procedures responsible for the demise of thousands following hospital and orthodox medical treatments, but incredibly he singles out those practitioners offering natural therapies and products.
The formation of this committee has sparked unusual anger among holistic practitioners and the general public alike who feel they have a right to choose health care appropriate to their needs. "It is agreed that unethical practitioners and unproved or dangerous devices should not be allowed in practice, but that is not the real issue." Says a Sydney practitioner.
If this is agreed, then why is there any opposition? Unless the opposition wants the frauds to continue of course.
At first glance it is difficult to understand why the Health Minister's announcement has inflamed so many so quickly. A groundswell of protest from alternative practitioners has reached federal proportions since the NSW Health Minister announced the special committee on October 31, 2002. However, numerous members of the complementary medicine community, who have already had previous dealings with both Professor Dwyer and Ms. Freeman, claim that a crackdown has been in effect for years already. They want a review and investigation to determine how ethically this ‘reform' or ‘crackdown' has been implemented in the past and how it will be conducted in the future.
As the alternative health care debate foments, many health care practitioners are coming forward with their experiences of official and non-official harassment by individuals who claim to represent the public interest. This group of individuals is usually unknown to the general public and has no mandate from the general community but are well known to holistic health care practitioners and their patients. Those who have shared their stories have preferred to remain de-identified, fearing a recurrence of what they regard as victimisation. Some remain frightened by the sometimes horrendous experiences they have undergone. But all, including several not here mentioned, have stated their willingness to give testimony to a legitimate official enquiry. There is a spreading awareness among the holistic health care community that a select group of complainants are lodging bogus complaints with government consumer and medical watchdog bureaucracies, for reasons that are unclear. The outcomes of these types of complaints do not appear to serve the interests of the community.
A 56 year old doctor practicing North of Sydney had been told by a patient of the pain relief she experienced while using a magnetic mat after suffering from chronic back pain for some years. Intrigued, the doctor conducted his own research and discovered 260 research papers and studies in the world scientific literature relating to this technology. He decided to acquire a unit for use in his surgery and soon discovered the appliance seemed to help other patients. With the patients permission the doctor wrote a (de identified) case history documenting the outcome of the treatment with the appliance. He did not profit from this in any way. This along with other testimonials found its way onto a website. Websites and advertisements are regularly trawled by individuals claiming to be consumer advocates. The doctor was reported to the HCCC (Health Care Complaints Commission) by a person whose identity was unknown to him at the time. She had never been his patient and had not, as far as anyone knew, even used the appliance. The complainant was Ms. Cheryl Freeman.
In 1994 a 53-year-old quietly spoken scientist with a PhD in biophysics discovered references in the world scientific literature about the efficacy of animal cartilage in the treatment of arthritis and a range of other disorders. The scientist began researching therapeutic uses of bovine cartilage and was so impressed with its healing properties that he decided to manufacture and market a cartilage product. He had sought the appropriate TGA (Therapeutic Goods Administration) approval and was given a federal TGA registration for his product.
I very much doubt that any quack was given TGA registration. He might have been given a "listing" (which costs a lot less and just means that the treatment doesn't do too much damage). Of course, as lying was his stock in trade, truth about TGA recognition is irrelevant.
The product was sold and ongoing studies confirmed its efficacy. While claiming to have had overwhelming positive feedback from customers with a range of illnesses after using his product, the biophysicist flatly denies he has ever claimed to cure cancer. Despite his denials he was written up in the Newcastle Herald, last year as having made such claims. Professor Dwyer was a major contributor to that article. Within weeks of the article's publication the scientist received word from the Department of Fair Trading, acting on a complaint by unknown persons. Subsequent investigations by the department revealed the complaint was unfounded, and the matter was dismissed.
Professor Dwyer, who has been hand chosen to lead the special committee, has long been known to discredit alternative therapies. He denies that toxic chemicals can be the cause of certain types of illness, while at the same time defending the safety of pesticides. Insurance companies engage his services on litigants who make claims of chemical injury following exposure to toxic chemicals.
A 48-year-old woman was diagnosed by a US Professor and world authority on chemical injury, as having been chemically injured, after exhaustive pathology testing and diagnostics imaging supported his diagnosis. After reviewing her case for an insurance company Professor Dwyer wrote, "It is likely that …(the patient) did experience a toxic reaction to constant exposure to sheep dip. This did her no significant harm…" Professor Dwyer states he has seen more than a hundred other patients with her condition. Of these he writes: "We seem to be dealing with severe psychosomatic symptomatology in all these cases." Of the treatment options for these chemically injured persons Professor Dwyer recommends that patients, "understand and accept the psychosomatic basis of (the) illness and enter into some intensive help from a competent psychiatrist". He makes no attempt to explain the abnormal physical pathology results, or indeed the body of world literature that supports the physical basis for chemical injury. As to the woman's treating doctors, including the US professor who is the author of a number of medical studies pertaining to chemical injury and peer-reviewed in the world literature, Professor Dwyer says; "…she slipped into unscientific hands and was told she had multiple chemical sensitivity syndrome." Professor Dwyer purports that persons suffering from this disorder are delusional and labels those who treat such persons as unscientific. Inexplicably he continues to ignore the current body of scientific literature. Some are questioning whether Professor Dwyer is simply unaware of the current research or whether he may be associated with a group of well known others who pass themselves off as health watchdogs and experts, but do not necessarily represent the interests of the community.
Oooh! A conspiracy!
After being reported, by Ms. Freeman, to NSW Department of Fair Trading, a 58-year-old manufacturer and distributor of colloidal silver generators was reported to the ACCC (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission) in 1999. The manufacturer claims he had never received a complaint from any of his customers about his product to that time. He has collected over 900 testimonies from satisfied customers of his product. However, quite extraordinarily the ACCC allows for other competitors to make complaints, including large corporations who find small competitors cutting into market shares. While the Department of Fair Trading dismissed Freeman's complaint against the manufacturer as being unfounded, he'd had however, numerous dealings with Mrs. Freeman in the media prior to the complaint being lodged with the ACCC. The manufacturer was unable to continue his business while the commission investigated the matter over the next year and the man's legal bills escalated to tens of thousands of dollars. Five days after he had alerted his customer database to his circumstances, he was seriously assaulted by unknown assailants in an unprovoked and unusually brutal attack. Remarkably he managed to fend them off. Before lapsing into unconsciousness he was able to note down the assailants' vehicle registration, which led to their apprehension. During the ensuing trial he claims to have overheard a comment made by the female partner of one of the assailants, chillingly indicating the attacker had been aware of unpublicised details of his matter before the ACCC. Following his partial recovery from the serious assault, the ACCC dragged on the investigation for another several months. No convictions arose from the ACCC investigation and no full court hearing eventuated. The manufacturer claims he still has night terrors and residual health problems from the nightmare that "nearly cost me my life" and "nearly sent me broke".
It seems a bizarre example of hypocrisy that a campaigner against chemical damage should support something so unnatural as the ingestion of silver. Perhaps Ms Hillary might like to explain to Rosemary Jacobs why some chemicals are bad but some are good (if they are recommended by quacks).
Though it may be difficult to imagine any benefit arising from these types of bureaucratic exercises, it could be argued that so long as there are watchdogs to protect community interests, it matters not whether a few cases are frivolous. It seems though that mischievous complaints are often pursued more vigorously than matters of serious concern. A quick review of medical misconduct indicates, that in some cases at least the watchdog is sleeping. As was the case of a Sydney GP who was convicted by the Supreme Court of shooting his wife and terrorising her and his son on a number of occasions with a knife, threatening to kill them. On another occasion he tied her up and threatened her with a knife and urinated on her. It was alleged he self prescribed a number of drugs. This practitioner was investigated by the HCCC where the matter progressed to the Medical Tribunal whose task it was to decide whether the doctor showed a lack of good character and whether he had been guilty of professional misconduct relating to the practice of medicine. The tribunal did not de-register the doctor, on some would say, reasonable grounds that the community might be safeguarded. But rather the judgement consisted of a reprimand for the practitioner who was required to pay a monthly visit to a psychiatrist while he returned to the practice of medicine after a year's full time employment in a public hospital.
The Judge who heard this case was the very same judge who presided over the celebrated case of Dr. William McBride, who was de-registered for making alterations to the amount of water ingested by rabbits in a laboratory experiment, which showed that a widely used chemical produced birth defects when given to pregnant rabbits. His article was published in the Australian Journal of Biological Science. Scientists working in the United States National Toxicological Study of Drugs and Chemicals later confirmed McBride's findings. In his defence McBride claimed that he thought that his finding was very important and he wanted to put out an early warning, having witnessed the Thalidomide disaster. Judge Wall dismissed this defence. After several years of deregistration Dr. McBride has been allowed, by the NSW Medical tribunal to practice medicine but has been barred from conducting research. It could be argued that the only realistic beneficiaries of Dr. McBride's deregistration and ban from research is the pharmaceutical industry.
I realise that supporters of quackery do not understand the concept of research, but one of the fundamental principles is honesty. If the results have been fabricated then they mean nothing and can tell us nothing about the world. This applies even if the fabricated results reflect what is subsequently found to be the real situation. Science is not guesswork or wishful thinking. Dr McBride did excellent work in warning the world of the dangers of Thalidomide (when given to pregnant women - it has other legitimate uses), but he lied in his subsequent research into Debendox.
As with the McBride case, the issue of self-appointed public health watchdogs makes a timely re-appearance with the appointment, onto a health watchdog committee, of Professor Dwyer. Minister Knowles office has been quiet on the subject, but it is now believed that Ms. Freeman has been excused as a member of the committee. Disturbingly there have been no ministerial replies to questions pertaining to this Committee, its members, affiliations, its terms of reference and other questions of community concern. The public has a right to know the identity of those who serve on the shadowy committees that watch over them. Particularly with respect to committee members' qualifications and affiliations - indeed whether they have an interest in any commercial organization or are paid consultants of corporate interests. Most would agree it is time to weed the garden. The time may well have come for the public to demand careful public scrutiny of bogus "consumer and health care advocates" requiring them to declare any vested interests they might represent. Anything less that full scrutiny represents a total abandonment of the public interest.
The stench around the issue of targeting complementary and holistic medicine can only be cleared by government transparency and accountability. It is time for the Health Minister to answer the phone.
Eve Hillary is a Writer and Researcher on Health Issueshttps://groups.yahoo.com/group/i-v-y/message/8588
Someone thinks that I am a doctor and I am too hard on Eve Hillary. Perhaps I would look more kindly on Ms Hillary if she stopped telling lies, stopped using ad hominem arguments to defend quackery and came out in support of action to clean up the alternative medicine business and get rid of the charlatans.
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 07:41:49 +1000
From: Connie Moore
Subject: Eve Hillary and your comments on the anti-quackery site
It's a shame, but not surprising, that those "protective" of conventional medicine are so threatened by Eve and people like her, who are doing nothing more that enlightening the public on what actually goes on "behind the closed doors of conventional medicine"... People respect Eve because she tells the truth, so the power will be placed in the hands of the public... the public is not as dumb as you doctors think...they've caught on; why do you think people like Eve have become so respected!!!
You may discredit what she says all you like, but be aware that more and more respected health professionals are joining the cause... hopefully (and I truly believe it will happen), you will be in the minority... all you have to do is watch the numbers of people seeking alternative/complimentary health care... they're sick of being lied to and mislead by conventional medicine... or should I say doctors, and the whole AMA, including the drug companies... well, they're all in it together anyway... so sad that it's come to this!