3 pp, June 4, 2008. Gov't steals protected scientific research to justify diabetic policy
The following journals have had scientific articles stolen from them. These articles were presented by Bonnie Dobbs, an academic researcher, hired by the Office of the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles, to write a policy paper trying to justify the diabetic driver's policy that I have challenged not only for it's illegality but discrimination, and horrific consequences. Her work is to also legally justify the other medical conditions the OSMV supposed manages because in their "view" these conditions need monitoring, no matter what the consequences of the intervention. If stolen research has been presented to justify the diabetic policy it begs the question as to what she will do to justify the other medical policies.
It must be remembered that there is NO policy to begin with, as I was never given one during my initial inquiry of 2002-2004, or the first Human Rights discrimination complaint of 2004-2006, or during the wait-time 2006-2008, that I waited for the promised Policy Paper to make the policy legal. To make the policy legal in an effort to pretend a legal policy justifies the killing, maiming, and endangerment of life the policy is responsible for, for the discrimination agaist the diabetic, and gov't propaganda that the diabetic is a liability to society.
Dobbs is a listed as a DR. but she is actually a PhD, not a medical doctor, which you would believe she would be, as she is has been placed in the position of proving the gov't wants are bona fide, to prove existing social policy.
So, what does she do. She presents stolen scientific documents to justify the policy, trying to make it legal, and inturn making the consequences of the illegal policy acceptable. The death of your children, spouse, parents, companion, or friend in an Overcrowded Emerge facility is an acceptable consequence of the illegal policy, based upon stolen research? A two year wait for surgery is an acceptable consequence of the illegal policy that should be based upon stolen research? The long wait-times to see a General Practitioner is an acceptable consequence of this illegal policy that is to be based upon some PhDs stolen research material?
How is it that a professional reseacher, a medical researcher, a PhDer, can forget that All or most research is Copyright Protected, has Intellectual Property Rights Protection, and Intent of Use Protection just like gov't websites have, just like the OSMV website has, just like music does, and just like computer research has. Just like the American owners of research that Blackberry paid a zillion dollars to because RIM forgot to get permission for use of their protected research? Dobbs did not forget. There should have been 2500-3000 pages of Permission Forms for 185 articles and their Protection devices.
Also. Reader, Dobbs presented it under an Affidavit. This was done to make the readers of the Affidavit believe she had permission to use the material.
Even with this official legal document, the underpinning of law and legal documents in Canada, I challenged the legality of the use and then the gov't lied about this use.
Reader, it must be remembered that if the stolen research material was bona fide it would have been introduced through legal means. If it had been presented during 2002-2004 I would not be here. It must be remembered that the research I was reading during 1999-2002 rebuked the want for the type 2 diabetic drivers policy, little lone the killing, maiming, and endangerment to life the consequences of the policy create. It must be remembered that if the material was bona fide and really did prove the need for the policy the OSMV would have used it to justify the policy and it did not. The policy is still illegal. The OSMV presented stolen research to justify the policy, research that really does not justify the policy and when caught they lied about what they did, and did not force the research on their defence of my Human Rights Discrimination Complaint, in other words they withdrew their defence of the illegal prejudicial policy and yet the BC Human Rights Tribunal did not question the theft, the lie, nor the withdrawl of the research. The BC HRT buried all this and when I complained I was informed I could get a lawyer. The illegal policy is still illegal, I'm seen as a liability to society, and turned into a pariah. The gov't is the monster not the diabetic.
The 185 articles listed were listed non-alphabetically, which has the reader believing the list to be impressive and unchallengable due to number of articles; this is just the old lie of bigger is better and the bigger is not challengable. In other words, Bullshit Baffles Brains. The Triple b's. Not just bbb or bBb or BbB but the BBB. A real big Bullshit Baffles Brains coming from those in the position of status, trust, power, and prestige; gov't lawyers, private lawyers, gov't, and newly hired scientific researcher with a PhD but called Dr.; people that one should be able to trust especially within a Human Rights Complaint and an Affidavit.
This hodgepodge of science needed to be reviewed as science needs looking into, all science, which allows readers to see if the science is Good Science and bona fide for the use it is being used for. Good science will stand the investigation. Dobbs presentation is not Good Science, little lone science, it is just stuff stolen and presented to manipulate people due to her position.
I listed the scientific journals alphabetically with the number of times articles from those journals had been used; good science presentations are organized so the reader is not manipulated or lead astry by the presentation.
eg: Accidental Analysis & Prevention has two articles listed. They were the 136th and 164th article.
The journals were not listed alphabetically, which would bring clarity to the use, which of coarse Dobbs did not want to do, she just wanted to bombard the reader with science in order to impress and have readers just believe in the bona fide(ness) due to volume, not value and worth.
The listing of the journals alphabetically and how many times they were used debunks the deliberate play of the researcher to mislead by shear volume. The old adage of bigger is better has been played out by the research. And like most misleading actions concerning length and volume this lie has also been corrected. It is important for the reader to be informed of how many times each journal was abused as this decreases the randomly listed 13 pages of articles (or 185 articles) to 3 pages of Journals and how many times each used; a much easier number to get ones mind around to realize that each should have Permission Forms and they are not there.
Also, it must be remembered that some of these articles have 'do not use under any circumstance' and yet Dobbs still used the article.
Lastly, reader you must wonder why some of the articles are listed. My complaint is about type 2 diabetes, not type 1 or gestational diabetes. There are articles that have nothing to do with diabetes; eg, there are fifteen articles on Thyroid. What has thyroid to do with diabetes and driving. This is not explained. My BC HRT Response to Dobbs investigates this Padding of her presentation.
*******
Corrected since email of May 5-6 April 30, 2009
Accident Analysis & Prevention, #136, 164, permissions @elsevier.com
Acta Medicus Scandinavia, #119, Canada @ocla.org
Aging & Mental Health, #159, info @cmha.ca
American College of Endocrinology, # 4, web submit form
American Diabetes Association, #5, 6, 7, 8, 18, AskADA@ diabetes.org for ADA, which publishes;
Diabetes, #17, 33, 76, 89, 90, 91, 110, 123, 137, 151, 157,
Diabetes Care, #1, 3, 9, 15, 16, 23, 29, 34, 38, 58, 65, 66, 70, 84, 85, 94, 95, 97, 98, 100, 106, 112, 130, 131, 134, 140, 142, 143, 145, 153, 156, 173,
Clinical Diabetes, #101,
Diabetes Spectrum, # not used
American Journal of Medicine, #154, JounalsOnlineSupport-usa @elsevier.com
American Journal of Physiology - Endocrinology and Metabolism, #40, 109, permissions @elsevier.com
American Journal of Psychiatry, #45 appi @psych.org
American Medical Association Press , #28 permissions @ama-assn.org
Annals of Internal Medicine, #81, 96, 170, mfogler @medicalreprints.com
Archives of Internal Medicine, #67, 82, 107, 108, 133, permissions @ama-assn.org
Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine, #144, info @aaam.org
Brain: A Journal of Neurology, #104, help @ingentaconnect.com
British Journal of Industrial Medicine, #172 custserv @nlm.hih.gov
British Medical Journal, #11, 53, 54, 126, 128, 135, 148, 149, 161, bmjpermissions1 @bmjgroup.com
Canadian Diabetic Association, #21,
Canadian Diabetes Association, #20, 22,
Canadian J Diabetes, #12,
Canadian Journal of Clinical Pharmacology/Journal Canadien De Pharmacologie Clinique, #79,
Canadian Journal of Public Health, #68, pulsus @pulsus.com or webmaster @cpha.ca
Centers for Disease Control, #24, cdcinfo @cdc.gov
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, # 25, (US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) cdcinfo @cdc.gov
Clinical and Endocrinology Metabolism, #83, societyservices @endo-society.org
Clinical Nephrology, #10, info @dustri.com
Clinical Science, #78, editorial @portlandpress.com
Daniel J Cox (research asks to contact him) djcf @virginia.edu
Diabetes Research & Clinical Practice, #73, permissions @elsevier.com
Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics, #93, info @liebertpub.com
Diabetes Metabolism, #174, permissions @elsevier.com
Diabetic Medicine, #51, 80, 120, 127, JournalsRights @oxon.blackwellpublishing.com
Diabetologia, #39, 64, 113, 147, diabetologia-j @bristol.ac.uk
DOT, HS 809 023, Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. #46
from web submit form mtl1(one) @mailwc.custhelp.com
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. #55
DOT, Volpe Center, Cambridge MA. National Personal Transportation Survey. #125,
DOT, Washington, DC. Federal Highway Administration, Office of the Motor Carriers. #169,
Endocrine Reviews, #62, societyservices @endo-society.org
Endocrinology and metabolism clinics of North America, #37, permissions @elsevier.com
European Journal of Pharmacology, #2, permissions @elsevier.com
European Journal of Endocrinology, #167, jennie.evans @endocrinology.org
Food and Drug Administration (n.d). #56 not copyright
Hartford, CT: The Hartford, #32 web submit form response to email as informaworld Customer Support
support @informaworld.com
Hormone and Metabolic Research, #14, 69, customerservice @thieme.com
Journal American Geriatric Society, #61, 121, JournalsRights @oxon.blackwellpublishing.com
Journal for Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, #30 web submit form
Journal of Affective Disorders, #132, permissions @elsevier.com
Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, #63, 105, societyservices @endo-society.org
Journal of Clinical Neuropsychology, #74, permissions @elsevier.com
Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, #44 cgomm @bmjgroup.com
Journal of Glaucoma, #150, reprints @lww.com
Journal of Internal Medicine, #72, krossett @wiley.com
Journal of Metabolic Research, #86, info @ki.se
Journal of Pediatrics, #168, permissions @elsevier.com
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, #88, krossett @wiley.com
Journal of the American Medical Association, #35, 103, 138, 139, permissions @ama-assn.org
Journal of Trauma-Injury Infection & Critical Care, #87, reprints @lww.com
Journals of Gerontology Series A-Biological Sciences & Medical Sciences, #122, customercare @copyright.com
Medical Journal of Australia, #3, 111, info @copyright.com.au
Risk Analysis, #99, 146, krossett @wiley.com
Neurologist, #49, reprints @lww.com
Neurology, #50 gjohnson @lww.com
Neuropsychobiology, #102, permissions @karger.ch
New Zealand Medical Journal, #166, nzma @nzma.org.nz
Psychoneuroendocrinology, #114, permissions @elsevier.com
Public Policy and Aging Report, #48 (National Academy on an Aging Society) info @agingsociety.org
The Lancet, #14, 57, 60, 77, 152, 160, healthpermissions @elsevier.com
The Netherlands Journal of Medicine, #163, (web submit form (Genamics))
The New England Journal of Medicine, #26, 71, 115, 124, 155, 165, permissions @nejm.org
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, #36, 41, 59, 92, societyservices @endo-society.org
The Journal of Oklahoma State Medical Association, #42 (web submit form, #31738) (Gaebler Ventures)
Thyroid, #19, info @liebertpub.com
Thyroid Foundation of Canada, #158. (no email)
University of Michigan; The Survey Research Centre of the Institute for Social Research, #13, isr-info @isr.umich.edu
World Health Organization, #171, info @who.int
Books;
#43, Geriatric medicine and gerontology, 6th Edition (pp1149-1156. Spain: Churchill Livingstone. Davis, I (2003) Aging and the endocrine system. R C Ellis and H M Fillit (Eds.) reprints @elsevier.com
#52, Edelman, SV and Henry RR 2002. Diagnosis and management of type 2 diabetes (5th ed.) Caddo, Okla.: Professional Communications.
Not listed; (email, books, unknowns)
#20, 21, 22, 75, 116, 117, 118, 129, 162,
Canadian Diabetes Association is not listed as it has not and does not support me in my endeavors, at least publicly, and yet my complaint changed fee payments for all diabetics and the diabetic policy whatever that is to be. Afraid of loosing funding? Why not? Look what is happening to me and what has just happened to your research and private property.
Approximately ten percent of the CDA funding comes from gov't and we would never know who the senior civil servants were that canceled that funding if it did disappear.
It must be remembered that there is NO policy to begin with, as I was never given one during my initial inquiry of 2002-2004, or the first Human Rights discrimination complaint of 2004-2006, or during the wait-time 2006-2008, that I waited for the promised Policy Paper to make the policy legal. To make the policy legal in an effort to pretend a legal policy justifies the killing, maiming, and endangerment of life the policy is responsible for, for the discrimination agaist the diabetic, and gov't propaganda that the diabetic is a liability to society.
Dobbs is a listed as a DR. but she is actually a PhD, not a medical doctor, which you would believe she would be, as she is has been placed in the position of proving the gov't wants are bona fide, to prove existing social policy.
So, what does she do. She presents stolen scientific documents to justify the policy, trying to make it legal, and inturn making the consequences of the illegal policy acceptable. The death of your children, spouse, parents, companion, or friend in an Overcrowded Emerge facility is an acceptable consequence of the illegal policy, based upon stolen research? A two year wait for surgery is an acceptable consequence of the illegal policy that should be based upon stolen research? The long wait-times to see a General Practitioner is an acceptable consequence of this illegal policy that is to be based upon some PhDs stolen research material?
How is it that a professional reseacher, a medical researcher, a PhDer, can forget that All or most research is Copyright Protected, has Intellectual Property Rights Protection, and Intent of Use Protection just like gov't websites have, just like the OSMV website has, just like music does, and just like computer research has. Just like the American owners of research that Blackberry paid a zillion dollars to because RIM forgot to get permission for use of their protected research? Dobbs did not forget. There should have been 2500-3000 pages of Permission Forms for 185 articles and their Protection devices.
Also. Reader, Dobbs presented it under an Affidavit. This was done to make the readers of the Affidavit believe she had permission to use the material.
Even with this official legal document, the underpinning of law and legal documents in Canada, I challenged the legality of the use and then the gov't lied about this use.
Reader, it must be remembered that if the stolen research material was bona fide it would have been introduced through legal means. If it had been presented during 2002-2004 I would not be here. It must be remembered that the research I was reading during 1999-2002 rebuked the want for the type 2 diabetic drivers policy, little lone the killing, maiming, and endangerment to life the consequences of the policy create. It must be remembered that if the material was bona fide and really did prove the need for the policy the OSMV would have used it to justify the policy and it did not. The policy is still illegal. The OSMV presented stolen research to justify the policy, research that really does not justify the policy and when caught they lied about what they did, and did not force the research on their defence of my Human Rights Discrimination Complaint, in other words they withdrew their defence of the illegal prejudicial policy and yet the BC Human Rights Tribunal did not question the theft, the lie, nor the withdrawl of the research. The BC HRT buried all this and when I complained I was informed I could get a lawyer. The illegal policy is still illegal, I'm seen as a liability to society, and turned into a pariah. The gov't is the monster not the diabetic.
The 185 articles listed were listed non-alphabetically, which has the reader believing the list to be impressive and unchallengable due to number of articles; this is just the old lie of bigger is better and the bigger is not challengable. In other words, Bullshit Baffles Brains. The Triple b's. Not just bbb or bBb or BbB but the BBB. A real big Bullshit Baffles Brains coming from those in the position of status, trust, power, and prestige; gov't lawyers, private lawyers, gov't, and newly hired scientific researcher with a PhD but called Dr.; people that one should be able to trust especially within a Human Rights Complaint and an Affidavit.
This hodgepodge of science needed to be reviewed as science needs looking into, all science, which allows readers to see if the science is Good Science and bona fide for the use it is being used for. Good science will stand the investigation. Dobbs presentation is not Good Science, little lone science, it is just stuff stolen and presented to manipulate people due to her position.
I listed the scientific journals alphabetically with the number of times articles from those journals had been used; good science presentations are organized so the reader is not manipulated or lead astry by the presentation.
eg: Accidental Analysis & Prevention has two articles listed. They were the 136th and 164th article.
The journals were not listed alphabetically, which would bring clarity to the use, which of coarse Dobbs did not want to do, she just wanted to bombard the reader with science in order to impress and have readers just believe in the bona fide(ness) due to volume, not value and worth.
The listing of the journals alphabetically and how many times they were used debunks the deliberate play of the researcher to mislead by shear volume. The old adage of bigger is better has been played out by the research. And like most misleading actions concerning length and volume this lie has also been corrected. It is important for the reader to be informed of how many times each journal was abused as this decreases the randomly listed 13 pages of articles (or 185 articles) to 3 pages of Journals and how many times each used; a much easier number to get ones mind around to realize that each should have Permission Forms and they are not there.
Also, it must be remembered that some of these articles have 'do not use under any circumstance' and yet Dobbs still used the article.
Lastly, reader you must wonder why some of the articles are listed. My complaint is about type 2 diabetes, not type 1 or gestational diabetes. There are articles that have nothing to do with diabetes; eg, there are fifteen articles on Thyroid. What has thyroid to do with diabetes and driving. This is not explained. My BC HRT Response to Dobbs investigates this Padding of her presentation.
*******
Corrected since email of May 5-6 April 30, 2009
Accident Analysis & Prevention, #136, 164, permissions @elsevier.com
Acta Medicus Scandinavia, #119, Canada @ocla.org
Aging & Mental Health, #159, info @cmha.ca
American College of Endocrinology, # 4, web submit form
American Diabetes Association, #5, 6, 7, 8, 18, AskADA@ diabetes.org for ADA, which publishes;
Diabetes, #17, 33, 76, 89, 90, 91, 110, 123, 137, 151, 157,
Diabetes Care, #1, 3, 9, 15, 16, 23, 29, 34, 38, 58, 65, 66, 70, 84, 85, 94, 95, 97, 98, 100, 106, 112, 130, 131, 134, 140, 142, 143, 145, 153, 156, 173,
Clinical Diabetes, #101,
Diabetes Spectrum, # not used
American Journal of Medicine, #154, JounalsOnlineSupport-usa @elsevier.com
American Journal of Physiology - Endocrinology and Metabolism, #40, 109, permissions @elsevier.com
American Journal of Psychiatry, #45 appi @psych.org
American Medical Association Press , #28 permissions @ama-assn.org
Annals of Internal Medicine, #81, 96, 170, mfogler @medicalreprints.com
Archives of Internal Medicine, #67, 82, 107, 108, 133, permissions @ama-assn.org
Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine, #144, info @aaam.org
Brain: A Journal of Neurology, #104, help @ingentaconnect.com
British Journal of Industrial Medicine, #172 custserv @nlm.hih.gov
British Medical Journal, #11, 53, 54, 126, 128, 135, 148, 149, 161, bmjpermissions1 @bmjgroup.com
Canadian Diabetic Association, #21,
Canadian Diabetes Association, #20, 22,
Canadian J Diabetes, #12,
Canadian Journal of Clinical Pharmacology/Journal Canadien De Pharmacologie Clinique, #79,
Canadian Journal of Public Health, #68, pulsus @pulsus.com or webmaster @cpha.ca
Centers for Disease Control, #24, cdcinfo @cdc.gov
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, # 25, (US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) cdcinfo @cdc.gov
Clinical and Endocrinology Metabolism, #83, societyservices @endo-society.org
Clinical Nephrology, #10, info @dustri.com
Clinical Science, #78, editorial @portlandpress.com
Daniel J Cox (research asks to contact him) djcf @virginia.edu
Diabetes Research & Clinical Practice, #73, permissions @elsevier.com
Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics, #93, info @liebertpub.com
Diabetes Metabolism, #174, permissions @elsevier.com
Diabetic Medicine, #51, 80, 120, 127, JournalsRights @oxon.blackwellpublishing.com
Diabetologia, #39, 64, 113, 147, diabetologia-j @bristol.ac.uk
DOT, HS 809 023, Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. #46
from web submit form mtl1(one) @mailwc.custhelp.com
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. #55
DOT, Volpe Center, Cambridge MA. National Personal Transportation Survey. #125,
DOT, Washington, DC. Federal Highway Administration, Office of the Motor Carriers. #169,
Endocrine Reviews, #62, societyservices @endo-society.org
Endocrinology and metabolism clinics of North America, #37, permissions @elsevier.com
European Journal of Pharmacology, #2, permissions @elsevier.com
European Journal of Endocrinology, #167, jennie.evans @endocrinology.org
Food and Drug Administration (n.d). #56 not copyright
Hartford, CT: The Hartford, #32 web submit form response to email as informaworld Customer Support
support @informaworld.com
Hormone and Metabolic Research, #14, 69, customerservice @thieme.com
Journal American Geriatric Society, #61, 121, JournalsRights @oxon.blackwellpublishing.com
Journal for Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, #30 web submit form
Journal of Affective Disorders, #132, permissions @elsevier.com
Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, #63, 105, societyservices @endo-society.org
Journal of Clinical Neuropsychology, #74, permissions @elsevier.com
Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, #44 cgomm @bmjgroup.com
Journal of Glaucoma, #150, reprints @lww.com
Journal of Internal Medicine, #72, krossett @wiley.com
Journal of Metabolic Research, #86, info @ki.se
Journal of Pediatrics, #168, permissions @elsevier.com
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, #88, krossett @wiley.com
Journal of the American Medical Association, #35, 103, 138, 139, permissions @ama-assn.org
Journal of Trauma-Injury Infection & Critical Care, #87, reprints @lww.com
Journals of Gerontology Series A-Biological Sciences & Medical Sciences, #122, customercare @copyright.com
Medical Journal of Australia, #3, 111, info @copyright.com.au
Risk Analysis, #99, 146, krossett @wiley.com
Neurologist, #49, reprints @lww.com
Neurology, #50 gjohnson @lww.com
Neuropsychobiology, #102, permissions @karger.ch
New Zealand Medical Journal, #166, nzma @nzma.org.nz
Psychoneuroendocrinology, #114, permissions @elsevier.com
Public Policy and Aging Report, #48 (National Academy on an Aging Society) info @agingsociety.org
The Lancet, #14, 57, 60, 77, 152, 160, healthpermissions @elsevier.com
The Netherlands Journal of Medicine, #163, (web submit form (Genamics))
The New England Journal of Medicine, #26, 71, 115, 124, 155, 165, permissions @nejm.org
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, #36, 41, 59, 92, societyservices @endo-society.org
The Journal of Oklahoma State Medical Association, #42 (web submit form, #31738) (Gaebler Ventures)
Thyroid, #19, info @liebertpub.com
Thyroid Foundation of Canada, #158. (no email)
University of Michigan; The Survey Research Centre of the Institute for Social Research, #13, isr-info @isr.umich.edu
World Health Organization, #171, info @who.int
Books;
#43, Geriatric medicine and gerontology, 6th Edition (pp1149-1156. Spain: Churchill Livingstone. Davis, I (2003) Aging and the endocrine system. R C Ellis and H M Fillit (Eds.) reprints @elsevier.com
#52, Edelman, SV and Henry RR 2002. Diagnosis and management of type 2 diabetes (5th ed.) Caddo, Okla.: Professional Communications.
Not listed; (email, books, unknowns)
#20, 21, 22, 75, 116, 117, 118, 129, 162,
Canadian Diabetes Association is not listed as it has not and does not support me in my endeavors, at least publicly, and yet my complaint changed fee payments for all diabetics and the diabetic policy whatever that is to be. Afraid of loosing funding? Why not? Look what is happening to me and what has just happened to your research and private property.
Approximately ten percent of the CDA funding comes from gov't and we would never know who the senior civil servants were that canceled that funding if it did disappear.
Labels: copyright theft, intellectual property rights theft, intent of use misuse
posted by type 2 at
4:28 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home