Re: GlobalTox suit against Sharon Kramer: A tipping point on ...

July 16, 2005

Thanks backing me up, . I am really quite perplexed as to why

Kelman and GlobalTox thought it was a good idea to falsely accuse me of libel.

All I did in the press release is draw attention to how her waffled back and

forth when trying to explain the relationship between the ACOEM, the Manhattan

Institute and the $40K.

I actually should send Dr. Kelman a Thank You note. By forcing me to defend

myself, I had to go back and research some of the docs I had. I've had the

Kilian Transcript, a couple of others and the ACOEM emails for about three or

four months. I just had not taken the time to sit down and put them into

cronilogical order, or cross reference them.

It's a pretty sick tale when you put it all together. Kelman is saying in

one under oath testimony, he only began the process for the ACOME and that he

was told it was peer reviewed by 100 very critical doctors (I wonder if this

is a little inside joke to himself, making fun of critical peer review while

on the witness stand. Difference between " critical doctors " and " critical

peer review " ) Later, you find out his co-author and co-worker, Hardin, had

been told that it had to be at least a dozen who reviewed it. My math skills

are still a bit off after the mold exposure, but I'm pretty sure a dozen is

not 100. You can see through the emails where Hardin, Kelman and Saxon had

much say so at the end. That doesn't jive with " just began the process " and

unbiased critical peer review. How this ACOEM Statement came to be, looks like

a shady deal to me.

I will say this, for Drl Kelman though. I do not believe he has a Conflict

of Interest. I think he has only one interest and that is to keep the

illnesses we are experiencing under wraps for the sake of MONEY, MONEY, MONEY!

Recommended Posts