# 13 WHAT THE ACOEM DOES NOT WANT YOU TO KNOW!!!!!!!!

[Guest guest]

Post # 28

THE FOLLOWING IS THE POST IN IT’S ENTIRETY AS POSTED ON MYHEALTHRIGHTS.COM

D and JD,

Thank you. But..Woozer! Slow Down! I can assure I would never qualify for

the status of Sainthood. Plus, I would never want to be one who is in a

position of possibly being burned at the stake! Yikes! LOL

From my Declaration in the lawsuit that was filed against me by Bruce Kelman

and GlobalTox for stating Dr. Kelman " altered his under oath testimony " on

the witness stand. (After being presented with his prior testimony from a case

in Arizona)

22. The above are well documented statements that I and many others have

brought to light numerous times. The paper attached hereto as Exhibit 11,

authored by Lee and edited by myself, tracks the intertwined

paths of the two edits of the GlobalTox authored defense argument. Our

research

information has been widely distributed. It has been effectively used to

change public opinion. It has been used in courts to discredit unscientific

science on behalf of those who are legitimately ill after an excessive exposure

to mold in an indoor environment.

23. At least a portion of Exhibit 11 was used as a source of information in

the Haynes case as is evident from the questioning of Kelman regarding Dr.

Johanning, Director of the Fungal Research Group Foundation and ACOEM member.

Attached hereto collectively as Exhibit 12 are true and correct copies of

Kelman's testimony from the Haynes case, discussing Dr. Echert Johanning,

(P.45:12 -P.52:6), Dr Johanning's CV and transcript of a speech given by

Johanning

in Boston.

Testimony, Bruce J. Kelman (K), Haynes vs. Adair Homes, Oregon, February

18, 2005. Mr. Vance (V) is the attorney for the Haynes' family. Page 40, Line

6

V: I'm sorry, Dr. Kelman. But, you're not a medical doctor. You were

straight up about

that. You said, that " I'm not a medical doctor. " Right?

K: That's correct.

V: You studied at the Univeristy of Illinois and you took some courses on

veterinarian—

veterinarian medicine, what do they call that? Veterinary science?

K: Well, the general catagory is in the veterinary science area. The

research I conducted

was within the veterinary school, because they're the only ones --I did my

experimentation on animals, and they're the only ones that were qualified

to handle

animals.

V: So, you didn't achieve a degree in --as a veterinarian then?

K: No. That wasn't my intent of studying at the--at the time I was

interested in research.

V: Okay. I UNDERSTAND.

K: And, the veterinarian degree is a clinical degree.

V: And, now what you do is you work for drug companies and you try to

analyze

their drugs and help them with getting those drugs approved by the Food and

Drug Administration, isn't that correct?

K: That's one of a broad range of --of activities. There's a certain

number of tests, certain

prescribed amount of testing that has to be done by drugs before the FDA

will even

consider them for release.

V: But, among your cliental, you would include pharmaceutical companies.

K: Yes.

Pg 42, Line 11

V: And, then you help write a report of some nature?

K: Yes.

Pg 48, Line 2

V: Okay. 6,000. Now, membership in that group is not restricted to doctors

or PHDs is it?

K: The last I heard it was, but it's possible if they had (inaudible) yes,

the process is the

committee on scientific affairs puts it together, it's reviewed by the board

of directors and

those physicians that they feel will give it usually the most --the greatest

criticism. And, of course, you couldn't possible deal with 6,000 comments.

V: No. But, you could have--make it a little bit more democratic than 100

out of 6,000

members, couldn't you? I mean, let's--don't you think that's fair to be a

little more

democratic than that? Dr. (inaudible) I would draw the question--Dr.

Eckheart Yohanning

(phoenetic), do you know who he is?

K: Oh, yes.

Pg 51, Line 11

V: All right. So, it doesn’t surprise you to learn that he's called it in

a speech in Boston,

" Undemocratic and not objective " ?

K: Well, I guess I would have trouble with the characterization from Dr.

Yohanning of

" unobjective " . I'd say critical review by 100 critical, very critical,

physicians is quite

objective, and I would also have to say that normally when one picks a

learned body, you

don't do it democratically. You pick the people that have the best

scientific

credentials and the best knowledge of the area.

Testimony of Bruce J. Kelman (K) from the trial of Kilian vs. Equity

Residential Trust, Arizona, June, 2004. Mr. Langerman (L) is the attorney for

Ms.

Kilian.

Kilian, Page 856, Line 21

L: Let me interrupt you. When you say it's a college of medicine, do you

mean to infer that it

is a professional affliliation that is available primarily to physicians,

medical doctors?

K: The American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine was

originally an

association of physicians, and about two years ago they opened membership

up to

a few PhD's who had expertise in affiliated areas, and toxicology is one of

the areas.

Page 921, Line 10

L: Dr. Kelman, you informed us earlier that you have done some laboratory

research; is that

correct?

K: Yes.

L: None of the laboratory research that you've done involves mold or

mycotoxins,

correct?

K: Aside recently from growing some, no.

L: No, it's not correct, or yes, it is correct?

K: Oh, I'm sorry. Aside from growing some, I have not done laboratory

research on animals.

A portion of Dr. Johanning's speech before the Boston City Council, December

9, 2004:

" I feel I am qualified to speak on the subject because I am an occupation

physician and I have worked in research and have worked several government

agencies such as EPA, CDC, and & HUD. I have been involved with this issue for

the past 15 years in NYC. We had had several symposiums and have brought

scientists together 5 times who will be more than willing to collaborate our

findings, which have already been published.

I know the Washington office of the Budget Management did a study of the

structure and situations of schools and concluded that a third of the schools

have serious Indoor Air Quality problems and that many of these are related to

water intrusion. The press picked up on this issue many years ago, much more

than the medical community I'm sad to say, and probably got the word out...

I have seen over the last couple of years organized effects by the insurance

industry and their advocates to defuse the issue and recently a report and

some papers have come out on the issue saying we don't see a connection. I am

a member of the American College of Occupational and Environmental

Medicine. They state they have a so-called paper that concludes that we don't

think

the evidence that connects mold in particular, mold to adverse health effects.

If you go and look how this paper was generated you will realize, and I have

legal documents to prove this, that this wasn't an objective, free

discussion within our membership. But rather a paper that was pushed in such a

secret

manner, was pushed through the committee in order to use that as a statement

against doctors who think that there is a problem....

Email authored by Hardin, dated August 16, 2002 and sent to

Borak, Chair of the Committee of Scientific Affairs of the ACOEM.

" ...Finally, we also would object to involving Drs. Hodgson or Dearborn or

others outside the normal ACOEM process for position papers. So far as we

can ascertain, they have no standing in the ACOEM, e.g., as members of Board,

the House of Delegates, etc. We have welcomed the thorough, impartial, and

scientifically rigerous peer review to date, but would think it inappropriate

to

add ad hoc reviewers who are highly visible advocates for a point of view

the draft position paper analyzes and finds lacking...

Email authored by Borak, dated February 27, 2002 and sent to Hardin.

The following are direct quotes of that email:

I had several conversations with Dean Grove, ACOEM President, and Barry

Eisenberg, ACOEM Executive Director, and both are enthusiastic about your

willingness to be involved with and contribute to the ACOEM.

The following is a suggested way that we could put these pieces together.

1. ACOEM will enroll you as an Associate Member (the catogory for PhD's, as

contrasted to MDs) at no cost for the first year. That will be an advance

" thank you " for your contributions, specifically the preparation of a

scientific position paper on the subject of mold, indoor air quality and

health.

2. " That position paper would be prepared by you and your GlobalTox

colleagues. We ask that you and/or Dr. Kelman be listed as the first authors,

as you

two will be the ACOEM members on the authorship list. We would be delighted

if the other authors would consider joining ACOEM, be we won't insist on

that. Unfortunately, the College policies limit the number of free membership

that can be awarded, so we can only provide that to you.

8. Finally, when all has been done, it is my great hope that you will

continue your membership in the ACOEM and that the Board and the Executive

Director can call upon you from time to time for advice, suggestions and

guidance.

You have a unique and valuable perspective on the totality of occupational

and environmental health. It would be of great value to ACOEM if you will

share your knowledge and wisdom with us.

Email authored by Borak, dated June 16, 2002 and sent to Harber,

M.D. Also, blind copied to Dean Grove, Bernacki, Holland, Tim

Key, Pamela Hymel, nne Dreger and Hardin.

....Background: This past February, Dean Grove (as President) asked me (as

Chair of CSA to develp a position statemtn on indoor mold. With Dean's

agreement, I approached Hardin--former Deputy Director of NIOSH--to

develop

such a statement. In return for his efforts, Dean and Barry approved the

granting of a one-year courtesy membership to , who was not then a member

(although his co-author, Bruce Kelman, was a dues-paying member).

Since then, I have been approached by others who heard (from Dean Grove)

that this was an issue to be addressed by ACOEM. One sent written info, the

others expressed interest. Nobody who initiated contact on the issue has been

involved in its development....

In an email authored by Borak and sent September 6, 2002, Borak states “As

this was an effort that you, Dean, asked me to initiate I thought that you

might have a good idea about what might be doneâ€.

Not A Post (#29)

I have some questions:

In Kelman’s testimony in the Kilian case, June, 2004, he stated the ACOEM

only opened membership to PhD’s approximately two years earlier. This project

was started in February, 2002. At what point did Kelman become a “

dues-paying member†of the ACOEM?

Why was Kelman chosen to work on this project? He testified in the Kilian

case, he had no prior laboratory experience with mold.

Why was Hardin brought into the organization and even provided a free

membership, yet some who were already members and had years of experience with

environmental illnesses, were not asked or even permitted to participate in the

“

peer review process�

Who did Dean Grove communicate with early on, to initiate this project?

Sharon Kramer

Post # 30

Re: Go to " Myhealthrights.com " to read Sharon's Post- Doug H

Posted by _Greg Weatherman_

(http://counsel.net/cgi-bin/chatscripts/mailform.cgi?uid=yo & dmn=swjgtagdgyausd.u\

ge & name=Greg+Weatherman & subject=Re:+Go+to+qtqtMy

healthrights.comqtqt+to+read+Sharon's+Post-+Doug+H) on 7/12/05

Sharon & Doug,

You would think there would be no funny business with

dissemimating valuable information that can be helpful in

depositions and trials for cases with such a huge financial

impact and human health implications.

I personally don't know why divulging email communications

between ACOEM members that are used as part of Sharons

declaration should not be referenced. The documents were

gained by lawful means weren't they?

I know as an expert witness that any communication I have with

the attorneys, plaintiffs, defendants or other expert

witnesses is open to dicovery.

Why would a legal chatboard " suppress " this information when a

judge in a court would not?

What gives,

Greg Weatherman

AerobioLogical Solutions Inc.

Arlington VA 22202

Post # 31

Re: Go to " Myhealthrights.com " to read Sharon's Post- Doug H

Posted by _Sharon_

(http://counsel.net/cgi-bin/chatscripts/mailform.cgi?uid=kfc1955 & dmn=sgd.uge & nam\

e=Sharon & subject=Re:+Go+to+qtqtMyhealthrights.comqtqt+to+

read+Sharon's+Post-+Doug+H) on 7/12/05

Yes, I have received them by legal means. If anybody wants 'em

call my cell 760-822-8206. Sharon