Re: ACOEM portrays themselves as victims in the mistreatment of injured workers.

[Guest guest]

Sympathy is in the dictionary under " S " if that is what they are

looking for. That is where they will find it. " Methodically

pressured " - they can always invoke the oath they took when they

became doctors and can refer to it when they are " pressured " that they

answer to a " Higher Authority. " If that became their " party line " they

would not have a worry in the world.

>

> " Our members feel they are being methodically pressured ... to

under-treat

> and mistreat, " said Dr. McLellan, president of the American

College of

> Occupational and Environmental Medicine. " ...This is a grave ethical

concern

> for our members. It's a grave medical concern. "

>

> _http://www.charlotte.com/local/story/587539.html_

> (http://www.charlotte.com/local/story/587539.html)

>

>

> Hmmmm????? Looks to me like someone is trying to run and blame

others for

> their misdeeds

>

>

>

> Rebuttal to the Wall Street Journal for outing them as industry

frontmen.

>

> Ambush Above the Fold: ACOEM Response to Recent Mold Issue

>

> _http://www.acoem.org/moldresponse.aspx_

> (http://www.acoem.org/moldresponse.aspx)

>

>

> Rebuttal to the International Journal of Occ and Env. Health for

outing them

> as industry frontmen.

> American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine

>

> _http://www.acoem.org/ResponseToIJOEH.aspx_

> (http://www.acoem.org/ResponseToIJOEH.aspx)

>

>

>

>

>

> **************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for

> fuel-efficient used cars.

(http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007)

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

The logical fallacies in these two statements strike me as surprising,

coming as they do from people who profess to be scientists.

For example: (since this is a board that discusses sick buildings)

* " Statement on Mold.* The IJOEH article re-publishes an internal ACOEM

e-mail communicating the state of the development of the ACOEM Statement on

Mold and rehashes a number of outdated accusations about conflict of

interest – all of which have been fully addressed by ACOEM and others in the

public arena. "

How can findings on conflict of interest be " outdated " ? And clearly, the

issues brought up by the ACOEM internal documents - which to me scream that

they had decided on the outcome to be promoted before going through the

review process.. is very pertinent and relevant to the validity of the ACOEM

as a scientific organization. To me, the documents seem to say that they

are basically a rubber stamp for industry, as IJOEH and many others have

been saying.

To simply try to drown out the valid points being raised in a shrill

cacaphony of protestation does not do anything to advance the debate, it

merely attempts to silence it, losing further credibility. Its like saying,

" the proof is that I scream louder and longer than anybody else " -

something I might expect from a six year old but not an allegedly

'respected' organization THAT RECEIVES PUBLIC FUNDS.