The Icy Numbing

                            "Imagine a strange metallic taste and magnify it at at least 
                             50 times.  Then imagine it pervading your nose, throat,
                             larynx, tongue, bronchi, and brain  . . .  smashing you 
                             completely." 

                          "A very weird state.  Hard to explain.  Almost the feeling 
                            one gets when exposed to subzero temperatures.  Your 
                           membranes seem to get anesthetized.    Yet, they make 
                           their presences known, despite the absence of sensation."

March 2003 Health:  fair/fatigued
Emotional Outlook:  well/optimistic

She was now practicing Avoidance.  This is the practice of avoiding
the airborne agents that trigger one's asthma.  It's a practice advocat-
ed in Report 4 (A-98) of   the AMA's Counsel on Scientific Affairs.

On the woman's mind at this point in time was her plan to go to Hunts-
ville, Alabama and search for an apartment there.  This created hope-
ful optimism in her.  Job opportunities were opening in Alabama, and
a physician told her that moving away from Johnson City could reduce
her frequency of asthma.  This optimism negates any suspicion that her
ills were triggered by anxiety or depression during this time span.

March 16, 2003

She went to a grocery store, in order to buy some last minute items for
her trip.  She had been in the store for only a minute, when an asthma
attack was triggered.  After all, the store was laden with strong odors,
and the AMA has already defined strong odors as asthma triggers.  On
this occasion, her inhaler took much longer than usual to work.  On this
occasion, she became disoriented for the first time.  On this occasion,
she had entirely lost her sense of direction.  An EMS crew had to drive
her home.

March 18, 2003  EMS call - hospitalized.
Health: severe illness
Mental outlook:  scared after the attack

Being that her trip had been arranged, she convinced herself that she
could travel.  So, she and her son left for Alabama.  En route to her
destination, she suddenly became sensitive to vehicle exhaust fumes.
Her face seemed to get hot and swollen, while a gland near her ton-
sils seemed to enlarge.  Chest tightness & asthma then set in.  It felt
as if a 10 inch ball of burning fire (exhaust fumes) hit her in the chest,
spreading throughout her entire body.  She could taste the petroleum
odors.

In having become too weak to continue the trip, she searched for an en-
vironmentally friendly hotel.  Her son finally located a room that seemed
suitable for her.  Yhe result was that the irritants triggered another asth-
ma attack.  She was placed on oxygen for six hours, and given breath-
ing treatments via Xopenex, Atrovent, and Salmeterol.  She was given
the intravenous form of steroids every four hours.  That night, while in
the hospital, her blood pressure dropped drastically.

She had been diagnosed with: (a) Acute and severe asthma attack, and
(b) Hypopotassemia.  Objective medical findings already noted on re-
cord, were:   (a) labored breathing, (b) wheezing, (c) rales, (d) rapid
heart beat, (e) gruntled sounds.  This negates the defense attorneys' al-
legation of mental illness.  Then came the October 2005 rhinolaryngo-
scopy whichindicated the presence of  a physical illness much more in
depth.

March 20, 2003  Health:  debilitated.

She recalled being barely able to function in Huntsville.  Yet, she and
her son attempted to explore the city.  When waiting for a traffic light
to change, she started to become hypersensitive to exhaust fumes once
again.  She had another asthma attack.  This time, her inhaler did not
seem to help.

Wwhen driving back toward the hotel, she completely lost her sense of
direction once again. This is the second time that this happened.  EMS
personnel escorted her back to the hotel.

March 21, 2003  E.M.S call/Huntsville hospital

She went to a health food store.  Her son went inside, while she waited
outside.  He bought rosemary juice and suggested that she put some in
her bath water, thinking that a warm bath would help her.  Being that
she had always enjoyed the odor of Rosemary, she put a small capful
into the bath.  It was a mistake to have done that.  The bath was relax-
ing, but upon coming out of the tub, she starting to feel warm, and then
faint, being unable to take in a full breath.  For the third time on this trip,
she became totally confused, while feeling very lightheaded.   Her son
called EMS, and en route to the hospital, she was administered oxygen
and an IV.  At the hospital, she was given saline.

March 22, 2003  Health:  very bad; EMS call

She realized that it was not possible for her to live in Huntsville, being
that it seemed to have a lot more vehicular exhaust than did Johnson
City.  Yet, she felt that she had to complete the trip to Tuscaloosa as
planned.  She did. 

March 23, 24, 25, 2002

She spent 3 days in Tuscaloosa with friends and  had trouble breathing
outside their house as much as inside of  it.  Her friend smoked indoors,
so she stayed with her friend's sister.  She went to a Chinese restaurant
with friends, but had to leave, because of  its indoor air quality.  It was
the familiar type of irritant airspace.

She and her friends went to Books-a-Million.  She would spend many
hours there when she lived in Tuscaloosa, with no problem being there.
This time, however, she had been seated for no more than five minutes,
when the aroma of coffee became too noxious to her.  Another asthma
attack was  triggered.  So, she went outside and resorted to her inhaler.

Late that night, her friend's sister turned on a gas heater.  An ensuing
odor made the woman sick, bringing her close to having another asth-
ma attack.  She had to sleep next to a window, while wearing a filter
mask throughout the entire night.  Her friends then took her to church
the next day, and she sat next to the open back door, wearing two fil-
ter masks.

She went back to Johnson City that week.  On the way back, she got
stuck in traffic.  She became ill once again.  When she finally reached
home, she collapsed out of weakness.   She also had a headache, a
sore throat, and chest inflammation.  This collapse mode lasted for the
next few years.

Since April, 2003, she had varying degrees of tightness in the chest,
along with asthma, nasal pain, burning, and congestion.  She took all
of her prescribed medications, and resorted to wearing activated car-
bon masks much of  the time.  In addition, she has a car interior air
cleaner, as well as dust screens for the car.  This helps, but she is
still able to smell odors, even through the carbon masks.

There were two doctor's appointments that she was unable to keep.
One was missed because she couldn’t find the doctor’s office in the
midst of another irritant response to exhaust fumes.  The other physi-
cian had his office in a commercial building downtown.  As she was
approaching the entrance, she caught sight of nurses smoking.  She
knew that she would not be able to make it down the smokey, fra-
grance laden, and cleaning agent laden corridor.  Her need to find a
primary care physician was pressing.

May 31st, 2003  Health:  Depends on exposures.
Mental:  Good/Fair

She found two doctors at a nearby university who understand her type
of medical condition.  They did all they could to help her.  She was ap-
prehensive on her first visit to one of the newly located physicians, and
it was with the utmost self-control that she waited in the waiting room.
This was due to her extreme sensitivity to fragrances and various clean-
ing agents.  Blood tests were ordered after a lengthy consultation.  Yet,
en route to the testing  area, she started to feel ill again, more so than
previously.

She was once scheduled to take a CT scan.  The building where the
scan was to be taken was a bit worse than the building where she had
previously been.  The technician had the woman go into the machine
promptly and performed the scan.  Meanwhile, she began to feel light
headed.  It seemed as if a metallic smell were causing it.  In fact, she
had to be helped out of  the room, after the scan.  She felt dizzy, even
to the point where she felt that she was about to pass out.

She remained ill up to 48 hours after the CT scan.  After the scan, she
was short of  breath.  But, this form of  shortness of breath was much
different than the previous bouts.  It appeared to be a tissue reaction,
she said; one accompanied by a hollow lack of sensation and even a
numbness.  This absence of sensation extended to her  nose, bronchi,
esophagus, trachea, and lungs.  She said that her lungs hurt.  But, it was
a dull chronic inflammation that she felt.  She described it in the follow-
ing manner:

      "A very weird state.  Hard to explain.  Almost the feeling
      feeling one gets when exposed to subzero temperatures.
      Your membranes seem to get anesthesized.  Yet, they
      make their existences known, despite the absence of
      sensation."

   "All this is very strange.  It's anxiety-causing, because if it's
     not ameliorated, it leads to a strange sort of  “inability" to 
     breath.  It's not like congestion, in the usual sense.  It leads 
     to the desire to cough, but the cough does not lead to any
     cessation of  symptoms.  I also feel as if I'm in the process 
     of fainting at times.  I feel shakey."

June 05, 2003

She began to feel better, two days after the CT scan.  The “hollow” 
and metallic” syndrome finally resolved itself.  About this she wrote:
"Just that little exposure to the CT Scan environment made me 
ill for two days!"

She had to go to the bank one day, and it was a hot and/or humid 84
degrees outside.  She started to feel ill in the heat, with the activated
carbon mask on.  The mask itself was starting to emit traces of ex-
haust odor.  She never made it to the bank that day.
==============================================

An Examation Report

The Chemically Sensitive Woman with More

Than a Dozen Objective Medical Findings:

Let us review.  The stereotypical pro-chemical and pro-corporate

propaganda has repeatedly been that chemically sensitive persons

have no objective medical findings to validate their symptoms, de-

spite the fact that RAST TESTING includes tests for chemical al-

lergies ... despite the recognition of Reactive Airways Dysfunction

Syndrome ... despite the fact that the golden rule for diagnosing

Irritant-associated Vocal Cord Dysfunction is the very objective 

Fiberoptic Rhinolaryngoscopy ... and despite the existence of the 

diagnosis of Occupational Asthma due to Low Weight Molecular 

Agents.

Posted below is one of  the pages in the medical record of  the pa-

tient high-lighted in The Chemically Sensitive Woman Who Has

More Than a Dozen Objective Medical Findings.  The report

records grossly enlarged turbinates, shoddy adenopathy, and a 

thickened coating over the dorsum of  tongue, among other things.

Quite frankly,  the grossly enlarged turbinates were enough to illu-

strate the presence of  a physical illness.   In the total tally, her med

records report her as having:

- Wheezing.

- Tachycardia.

- Hypopotassemia.

- Gruntled breathing.

- Rales and crackles.

- Erythematous uvula.

- Blistering of the tongue.

- Grossly enlarged turbinates.

- Erythema of the oropharynx.

- Edema of the true vocal cords.

- Adenopathy in the left postauricular region.

- Thickened coating over the dorsum of the tongue.

- Productive response in Spiriva challenge testing.

- A circumscribed nodule in the left occipital region.

- A firm 1x1 cm nodule in the right postauricular region.

- A couple additional findings consistent with Rhinitis.

The bottom line concerning this woman is that, whatever be her ill- 

ness, it's one of  a physical nature and not a matter of  psychiatric

illness.   The more universal bottom line is that there are chemically

sensitive people who have objective medical findings that validate

their sufferings.  In all such cases, allegations of  mental illness con-

stitute a defamation of  character hurled against an entire class of

people.   Clicking on the photo below will enable you to read the

medical report.  In addition, Glossitis mentioned in the following 

report is inflammation of the tongue.

Case Closed, due to a technicality

Late in the Year 2010 the woman's son was in an auto accident sever-
al states away from Tennessee.  Plus, by this time, the woman had al-
ready moved to the East Coast.  Now, the hearing was scheduled dur-
ing the time when she still tending to her son, in his need.  The judge
refused to grant a continuance, stating that the case had been granted
so many continuances already that no more could be granted.  How-
ever, it was the corporation's defense attorneys who kept requesting
the continuances, stalling the case.  The woman never asked for a
continuance until the time of her son's automobile collision.     
       

The asthma-triggering fad of letting cars reek with sickingly sweet amounts of chemically laden fragrance products.

If the new Xenon HIDs don't too much eye damage, then the gluttonous reeking
of automobile fragrance products will.

1} A very nice young lady who works at the
deli section of an Akron area grocery store
told me that some cars today reek with such
a gluttonous supply of synthetic fragrances
that she literally was choked a few times,
when in the presence of those cars, such as
when she was at a red light or in a parking
lot.

2} A female Bank of America employee said that she got overwhelmed
     by the gaudy odors reeking from the same type of vehicles ... those
     that emit sickeningly sweet artificial fragrances, including those cars
     that have three, five, even seven and nine chemically laden fragrance
     products hanging from their rearview mirrors or clipped on to the car
     dashboard.

3}  A very athletic young lady in the Pittsburgh area who has the physique
      of an Irish River Dancer concurred, in that some cars today are noxious-
      ly repugnant, due to the glut of synthetic fragrance products reeking
      from them.

 4} Her manager agreed.  In fact, both ladies responded with their eyes
      wide open, in confirming that they, too, were overwhelmed by inor-
      dinate amounts of synthetic fragrances that reek from today's cars..

5}  An aging cashier of a spacious Pittsburgh-area health food store told
      me that the artificial fragrance odors reeking from cars gave her split-
      ting headaches ... and she had to walk through a parking lot at least
      twice a workday.

6}  Two retail store employees in Saint Augustine Florida also admitted
      that they get assailed by the gluttonous levels of synthetic fragrance
      products that reek from certain cars and pick-up trucks.

7}  A sporting goods cashier mentioned how Febreze clip-ons are the
      worst triggers to her asthmatic respiratory tract.  She even stated
      that she once detected from a distance an automobile reeking with
      the asthma-triggering smell of Febreze, with her husband as a wit-
      ness to the event.  It turned out that there were two Febreze clip-
      ons attached to the dashboard.  Her radar was on track.

8} Concerning Febreze, a woman who communicated to me several times
     even during my 12,000 mile road trip, stated that Febreze was her worst
     nightmare.

9} Yet another woman ... from the other side of America ... let me know that,
      as soon as she removed Febreze from her night stand, her symptoms van-
      ished.  Febreze Air Effects was found to have 86 chemicals in it.

10} A social worker concurred on how intense are the odors that radiate from
       heavily fragranced automobiles.

11} A Western Pennsylvania police officer also concurred that some cars reek
       hideously with sickeningly sweet levels of fragrance products.

12} A volunteer of the homeless shelter who has asthma concurred to how
       intensely assailing the levels of fragrances are that reek from American
       cars.

For the reality check on Febreze, incidentally, refer to the following:

http://www.bluemarblealbum.com/2013/10/chemically-laden-febreze.html

When we were young, we were told to never overdo it with cologne.
Two dabs will do.  If you go any further, you'll reek and drive people
away from you.  Today, that rule of nature has been forgotten.  Yet,
there are far more asthmatics in the world today, some of which are
reactive to fragrance chemicals.  Even automobiles reek hideously
today, illustrating a generation of humanity entirely out of touch
with perception reality and proportionality ... of a generation en-
tirely inconsiderate to other people ... kind of like right winged
conservative Republicans:

When you're at a red light, in a parking lot, or in a traffic jam, while
driving a car or truck that has in it 2 to 4 to 6 chemically-laden fra-
grance products in it, and there.  If you're hiding the odor of illegal
substances that you smoke, by means of putting high levels of sick-
eningly sweet fragrance chemicals in your car, know that you're at-
tracting attention.  That's not how you hide things.

If this applies to you, know that the American Lung Association and
other organizations of trusted reputation publicly acknowledge that
"air fresheners" are asthma triggers.  This means that, if you have a
gluttonous amount of synthetic "air fresheners" in your car, your car
is an asthma attack waiting to happen to an asthmatic somewhere.
The person merely needs to be relatively near your car; not in it and
not beside it. 

An anti-cigarette commercial explained it correctly, years ago

An anti-cigarette commercial, years ago, explained it properly, by re-
minding the viewers that the clothing in the closet of any cigarette
smoke reek with cigarette smoke.  The same applies to chemically-
laden fragrance products.  They are cigarettes with a wider reach-
ing delivery system, meaning that chemical fragrance odors travel
much further than cigarette smoke, because the smoke vs vapor/fume
factor.

 The airspace in your car or truck is very small.  The glut of chemical
fragrance products in those vehicles don't achieve what you think they
do, because they reach a saturation point in your vehicle's cab, and the
rest the fragrance compounds leak out of the cab, making your vehicle
reek.  Your car isn't airtight.  If it were, you would suffocate in it.  The
scenario goes as follows:

Saturation Point ==> Leakage ==> a car that reeks ==> asthma attack
to any poor soul afflicted with asthma and stuck at a red light next to
(or behind) a reeking auto.

http://www.lung.org/healthy-air/home/resources/cleaning-supplies.html

The United States Environmental Protection Agency concurred with the
American Lung Association, concerning synthetic "air fresheners" trig-
gering asthma.  So, why not start protecting the American environment,
for a change?   Now, Dick Cheney and his cohorts succeeded in dumb-
ing down America.  The fragrance industry is succeeding in numbing it
down, as in neurotoxic chemicals, sensitizers, clastogens (chromosome
chain slicers), endocrine disruptors, hepatotoxins (liver cell killers),
irritants, etc.

http://www.epa.gov/asthma/chemical_irritants.html

Even an RN (registered nurse) writing for About.com mentioned that
"air fresheners"are common asthma triggers.  Therefore, when you have
three, four, or five of those automobile air fresheners reeking from your
car, your car is literally a vehicle of toxic battery.  The operative phrase
in the article linked below is "common asthma trigger."

http://asthma.about.com/od/asthmatriggers/qt/chemictriggers.htm

You're first response will be to say that you can do whatever you damn
please in your car.  ANS:  Not when it's invading an asthmatic's respira-
tory tract, suffocating that person, in his own car.  You're invading some-
one's personal space and injuring his health.  There is also the matter of
exposing gluttonous amounts of chemically-laden fragrance products to
children and small animals.  Remember:  The asthma rate is on the rise,
and has been so for years. 

Why would you want to have your car smell like a child molester's
car, with a sugary sweet lollipop odor?

Some of your cars smell as if you are trying to attract children to your
car,  with the now-familiar sickeningly sweet smell encountered time
and time again.  Why would you want your car to smell like a molester
mobile? 

Everyone needs air.  
No one needs a gluttonous amount of chemical fragrance products.

Asthmatics have the inalienable right to be on State and Federal roadways.
Today, a person can't even sit at a red light without being assailed by one
or more cars that contain obnoxiously high levels of chemical fragrance
products.  This noxious fad began in the summer of 2012.

If you ever have had an asthmatic attack triggered while sitting at a red
light, day after day, you would understand.  Why do you insist on having
two, three, four, and even seven of  these things in your car?   Do you know
that chemicals in America do NOT have to be tested for safety, in order for
them to be marketed?

Putting four clip-on "air fresheners" on the dashboard of one car is chemi-
cal assault, via Saturation Point ==> Leakage ===> Reeking Auto.  This is
four times the recommended dose.  I literally witnessed the four clip-on ha-
bit, as much as I repeatedly witnessed up to seven pine tree fragrance pro-
ducts hanging from a single rear view mirror.  There were even automobile
fragrance products encountered by me this past summer on a hand grenade
template.  Each one was especially odorous, and thus, especially chemical.

These things are not air fresheners.  Nature is the air freshener ... not a
chemist's lab.  The other thing which helps one's auto is the heater and
air condition, due to their ability to dry the air in your vehicle's cab.  Dry
air stops the molding and mildewing.

Have not you heard of the "Trade Secret Law?"  If not, the following can
educate you.  However, if you are a person who does the seven pine tree
thing, the probability is that you are too lazy to read.  In fact, it's unlikely
that this is being read by anyone to whom it's addressed:

http://www.bluemarblealbum.com/2015/05/toxic-america.html

Triggering respiratory ills isn't the new cool.  Thus, when it comes to assault-
ing an asthmatic's respiratory tract with a reeking vehicle carrying two, four,
and even seven fragrance products, something needs to be understood:

1}  Nuisance Law.
2} Aggravating a pre-existing condition.
3} The Americans with Disabilities Act,
      concerning those persons who have a right to be on a State road with-
      out being suffocated by gaudy amounts of chemicals reeking from 
      cars that have far too many fragrance products in them.

4} Cars have license plate numbers on them, and trucks have the employ-
     er's name written on them ... and sometimes the phone number. 
     __________________________________________________

Doctor Jekyll and Mr. Formaldehyde: The 89 yr old Stephen Barrett, MD

In the Year 2001, a retired psychiatrist
who was never board certified in any-
thing stated: "Today, I am the media."
He repeatedly presented himself  as an
expert in medicine, nutrition, and law,
while having zero experience as a prac-
ticing physician, no training in nutrition,
and zero bar association membership.
He is a naysayer of everything which
competes for big pharma dollars.  He
is too obvious.



At the principle website that he operates, he is described as a medical
communications expert of  national renown.  He even presented him-
self  as a master in spiritual direction, in book form.  Representations
of Stephen Barrett insinuate that he alone can suffice as the voice of
medicine.  In fact, representations of  him make it sound as if, during
any given election, he should run for God.  However, the scorecard
on Barrett differs drastically from the representations made of  him. 

Stephen Barrett's Extensive Lack of  Credentials,
Lack of Experience, and Lack of Board Certification

[1]  Stephen Barrett, M.D. was never board-certified in anything, at
       any time in his life.  He has never been able to speak with the au-
       thority of  a board-certified medical expert.

[2]  Nor has he been able to speak from the vantage point of  a practi-
       tioner in any type of  internal or dermatological medicine.  In fact,
       Stephen Barrett has not served in the capacity of  a physician since
       the end of  his rotating internship days.  Those days ended over 66
       years ago, in 1958.  

       The "MD" affixed to his name simply means that he graduated from
       a medical school.  He did do that.  But, he did it over a half century
       ago, in 1957 ... 67 years ago.

[3]  Barrett has never been a researcher in any capacity; neither at the
       clinical level nor at the murine test level.  He has been neither a
       toxicologist, nor a vaccinologist, nor a neurologist, nor a bio-
       chemist, nor an immunologist, nor any type of  medical tech-
       nologist, nor a pharmacologist.  This means that he has never
       been able to speak from the vantage point of  a research col-
       league.  That is to say, if  Stephen Barrett had been seen in a
       lab coat after 1958, it was during Halloween or a masquerade
       party.

[4]  And Stephen Barrett has zero inventions/patents to his name.
       Therefore, he has never been able to speak from the vantage
       point of a medical innovator, either.

[5]  Furthermore, there is no evidence that Stephen Barrett is a first-
       hand witness to illness on either side of  the coin; neither as a
       practicing physician nor as a patient.  That is to say, he has no
       known history of severe medical impairment.  By all appear-
       ances, he is not able to offer any insight on what it is to know
       intense physical suffering in the first person singular.  His ruth-
       lessness and callousness indicates this.

[6]  And as far as concerns Stephen Barrett being advertised as a
       medical communications expert, his curriculum vitae indicates
       that he:

- never managed disaster relief  efforts,
- never developed medical software programs,
- never oversaw ambulance dispatch operations,
- never managed the allocation of medical supplies,
- never networked hospital communication systems,
- never transmitted emergency medical instructions to sea,
- never networked pharmaceutical communication systems,
- never translated medical literature into foreign languages.

  So where is the medical communicating that Stephen Barrett
   is supposed to do so expertly ?

Stephen Barrett's Allegation of Being a Legal Expert

It was in a 21st Century California court where Barrett presented him-
self as an expert in FDA regulatory law.  The matter concerned a case
that he himself  instigated, under the name of a 501c non-profit organi-
zation of  which he was/is a member and even an officer.

Barrett saw to the filing of  the lawsuit (under the corporate name), and
then he hired himself as an expert witness, despite the blatant conflict of
interest.  He then expected money to be transferred from the 501c non-
profit group's bank account to his own personal account, in the form of
a fee payment.

Needless to say, Stephen Barrett never worked for, with, over, under,
or besides the FDA.  The presiding judge stated:

       "the Court finds that Dr. Barrett lacks sufficient
         qualifications in this area."

       "He has never testified before any governmental
         panel or agency on issues relating to FDA regulation
         of drugs."

       "Moreover, there was no real focus to his testimony
         with respect to any of the issues associated with
         Defendant's products."

        Furthermore, the judge stated that Stephen Barrett's
        testimony should be "accorded little, if any, credibility."

In the end, the 501c private corporation of which Barrett is a member
lost the case.  It was ordered to pay the defendant's attorney fees.  As
an added note, he claimed himself to be a 21st Century legal expert
in FDA regulatory matters, because he completed one and a half years
of correspondence law school in 1963;  and because he had several
conversations with FDA personnel, as well as some sort of  continuing
education classes that he had not attended in eight years prior to the
judgment.

Stephen Barrett has filed many lawsuits.  Each one is an article of its
own.  He usually sues for libel, malice, and/or conspiracy.  One re-
port attached Barrett to a multiplicity of  lawsuits filed against forty
defendants.  This is reminiscient of a con artist who pretends getting
hit by autos ... repeatedly.  This is ridiculous.

Barret had acourtroom loss is dated October 2005, in the Court of
Common Pleas of Lehigh County for the State of  Pennsylvania.  In
that court case, Barrett once again claimed that he was a legal expert. 
Barrett lost a court case filed in California, under his own name.  He
also lost cases in Oregon and Illinois, as well as in Pennsylvania, also
filed under his own name.

In summary, Stephen Barrett was never the member of  any bar as-
sociation.  He never represented himself as his own attorney in any
of  his many lawsuits.  He was never a district magistrate, and he
was not a clerk of  court.  Yet, he has repeated claimed that he is a
legal expert.  Barrett did have court appearances as an expert wit-
ness in criminal and parole cases, but only in the capacity of a
psychiatrist who was never board certified.  One such venue
was the juvenile court system in San Francisco during the 60s.

Barrett's Claim of Being a Nutritional Expert

As far as concerns his allegations of being a nutritional expert, it was
during the 1990s when he once testified against a credentialed and
certified nutritionist.  This was at a hearing of the American Dietetic
Association.  Barrett was only a non-trained and honorary member
of  that association, yet he was presented as one of its two expert
witnesses.  As a result of  that hearing, the lady against whom Bar-
rett testified lost her registered dietician credentials.  Her reputation
suffered harm, and her future earnings potential was compromised.

The woman then sued the association who presented Barrett as a nu-
tritional expert.  And it was during a cross-examination when Barrett
finally conceded that he was not a nutritional expert, being that had
no training in the subject.  He said that he was an expert in consumer
strategy, instead.  As a result, the woman against whom Barrett testi-
fied had her credentials restored in full.  Notification of  this was pub-
lished in the courier & journal of  the American Dietetic Association.
The woman also received an undisclosed settlement.

A Sample of Stephen Barrett's Mode of Communication

Stephen Barrett co-authored a book with a publicly known defrauder
whose now-defunct paper review company, in providing health reports
to State Farm Insurance adjustors, was declared "a completely bogus
operation" by an Oregon judge.

Concerning Barrett's fraudulent co-author, it was the NBC television
network who reported him as the ratifier of fraudulent health reports.
He is a Dr. Ronald Gots, founder of Medical Claims Review Services.
The company went out of business in 1995.

The NBC television network obtained 79 of the reports that Gots'
paper review company provided for State Farm's adjustors.  Ever-
so-coincidentally, 100% of those 79 reports favored State Farm
over every auto accident claimant profiled in those reports. 

The irony to this is that Stephen Barrett heralds himself as an exposer
of health fraud, as well as a defender of mankind from persons com-
mitting health fraud.  Yet, he elected to have his name placed in print
next to a notorious defrauder.

For further information on this matter, see:

The Paper Chase: A 15 month NBC Dateline Investigation

The Barrett/Gots Book, itself

The Barrett/Gots book is titled, "Chemical Sensitivity:  The Truth 
About Environmental Illness."  Needless to say, the book is a ve-
hement denial of the valid existence of  Chemical Sensitivity.  How-
ever, Chemical Sensitivity comes in many case-specific and medi-
cally acknowledged forms; in forms such as:

> Red Cedar Asthma (Plicatic Acid Sensitivity),
> IgE-mediated Triethanolamine Sensitivity,
> Pine Allergy (Abietic Acid Sensitivity),
> Formaldehyde-induced Anaphylaxis,
> Phthalic Anhydride Hypersensitivity,
> Ammonium Persulfate Sensitivity,
> Glutaraldehyde-induced Asthma,
> Phenyl Isocyanate Sensitivity,
> Halothane-induced Hepatitis,
> Sulfite-induced Anaphylaxis,
> Chemical Worker's Lung,
> TDI-induced Asthma,
> NSAID Intolerance,   . . .

. . .  and numerous other forms, such as

Similarly, the Barrett/Gots book is a denial of  the existence of the En-
vironmental Illness which comes in of medically acknowledged case-
specific forms; in forms such as:

> Vasomotor Rhinitis,
> Occupational Urticaria,
> Irritant-induced Asthma,
> Occupational Rhinosinusitis,
> Hypersensitivity Pneumonitis,
> Photoallergic Contact Dermatitis,
> Airborne-irritant Contact Dermatitis,
> Reactive Airways Dysfunction Syndrome,
> Irritant-associated Vocal Cord Dysfunction,
> Sick Building Syndrome (Building-related Illness),   . . .

. . . and a few other forms.

In fact, the Barrett/Gots book calls Sick Building Syndrome "a fad di-
agnosis."  However, Sick Building Syndrome is listed as one of the
"Most Common Diagnoses" at the Occupational & Environmental
Health centers of:

> Iowa University,
> Johns Hopkins University,
> The University of Pittsburgh,
> The University of Stony Brook,
> Detroit's Wayne State University,
> The University of Illinois-Chicago,
> The University of California-Davis,
> Boston Medical Center, as Building-related Illness,
> Washington University's Harborview Medical Center,
> The University of Maryland, as Building Related Disease,
> Nat. Jewish Med. Research Ctr, as Building Related Illness.

Needless to say, the Barrett/Gots book also denies the physiological
existence of  the Multiple Chemical Sensitivity which is listed as one
of the "Most Common Diagnoses" at the O&E Health centers of:

> the world renowned Yale University,
> the world renowned Mount Sinai Hospital,
> the world renowned Johns Hopkins University,
> a hospital affiliated with Harvard University,
> and a few other American medical institutions
  which are licensed and certified centers of practice.

The listing thereof is done by the Association of Occupational
& Environmental Clinics.   For more information, see:

http://www.aoec.org/content/directory_MA.htm

http://www.aoec.org/content/directory_NY.htm

http://www.aoec.org/content/directory_CT.htm

http://www.aoec.org/content/directory_MD.htm

The Objective Medical Findings of Chemically Sensitive 
Patients that Barrett Conveniently Neglected to Disclose

For the record, there do exist objective medical findings in the world
of Chemical Sensitivity.  The following findings have been document-
ed in the records of chemically sensitive patients:

> dermatitis,
> anaphylaxis,
> angioedema,
> turbinate swelling,
> glandular hyperplasia,
> excessive nasal pallor,
> edema of the adenoids,
> edema of the true vocal cords,
> nasal and/or laryngeal erythema,
> protuberant/distended abdomen,
> permeability of epithelial cell junctions,
> hepatotoxicity in the absense of viral hepatitis,
> paradoxical adduction of the true vocal cords,
> marked cobblestoning of the posterior pharynx,
> inflammation of  the alveoli (air sacs of the lungs),
> a 20%+ drop in FEV1 during inhalation challenge testing,
... and a few other things, such as visible and measurable
wheals produced during placebo-controlled skin testing, 

Barrett's Contradiction

Barrett also wrote a 64 page booklet on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity.
Furthermore, he wrote a text of much shorter length, titled: "Multiple
Chemical Sensitivity: A Spurious Diagnosis."  In that article, Barrett
states:

          "Legitimate cases exist where exposure to large
            or cumulative amounts of toxic chemicals has
            injured people."

Well, such exposure scenarios are the causes of Chemical Sensitivity.
That is why lay persons regard it as "Chemical Injury."  In as much,
Barrett first denies the existence of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity in
name.  Yet, he describes Chemical Sensitivity in function.  But, he
does so in such a way that he leaves the reader uncertain as to what
his statement is intended to mean.  After all, a novice might assume
that Barrett is referring to resovable acute toxicity cases, instead of
long-term chemical sensitization illnesses.

A Duly Noted Hypocrisy

Stephen Barrett markets fear.  For example, he has marketed fear of
the formerly overrated echinacea flower which is only harmful to per-
sons severely allergic to the inulin that it contains; to the inulin which
is also present in Jerusalem artichokes, leeks, bananas, garlic, and
onions.  Yet, has Barrett ever warned people about bananas, onions,
and Jerusalem artichokes?   Has he ever warned people about things
as tragic as VIOXX, BEXTRA, ZYPREXA and the other pharma-
ceuticals that caused harm to mankind?

All in all, when you attack as many persons as does Stephen Barrett,
the statistical probability is that you are going to be correct some of
the time.  However, the same statistical probability is that you're go-
ing to be wrong some of the time, especially when you're unqualified
to comment.  Being that Stephen Barrett neither scored a 100% nor
a passing grade on his board exams, he cannot be reasonably expect-
ed to be 100% correct in his volumes of writings.

People have brain cells.  They can recognize "quackery" by ill effect
or lack of effect.  They don't have need of a "Stephen Barrett" to tell
them.  Not only can reasonable people detect a "quack" when they
see one, they can just as easily detect a disingenuous political opera-
tive when they read one.

Stephen Barrett's Cookie Cutter Techniques

It is not an incident of unheard proportions for Barrett to have cited
an obsolete reference, as well as an outdated and isolated instance, in
order to have mankind adhere to an assertion of  his.  For example,
in order to convince mankind that Chemical Sensitivity is nothing more
than a mental illness, Barrett cited an incident which was put into writ-
ing 120 years ago, in 1886, concerning one woman and one woman
only.  That incident was not about chemicals.  It was about roses.

Now, concerning the medical practices and medical doctrines that
Barrett opposes, he is repeatedly found stating, "inconclusive and not
yet proven."  If  he cannot discredit something on technical merits, he
cites an isolated case here and an isolated case there, concerning an
unauthorized billing or a marketing violation committed by a person
engaged in something that Barrett wants deleted from the face of the
Earth.  Yet, Barrett never mentions the dozens of  frauds that were
committed under the supervision of his co-author, Dr. Ronald Gots.

Barrett never mentions the vast number of  lawsuits filed against
pharmaceutical companies.

Barrett often mentions what treatments and tests the Aetna Insurance
Company will not cover, as if Aetna is a charity organization found-
ed by Mother Theresa; as if it's not a profit minded corporation that
benefits from the denial of claims.  In as much, there is no insurance
company which will pay for redundant treatment or redundant testing.
Therefore a similar test or treatment will not be covered.  Furthermore,
insurance companies will not pay for anything that is regarded as being
in the experimental & investigational stage.  As a side note, everything
in established medicine today was at the experimental & investigational
stage yesterday. 

The Ironies about Dr. Stephen Barrett,
in Light of the Fact that He is a Retired Psychiatrist

The great irony about Barrett is that a psychiatrist is expected to be
a master at procuring peace in the minds and hearts of men.  A tree
is known by its fruits.  Barrett's fruits have been made known.

Another great irony is that a psychiatrist is expected by the reason-
ably minded person to be a master in neurology.  Barrett failed the
Neurology section of his board exams.

Yet another irony is that a psychiatrist is expected to have a reflex
action for keeping confidentiality, being that patients confide inti-
mate details to a psychiatrist.  However, Barrett has placed person
after person in an unfavorable spotlight.  He's even known to have
revealed the tax problems of one of  his opponents; not so that the
man can use someone's help, but rather, to provoke ill regards for
the man.  Yet, when has Stephen Barrett ever placed the spotlight
on the exorbitant price mark-ups of pharmaceuticals in America?
After all, Barrett claims that he's a consumer advocate.  So, where
is the consumer advocating in one of  the most taxing impositions
on the American economy and consumer?
___________________________________________________

Lanes of Thunder

The following is a description of Pittsburgh Pennsylvania at night, in the Springtime,
near the Three Rivers Confluence.  The lightning bolt imagery in the poem is what it
actually looked like, when seeing barge lights on the Ohio River.  The ripples on the
river made the beams of light which touched them look like lightning bolts. 

Incidentally, the budding clouds of a new season, mentioned in the poem, were the
apple blossoms that lined the eastern banks of the Ohio River in late April or so. 
They did look like a skyline of clouds when fully budded.

The lanes of thunder roaring under the leaves came from the experience of being in

a Pittsburgh apartment basement during a thunder storm, while looking out the win-

dow at a parking lot of autumn leaves which never blew away, despite three months

of winter.  

The thunder sounded extremely close to the basement.  In addition, when-ever any tall 

swaying shrub sways in front of a stationary light, it creates the strobe light effect.  

Therefore, that image in the poem was not symbolic.  It was Realism. 

It was a description of an entrance way.

It's a very simple poem.   One night in Pittsburgh, while leaving my vehicle, the wind 

was so strong that my keys literally blew out of my hands.   All in all, the poem is not

based on any type of symbolism or fantasia.  It's realism, conveying what life is occas-

ionally like, throughout the inclines of Pittsburgh.  Pennsylvania had far more beautiful 

skylines than did the Eastern Atlantic coastline.  The Gulf of Mexico, however, had far

more beautiful sunsets than did PA.  None the less, the Pennsylvania landscape seems

so mystical at times. 

                                            Lanes of Thunder

On this stormy night,
there were no cracks of sound coming from that part of the night sky,

where Thor, Odin, and Zeus used to keep mankind in line, by taking
turns conducting the percussion section of the gods.

Throughout the night,
there were no flashes over the hilltop laboratory of any mad scientist.
Nor were there any goddesses bowling strikes on the clouds which
hovered over the vineyards.

Neither were there any angels bowling spares before Vespers.

In fact, there were neither boulders crashing into cliffs

nor sheet metal waving profusely in the wind.

You know, you have nothing to fear, but your own lies,

whenever they are believed by someone else.
This includes this evening's thunder.

This evening, 

while moonlight sat in the passenger seat of a row of parked cars,

currents of thunder roared under the leaves that remained in tact
throughout the winter.

A car door opened to a new life and
a set of keys flew out of the driver's hands,

landing on smooth, clear asphalt.

A tall swaying shrub transformed a doorway bulb into a strobe light,

while a streetlight found its way into a closed third floor window,

marking upon a calendar the date when trees along the river

would once again bud forth the clouds of a new season.

Until the marked time arrived, we were able to see 

soft lightning bolts which came from the ledges of river barges

and which did quiver on the water during windy nights,

as the beams of light penetrated and refracted into the river.

_________________________________