Privacy – Hospitals, privacy and politics

FAXING HEALTH INFORMATION TO THE WRONG PEOPLE

Nova Scotia – 2006 – 2016

For over 10 years dozens of highly sensitive mental health records were faxed to Lisa Belanger’s Bedford spa; faxes which should have gone to a mental health referral office. “She estimates she receives between eight and 14 a year.” (1) She contacted the doctors offices that sent the fax, and “an official at the former Capital District Health Authority, hoping someone there would take action to stop it.”(1) They said memos were sent to all doctors offices telling them to carefully enter fax numbers and to have “the proper preset fax number on the fax machine” (1) But Ms. Belanger continued to receive faxes. Really, how hard is it to preset a fax number?

“She says she subsequently called Health Minister Leo Glavine’s office, the College of Physicians and Surgeons and the office of Nova Scotia’s privacy commissioner.” (1) * “Belanger was concerned about the personal information on the documents.” (5) She said “she’s been repeatedly assured by health officials the problem would be fixed, but the faxes continued.” (5) “She has even made suggestions on improving the way faxes are transmitted.” (1) Finally, in 2016, in frustration she contacted the CBC. (5)

“Everton McLean, a spokesman with the Nova Scotia Health Authority, said doctors are independent and the authority can’t tell them what to do.” (1) And yet, “Nova Scotia’s Personal Health Information Act says it’s an offence to fail to protect personal health information in a secure manner. Anyone found guilty may be subject to a fine of up to $10,000 or imprisonment for six months, or both.” (1) I think if you start enforcing the law there would be change. Also, doctors are paid from tax dollars so, I believe, the government can put conditions on receiving those funds. “Halifax privacy lawyer David Fraser” said “‘The larger concern for me is the apparent casualness with which these documents are being faxed and also what seems to be the response when they’re told that they’re going to the wrong place,”‘ Fraser said. (1)

When this issue hit the media, the privacy commissioner started to pretend to do something (they do like their name in the media). Privacy commissioner Catherine Tully made recommendations (5) which the doctors are free to ignore. In fact, I suspect that most doctors aren’t aware that a report was written much less read it.

“Tully said if the information had ended up in the hands of someone who knew the patient, the harm would be ‘close to irreparable.'” (5) We don’t know that some unreported mis-faxed information hasn’t gone to people who know, or will know, a patient and the patient just hasn’t heard about it. We only know about the faxes reported to the media.

“Privacy commissioner Catherine Tully wrote in a report… that momentary inattention and human error by those sending the faxes are to blame for the three cases her office examined.” (5) But, between 80 and 140 faxes went to Ms. Belanger’s spa over 10 years. Were all these human error? And, at what point, does human error become incompetency or just disregard for people’s rights?

“The report says doctors notified each of the patients whose privacy was breached.” (5) Were these just the patients in the three cases Tully received or all 80 to 140 patients whose personal/health information was received by Ms. Belanger? The report also does not say when or how the patients were notified, nor is there any verification that it is true. A victim of the breaches, whose name was not given, said “he only learned of it this week when Belanger herself contacted him to say his information had been faxed to her last fall.” “‘This is pretty serious stuff,” he said. “This can ruin people’s relationships, careers, a whole myriad of things.'” (2)

As of June 1, 2013, “’The Personal Health Information Act does require that notification goes to somebody,’ (bolding mine) said Robert Bay” (a Nova Scotia privacy commissioner spokesperson). “So the question is: Is the notification to the individual whose privacy has been breached or is the notification to our office? The determining factors are the degree of harm or embarrassment that would result from the breach.” “He says if the” ‘custodians’ “who hold the personal information”, the doctors, “determine there is no potential harm or embarrassment, then the person whose information was mishandled may not be told.” “The commission said it has no way of knowing how many breaches resulted in notification to patients.” (2) In essence, unless the commissioner has been notified, they have no way of knowing if anyone was notified. And, why would you notify the commissioner if there is no potential of harm or embarrassment to the patient and not when there is? Why are the doctors given the right to make this decision? Isn’t that a conflict of interest? How often do you think doctors will decide “no harm done” and not inform patients that their privacy was breached and not inform the privacy commissioner. Not that notifying the privacy commissioner is any great help. All they can do is write a report and/or encourage/recommend as they have no enforcement powers.

North West Territories – 2010

On four separate occasions, in a two month period, confidential files were mistakenly faxed to the CBC from the N.W. T.’s main hospital. If this weren’t so serious, it would be funny.

The hospital then imposed a faxing freeze “on any medical documents unless it is an emergency”. (4)

“In addition to the freeze, the hospital has also implemented a temporary policy requiring two staff members to oversee the faxing of confidential documents, Lewis said” (CEO of Stanton Territorial Hospital). (4)

“This ‘double-checking’ policy, which is meant to ensure the faxes reach the right destination, will stay in place until a permanent solution is found, she said.” But, as usual for the government, “she wouldn’t give specific details about any measures being taken”.(4)

In 2012 the CBC received its 6th sensitive medical fax in two years. (6) This came from Kugluktuk, Nunavut health centre. “The fax included information about the patient and their sexual health history.” “In a statement, the department said it’s investigating. It added that health centres are required to use pre-set speed dials for confidential patient referrals”. (6)

“At the time, Health Minister Tom Beaulieu said a summer student sent that fax. The department has not yet said if any action was taken, or why the faxes continue to come to CBC North in Yellowknife.” (6) It certainly illustrates how important privacy is – the faxes continue and very sensitive patient information is given to a summer student. But the government/medical business will tell you that it takes your privacy very seriously — just propaganda.

Alberta – 2014

“Entering incorrect telephone numbers into fax machines is being blamed for more privacy breaches of personal health information by Alberta Health Services.” (3)

“Documents obtained by CBC News through access to information show that Alberta Health Services were regularly (bolding mine) sending faxes intended for Strathcona Home Care to a custom home builder in Sherwood Park over a two-year period.” (3) “At one point the builder was receiving as many as one fax each week.” (3) “Despite repeated calls, the faxes continued until company owner Dianne Ingram sent AHS a fax of her own.” “She scrawled, “You have the wrong fax number!! Stop faxing us!!.” (3) Also faxes were sent to a manufacturing company. (3)

“Patients often go uninformed when their information is disclosed.” (3)

“While AHS is not obligated to report breaches, Hamilton (Brian Hamilton, with the Office of the Alberta Information and Privacy Commissioner) said his office encourages AHS to inform all patients whose privacy has been breached.” (3) Sorry, but, in my opinion, “encourage” is essentially meaningless.

“’This is highly sensitive information and an issue of public trust,” privacy commissioner Frank Work said. “How can the public have faith in public bodies if they can’t provide security for personal information?”‘ (7) (Bolding Mine). He was referring to laptops but it is just as relevant to faxes.

‘”It’s surprising,” Hamilton said during an interview. “The health sector in particular, spends millions of dollars on information systems with secure access, and yet people keep faxing.”‘ (3)

“Sending personal information by fax is a less secure method of transferring information compared to encrypted emails, he said.” (3)

Dr. Verna Yiu, with Alberta Health Services said “We do rely on cooperation of the recipient to let us know that” (they have received a mis-fax), “and I would have to say that in general (italics mine) people are pretty co operative about that.” (3) This is NOT a privacy policy. This is NOT how you protect patient information.

Some Questions:

In all these cases, the doctors offices, violating patients privacy, were not identified. Should they be? Would you want to know who is not taking care of your information?
Most people who violate people’s privacy are either not disciplined, disciplined (ex. A day or more off without pay), or fired. Should the penalties be stiffer? Do we have a right to know what disciplinary action is taken under what circumstances so we can determine if this is sufficient or excessive?
Don’t you think THE PATIENT should be notified in all cases so the PATIENT can decide the degree of harm in violating the patient’s privacy?
Should there be a central phone number that people can call when they receive medical information that belongs to someone else?

You may have noticed the trend by the government/medical system: it’s someone else’s responsibility, there is nothing we can do, false promises to fix it or we’ll look into it but the people never hear if anything was ever done to fix the problem. And if it hits the media, the “problem” is sent to the privacy commissioner, who writes a report. The report may say “Order No.” but it is not an order, it is a recommendation which the medical system is free to, and I suspect in most cases does, ignore. So what changes – NOTHING. Mistakes are made, and I think people would be mostly forgiving, if they knew concrete steps had been taken to fix the problem. Instead we get propaganda – we’ll fix it, trust us, trust us. Save the money from all these useless, money-sucking,, reports and put it into software/training for something positive such as end-to-end encryption and enforcement; privacy might be protected and money saved.

And, these violations are only the ones that are reported to the media. These are, no doubt, the proverbial tip of the iceberg. I suspect there are some medical people who are very careful about patient’s privacy. But, we don’t know who they are, therefore all are suspect.

I am deeply grateful to Ms. Belanger and Ms. Igram for sharing the information with the media; and to CBC News for publicising the problem. It is the only way we are learning that our information is not protected. And, until we know the truth, we cannot try to fix the problem.

* I contacted a Minister of Health, Victor Boudreau, twice and requested an organizational chart/description of the health system in a province (who reports to whom and what are their responsibilities). Never got a reply (see future post tentatively titled “My Story – Part II).

Mental health records sent to Nova Scotia spa in error over last decade – Yvonne Colbert, 07 Apr 2016, CBC News
Victim of mental health privacy breach in Nova Scotia feels “very exposed” – Yvonne Colbert, 08 April 2016, CBC News
Unsecure faxes put health data of Albertans at risk – Kim Trynacity, 10 Feb. 2014, CBC News
N.W.T. Hospital clamps down on medical faxes – 07 Jul 2010, CBC News
Privacy commissioner says doctors should move faxing patient referrals – Yvonne Colbert, 23 Nov. 2016, CBC News
CBC Yellowknife newsroom gets 6th medical fax in 2 years – 30 Jul 2012, CBC News
Security on stolen laptops was inadequate: privacy commissioner – 24 Jun 2009, CBC News

COLLECTING MEDICAL INFORMATION (OR NOT) – MY STORY

I started to get copies of my medical information that I didn’t already have.

(1). My primary doctor’s office first demanded to know why I wanted a copy of my records. I told them “because I want them”. I didn’t feel I needed to provide an explanation; a reasonable office employee told the other to just give them to me. But the other one said that I would have to talk to the office manager, who wasn’t in the office. I finally contacted her and she said some of the records might be stored in the back and they would have a hard time getting them. I asked for them anyways. In fact, if she had checked the computer she would have known that I had started seeing the doctor after they started computerizing their records. But some doctors do all they can to avoid giving out copies of records to patients.

Then she demanded to know why I wanted the records. She said there were different prices depending on whether they were for me or for my lawyer. I asked what the difference in price was and she refused to tell me. Is it legal to charge different prices for the same thing (assuming she was telling the truth)? And are they legally allowed to refuse to give me a copy of my information unless I tell them why I want it? Are they legally allowed to do everything they can to discourage me from getting a copy of my records? Oh yes this is the medical business who don’t seem to care about the law, unless it suits them.

All my information was, if fact, in their computer. My primary doctor charged $27 and as the office manager said, they just printed it off the computer; is this expensive paper, another way to discourage people from getting their records or just a money grab? My medical records were put in an envelope, unsealed, and left at the front desk for a few days; Staff and patients are all round the desk. Another middle finger given to privacy.

I was delayed picking up the envelope because I wanted to pick up this information and the “d”’s at the same time. Of course, I had expected the envelope to be sealed.

(2) The first surgeon I had seen refused to give me a copy of the information that had been collected.

(3) No problem with my surgeon. I just had to go in and sign off at the desk that I had received the copies which was fine. Except that there had been communication between the surgeon and the “d’. The surgeon wasn’t sure the information could be released without the other doctor’s approval so he didn’t give it to me (he could have just phoned the “d”).

(4) I phoned the “d”s office and asked for a copy of my medical records and if he gave my information to the registry. I had asked my primary doctor and surgeon but neither of them knew who gave my information to the registry (or so they said). At the “d”s office I was told that I had to make an appointment to get this information. Now you know where some your tax dollars get wasted. As I am entitled to a copy of my medical records I made an appointment. When I went into his office he started taking the conversation in a different direction so I stated, again, that I just wanted my medical records and to know if he gave my information to the registry. Again he took the conversation in different directions, probably trying to justify the visit, but when I wouldn’t play ball, he finally said essentially “So, you just want a copy of your medical records and to know if I gave your information to the registry.” He said he didn’t have any records so apparently there was no record of my first visit or the so-called checkup. He also said that he hadn’t given my information to the registry but he mentioned who might have. Also, when I mentioned the communication between him and my surgeon I got the same response as my surgeon. Now these are two people who, based on age, have been in the business for a lot of years and I would think would have encountered this before and so should know whether they could share the information or not. In any case, he said he would check with the other doctor and get back to me. Of course, being the medical system, he never did. He just LIED. It would have been interesting to find out what they were hiding. I walked out of his office in absolute disgust, AGAIN.

I also wrote letters to the hospital and anyone else involved in my health care, requesting copies of my files. And I wrote to the appropriate organizations with questions (this included treatment in the new province). I did not receive a response to several letters, so I mailed another copy, after a few more months and no answer, I sent the letters by registered mail. I got answers. Now it is possible that ONE letter got overlooked but when it happens to several letters and to different people/organizations, in the same business, it begins to look like a tactic.

Some answers I received to my questions made sense in relation to my direct health care. Others did not (I do not include those mentioned in other posts). These are some of the non-answers from William Findlay, Michele Stanton and John Garratt:

What are your living arrangements? They said that they want to know if someone will be at home when you get out of surgery. So, why don’t they ask “will someone be at home to care for you when you leave the hospital”? You may be living with someone but that doesn’t mean that, for a variety of reasons, they will be there when you get home. You may live alone but that does not mean you will not have someone at home when you leave the hospital? The non-answer I got from Findlay was “yes, that is a broad question”, which means they will continue to ask the questions for reasons they refuse to state.
I asked who sent my information to the registry? I was told it was nobody specific; it’s just entered from a variety of sources at the hospital. And researchers have access to this information. My surgeon said researchers would only have access if I went for further treatment which I didn’t. The “d” said they were only counting a number. Now, I am being told that the registry staff and “researchers” have access to my information (no limits mentioned). You just can’t get an honest answer from these disgusting “people”.

I asked William Findlay how much of my information was put in the registry. He refused to answer and referred me to the organization that owns the agency that has the registry. That organization refused to answer my question. I sent letters again to the organization and to Findlay insisting on an answer since it was the hospital sharing my information. Findlay’s secretary said, in essence, that they refused to answer the question. I got no response from the organization. I sent a letter to the agency and they refused to answer my questions.

I have to assume that all my information/body parts is being shared/traded/bartered with all their unsavoury friends (the only kind who steal from the vulnerable/sick people) until I hear otherwise and, so far, no one will tell me; I just get the run-around. Obviously, these vultures have something truly horrendous and very evil to hide.

I asked if my DNA was shared with researchers and I provided my care card number so they could look at my file. All I got was a non-answer that researchers may access the registry. So, I can only assume that researchers have access to my DNA for their use. Just think they could clone me (like they have done to sheep, etc.) and then throw darts at me and otherwise torture me. Anything is possible until the truth is known.
I asked if researchers, biotech companies, etc. are allowed to patent my DNA. Again they had my care card number to check my file. Again, I just got the non-answer “This is very uncommon. Should you wish to have your DNA patented you should contact your family doctor about that”. I guess he thought that was pretty funny. So, although I gave him my personal health number (PHN) he could not/would not tell me if my DNA was, or could be, patented without my knowledge/consent. So I can only assume that “researchers” can do whatever they want with my DNA.
I was also told that when I was admitted to the hospital I signed an admission form basically giving them permission to do whatever they want. I checked my copy of forms from the hospital and did not find an admission form. I asked William Findlay, in two separate letters, to send me a copy of the signed admission form. The question was continually ignored and I have not received a copy of the form so I have to assume that it does not exist. But, if it did exist it would only have been manufactured consent versus real consent. Real consent is explaining exactly how they want to use information, especially in ways that are not directly connected with my specific care, with whom they want to share the information and requesting my consent (it implies respect for the patient). Manufactured consent implies contempt for the patient — Give us everything we want or die, we don’t care, we are the medical business.

Update: I found a consent form in with the copies from my surgeon. When asked to sign the form I said that I didn’t agree with some of the “requests”. I was told to just stroke out anything I didn’t like, which I did. I don’t know if this is the hospital consent form but I suspect it is. It may be why they refuse to send me a copy because I stroked out everything that was not directly related to my surgery, such as no sharing of information or body parts, etc. But they probably just stole the information/body parts anyways.

William Findlay said that the confidentiality and security of my information was protected under the privacy act. Isn’t that disgusting. My information is protected under the privacy act. Let’s see, oh yes, the auditor general and the privacy commissioner have found, on several occasions, that the privacy act has not been implemented, much less enforced in the medical business. They found that our information was/is being shared with every low-life. But my information is protected under the privacy act. How? Oh yes, and when the medical business is caught illegally sharing patient information NOTHING happens. The management is not sued, fired or held accountable in any way. They just promise to change things, until they get caught again. And then they just make the same lying promise. But my information is protected under the privacy act. The privacy act was meant to be, and is, just words on paper to be used to misdirect and con the public. But my information is protected under the privacy act. What a vile farce.

One medical person, when asked for specific information, about who my information was being shared with, told me, essentially, that if I didn’t like his (general) information I could contact the privacy commissioner. I contacted the privacy commissioner who told me that such requests were outside their mandate. But that’s what they do, run you in circles.

I had to laugh at the arrogance/narcissism of one medical person who said that I had his assurance that my information was protected. Obviously, he was still under the illusion that the word of someone in the medical business had value, that he could be trusted. I wish that were true but it isn’t.

As for that registry, well, I tell people I wouldn’t give that organization my spit. But then they have probably STOLEN that too.

I received a letter from the staff of a doctor telling me that the doctor would like me to phone as the doctor had something to say to me. I asked that the information be sent in a letter. I never heard from the doctor/staff again.

If I could trust the medical/government business I wouldn’t have to ask the questions. But they have proven they are not trustworthy. And, if they were trustworthy, I would have gotten honest, complete answers, not non-answers, run-arounds or just blatant LIES.

So, now they have all this information on me, the truth and the lies. It will be shared with every scumbag because, in my opinion, that’s the only type that would access a patient’s information without their knowledge and/or their real consent. Collecting information “anonymously” has been proven too many times to be another lie.

Again, I state, I am not against research, if done with respect. I am against stealing people’s information because only unethical, immoral fiends would do this. If you can’t ask for information honestly, if you refuse to state who is using this information and for what purpose, if you have to hide in the shadows, in the gutters, then you must be doing something corrupt, vile and contemptible.

From the Open Society Justice Initiative, printed by the Office of the BC Information and Privacy Commissioner, Right to Know Week, September 28th to October 5th, 2007,:

10 Principles that form the core of the right to know:

Access to information is a right of everyone.
Access is the rule – secrecy is the exception!
The right applies to all public bodies.
Making requests should be simple, speedy, and free.
Officials have a duty to assist requestors.
Refusals must be justified.
The public interest takes precedence over secrecy.
Everyone has the right to appeal an adverse decision.
Public bodies should proactively publish core information.
The right should be guaranteed by an independent body.

Just words on paper. Sounds good but not worth a damn because the medical/government business will not implement it. But the privacy commissioner’s office likes to print it because it makes them look like they care. Just propaganda by the government.

Simply put, privacy refers to an individual’s right to remain anonymous or control who, how, when, and where information that is used to identify them is managed. (source unknown). And we have a RIGHT to privacy, this is our information not theirs but these people flip their middle finger at our RIGHTS.

I still have to see medical “people” periodically, whether for healthcare or outside the medical business. But I don’t have to like them, I certainly don’t respect or trust them. I look at these cannibalistic cowards who feed off the patients, whether it’s a pharmacist/technician/researcher/physician, etc. (with one or two individual exceptions) with the same disgust and contempt that they have for the patients. The difference is — I don’t mask it.

A BIT ABOUT MY HEALTH STORY

Years ago, before I started raising awareness outside of St. Paul’s, I went to a doctor for a health problem. The doctor wanted me to become part of a “study”. I was told that some researchers were being given access to patients records in return for providing services to the medical system (sold/traded/bartered). There would be a table of researchers, from different disciplines, asking questions. I asked what kind of questions. The doctor provided me with a outline of some of the questions. They wanted to know EVERYTHING, including all intimate information. I was shocked to say the least. It really was a case of taking a sledgehammer to a finishing nail so I certainly didn’t feel that this “research” was for my benefit. And, according to comments from the doctor, I was certainly not the first patient that the doctor had directed, or tried to direct, to this group.

I asked this doctor about privacy. I was told not to ask about privacy or I would be listed as being “paranoid”. There’s that word again. I felt, under the circumstances, that it was a very reasonable question. But, if you want to shut people up, or keep them from thinking along certain lines, or keep them from asking uncomfortable questions, just call them paranoid. It felt like intimidation, or blackmail, to me. I said no. And, knowing what I know today, I am sooooo glad I did. But at least, in this case, they had to ask and I had the option to say no. Of course, the politicians had already given them permission to steal whatever information was in the system but for any additional information they needed my cooperation.

My doctor said that we would discuss it again. I had said NO but gawd forbid that it should be respected. I didn’t go back to this doctor for a variety of reasons, including not wanting to be harassed or coerced and not being respected.

I consider it unethical to try to manipulate a patient into becoming a lab rat by telling them it’s for their benefit, when in fact it’s for the benefit of the “researchers” and whatever company/organization they work for. I don’t recall being told what organization this group was with, the purpose of the research or how the information would be used. Do doctors get kick-backs or brownie points or some other benefit for every patient they direct to the “researchers”. As for my medical issue, I eventually figured out what was causing it, fixed it; problem solved and without a doctor.

I noticed, over the years, that every time I went to a new doctor, in whatever discipline (medical, dentist, optometrist, massage, etc.) I was asked my occupation. It was usually asked as if it were just “conversation”. But when I kept getting asked the same question I realized that they were, in fact, collecting information. Apparently, they just didn’t want me to know it would be entered into their records (to be shared with all the miscreants). I also came to believe that medical people don’t have just general “conversations”. All questions, and even some statements, are about collecting information. Again, I consider it unethical to collect information under the guise of “general conversation”. Now I have a little fun with it. I decide what I want to be that day – a pilot, an archeologist, a retail clerk …… and do the same with other questions.

In 2013 I became ill. I didn’t know it immediately but according to a doctor, I got sick around B.C. election time. What a coincidence. I had to go to a surgeon. This surgeon started asking me a lot of questions which didn’t seem to have anything to do with my surgery. So I asked and all I was told was that it had to do with my treatment. I still didn’t see the connection so I asked specifically how one related to the other. Instead of answering the question I was told that the surgeon had only so much time for me and if I was was going to ask questions right from the beginning, well….. Then the surgeon changed tactics and said it’s about trust and if I didn’t trust the surgeon then I should find another surgeon. So, either I “trusted” the doctor and did whatever I was told without question (be submissive/subservient, crawl), or I would be denied health care by this doctor. The fact that she was refusing to answer a simple question didn’t instill trust. In fact, it suggested that she was lying and was, in fact, collecting information that was not directly connected to my surgery.

I don’t believe that the majority of questions had anything to do with my health but, in fact, was information gathering for their vile friends, the scientists, the researchers, the suppliers, the marketers and gawd knows who else. Again, it becomes a case of collecting information under false pretenses which I consider immoral and unethical. If it was moral and ethical they wouldn’t have to lie about it and hide what they were really doing, they would just answer the question. So what are they doing that is so heinous that they have to lie about it?

Anyways, I needed surgery and soon (I was sick and vulnerable) so I answered the questions but not always truthfully. That pretty much destroys the value of the information. After I left the surgeon’s office and had time to think I decided that I didn’t want anything to do with this surgeon who refused to answer my questions even if it meant delaying needed surgery. How can one trust a surgeon who lies and won’t answer questions. So I got a new surgeon and I’m soooo glad I’m did.

I was overall very pleased with this surgeon. But the surgeon was not perfect and again it was privacy issues. I wasn’t asked all the questions as I had been previously but then I suspect that the surgeon got the information from the previous surgeon. But I was asked whether I worked outside the home. Again that question. I asked why the surgeon wanted to know. I was told it was to determine my availability. Well, if you want to know someone’s availability you ask how available that person is. A person’s availability is dependent on other factors/commitments besides work. So I believe the answer I was given to the question was a lie. But I answered the question because, quite honestly, I wondered if the real purpose was to decide on the quality of care I would receive; how valuable am I to “society”, more to the point, the turdits and their friends. If you don’t know the reason for the question, and you are being lied to, anything is possible.

The next question was, of course, since I worked, my occupation. Again I asked what this had to do with my surgery. I was told that the hospital would want to know, which didn’t really answer the question. I answered it but again not quite truthfully. They’re lying to me so I didn’t feel that I owed them the truth. I found out later that if the hospital wants to know anything they will ask (and they asked lots and lots of questions). They didn’t ask this question. So why did the surgeon lie about the hospital wanting to know specifically my occupation. Again, I think this was information collecting for the gutter trash who feed off the vulnerable, the sick. As I left the surgeon’s office he said to me “so are you available? (for tests and surgery)”. So, this confirmed that asking about my work was not about “availability”.

Also, my primary doctor had told me that a test had not yet come back. I asked which test and the first time I asked I was given an answer that was incomprehensible to me. So, on the next visit I asked again and I was told that a sample of my DNA had been taken and what it was being tested for. Before every test I asked what was being tested and I read the form I had to give to the testers; nowhere did I see DNA. I told my surgeon about this test and the surgeon said that they never do that. So, I went back to my primary doctor and asked “Was my DNA taken and tested for….”. The doctor kept giving a non-answer so I had to repeat the question several times. Eventually the doctor said “I don’t know”. This doctor is suppose to have a record of all tests. Was the surgeon telling the truth? Which doctor was lying or were both lying? Again, you just can’t get a straight answer from these people. What are they hiding?

Did they take my DNA? Is my DNA being stored in a DNA warehouse, like they do with newborns, shared with all sorts of “people” and organizations (the US military love collecting other people’s DNA). I don’t know and I should have the right to know.

While going through tests and the actual visit to the hospital, this was an issue that kept reoccurring – collecting information not needed for my surgery. For example, the hospital wanted to know my marital status. Why? What did this have to do with my surgery? They also don’t want you to have the questions beforehand. It would appear that they don’t want you to have time to think about the questions, or they have some other motive. For example, they had a 4 page questionnaire, even before I got to the hospital, and when I asked them to fax or email me a copy of the questions, they refused. The only way I could get a copy was for me to go to the hospital and ask if someone would print it out (if someone would, in fact, do it). But there wasn’t time because my surgery was the next day and they needed the answers. I think of that as blackmail – give us the information now or your surgery will be cancelled.

Another example was the day I went for surgery I was at one location (I got sent to many) and asked to fill out two forms. I filled out one and, after reviewing the second, asked the purpose of the questions. I was told not to fill it out if I didn’t want to. So why would they give it to me if they don’t need it and why not state, when it is given to me, that it is optional? Anyways, shortly after that I was laying on a gurney, with a tube in me and a medical person comes over and says they lost the form I filled out (I believe it was the form I filled out, not the other one) and she was going to ask the questions again. I told her that I had a copy in the locker which was directly across from us, only a few arms length away. But no she insisted on asking the questions. So:

Did they lose my personal, confidential information in about 10 minutes?
Was she lying?
Or both?

I suspect it was the second, or possibly the third answer. But these people expect trust and respect from you when all they do is lie. Strange.

I also noticed as I went through the system that I would sometimes have the same questions asked more than once. For example, after a test, one medical person sat down beside me, as if she was my best friend (in fact, she was anything but), and asked a question that she had asked earlier. I learned during my time in front of St. Paul’s that “pretending to be your friend” is a tactic used to gain information from people who you think don’t want to provide the information; it’s manipulative. So, I learned to lie consistently on some questions or I changed my answer each time they asked on other questions. I had no respect for these bastards who were lying to and conning me, who didn’t have the ethics or morals to state the real reason they were collecting this information. I also started taping everything. You may even want to take a camera, if possible, to protect yourself.

I also strongly suggest that you take someone with you when you go through the medical system. This person should be with you at all times, even, if it were possible, in surgery. Otherwise you may find that you are asked if someone, a male, can watch a procedure. You may say NO. The person asking (a female) and the male may go off and have a little talk. Then, when you are in the middle of the procedure and half-naked, you may look up and see the male peeking around the curtain. You may realize that the male has been standing on the other side of the curtain, listening, waiting for the “opportune” moment, for him. What do you call someone who would do this? Certainly, you would not call it a man because a real man would never do something like that. Do you call it a pervert, a sicko, a voyeur, human garbage. You may be going through an extraordinarily difficult time and then have to emotionally deal with the indignity, the humiliation of a pervert(s). And if he was told to do it then do you have two perverts, two pieces of human garbage? And just think what someone(s) like this is learning and will do to the next patient. These people do not respect the word NO. If you say NO they will just take it anyway, by whatever means, and they don’t care how far into hell they have to sink to do it. And who spawns and raises such sickos?
A male said to me “I don’t care about you. You don’t DO anything”. Well, actually I DO something. But why let the truth get in the way of a convenient lie. Who else do they “not care about”. It doesn’t matter what a person does or does not DO because all people SHOULD be treated the same in the medical system — with dignity and respect.

Also, when you are going through the system you may have two females strap you into a machine, half-naked, so you can’t move. Then they may take off (coffee break). A bit later you may hear someone moving around behind you and ask who it is and a male may answer. You may never see him, any part of him, or what he was doing behind you, or even if there was more than one male. As far as you know it’s just him and you and you are half-naked and can’t move. Would something like this be considered a “perk” of the job?

You may be going through hell, vulnerable and sick but the more vulnerable you are the easier it is to be degraded, devalued, and dehumanized by these cowards in the medical business.

Aren’t there rules against this? But, of course, if there are they would just be words on paper, meaningless. And these people insist on trust and respect. But gawd forbid that a patient should delay the bastards coffee break; that appeared more important than the dignity and emotional well-being of a patient.

You should be able to feel safe in the medical system but you are not safe, especially a woman.

Perhaps I should feel compassion for people who seem to be depraved but I’m not there yet.

Right now, I hope there is a special place in hell for “people” like this.

And just think, one or more of these “people” may “take care” of you if you get sick.

I was in recovery after surgery when a nurse said to me: “your healthy, how did you get this illness”, as if I had brought it on myself (no one knows what causes my illness or so they say). Was she:

grossly insensitive
Collecting information
Both

As I said before, I don’t believe these people ask questions unless they are collecting information. So, there I was, still coming out of anesthetic, susceptible, vulnerable. What a perfect time to take advantage of someone.

A week or so after surgery I had to go to the surgeon for a checkup. It was at this visit that I found out that my medical information had gone into a registry. I had not been asked if I wanted my information in this registry and only told after the fact. I was told that no one, other than the next doctor I had to see, would access my information without my written consent (another LIE). I found out later that I would be “tracked”. So, I was now in a registry, being treated like I was a criminal, like I was a paedophile, because I got sick with an illness that affects no one but me.

After noticing the t-shirt I had on the surgeon mentioned that his daughter had visited that country. I got the impression that I was expected to respond with some comment about my family – I didn’t. This question was then asked by the next doctor.

So, I had to go see another doctor (I came up with a number of names for him, the politest was, well, I’ll call him the “d”). On appointment day I couldn’t find this doctor’s address so I went to my primary doctor and the person at the desk, not a doctor, went into my medical files to find out who I had been referred to. I mention this because I had been told by the office manager that no one had access to my information except the doctors. So, more lies.

I went to the “d”s office, let them know at the desk that I was there and sat and waited. Half an hour later one of the desk people came and asked me if I was waiting for someone. I waited for a moment while a number of sarcastic remarks ran through my head and then said “yes”. I went into the doctor’s office and he explained that he had been delayed because he couldn’t get his computer to work, then he couldn’t get his printer to work so I gather that he borrowed a laptop. The first question he asked was my marital status. Why? Did he want to date me? No? Well, I couldn’t see what my marital status had to do with my health care. So, I told him it was irrelevant and he said it was relevant but didn’t say why. Next he asked if I had family. Why? Did they want to know how available my body parts were before I was dead? I told him it was irrelevant and he said it was relevant but again didn’t say why.

When he accessed my information in the registry I asked who else had access. He said researchers but they only want to count a number. Well, if all they want is to count a number then there isn’t a need for all my information to be in this registry. And this answer was different from my surgeon’s; and, as you can read in the next post I will get a different answer from the reprobates running the registry. You just can’t get an honest, straight answer from these disgusting, reprehensible excuses for human beings.

He recommended further treatment but he only gave me the most minimal of information. In my opinion, only enough information to manipulate me into doing what he wanted. I asked him where he got his information. Basically I wanted to know his sources because this guy was not instilling in me any sense of confidence that he knew what he was doing. He shrugged and looked at the computer; I certainly didn’t get the impression that he gave a damn. He did not mention a lot of things, including side affects of treatment. I had to ask and then he had to think for a few minutes before he came up with one obvious one. Apparently, I spent more time researching than him so I knew there were other side effects. Anyways, I said that I would think about further treatment. He decided at the point that he needed to do a checkup. Considering all the tests I had just been through, I couldn’t figure out why, but okay. So he reaches for the equipment to check my blood pressure and it doesn’t work (or so he said). So he decides to check my heart. I remember thinking “yes, I do have one” because, by this point, I came believe that that was all he could figure out. He placed the stethoscope in the general vicinity of my heart for a fraction of a second so I’m not sure he even determined that much. I walked out of the “d”s office in complete disgust. Health care should be a cooperation between doctor and patient, with the patient receiving all information necessary to make an informed decision about what the patient wants done to them – not a power play, not manipulation, by the medical “people”.

Shortly after my operation I was in front of St. Paul’s. I don’t think I was expected to be there again (presumably, there’s more than one way to make a person disappear). Interestingly, just after I arrived a young male, riding a bike, told me, as he went by, that he had an illness (almost identical to mine, what a coincidence). And he said “I give them (the medical people) everything they want or die”. Another expression of our non-democracy. This person had ridden by before my illness, throwing out negative comments, and was patted on the back by someone from the hospital.

When I moved I was told that the medical information is not transferred from one province to another. In the new province I moved to I had to go for tests. The technician asked in what province I had my operation, I told her since I believed they already had the information (in hindsight I shouldn’t have given the information). Then she asked which hospital. I refused to say. After all what difference does it make unless you are planning on stealing my information.

A doctor asked for a copy of my medical records so “they” could “track me”. I refused. You should see the caring, compassionate mask drop when they don’t get what they want. These bastards stole my information/body parts, they have consistently lied, they refused to say how much of my information they stole, who they would share it with and how it would be used (see next post “Collecting Information Or Not – My Story), but they wanted my co-operation. Their level of narcissism is unbelievable.

I went to a different doctor and she asked a question. She was shocked at my answer. I don’t know if it was the answer that shocked her or if she realized I was lying. It didn’t matter. She was just “information collecting”. So, I just smiled internally and thought “touche, bastard”. What comes around goes around.

Did some of the people in the medical system do what I pay them to do? Yes, and the occasional one even caringly. But it’s like a priest that holds the hand of a dying person (at the patient’s request) or preaches to people about morals, ethics, and integrity and then says, oh excuse me while I go and rape one of your children or cover for those who do – besides being hypocritical, one does not absolve the other. Or the mafia who kills someone one day and then gives to charity — one does not absolve the other. You are still something that harms the vulnerable, the sick, the children even it’s by doing nothing but covering for others.

I’m angry because I wanted to trust these people, I wanted to respect these people, I wanted to feel safe when I went for healthcare and instead I got the opposite. So, now when I look into the face of these “people”, whether I am seeing them for healthcare or in a pharmacy or in the streets or wherever, I feel contempt, revulsion, and total disgust.

FOLLOW THE MONEY

Where does the money go when you contribute to research? Do we pay for the research and then pharmaceutical companies make billions in profits selling it back to us so we pay two or more times.

If you don’t care about your privacy, maybe you care about your money. You pay for health care, your information is then sold/traded/bartered, the politicians then give researchers taxpayer money to do research, and people donate money for research. The research is done and then the people pay again for the resulting pharmaceuticals or patent testing. How many times have you paid for the pharmaceuticals and tests you may, or may not, use?

I have read the websites, and reviewed the financial statements of several health foundations/societies/agencies. They put on the website some information which is useful to people with that particular illness. But I also noticed that 23%-53% of the money raised went to fundraising costs, even with volunteers. There are no details as to how the money is actually spent. Does it all go primarily to one fundraiser, are there connections to the foundation/society/agency personnel, or are the costs spread among a lot of different people/companies, and are the costs justified? Who are the fundraising people/companies and are they affiliated with the politicians. The fundraising costs amount, in some cases, in just one society/foundation to hundreds of thousands of dollars, annually.

The websites say that they give x dollars to researchers and sometimes they name the researchers or research being done. But they don’t account for the money or the research. Is the money just to pay wages and, if so, what are the wages of the researchers? Do the researchers have funding from somewhere else? Could they be double- or triple-dipping? How else is the money being spent and is it being spent wisely? We don’t know because there is no information.

The websites also don’t tell you what happens with the research. Was the money spent on research that was successful? How much did it cost to find a cure or something that aids a sick person? Again, was this money spent wisely? What happened to the successful research – was it then patented? If so, who gets the money and how much does the patient/taxpayers have to pay, again, for the results of this research? Even if the research was unsuccessful, was the money spent wisely? Could the money have been better spent aiding sick people in some other way? The BC Cancer Agency website says that they have “set up the Technology Development Office to champion its intellectual property management (presumably that means “market” its, not the people’s, intellectual property) and commercialization. They also say that they “partner closely with research institutions, non-profit organizations, and industry around the world to help drive new discoveries forward quickly” and they have a “duty to act on behalf of our patients and the general public to ensure that a culture of accountability is fostered”. Are yet they won’t say specifically who they are sharing our information with and under what circumstances so where does the accountability come or is it just lies? The Liver Foundation provides minimal financial information but does say you can contact them to get the details. I contacted them, several times, and never got a response.

I am upfront about the fact that I don’t contribute to these organizations (at least not willingly). When they provide me with enough information that I know my money is being wisely used for the benefit of sick people, and not to line someone’s pocket, I will contribute. Needless to say, I would also want assurance that the research wasn’t using stolen information and being given to pharmaceutical/research organizations with a unethical/criminal history (4, 5, 6).

I heard, some time ago, that there is medical research that would benefit patients but that it is not being done because it can’t be patented. I doubt that things have changed. Gawd forbid that we would pay for research and then have a medical benefit that would cost the patients/taxpayers nothing or next to nothing more.

If you read post “Patenting DNA”, you will see that the public “invests” their information (mostly without their consent or knowledge), monetarily fund the research and then research hospitals/universities patent/sell what they discover. They are the owners, not the citizens. The hospitals/universities then charge the citizens for the test/drug, etc. and keep the money to use as they see fit. The citizens do not have a say, they are not even allowed to know how much money is being made off the citizens investment as it has now become “confidential”.(1) The information, and the money, has gone from being ours, to being theirs. (2) Interesting how that happens.

Is this not exploitation of the sick? No wonder “Many (billionaires) have gotten rich from interests in …..the pharmaceutical and health-care industry”. (3) Is research just a wealth transfer project where wealth of information and money is transferred from the many to the few? Oh, please let me donate more. The wealthy suffer so much.-). Are the foundations/charities primarily fronts for the pharmaceutical companies? We don’t know.

If we are providing the body parts and information and paying for the research, are we getting the research WE want or just the research that will line the pockets of the multinationals?

When I was in front of St. Paul’s I had a discussion with someone on this topic. This person said the pharmaceutical/research companies need the money for marketing. Why? If this is a necessary medical product why do you need to spend a lot of money advertising or running around convincing people to buy as much as possible? If this is just some cosmetic product or duplicate with a new flavour, then why is our money being invested on this kind of research?

Isn’t it time we knew where our information, our body parts and our money was going? But that would require transparency and accountability, something the medical business, in all forms, has an aversion to. I wonder why?

And, Isn’t it time we claimed ownership of our investment?

Breast cancer gene patents: the Canadian story – Kelly Crowe, 18 Jul 2013, CBC News
SickKids Hospital dragged into U.S. Breast cancer gene suit – Kelly Crowe, 18 Jul 2013, CBC News
Wealth gap: Canada’s middle class is not immune to trends of income concentration – 20 Jan. 2015, The Globe and Mail
Pharmaceutical Corruption Media Articles, www.wanttoknow.info/pharmaceuticalcorruptionmediaarticles

Ethics in pharmaceutical sales, wikipedia

7 Shameful Examples of Big Pharma Fraud, Vactruth.com

GENETIC TESTS

So, what happens to the genetic tests that are done on you, with or without your knowledge/permission [see future posts “My Story” and “Information Collected (or Not)].

Besides going to researchers (and probably the pharmaceutical companies they are associated with), it may go to insurance companies, employers, banks, marketing companies and probably a whole lot of other “people”. And this is just the start.

“Canada’s privacy watchdog is urging insurance companies and others to stop asking for access to the results of existing genetic tests.”

Federal Privacy Commissioner Daniel Therrien says it is becoming more of a challenge to protect people’s genetic privacy with recent advances in science and technology.

‘We are calling on the industry to refrain from asking for existing test results to assess insurance risk until the industry can clearly show that these tests are necessary and effective in assessing risk.’ Therrien said in a statement Thursday.

There are now hundreds of tests to help spot genes known to increase a person’s risk of certain medical conditions.

But some people may decline tests for fear a positive result may mean they could face discrimination from insurance companies or their employers.. (1)

There are currently no laws in Canada that specifically prohibit genetic discrimination.”

Declining the tests, of course, assumes the people are given an option and the tests are not just done, without the people’s knowledge/real consent, from blood and other samples collected by the medical business.

And what will happen when they “open the door to an era of personalized medicine,” where treatments are tailored to specific genetic characteristics. (2) How many other people/organizations will have access to our very, very personal information such as marketers, suppliers, banks, insurance companies, employers, other countries (who many disallow you into their country), etc.?

How much discrimination will the people face based on our specific genetic characteristics? Will they be denied having children? Will they be denied certain health care, jobs, etc. Will they be targeted for experimentation (with or without their knowledge)? And the list of possible discrimination goes on…

We have no idea what’s going on and how it will affect us. It seems like a free-for-all with our information/body parts. And once it’s out there, you don’t get it back. And we have no idea what’s going on in the medical/government business.

The turdits, and their friends in the medical/government business, won’t/can’t protect our information and, instead, share it with all the ghouls even when there are laws prohibiting it (see all past/future posts) and, of course, in cases like genetic tests they don’t even bother with laws. That would be working in the interests of the people and gawd forbid that should happen.

Insurers asked to stop seeking access to results of genetic tests – The Canadian Press, 11 July 2014, Metro
Hospital launches legal challenge to patents on genes – Andre Picard, 4 Nov 2014, The Globe and Mail

ANOTHER MAJOR PRIVACY BREACH IN B.C.

Since 2010, a total of 4,420 government privacy breaches have been reported to the Office of the Chief Information Officer in B.C. That’s almost a thousand “breaches” a year. (1) And, it only includes those reported. The privacy commissioner’s office has “looked into some 500 privacy breaches of one kind or another involving government and its agencies over the past five years”. (9) And again, it includes only those reported which are a very small fraction of the total “breaches” because government agencies are not required to report “breaches”.

Now, more information has been “lost” by the B.C. government. This time the education ministry “lost” “personal information for 3.4 million B.C. and Yukon students and B.C. teachers from 1986 and 2009. The hard drives included names, addresses, genders, birth dates and education identity numbers, teacher retirement plans, substance abuse information, mental health issues, psychological assessments, plus detailed family data, social, type of schooling, grade information, graduation status, financial aid data, and designations such as ESL and special needs, economic and education status of cancer victims and children in provincial foster care and health and behaviour issues for children in care. (1)(2)(5)(7) “It also included family troubles and police interventions……, letters from members of the public with specific complaints about teachers; particulars on some 1,000 cancer survivors who took part in a lengthy research trial”. (9) This information was NOT anonymous. All information could be connected to people’s names. (8)

Why does the education ministry have information going back 30 years? The teacher retirement plans was a survey done in 2003 so the older information pertains to the children. Isn’t there a time limit on how long the government can keep information on students and children in care. Oh right, this is the B.C. government that keeps all information on citizens for ever.

The hard drive was discovered missing in August 2015 but the hard drive “could have been missing for as long as five years”. (4) The ministry had been trying to track it down since early August and didn’t notify the Technology Minister Amrik Virk until around September 11, 2015.

Again, the privacy commissioner’s office listed numerous ways in which the education ministry failed to provide adequate security and provided recommendations to improve security. (1) This is the same list/recommendations as identified in previous “breaches” and, no doubt, it will be the same list/recommendations as identified in future “breaches”. I suspect the privacy commissioner’s office keeps a copy of this list of inadequate security measures and recommendations that it just reprints for each new “breach’ because nothing changes.

The Technology Minister Amrik Virk called the “breach” “low risk” because there is no indication of fraud and identity theft. (5) What a “convenient” statement. Apparently, the ministry has done comprehensive searches by up to 50 bureaucrats, and “they had looked in every box, in every desk, in every drawer, and they weren’t able to find it” (6), but the ministry still considers the possibility of theft to be “low”. And, the warehouse was not equipped to secure information. (6) Plus, when the statement was made, the ministry had not examined the potential risk to individuals or notified them. (5) The use of the information by others may not be as obvious as identity theft. Personal information is very valuable these days. Based on what I’ve read, companies are building large personal information databases. This information can be used by the company and/or sold to marketers, insurance, banks, future employers, etc. so the people whose information went “missing” may never know that they lost a job, a bank loan, insurance and so on because of the information the companies were/are able to access. This “loss” of information could haunt these people for the rest of their lives.

And, as the privacy commissioner’s office noted: the information could cause emotional hurt, humiliation or damage to reputation, if in the wrong hands. “I think it essential to emphasize that the affected individuals are some of the most vulnerable in our society. They include children in care, children in custody, children with special needs, and children with health conditions. These are all circumstances that can lead to stigmatization by society in general and instances of individual discrimination.” (1)

The privacy commissioner’s office “interviewed some 16 individuals, including current and former employees. But ‘owing to the passage of time, the testimony was, understandably, often vague, incomplete or inconsistent.’ Coupled with the lack of documentation — another common occurrence with this government — she was unable to place blame on any particular individuals”. (9) So, again, no one will be held accountable.

Education Minister Mike Bernier said: “We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this incident may have caused people” (italics mine). Could you trivialize the matter more? My goodness, did the government drop someone’s pen?

But just ask the B.C. government, including medical people, and they will tell you that your information is protected.

“The incident prompted the Government Communications and Public Engagement office to write a 16-page script of anticipated questions and suggested answers for politicians.” (1) So the hand puppets and toadies just regurgitate the scripted answers.

The scripted answers also state that the trend of reported “breaches” was increasing through 2014, but has since begun to decline. Other possibilities:

This is a scripted answer by government so is likely a lie. See post “Our Information is Not Protected – Part I” for example(s) of how government lies.
The government may just be covering up more “breaches” and not reporting them.
When you are “losing” information on millions of B.C. citizens at one time, what’s left to “breach” that isn’t already out there? Again, see post “Our Information is Not Protected – Part I” where the government “illegally shared” information on 4 to 5 million B.C. citizens.

And, of course, they promise everything will be fixed so citizen’s information is protected. Until the next time!! Because they lie!!

My question is: Is there any information left, on the people of B.C., held by the B.C. government, that hasn’t been illegally shared or “lost”??

Education Ministry Chastised for Latest BC Data Breach – Bob Mackin, 29 JAN 2016, TheTyee.ca

Ministry of Education failed to protect personal information involving missing portable hard drive – Dissent, 28 JAN 2016, Office of Inadequate Security

Investigation Report F16-01, Ministry of Education, 28 JAN 2016, The Privacy Commissioner’s office; CanLII Cite: 2015 BCIPC No. 65; Quicklaw Cite: [2015] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 65

B.C. ministry broke rules, leading to data breach: Privacy commissioner – The Canadian Press, 28 JAN 2016, The Globe and Mail,

B.C. education data breach: government can’t find unencrypted hard drive – 15 Sep 2015, CBC

B.C. Education Ministry Slammed For Losing Hard Drive With Students’ Personal Info – Tamsyn Burgmann, 28 JAN 2016, The Canadian Press

B.C. ministry broke rules, leading to data breach: Privacy commissioner – The Canadian Press, 28 JAN 2016, The Globe and Mail

Largest data breach in B.C. could have been “completely preventable’: watchdog report – Paula Baker, 28 JAN 2016, Global News (this is actually the 2nd largest see , see post “Our Information is Not Protected – Part I” where the government “illegally shared” information on 4 to 5 million B.C. citizens.

Privacy breach a failure of ‘executive leadership,’ watchdog says – Vaughn Palmer, 28 JAN 2016, Vancouver Sun (a paper I never bought)

10. B.C. student data breach could affect more than 3 million people – Amy Judd, 22 SEP 2015, Global News

COMPLICIT

If you have to lie, steal, and con to get information, then what you are doing is neither moral nor ethical.

I believe that everyone who knows about the lies and the theft of our information and body parts, and does nothing, is complicit.

I thought at first that these people might be pawns but, in fact, they are willing participants in the lying, conning and theft of our information, our body parts.

I was taught when I was a child that you don’t pick on those younger, weaker, more vulnerable; that’s only for cowards. I have to assume that the people in the catholic/medical/government business and all they accomplices have yellow streaks up their front, their back and their sides.

Someone told me, when I was in front of St. Paul’s, that these people were just getting a pay-cheque, jobs were hard to find. Well, that’s what any thief would tell you — it’s just a job. The same for a hit man/woman, who just take the money and carry out the dirty deeds. What you are doing is still unscrupulous, unethical and possibly illegal. And if you are just getting a pay-cheque then there is no caring or compassion in what you do. You do not care about the patients, only yourself.

I was told that I had a lot of support in the medical business for raising awareness of what was going on in the medical business. Is this true? I don’t know. But, even if it is, verbal support, especially hidden, isn’t enough. You have to DO something.

A few people did provide me with information, usually without evidence, so I had to be careful that I wasn’t being setup. But, for those who gave me information, it shows you care but you, and the others, need to speak louder.

Dr. Warren Bell, Salmon Arm, BC wrote Doctor’s Diagnosis: Pipeline Symptoms of “Social Pathology”, 04 Feb 2013, TheTyee.ca. He states how he helped found the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment or CAPE because they wanted to improve health by improving the environment. I find what I consider to be his hypocrisy mind-boggling. “A 2007 Canadian Medical Association survey showed that 11 per cent of patients already admit to holding back information from health care providers because of privacy concerns.

A 2012 survey “indicated that 43.2% (of patients) have withheld or would withhold information from their health care provider because of privacy concerns, while 31.3% of Canadian patients have or would postpone care over privacy concerns, and 42.9% would seek care outside their communities for the same reason” [Medical privacy breaches rising, Roger Collier, 06 Mar, 2012. vol. 184 no.4, Canadian Medical Association Journal CMAJ)]. And I expect these numbers will continue to increase. And note this refers to patients. How many people don’t just hold back information but don’t even see a doctor because of privacy concerns? But, do you see the doctors founding an association to “Protect People’s Health by Protecting Their Privacy Rights” so they can improve health. NO. And this is an area where they are largely responsible for the loss of privacy and trust. So, what is it that they don’t want to give up to protect patients health; Is it pay-cheques, is it kickbacks, an attitude of arrogance/narcissism that patients privacy is irrelevant to medical people?

But getting on the bandwagon of promoting the environment, and other issues, distracts the people from the fact that the catholic/medical/government businesses are adversely affecting people’s health by violating their privacy. I think it’s a diversionary tactic. The pope is doing it and it diverts people’s attention away from the paedophile issue. It’s purpose is the make the medical people/pope look good and it doesn’t cost them a thing. They don’t have to change what they are doing, or give up anything.

Dr. Bell writes about the “structural pathology” in the governance system in Canada. But he ignores the “structural pathology” in the medical system. He adds other comments which, again, he fails to mention could also apply to the medical business. I guess it’s a case of “look over there so you don’t see what I am doing”.

And Dr. Bell is not alone. Lots of other doctors and their organizations lobby the government for various reasons, such as increasing funding to the health care system. But they don’t lobby about privacy rights for patients. Instead they lie, steal and con. Why?

The medical unions, at contract time, like to advertise what they do for the patients. What they fail to mention is how they steal patients privacy/body parts and the negative affects that may have on the patients health and safety. They know privacy is important because, in their own contracts, they made sure their privacy was protected, but not the patients. If privacy is important to the medical staff, why is it not considered important for the patients?

This is from a commenter named cyndi: “I am one of those nurses that is being forced to wear a mask for the next 4 months. I take umbrage against that policy. My rights as a human being are being held hostage to a Health Authority. Why dont they make it mandatory to just give every admitted patient the flu shot on admission to the hospital should be the question….that way all of us front line workers would be so called protected instead of forcing us to get the flu shot every year!!! I think the real discussion here is Are frontline workers human rights being maligned….I am extremely insulted by this Health Authority policy!!! And employees have the right to work in a respectful place free from discrimination. (Are Flu Shots as Effective as Billed, Bill Tieleman, 08 Dec 2014, TheTyee.ca) This is only one person’s comment but I include this because it represents an attitude I heard many times, from medical staff, in front of St. Paul’s. It’s all about them. They get very upset if they feel their rights as a human being are violated but don’t care about patients rights as human beings. In fact, she said to do to the patients what they, the medical people, don’t want done to them, make the patients have the flu shot. Aren’t patients rights as human beings being stolen when the medical people steal their information/body parts? She talks about discrimination against her but isn’t it discrimination when medical staff and their special friends have their privacy protected but patients don’t. My response, to paraphrase a couple of sayings, is: they came for my rights and you did nothing, so quite frankly my dear, I don’t give a damn about you.

I didn’t want to spend a lot of time standing in front of St. Paul’s taking all the abuse. I didn’t want to spend a lot of time researching and writing a blog. But when I realized that the medical business was lying, stealing and conning the vulnerable, the sick, the newborns I couldn’t walk away. I know the difference between right and wrong and my values say that you must speak up against injustice. It cost me a lot, in a variety of ways. That was a choice I made because the cost of doing nothing was much higher, to who I am as a human being.

Obviously I won’t be in front of St. Paul’s anymore which I’m sure makes “them” very happy. But I don’t have to be. My blog is still on the internet, people have linked their social media sites to my blog; my blog has over 100,000 page views and counting. It has been, and continues to be, read not only by people in Canada but by thousands of people around the world who are learning how Canada treats its vulnerable, its sick, its newborns. I am on twitter and I will keep raising awareness in one way or another. The information is out there and they don’t get it back. And it will continue to spread, a lot of it from their own unethical, immoral actions.

“In order for evil to flourish, all that is required is for good men (people) to do nothing.” – Edward Burke

ANONYMOUS (OR NOT)

I read that medical information should be shared if it is anonymous. I used to agree with that. Why would I not agree if everything is above-board, if the information was being shared to improve the health care of people and if things were done morally and ethically. But then I found out how the medical system really works.

These posts have examples of how, essentially, all our information has been shared non-anonymously:

-Post – Auditor General – PARIS report – 5/24/2010 – Vancouver Coastal Health audit showed that there was virtually no protection of patient information. And there was no reason to believe that any other hospital database was any better.

Post – Our Information is not protected – Part I – 12/27/2015 – researchers could, and were, downloading and sharing our information with no detection. They could give it to anyone else, who could also “share” this information, again without detection.

– Post – Our Information is not protected – Part II – 12/29/2015 – more examples of how our information is shared non-anonymously

Post – Patenting DNA – 2016-02-04 – if you collect enough information on an individual, even if it is anonymous, you can identify who they are.

And we know, logically, that this is just the tip of the iceberg. The ones the media happen to find out about. The rest are either not caught or they are covered up.

Now, I would only agree to my information being shared conditionally. The conditions being:

I am told if information is being collected for “others” and not for my direct personal health care
I am told who it is being shared with.
I am told how it will be used.
I have proof that the information collected under my name is being adequately protected.
It can be proven to me that this information will only be shared anonymously.
I can get this in writing.
There will be severe penalties if any of the conditions listed above are “violated”.

This, of course, presumes that I have any say in the collection and sharing of my information, which in our low-grade so-called democracy; I don’t. The medical system and their friends do what they want. I am, like other patients except the “special” patients, just fodder for them to feed off.

But any information that I determine they don’t need for my direct health care (and that is very little) I mix up between truth/lies. The information then becomes useless.

These people in the medical/government business just steal, lie and con. Why? They eventually lose all trust and it just comes back on them. What are they getting in return for taking such risks? Or did they really think they could do this forever with impunity? Are they that arrogant/narcissistic? Apparently, they are.