Response to College of Physicians and Surgeons Ontario

Last day to respond is Mar 31.21

You can respond on line to proposed revisions to Complementary and Alternative Medicine [CAM] Policy at http://policyconsult.cpso.on.ca/?page_id=13083

My comment registration# http://policyconsult.cpso.on.ca/?page_id=13091#comment-11978 I wrote:

Every man has an innate right of self-ownership, and no one has any inherent, a priori claim on anyone else.

In 1910, the Flexner Report was used to establish the biomedical pharmaceutical drug model as the gold standard of medical training, funded by the Rockefeller Foundation, without regard for conditions of the host organism as the causal agent. When my body hosted stage 3 cancer an oncologist prescribed chemo and radiation. Instead, I chose alternative treatment that allowed my immunity to restore my biology.

I reject proposed revisions to CPSO’s existing CAM policy, and ask you to note:

1] AMR antimicrobial resistance http://www.icmra.info/drupal/sites/default/files/2019-11/ICMRA_Antimicrobial_Resistance.pdf  

2] Clostridium difficile https://www.cdc.gov/cdiff/pdf/Cdiff-Factsheet-P.pdf   

3] Vaccine injury https://informedconsentdefense.org

I ask CPSO to encourage ‘all’ physicians to collaborate and assess methods of treatment, to benefit patients in need. Thank you.

Registered mail and email sent to Minster of Health

From: Doreen <earthcentral@rogers.com>
Sent: March-30-21 8:10 PM
To: Christine.elliott@pc.ola.org
Subject: Response to CPSO proposed revisions CAM policy

Also sent by registered mail on Mar 30.21 as per attached.

Hon. Christine Elliott, MPP
Ministry of Health
777 Bay St., 5th Floor
Toronto, ON M7A 2J3

Dear Minister Elliott,

Since the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario is accountable to the Ministry of Health, this letter is Notice that I reject CPSO’s proposed revisions to existing Complementary and Alternative Medicine policy.

Every man has an innate right of self-ownership, and no one has any inherent, a priori claim on anyone else. This includes the innate right to alternative and natural health care treatment of individual choice. 

Significant issues follow regarding the new draft of the policy, eerily similar to the 1910 Flexner Report that re-sculpted the practice of medicine in America, limiting options of treatment and care.

The Flexner Report was used to establish the biomedical pharmaceutical drug model as the gold standard of medical training, funded by the Rockefeller Foundation, without regard for conditions of the host organism as the causal agent. When my body hosted stage 3 cancer an oncologist prescribed chemo and radiation. Instead, I chose alternative treatment that allowed my immunity to restore my biology.

#1 Increased evidentiary requirements for physicians using CAM would require physicians to provide treatments exclusively supported by evidence and scientific reasoning. This language replaces the term ‘informed by’ in the previous policy; the same language used in policies in BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland & Labrador.

The new policy explicitly outlines a hierarchy of evidence with randomized control trials at the top and case-control studies, case reports, and editorials/expert opinions deemed to be of lower quality evidence.

Consequently, many natural treatments would likely not be substantiated by the level of evidence the new policy requires because they are not patentable and therefore less eligible for financial backing to pay for large-scale clinical trials.

2. Unreasonably burdensome documentation requirements not imposed on conventional physicians
that require evidence-based rationale and risk benefit analysis for every treatment is not logistically feasible, introduces another deterrent to physicians from using CAM, and exhibits the discriminatory nature of the policy. 

3. Omission of Section 5.1 of the Ontario Medicine Act
This provision states that ‘physicians shall not be found guilty of professional misconduct or incompetence solely on the basis that they practice a therapy that is non-traditional or that departs from the prevailing medical practice.’ This Section is included in the current policy and entirely omitted from the new policy, settinga deeply concerning tone for the intent of the entire policy. 

Conventional medicine does not have answers for all ailments. The new policy prevents conscientious physicians from collaborating, assessing, and accessing all available methods of treatment to benefit patients in need.

The new policy, if adopted, would prevent physicians from using natural and innovative treatments that benefitted thousands of people. Irrespective of their safe and effective benefits to patients, natural treatments would be unjustly considered unproven and therefore, disallowed.

Similar to the 1910 Flexner Report, only chemical based patented drug therapy will continue to be taught in medical schools, restraining and eliminating natural disciplines of medicine.

Minister Elliott, I ask that CPSO uphold existing Ontario law Section 5.1 of the Medicine Act. The CPSO’s proposed revision, which would discipline physicians who use treatments that depart from prevailing medicine, is a clear contravention of Section 5.1. 

Clear case law states the majority in a profession ought not to be allowed to stifle the creativity and innovation of the minority (Brett et al. v. Board of Directors of Physiotherapy). The CPSO’s proposed revision allows the majority (i.e., conventional practitioners) to stifle the creativity and innovation of the minority (i.e., physicians using complementary and alternative medicine treatments). 

Minister Elliot, I ask that you present my concerns to the CPSO, urge reconsideration of the draft policy that denies man’s inherent right to choose natural treatments, remove increased evidentiary requirements, include Section 5.1 reference, and include a CAM physician in the policy revision committee.

Man’s innate right to choose alternative and natural health care treatment deserves a rightful place in the evolution of our species. Thank you.

Without prejudice and without recourse,
Doreen Agostino
Full address was included

Cc: Dr. Nancy Whitmore
Registrar & CEO College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario
80 College Street
Toronto, ON M5G 2E2

Cc: Mr. Michael Bryant
Executive Director and General Counsel Canadian Civil Liberties Association
900 – 90 Eglinton Ave. E.
Toronto, ON M4P 2Y3

Cc: Also sent via registered mail.

“It is the duty of the Minister to ensure that the health professions are regulated and coordinated in the public interest, that appropriate standards of practice are developed and maintained and that individuals have access to services provided by health professions of their choice and that they are treated with sensitivity and respect in their dealings with health professionals, the College and the Board.”  https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/91r18#BK2

Registered mail and email sent to College of Physicians and Surgeons, Ontario

From: Doreen <earthcentral@rogers.com>
Sent: March-30-21 8:24 PM
To: nwhitmore@cpso.on.ca
Subject: Response to CPSO proposed revisions CAM policy

Also sent by registered mail on Mar 30.21 as per attached.

Dr. Nancy Whitmore
Registrar & CEO
College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario
80 College Street
Toronto, ON M5G 2E2  

Dear Dr. Whitmore,

I write with a sense of urgency and concern regarding the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) proposed revisions to existing Complementary and Alternative Medicine policy [CAM].

May 2019: OMA agrees that patient autonomy should be respected and that patients should not be criticized or discharged from a physician’s practice for pursuing CAM therapies, as is consistent with the CPSO policy. http://policyconsult.cpso.on.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/FINAL-OMA-CAM-Policy-response.pdf

March 2021: What is the root cause of CPSO abandoning its policy where patients have the right to make health care decisions that accord with their own values, wishes and preferences, which includes decisions to pursue complementary and alternative medicine either as an adjunct to conventional medicine, or instead of conventional medicine? https://www.cpso.on.ca/Physicians/Policies-Guidance/Policies/Complementary-Alternative-Medicine

As the CPSO is accountable to the Ministry of Health, attached is a letter I sent to Hon. Christine Elliott, MPP rejecting CPSO’s proposed revisions to existing CAM policy.

Significant issues follow regarding the new draft of the policy, eerily similar to the 1910 Flexner Report that re-sculpted the practice of medicine in America, limiting options of treatment and care.

The Flexner Report was used to establish the biomedical pharmaceutical drug model as the gold standard of medical training, funded by the Rockefeller Foundation, without regard for conditions of the host organism as the causal agent. When my body hosted stage 3 cancer an oncologist prescribed chemo and radiation. Instead, I chose alternative treatment that allowed my immunity to restore my biology.

#1 Increased evidentiary requirements for physicians using CAM would require physicians to provide treatments exclusively supported by evidence and scientific reasoning. This language replaces the term ‘informed by’ in the previous policy; the same language used in policies in BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland & Labrador.

The new policy explicitly outlines a hierarchy of evidence with randomized control trials at the top and case-control studies, case reports, and editorials/expert opinions deemed to be of lower quality evidence.

Consequently, many natural treatments would never be substantiated by the level of evidence the new policy requires because they are not patentable and therefore less eligible for financial backing to pay for large-scale clinical trials.

2. Unreasonably burdensome documentation requirements not imposed on conventional physicians
that require evidence-based rationale and risk benefit analysis for every treatment is not logistically feasible, introduces another deterrent to physicians from using CAM, and exhibits the discriminatory nature of the policy. 

3. Omission of Section 5.1 of the Ontario Medicine Act
This provision states that ‘physicians shall not be found guilty of professional misconduct or incompetence solely on the basis that they practice a therapy that is non-traditional or that departs from the prevailing medical practice.’ This Section is included in the current policy and entirely omitted from the new policy, settinga deeply concerning tone for the intent of the entire policy. 

Conventional medicine does not have answers for all ailments. The new policy prevents conscientious physicians from collaborating, assessing, and accessing all available methods of treatment to benefit patients in need.

The new policy, if adopted, would prevent physicians from using natural and innovative treatments that benefitted thousands of people. Irrespective of their safe and effective benefits to patients, natural treatments would be unjustly considered unproven and therefore, disallowed.

Similar to the 1910 Flexner Report, only chemical based patented drug therapy will continue to be taught in medical schools, restraining and eliminating natural disciplines of medicine.

Dr. Whitmore, I ask that CPSO uphold existing Ontario law Section 5.1 of the Medicine Act. The CPSO’s proposed revision, which would discipline physicians who use treatments that depart from prevailing medicine is a clear contravention of Section 5.1. 

Clear case law states the majority in a profession ought not to be allowed to stifle the creativity and innovation of the minority (Brett et al. v. Board of Directors of Physiotherapy). The CPSO’s proposed revision allows the majority (i.e., conventional practitioners) to stifle the creativity and innovation of the minority (i.e., physicians using complementary and alternative medicine treatments). 

Dr. Whitmore, I am not asking for unreasonable intervention with the CAM Policy Working Group’s autonomy. I ask that you present my concerns, urge reconsideration of the draft policy that denies man’s inherent right to choose natural treatments, remove increased evidentiary requirements, include Section 5.1 reference, include a CAM physician in the policy revision committee, and respect man’s innate right to choose alternative and natural health care treatment.

Man’s innate right to choose alternative and natural health care treatment deserves a rightful place in the evolution of our species. Thank you.

Without prejudice and without recourse,
Doreen Agostino
Full address was included

Cc: Hon. Christine Elliott, MPP
Ministry of Health
777 Bay St., 5th Floor

Cc: Mr. Michael Bryant
Executive Director and General Counsel Canadian Civil Liberties Association
900 – 90 Eglinton Ave. E.
Toronto, ON M4P 2Y3

Cc also sent via registered mail.

Template for people to speak up. https://ourgreaterdestiny.org/2021/02/an-important-letter-to-my-patients-call-to-action/

Many people realize what covid injections are doing to man. One sure way to end this is to stand together and withdraw consent. Thank you.

Without Prejudice and Without Recourse
Doreen A Agostino
http://freetobewealthy.net
Via ethernet to safeguard life

govon

About ourgreaterdestiny

Seniorpreneur, Author, Blogger, Radio Host, Editor, Researcher, Coherence and Freedom Resonator.
This entry was posted in Climate changers, Digital dictators, Energy harvest, Law, Self-empower and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply