Post # 2 WHAT THE ACOEM DOES NOT WANT YOU TO KNOW!!!!!!!

[Guest guest]

_Jury Finds " Toxic Mold " Harmed Oregon Family, Builder's ..._

(http://aolsearch.aol.com/aol/redir?src=websearch & requestId=290d38c58d86c1d8 & cli\

ckedItemRank=

1 & userQuery=jury+haynes+adair & clickedItemURN=http://press.arrivenet.com/hea/ar

ticle.php/608226.html & title=Jury+Finds+ & quot;Toxic+Mold & quot;+Harmed+Oregon+Fa

mily,+Builder & #39;s+...)

(http://aolsearch.aol.com/aol/redir?src=websearch & requestId=290d38c58d86c1d8 & cli\

ckedItemRank=1 & userQuery=jury+haynes+adair & clicke

dItemURN=http://press.arrivenet.com/hea/article.php/608226.html & title=Jury+Fin

ds+ & quot;Toxic+Mold & quot;+Harmed+Oregon+Family,+Builder & #39;s+...)

The jury also found Adair's negligence caused illness in Mrs. Haynes and the

couple's two small children – , 6, and Liam, 4. ...

_http://press.arrivenet.com/hea/article.php/608226.html_

(http://press.arrivenet.com/hea/article.php/608226.html)

As you read the following posts, please know that although I have attempted

to correct my mistakes, typing and spelling not my strong suits. Also, this

is typed in printable format, so there are large spaces between many of the

posts.

Sharon Kramer

Post # 1:

Post: Okay, My Declaration is now a Legal, Public Doc

Posted by _Sharon_ (http://counsel.net/cgi-bin

/chatscripts/mailform.cgi?uid=kfc1955 & dmn=sgd.uge & name=Sharon & subject=Okay,+My+D\

eclaration+is+now+a+Legal,+Pub

lic+Doc) on 7/08/05

Testimony of Bruce J. Kelman, (K). Haynes vs. Adair

Homes, Case No. CC0211573, In the court of the State of

Oregon. February 18, 2005. Pages 53, line 2 to 58, line 7.

Questioning by Mr. Vance,(V) the Haynes family attorney:

MR. VANCE: And, you're actually one of the owners of

GlobalTox, aren't you?

BRUCE J KELMAN: One's normally an owner of a practice, yes.

V: Yes. GlobalTox is an international corporation, isn't

that true?

K: We have offices in the US and in Canada, and we work

across the US.

V: Okay. Do you have any offices--

K: I mean, I'm sorry, across the world.

V: You have offices in Europe?

K: No. We do not.

V: Okay. Now, this revision of the Colleges of Occupation

and Environmental Medicines state--

K: What revision?

V: The revision--you said that you were instrumental in

writing the statement, and then later on you said you and a

couple other colleagues wrote a revision of that statement,

isn't that true?

K: No, I didn't say that

V: Well--

K: To help you out I said there were revisions of the

position statement that went on after we had turned in the

first draft.

V: And, you participated in those revisions?

K: WELL, OF COURSE, AS ONE OF THE AUTHORS.

V: All right. And, isn't it true that the Manhattan

Institute paid GlobalTox $40,000 to make revisions in that

statement?

K: That is one of the most ridiculous statements I have

ever heard.

V: Well, you admitted to it in the Killian deposition, sir.

K: No. I did not.

V: Your Honor, may I approach. Would you read into the

record, please, the highlighted parts of pages 905 and 906

of the trial transcript in that case.

MR. KECKLE: Your Honor, I would ask that Dr. Kelman be

provided the rest of the transcript under the rule of

completeness. He's only been given two pages.

JUDGE VANDYK: Do you have a copy of the transcript?

KECKLE: I do not.

V: Your Honor, I learned about Dr. Kelman just a--

JUDGE: How many pages do you have?

V: I have the entire transcript from pages --

JUDGE: All right. Hand him the transcript.

V: --I'd be happy to give it to him, Your Honor.

JUDGE: All right.

V: Would you read into the record the highlighted portions

of that transcript, sir?

K: " And, that new version that you did for the Manhattan

Institute, your company, GlobalTox got paid $40,000.

Correct. 'Yes, the company was paid $40,000 for it. "

V: Thank you. So, you participated in writing the study,

your company was paid very handsomely for it, and then you

go out and you testify around the country legitimizing the

study that you wrote. Isn't that a conflict of interest,

sir?

K: Sir, that is a complete lie.

V: Well, your vouching for your own self (inaudible). You

write a study and you say, " And, it's an accurate study. "

K: We were not paid for that. In fact, the sequence was in

February of 2002, Dr. Harden, and (inaudible)

surgeon general that works with me, was asked by American

College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine to draft

a position statement for consideration by the college. He

contacted Dr. Saxton, who is the head of immunology

at UC--clinical immunology at UCLA and myself, because he

felt he couldn't do that by himself. The position statement

was published on the web in October of 2002. In April of

2003 I was contacted by the Manhattan Institute and asked

to write a lay version of what the had said in the ACOEM

paper--I'm sorry, the American College of Occupational and

Environmental Medicine position statement. When I was

initially contacted I said, " no. " For the amount of effort

it takes to write a paper I can do another scientific

publication. They then came back a few weeks later and

said, " If we compensate you for your time, will you write

the paper? " And, at that point, I said, " Yes, as a

group. " The published version of the ACOEM paper came out

in the Journal of Environmental and Occupational Medicine

in May. And, then sometime after that, I think it was in

July, this lay translation came out. They're two different

papers, two different activities. The--we would have never

been contacted to do a translation of a document that had

already been prepared, if it hadn't already been prepared.

V: Well, your testimony just a second ago that you read

into the records, you stated in that other case, you

said, " Yes. GlobalTox was paid $40,000 by the Manhattan

Institute to write a new version of the ACOEM paper. " Isn't

that true, sir.

K: I just said, we were asked to do a lay translation, cuz

the ACOEM paper is meant for physicians, and it was not

accessible to the general public.

V: I have no further questions for him.

JDUGE: All right. Mr. Keckle, can you forgo any redirect

with this witness and he can be excused?

Mr. KECKLE: I can, Your Honor.

JUDGE: I'M SURE HE'S GONNA APPRECIATE THAT. All right. Thank you, Dr.

Kelman (END OF DR. KELMAN'S TESTIMONY)

A Minute Portion of My Declaration from the lawsuit filed against me by

Kelman and GlobalTox:

12. Within the prior sentences, Kelman testified “We

were not paid for that…â€, not clarifying which version he

was discussing. There was no question asked of him at that

time. He went on to say GlobalTox was paid for the “lay

translation†of the ACOEM Statement. He then altered to

say “They’re two different papers, two different

activities.†He then flipped back again by saying “we

would have never been contacted to do a translation of a

document that had already been prepared, if it hadn’t

already been prepared.†By this statement he verified they

were not two different papers, merely two versions of the

same paper.

AND THAT IS WHAT THIS LAWSUIT IS REALLY ALL ABOUT.

13. The rambling attempted explanation of the two

papers’ relationship coupled with the filing of this

lawsuit intended to silence me, have merely spotlighted

Kelman’s strong desire to have the ACOEM Statement and the

Manhattan Institute Version portrayed as two separate works

by esteemed scientists.

14. In reality, they are authored by Kelman and Hardin,

the principals of a corporation called GlobalTox, Inc. – a

corporation that generates much income denouncing the

illnesses of families, office workers, teachers and

children with the purpose of limiting the financial

liability of others. One paper is an edit of the other and

both are used together to propagate biased thought based on

a scant scientific foundation.

15. Together, they are the core of an elaborate sham

that has been perpetrated on our courts, our medical

community and the American public. Together, they are the

vehicle used to give financial interests of some indecent

precedence over the lives of others.

50. In the Haynes case, when questioned about the ACOEM

peer review process by the attorney for Adair Homes and

prior to Vance’s questioning, Kelman described the ACOEM

peer review process by stating, “We.., the American College

of Occupational and Environmental Medicine has divided

effects into three areas, and this is in their positions

statement. And, I think it’s important to understand the

physician statement, although I said I was one of the

authors I only began the process. So, I and two other

authors were asked to put the report, the statement,

together, but then went to a committee of scientific

affairs. This committee on scientific affairs has twenty

some physicians in it, they reviewed it, they sent it out

to many more physicians, went to the board of directors,

they reviewed it. I was told by the head of that committee

that somewhere in the order of one hundred very critical

physicians reviewed that paper. So, by the time it gets to

the end of the process, the college adopts it as their

position statement.

57. An email was sent from GlobalTox principal, Hardin

to Borak, dated April 22, 2003, six months after the ACOEM

Statement was officially placed on the ACOEM website.

Kelman’s coauthor and coworker asked Borak, Chair of the

Committee on Scientific Affairs for the ACOEM, “Can you

give an idea how many people were involved in the various

stages of reviews?†Borak’s response to Hardin was “I do

not know how many because I do not know how many reviewed

the MS†(mold statement) “and agreed, but did not respond.

Also, I have not maintained any of the files or emails. It

was certainly more than a dozen: there are more than that

on the Board alone.â€

Sharon Kramer