Google recently decided to delete the regular blog of Bosch Fawstin. 14 years worth of posts, deleted by Google. Mr. Fawstin is a cartoonist & ex-Muslim.
This past week my wife and I engaged in the following activity: #deletefacebook Here’s excepts from text shared with friends and family:
You are being f-ed with on Facebook. On my wife’s account they are now blocking our ability to send the following text IN FACEBOOK MESSENGER.
Facebook is watching you.
Facebook is controlling you.
It is highly inadvisable to stay here.
Programmatic AI is watching what you type, and now all manner of shadow banning is now easily triggered.
Wake up.
——- text blocked from New individual messages in Messenger for the account of my wife:
We are leaving Facebook (including Facebook Messenger) on February 10, 2020:
Should you wish continued contact, you can contact us via Skype and email:
Email:
<clip>
Skype (vid and text chat):
<clip>
If possible please move all communication paths to these new venues.
As of February 10 all our Facebook accounts will be deleted.
Regarding "Facebook similar" activities, for now these activities are being moved to minds and twitter.
Minds dOt com forwardslash jhigbee
(Facebook also sometimes blocks minds URLs)
Twitter.com/jhigbee2021
Minds is similar to Facebook in feature set.
All of our photo albums have been moved to Google Drive (high quality unlimited upload mode).
We will not be on Facebook in any way after February 10, 2020.
We will not support the psychopathy of the operators of Facebook.
#dumpfacebook
#deletefacebook
=============end of quote.
Leave Facebook. They HAVE imposed new programmatic AI to monitor what YOU type, even in f- ing MESSENGER! And if the AI doesn’t like what you’re touring, a Beijing style shadowban will be implemented.
The vid they banned, now on the venerable site BitChute:
Copy of censorship notification email is below. Their assertions are absurd, libelous, and slanderous. I want to fucking, SAVE LIVES (!!!) by not having people drawn into the bastard religion secular cult which is, All The Letters of Stonewall! L G B T, oh and P and Z. One letter after another, one reason after another, to not have kids, or to fuck up the lives of children you happen to have had before being sucked in.
Additional related screen clips:
=========================================
=========================================
=========================================
Censorship shall result in amplification, duplication, and increased visibility.
Operation Clambake, Fighting SJW Edition is in operation.
I'm moving to Minds.com, and to Twitter more as a means of sharing my memes. And youtube. The latter two are controlled by San Fran elitist anti-Enlightenment SJWs. I'm on my 2nd Twatter account for example.
In any case, here's where you can find my ideas & thoughts in addition to here:
Violating our rules against hateful conduct.
You may not promote violence against, threaten, or harass other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or serious disease.
As a result, we’ve temporarily limited some of your account features. While in this state, you can still browse Twitter, but you’re limited to only sending Direct Messages to your followers –– no Tweets, Retweets, follows, or likes. Learn more. Your account will be restored to full functionality in: 12 hours and 0 minutes.
——
I was on there with a pseudonym. There’s more where that came from.
As for FB the fight continues here also. San Fran freakazoids.
And I say this as a guy who’s seen lives destroyed in my own family via the abusive permissiveness of the cultural left. Real lives, real families, destroyed.
I was banned for posting the following comment in response to a post. The original post asked if 'LGBTs' had a place in conservatism. I posted my response and then was banned within about 14 hours. Here's a clip of the post to which I was responding...
Conservatism is conservatism.
----- quote begins of banned post
Space or safe space?
Socially conservative would mean conserving and valuing our 1.2 billon year evolved morality.
Are you inclined to make one of these (see the small human animal pictured) au naturel or not? If not, you are an outlier, either a forced victim of abusive postmodernism, or a much less common DNA type.
T - the gender dysphoric exist for sure. May they find recovery via mental health counseling.
L - please loose weight and try to be more attractive. You're cheating yourself and others.
G - most are abuse victims and forced outliers.
B - abusive denialist cheaters. Choose to be a non-outlier if you can.
---- end of quote
Wolves in the hen house apparently, or at the very least touchy outliers who don't like the truth of long standing biological history and evolution.
Apparently the LGBTPZ fiscal conservatives will not tolerate social conservatives who question their denialist liberal doctrines.
Gays are victims of postmodernism.
When I see people jumping off a cliff, yes that offends my sensibilities
Socially conservative atheists exist. Abusively permissive, denialist, pot smoking libertarians who are not socially conservative can't tolerate their presence though.
1.2 billion years of evolutionary history is so inconvenient.
Our evolved morality is not subjective. Whereas abusive neomarxist postmodernism is.
The censoring non-conservative admins of a 'Conservative Atheists' group on facebook:
There are alternate groups on facebook with similar names.
Thus my own banning has not blocked me completely on there. But it's worth noting that fiscal conservatives who see themselves as 'quintisentially' conservative, really aren't.
A true conservative would be both socially and fiscally conservative.
Conserve, what's good about 1.2 billion years of evolved human history. The valuing of family. The valuing of life. Yes the valuing of inherent reproduction. And yes, devaluing abusive non-reproductive outliers. Working to help people live happy lives, through education and advocacy. Advocacy for the valuing of highly useful and good evolved human values.
Sam Harris, previously a horseman of the new atheist apocalypse, is full of woo.
Today I posted a long analysis of Harris's recent podcast where he chatted at length with Chalmers. I posted this text on a few Facebook forums and on Harris's page. The posting on Harris's page was deleted after about 10 seconds - probably by Harris or his family I bet.
Here's the text which Harris deleted or allowed to be deleted from his Facebook page:
As per Dennett and as per my own evaluation, Harris and Chalmers apparently see consciousness as an ineffable glow or hum. You know, mostly the same fluffamuff glow one sees with 'light' ghostly mystical deistic Christianity (Anglican, Catholic, etc.).
I've tried very hard to wade through the first video with Sam's podcast. But every time I listen to a few minutes, I feel as if every single step further & further is chock full of woo filled treacle.
Harris & Chalmers sometimes partially and sometimes fully misrepresent Dennett's views. I don't think Dennett is saying consciousness doesn't exist. He's saying the woo-type doesn't exist. However the biological-computer virtual-machine type *does* exist, and he's not saying otherwise from what I can tell.
A lot of verbal & mental masturbation that happens during Sam's podcast (and I say this with the greatest respect for all forms of masturbation) is just plain crazy woo. Examples: We live in a simulated world? Woo. One *key* thing about even beginning to consider such a possibility is one of *perspective.* Who's watching the 'screen or monitor' of such a simulation? Computers who run sims respond to *us* and show *us* what they are doing.
If we did live in a simulation, the >simulating computer< would be generating results, presumably, for an *observer*. Thus there's no need for simulants to have any perception whatsoever of a *real* inner life, really. The hardware on which the sim is running has presents the sim world to an observer, period, right?
As independent biological machines we perceive our inner life because we're independent. If we were in a simulation, there would be no need (nor mechanism?) for simultants themselves to have any perception. The *observer* of the *entire* simulation just needs to be presented with a reasonable simulation, end of story - perhaps.
That's one objection. There's others. But assuming exponential curves for growth is perhaps misplaced. Just seems woo-ey.
Lastly Harris had plenty of time to read up on Dennett's views on consciousness before this most recent podcast with Chalmers, and to chat first hand with Dennett about these matters in detail, before Harris felt inclined to quickly publish a very rough hewn pamphlet on free will - thereby creating a new distance between himself & Dennett, and which is why I believe Dennett doesn't wish to engage in first hand chats with Harris on these matters now.
Harris's entire approach, to free will, and now to consciousness, seems lazy, woo-ey, and hobbled in part by previous exposure to woo Buddhism, and an over ascribing of far too much analytical experiential value to a past drug trip.
Buddhist ideas polluting science & reason: free will, the self, and consciousness
It was deleted within about 10 seconds. I don't think he liked my critique of his podcast & so on, if it was his hands on the delete button - probably.
----------------- end of quote of my edited Facebook post where I note the observed censorship down toward the bottom.
Addendum:
In another forum someone asked how big the batteries shall be on the future simulating computer. My response:
As big as Sam Harris's and David Chalmers' egos.
The brain which must be uploaded first is Dennett's.
Feels like if it weren't for his matter of fact common sense evaluations, woo-meisters like Chalmers and Harris would have free reign.
The Hard Problem of Consciousness (Chalmers, Dennett, & Hoffman)
"...he utterly mangles quantum mechanics theory in an attempt to argue that – science says the world is weird, and my beliefs are weird, therefore science supports my views. The logic of this argument fails, but it doesn’t matter because the premise if wrong – quantum weirdness disappears at the macroscopic level.
In the end Wallace does no better than anyone who tries to subvert science to support any ideology..."
---end of quote
Chopra & Chalmers & now Harris do also. Woo-meisters all. The conflation of science with mystical charlatanry
Facebook Censorship: Tranny, Feminazi - these are leftist "bad words" which will get you reported by leftist fascists and auto-banned by FB thought-control bots.
When freakish abusive trannies come to the fore, those of us who value non-outlier human history & human values & family values complain, and we speak our mind. But such actions are too much for leftist fascists.
When Bruce Jenner came out as an outlier freak, we complained. The response? SHUT UP! - from leftists and leftist-fascism enablers who run Facebook.
Later, when supports of gay marriage find there's "people of reason" (AKA atheists) who oppose gay marriage, they can't handle that fact. They report posts they disagree with so as to attempt to shut those people up.
24 hour ban resulting from the following exchange:
Freedom is a leftist swear word, a leftist "hate speech" word.
Freedom of thought.
Freedom of speech.
Freedom to refuse to comply with leftist dogma & doctrines. Sacrilege. The new religion of our day. And Facebook operators play a key part in the fascism of the left.
Leftists seek to censor, again and again and again. They demand you either fall in line with their views, or that you shut up.
Here's some of my recent reflections on the pressing issues of the day, posted in a place where deletion is less likely (originally posted on Faisal Saeed Al Mutar's facebook page).
============
OMG there is no such think as an unbiased journalist. Some bias is useful, and the more I look at things I see that a rightist bias is more reasonable.
Pro-family.
Pro-life, as in human life, as in survival.
Pro-Enlightenment, generally speaking, de facto (even if a given person claims they just 'hate' 'hate' 'hate' Darwin's findings, they can still be de facto pro-Enlightenment but what they say and do).
Pro-the-truth.
In the wake of Hebdo, exactly who on this planet published the cartoons? Who, exactly? Leftist media? "Main stream" media, which is de facto leftist? N-O.
As an ex-Mormon I can see the plight of ex-Muslims, fighting to be heard. People like Bosch Fawstin, who face death threats in response to their life work, and there's many others: Ayaan, Maryam; and that's not to mention the atheist bloggers who've been killed.
Where does the truth lie? In being honest and true to our evolutionary history. Embracing enlightenment & science, but not throwing out the baby with the bath water.
Daniel Dennett's dangerous idea is that religion is a natural phenomenon. That fact cuts several ways. Fully natural & useful & evolved human values exist w/in religion - values evolved to help us avoid destructive behaviors. But religions can and do go overboard: the hijab; controls on dating & marriage - Islam goes *way* too far in the negative & controlling direction.
In the 90s I thought Mormonism was the fruit of all evil, but now I see Islam as a far bigger problem.
And an an ex-religionist it's hard to admit that some shaming is useful, from a utilitarian perspective. Yes there's damn good reasons not to get an STD and leave your family with no parent, for example. Letting it all hang out has real world downsides.
Finding a balance between the crazies on all sides is hard work. The left is too permissive. The right is too uptight.
Freedom of speech comes from a limited slice of human heritage & experience (ref. Mark Steyn). Most people don't value it - which is one reason why it must be valued by those of us who were either born into or adopted into the Western heritage.
Who stands up for free speech? Not "the left," generally speaking. Who published & who was willing to show the cartoons? There is your answer - the camp we should go to & join.
------------
[In response to the above post a pro-gay-marriage person complained and stated that his gay "marriage" to his gay associate was an example of family values. I then drafted the following reply, a reply which resulted in a ban from FB for 24 hours. I don't think they liked my use of the tranny & femin*zi terms. But it's apparently quite true that there are strong institutional barriers against speaking one's mind & speaking the truth. Honest observations and honest opinions. True diversity encompasses a diversity of opinion (!), just just a diversity of skin tone.]
------------
Control experiment: Visit human communities who're opposed to gay-advocacy & gay "marriage," communities which have zero connection to the Bible or the Quran. Ask what they think. Do their views have value? Where do their views come from?
Religion is a natural phenomenon as noted. Dismissing out of hand everything w/in religion simply because given values are couched w/in a religious context is wrong headed & foolish & unscientific and unhistorical.
Outliers exist. They are side effects of how evolution works, how sex gets set up in humans. Outliers are a side effect of selection, not a root cause for selection.
When the human animal can naturally produce children via outlier "sexual" activity, or via natural non-interventionary parthenogenesis, then outlier "sex" will no longer have an outlier status.
Gay people can be service oriented and they can help main-line non-outlier humans who can and do naturally reproduce. But outliers can also inappropriately assume that they should essentially steal away children into outlier culture.
Gay culture is no place for children. Gay men tend to not be faithful. Gay women don't have father-figures around at all.
Non-faithfulness is simply a way of life w/in gay culture. Also children have been hard coded (by evolution, by nature) to *need* to be raised in a household where a mother & father are present.
So re gayness: here's for contributors like Alan Turing, Stephen Fry, Douglas Murray, and so on. That's all fine and good. But I suggest not whitewashing problems with gay culture & so-called gay "marriage."
Yes gay people can hook up, but they cannot have true sex nor true & honest marriage. Why? Because sex only happens when two sexual animals engage in inherently reproductive activities with their sexual organs. Other activities with one's sexual organs are not, literally, and in any real meaningful scientific sense, sex. And as marriage has been a direct extension of inherently reproductive sex, AKA sex, there is only one type of true & honest & meaningful marriage.
It's not about civil rights. Outliers have every right to work to not be outliers. That's why I support secular groups like NARTH. My gay nephew certainly would benefit from association with such a group. He lives such a wastrel, petty, selfish, mostly meaningful life, it's amazing and sad. Seen this first hand. I also say how he & his friends readily accepted a convicted pedophile into their friend community after the pedo was released from prison.
Oh and then there was my gay (or "bi") uncle who died of AIDS: a victim of the abusively permissive glory hole culture of San Francisco, thereby leaving his straight normal family (AKA his family) with no father. My uncle was a victim of both the ultra-right and the ultra-left - a victim of the ping pong game that happens when people rebel in response to exposure to ultra-right religion.
Ultra-left religion is no "answer" to the cultural & religious right, nor is it a panacea.
Then when I grew up and tossed my ultra-leftist colored glasses I graduated to: http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/
...where I am willing to examine truth from all sides, and where I take w/a grain of salt the dogmatic claims of all sides.
Gay "marriage" is not about families, it's about a basic denial of human nature, a denial of 1.2 billion years of sexual history, and ~13.82 billion years of evolutionary history. Leftists deny human nature all the time even more than righties do. At least rightist culture can help one avoid deadly STDs, the "childfree" life, a dead end life, a wastrel, a life as a lesbian femin*zi, and so on.
I am happy to have the gay people (AKA biological outliers) who contribute to society, and who help those of us who *are* inclined to naturally reproduce. But please don't steal away our kids into your sometimes-abusive culture. Gay culture is no place for kids.
From Jesse Bering: "...Even in societies where homosexuality was tolerated, such as in Ancient Greece, men tended to engage in pederasty with adolescent boys while maintaining wives and families at home..."
Geezus is not my savior, nor do I believe in Mohamed. But socially conservative atheists from rural China can serve as a control group and a counter to leftist relativism & leftist denialism.
In as much as gay culture produces people like Douglas Murray, I say let's have a million of them. The more neocons the better, yes that's true. But please let's have less gays like my gay nephew & less gays like my gay uncle, please.
[copy of a complaint filed with the University of Utah]
September 23, 2015
Complaint regarding the University of Utah Hospital and it's marketing department: Censored on Facebook, Permanently.
Request
this complaint be reviewed by the "complaint review" committee of the
Hospital, and by whatever citizen-rights-advocacy person or group may
exist within the University structure - any person or group who may
advocate on behalf of citizens who've been wronged by University
actions.
In violation of the First Amendment, in violation of my
right as a patient and citizen to complain to and about the University,
publicly, I have been blocked from any ability to post comments on the
University of Utah Hospital's Facebook page, at
https://www.facebook.com/pages/University-of-Utah-Hospital/102550626466923?fref=ts
Previously I posted copies of complaints on the Hospital's page regarding the Orthopedic Center unit of the Hospital.
Those posts were deleted by Hospital staff, in violation of the First Amendment.
My
posts were labeled as "spam" by the marketing department of the
Hospital (as per their comments to the University Office of Equal
Opportunity).
My ability to post ANY comments at all on the Hospital's Facebook page has been blocked by Hospital staff.
A permanent black mark.
An
attempt at retaliation in response to my Free Speech activities (my attempts to let the public know about problems with the University and
with the Hospital, in a public forum).
----
Congress shall
make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the
free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the
press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition
the Government for a redress of grievances.
----
"The
right to petition government for redress of grievances is the right to
make a complaint to, or seek the assistance of, one's government,
without fear of punishment or reprisals."
Dr.
David Petron and his staff have directly acted to attempt to punish me
for making in-person during-visit complaints regarding their refusal to
weigh me on a scale during my visit.
Clinic Manager Leslie Berg
of the School of Dentistry has directly attempted to have me ejected
from the School of Dentistry clinics in response to complaints filed
about the school she works for, complaints filed with the University and
with other relevant parties.
The Marketing department of the
Hospital has directly attempted to have be barred from access to the
Hospital Facebook page. They have labeled my posts as "spam," have
labeled me a "spammer," have deleted my public posts complaining about
the University Hospital and it's clinics, and they have permanently
blocked my ability to post anything at all on the Hospital Facebook
page.
These acts by the University are reprisals.
These acts by the University are retaliation.
The University has engaged in censorship.
The University Hospital has labeling my speech as "spam."
The University Hospital has labeled me, a patient & citizen, a "spammer."
The
University Hospital does attempt to boot, block, and censor
patients who complain about poor treatment. If complaints are made
during an active visit, lower level staff summarily boot patients with
zero due process and with no opportunity to speak with the doctor being
seen that day (Orthopedic Center). If complaints are made after a visit
to other parts of the University and to other relevant professional
& accrediting bodies, University Hospital employees try & boot
patients in response. From Leslie Berg: "We don't know why you would
want to continue coming here?" - from the School of Dentistry Clinic Manager.
Are all these the appropriate actions for a governmental institution and for a University and for a hospital?
Clearly not!
They ARE the acts of an abusive institution bent on self-serving self-protection.
A "whack-a-mole" game IS engaged at the University when patients complain.
Your retaliatory acts are acts of punishment, and are reprisals.
Punishments directed at my family.
There
are some good providers & managers at the University - usually most
often on the "general practice" side of things. But there's also
administrators, doctors, clinic managers, and medical students who root
their daily work solely within the religious culture of Utah, where
belief maintenance, heresy trials, and excommunication are all ready
tools they have zero problem with using, using in their jobs as
government employees.
These people haven't read the Constitution, and neither apparently have the legal staff for the University.
Sincerely,
Jonathan with Yanning, Carl, and Tina
p.s.
Carl & Tina were both born at the University Hospital, if that
means anything to you. My wife Yanning is a patient of the Hospital and
it's clinics, it that means anything to you. Attempts to shut up and
shut down my family will not succeed, regardless of the apparent
sociopathic. theocratic, and dictatorial anti-Constitution inclinations
of Hospital & University administrators. The Utah government is MY
government, not your private club nor your personal enrichment device.
Here is the general text of a complaint I have filed with various federal & state agencies regarding the University of Utah Orthopedic Center, and a doctor I tried to see there today for knee and foot pain.
----------------------
June 22, 2015
Complaint against:
1. Dr. David J. Petron
2. The medical assistants who spoke with me during my 6-22-15 7:45am visit to the University of Utah Orthopedic Center.
3. The University of Utah Orthopedic Center, 590 Wakara Way, Salt Lake City, Utah 84108 (801) 587-7109
4. The University of Utah Hospitals & Clinics, 50 North Medical Drive, Salt Lake City, Utah (801) 581-2121
Summary of complaint:
Being overweight is a large contributing to the status of my health. Being able to be accurately weighed during my health care visits needs to be a key part of my care. I have arthritis in my hips, knees, and feet. My arthritis directly impacts my ability to walk and hike. Being overweight makes my arthritis worse.
On the morning of June 22, 2015 I was turned away from the University of Utah orthopedic center, because I requested that I be allowed to be weighed on a scale in the clinic before I saw the doctor I was scheduled to see.
Scheduled for 7:45am on 6-22-15 with Dr. David Petron.
Details of visit:
Arrived at the clinic at about 7:32am.
Was handed a health survey electronic tablet. Started answering the survey.
A medical assistant young women took me back to an exam room. I asked the woman if I could quickly use the restroom. She agreed.
When I returned from the restroom the survey tablet screen had turned black. I asked the woman why. She said there was no need to deal with that now. Her tone was generally curt and dismissive.
The medical assistant asked about my height and weight. I told her my height and approximate weight. But I also asked her if I could be weight on a scale, so that we all weren't just guessing.
The medical assistant told me that no scale was available "in their hallway."
The medical assistant finished her questions and walked out of the room.
I waited more time for Dr. Petron to come into the room.
While waiting I went to use the restroom a second time. While near the restroom I spent 30 seconds going out (via an external public atrium hallway) and verified that another clinic on the 2nd floor of the orthopedic center had a patient scale available. The staff at the very near clinic answered yes, that they did have a scale.
Within 60 seconds of my departure from the restroom near Dr. Petron's exam rooms I returned to his clinic area. I informed the staff that the other 2nd floor clinic in fact had a scale I could use to be weighed. However the staff at that point refused to take me back to the exam room I had been placed in just a couple of minutes before.
10 to 15 minutes later a manager man came out and told me that Dr. Petron was refusing to see me because I had walked out of the exam room.
I explained to the manager that I walked out to use the restroom, and I quickly checked to see if a scale was available at a nearby clinic just a very short walk down the 2nd floor atrium hallway, because the medical assistants refused to do any such checking themselves.
At no time did I actually see Dr. Petron first hand, and I never had a conversation with him. All my talking before I spoke with a manager was with Dr. Petron's medical assistants.
The manager said that maybe he could get me in to see a foot doctor, but that Dr. Petron would not see me, "because he was busy."
I told the manager that I was the first person on the schedule, and the matter of being too busy to see me was a ridiculous claim.
When the medical assistant staff refused to see if there was a scale I could be weighed on, I then had the gall to do such checking myself, for 30 to 60 seconds, while using the restroom and while waiting for Dr. Petron.
Dr. Petron never made any effort whatsoever to speak with me in person about the matter. He simply allowed his staff to, in the first instance, act rudely. Rudely about the health survey electronic pad turning off. Rudely about my repeated requests to be weighed before I saw Dr. Petron. And he refused to speak with me directly before booting me out the door.
I am overweight. I was morbidly obese in the past. I have arthritis in multiple joints. And my weight and arthritis and the associated high levels of pain all does impact my ability to walk, and to engage in exercise activities such as hiking. It also impacts my ability to care for my two kids.
Today I was booted for simply asking to be weighed, and after spending 30 seconds to verify that a scale was in fact available in a very near part of the building, and after lower-level staff refused to check to see if a scale was available nearby and after they brushed off my weighing request.
Being properly weighed at each visit is a key part of my care.
Strange that Dr. Petron and his staff refuse such requests.
And if a patient has the gall to spend 30 seconds to verify that a scale is available very near in the building and on the same floor (after low level staff refuse & brush off his requests), that's enough for Dr. Petron to boot you out the door.
Unfriendly. Pompous. Rude. Uncaring. This atmosphere pervades the orthopedic center now, apparently.
And a full willingness to actively retaliate against patients who take simple actions to find out if a given simple medical test (eg: being weighed on a scale) is in fact easily available in a very nearby part of a given building.
Yes there are caring providers at the university. But there's also some providers who, at the drop of a very small feather, and on a whim, will turn people away.
A sports medicine doctor who refuses to weigh his patients.
A sports medicine doctor who boots long standing patients quickly out the door if they have the gall to verify that a patient scale is available nearby to use.
Strange.
For a patient with a history of weight issues, and where weight issues are a large contributing factor to his health, that's a very strange stance to take.
Discrimination claim: That the University of Utah Orthopedic Center, and Dr. David J. Petron, actively discriminate against people who are overweight, and whose weight has a high impact on their health. A refusal to follow any reasonably conversational health care process before booting a patient out the door. No conversation with Dr. Petron at all - just with dismissive rude lower level staff who refused my weighing request. And when I spend 30 seconds out in an external public hallway during a very brief restroom visit break period to verify that a scale was in fact available, that's enough for Petron to simply & easily & quickly boot people such as myself right out the door, in spite of my history with the orthopedic center as a past surgical patient, and a general patient of the University including when I was even more obese at a morbid-type level. Also in spite of the fact that my entire family are patients of the University, and in spite of my wife having kids born at the U Hospital.
Doctors with zero patience for their patients really don't deserve to be within the medical profession.
And a State health care institution should be interested in serving the public who pay their salaries, and serving the citizenry generally as a whole.
So this is not just a matter of being turned away by Dr. Petron today, I was also essentially turned away by the State of Utah today, because I asked to be weighed on a scale, and because I had the gall to verify that a scale was easily & readily available on the same floor of a State of Utah facility. I needed to be weighed as a key part of my health care. They were angry that I asked. They were angry that I checked when they in the first instance refused to check. And they happily booted me out the door when I came & told them I could be easily weighed at the office very near to their office all on the 2nd floor of the Orthopedic Center.
At the Orthopedic Center I have had two carpal tunnel surgeries, and I've had knee evaluations done there.
My wife had babies at the U of U Hospital.
My wife and my kids are patients of the University.
When a doctor and his staff act very rudely, and when they turn people such as myself away, not just my health care is impacted. The care of my entire family is impacted.
=============
June 22 addendum - quotes from related social media comments:
Federal & state agencies have been informed. Also the accrediting agency who accredits the University Hospital.
The
days when a doctor and his staff can act in such a rude and
unprofessional and uncaring manner, act in a vacuum that is, have
passed.
And for a State of Utah organization to act in this way really is pitiful. The citizenry of this state deserve better.
Today
I was treated with essentially zero care. The medical assistant who
first met me, her attitude, typified the entire visit. Rude. Curt.
Dismissive. And when I pressed to be weighed, outright anger and threats
of ejection quickly came. Then your Dr. Petron followed through and
booted me out the door - all because I wanted to be weighed. It was too
much for him.
A patient, standing up for his rights - too much for the pompous rude god-complex doctors w/in some of your clinics.
Patients
are way at the bottom of the pile at the University. God-complex
doctors are at the top. No one listens to the concerns of patients
there.
===
Heart disease is probably made worse when patients visit rude doctors, for example Dr. Petron at the Orthopedic Center.
Also
being able to exercise effectively can help with your heart, as can
loosing weight. But there's no scales available for patients to use at
the orthopedic center. If you ask to be weighed by one, even if they
have one, you'll be booted out the door.
Thanks,
University of Utah Health Care. Thanks to the angry MAs at Petron's
office. Thanks to the angry managers who helped carry out the "protocol"
of completely ignoring the requests of patients - a request to be
weighed. Too much for a sports doctor to handle.
When a patient pops their head up at some locations of the University system, a game of whack-a-mole is then engaged.
"You speak up? You question my god-like-status as a doctor? You're out of here!" --- is the general response.
Heart disease awaits.=============
June 23 addendum:
University Hospital staff saw some of the above posts on their main Facebook page. They deleted them all, and they blocked the ability for my regular Facebook account to post on their main Facebook page.
I have just transmitted the following complaint addendum to the University of Utah Office of Equal Opportunity. The following addendum text will also be shared with relevant federal & state authorities.
---
As a follow up to my 6-22-2015 complaint, further adverse action has been taken against myself and my family by the University.
The
University of Utah Hospitals & Clinics maintains a public Facebook
page. I posted a complaint on that public forum page where the Hospital
has chosen to have a public presence, and to allow public comments.
The
hospital staff who operate their public-facing public-forum Facebook
page saw my complaint notes, deleted all of them, and then blocked my
regular Facebook account from being able to post any comments there
going forward.
So my regular Facebook account has been
completely blocked by Hospital staff from being able to post in a public
forum where the Hospital maintains a public presence.
Members of the public may well comment on their treatment at University facilities in that forum.
To block & censor comments from members of the public in that forum really is inappropriate - for a public entity.
The
University of Utah is a part of the State of Utah. The U Hospital is
not a private hospital and their doctors are not private employees.
Rather
than having any dialogue, their general
response has been so far to a.) refuse to talk, b.) refuse to have
relevant medical
managers & doctors call me on the phone [after requests were made to
the Hospital customer service dept.], and c.) attempt to censor any and
all
complaints I may make about the University in public forums - where
their staff can click on the delete & block buttons.
State of
Utah employees clicking delete on comments from members of the public,
comments from patients, comments made in a fully public forum where the
University Hospitals & Clinics have chosen to have a public
presence.
=============
June 24 addendum:
Copy of 6-24 email sent to the University of Utah Office of Equal Opportunity:
, they have a "posts to page" section where any member of the public can post comments.
There
is still one complaint on there from someone else about a prisoner who
died due to scheduling error at the hospital. But my posts were deleted
by U staff.
I posted:
1. The text of my UOEO [University of Utah Office of Equal Opportunity] complaint.
2. An addendum comment.
3. A comment in response to a posting of the U Hospital on their main page.
All
of these comments fell within the bounds of a public-forum type
exchange. Initially someone responded asking for my contact info so that
customer service could contact me. Then a few hours later all of my
posts had been deleted, and my ability to post anything whatsoever on
that particular page had been blocked by hospital staff (page owners on
Facebook can block certain people from being able to post).
Page
owners on Facebook can decide to allow posts or not generally, or to
allow "posts to page" or not. But when those features are enabled it's
generally understood that anyone can post.
A private
group or individual blocking people from their Facebook page is one
thing. A page which is put out by a State of Utah entity (a
government-set-up group more directly covered by the First Amendment
& so on) which censors comments and blocks citizens is quite
another.
And this is all in addition to what's
occurred with my virtual excommunication from the Orthopedic Center in
response to being asked to be easily and quickly weighed on a scale,
well before Dr. Petron was ready to see me.
The first
MA woman who saw me asked my weight. In response I asked to be weighed
on a scale. And things went down hill from there. Continual deferments.
More irritation and anger on their part. And when, during a quick second
restroom break (needed because I take blood pressure medicines) I had
the gall to verify that a scale was in fact easily & readily
available, that was too much for them. They had plenty of time to weigh
me before Petron was ready to go into a room with me. And when I pressed
to be weighed when Petron was ready, that made them even more angry. An
MA young man stated that they weren't sure if Petron could see me
because he was busy. But I was the first person on his schedule that
day. And then several minutes later a manager man claimed that Petron
didn't want to see me because I "walked out." That wasn't true either
really. Again during a very quick second restroom break well before
Petron was ready to go into a room with me I simply verified that a
scale was in fact easily available at another very close clinic on the
second floor. I quickly came back & asked the front end receptionist
to let me back and to tell the MAs that I had found a scale I could be
weighed on. But I was never brought back in. They let the clock run.
Then a male MA came out and I saw Petron in the far distance. The male
MA spoke to me ultimatum-style, and said "do you want to see Petron or
not?" I responded that I wanted to be weighed on a scale as part of the
visit. The male MA walked with me to the other clinic & then
disappeared. As he walked he stated that he wasn't sure if Petron could
see me. Then 10 to 15 minutes later a manager man came out to deliver
the excommunication. The manager man was angry and upset also. He said
it was Petron's protocol to not weigh anyone, and that Petron would not
see me because I had "walked out." He also said Petron was too busy to
see me. I told the manager that I was the first person on Petron's
schedule, and so the "too busy" claim was ridiculous. I then left.
Because
took the initiative myself to get an accurate weight, so that I could
answer the first MAs question accurately, that made them even more
angry. And so they retaliated in the ways they did - by expressing
anger, by expressing irritation, by deferring my request and making me
wait out in the atrium-waiting room for several minutes, and then by
claiming that Petron could not see me because he was busy and because "I
had walked out." It was all very disingenuous and strange.
They
refused to let me back in after a second restroom break. They refused
to walk with me to the other 2nd floor clinic well before Petron was
ready to see me, so that I could be weighed there. They refused to have
Petron talk with me before a.) making me wait 10 to 15 minutes more, and
before b.) having a manager booting me out.
Separately
I have requested of the Orthopedic Center management that they not will
myself or my insurance company for the 6-22 7:45AM appointment. They
have not responded.
[wife's name] - my wife & patient of the Midwife group, and of Greenwood dental & family care.
[children's names], my children, patients of Greenwood pediatrics and family care, born at the U hospital.
When staff at the U hospital & clinics act in this way, the care of an entire family is impacted.
When other U hospital staff act to censor and shut me up on their public Facebook page, our care is impacted.
I
simply asked to be weighed in direct response to a question about my
weight from an MA. For several years I was morbidly obese, and I'm
perhaps up to 50 to 70 pounds overweight now. I have high levels of left
foot & knee pain which are directly impacted by my weight. So being
asked to be weighed in response to an MA's question, and while visiting
a sports medicine doctor, seems like a reasonable request. Weight
tracking would be a highly useful activity for such a person I would
think.
I took some initiative during a very quick restroom break
well before a doctor was ready to see me that a scale was available. But
that initiative was too much for these people.
===
Copy of related 6-24 email sent to the University Hospital customer service department:
Today I found the following note on another U page:
It's
also incompatible with the operation of a government. The University is
a part of the State of Utah, and Utah is a state within the USA, and
therefore is subject to the First Amendment. Employees at the U are
government employees.
On the main Facebook page for the University Hospital, at https://www.facebook.com/UofUHealthCare , you have a "posts to page" section where any member of the public can post comments.
There
is still one complaint on there from someone else about a prisoner who
died due to scheduling error at the hospital. But my posts put on there
this week were all deleted by U staff.
I posted:
1. The text of my UOEO complaint. 2. An addendum comment. 3. A comment in response to a posting of the U Hospital on their main page.
All
of these comments fell within the bounds of a public-forum type
exchange. Initially someone responded asking for my contact info so that
customer service could contact me. Then a few hours later all of my
posts had been deleted, and my ability to post anything whatsoever on
that particular page had been blocked by hospital staff (page owners on
Facebook can block certain people from being able to post).
Page
owners on Facebook can decide to allow posts or not generally, or to
allow "posts to page" or not. But when those features are enabled it's
generally understood that anyone can post.
A private group or
individual blocking people from their Facebook page is one thing. A page
which is put out by a State of Utah entity (a government-set-up group
more directly covered by the First Amendment & so on) which censors
comments and blocks citizens is quite another.
Your State of Utah
employed staff have actively censored and blocked my speech, in a
public forum, a forum where other members of the public are still
allowed to comment, including a still-present comment put on there by
someone complaining about the death of a prisoner due to a scheduling
error. You have attempted to shut me up as a patient.
And this is
all in addition to what's occurred with my virtual excommunication from
the Orthopedic Center in response to being asked to be easily and
quickly weighed on a scale, well before Dr. Petron was ready to see me
[wife's name] - my wife & patient of the Midwife group, and of Greenwood dental & family care. [children's names], my children, patients of Greenwood pediatrics and family care, born at the U hospital.
When staff at the U hospital & clinics act in this way, the care of an entire family is impacted.
When other U hospital staff act to censor and shut me up on their public Facebook page, our care is impacted.
I
simply asked to be weighed in direct response to a question about my
weight from an MA. For several years I was morbidly obese, and I'm
perhaps up to 50 to 70 pounds overweight now. I have high levels of left
foot & knee pain which are directly impacted by my weight. So being
asked to be weighed in response to an MA's question, and while visiting
a sports medicine doctor, seems like a reasonable request. Weight
tracking would be a highly useful activity for such a person I would
think.
I took some initiative during a very quick restroom break
well before a doctor was ready to see me that a scale was available. But
that initiative was too much for these people.
=========== September 22, 2015 addendum: ===========
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jonathan
Date: Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 7:31 AM
Subject: Orthopedic Center complaint follow up
To: david.entwistle@hsc.utah.edu, BRIAN NICHOLLS <Brian.Nicholls@utah.edu>
Cc: david.petron@hsc.utah.edu, Michael S Bown <michael.bown@hsc.utah.edu>
Request for the University Hospital customer service department:
That
the entirety of my complaint regarding the Orthopedic Center be
reviewed by a Hospital review committee. The OEO/AA office as completed
their (faulty & flawed) report. And so I now request a "committee"
review of my complaint, as is my right.
The
blocking from Facebook was a de facto act of excommunication, and FULLY
INAPPROPRIATE ACT FOR A GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION (since the attached
OEO/AA PDF report has introduced the ALL CAPS method of response to our
dialogue, I'm going to use a bit of that method also here), as was the
ejection by Petron's staff on the date in question. Ask to be weighed on
a scale. Get booted out the door in response. No questions. Nothing.
Just, out - you - go, you patient who had the gall to push back against
rude treatment by an MA, and a doctor who doesn't spend one second
talking to you before he allows his staff to summarily boot you.
It's
worth noting that the Orthopedic Center has "mood" evaluation
electronic pads in use which ask question after question regarding mood.
May I suggest that you begin having the staff at the Orthopedic Center
filling out those questionnaires themselves before they begin seeing
patients.
Also acts of free speech on
Facebook, engaging the First Amendment (redress of grievances), cannot
and must not be abridged. Labeling my free speech online regarding the
University as "spam" is an abuse (in an increasing list of University
abuses). Again the University is a GOVERNMENTAL organization, not a
private one. You ARE bound by the First Amendment, and citizens have
every right to tell their government & fellow citizens when they
believe problems are present with the operation of government.
A quick google search on the First Amendment reveals the following sentence: "...The
right to petition government for redress of grievances is the right to
make a complaint to, or seek the assistance of, one's government,
without fear of punishment or reprisals..."
WITHOUT FEAR OF REPRISALS!?!?
Is labeling the free speech of a patient and citizen as "spam" a reprisal? Yes of course.
Categorizing
the words of a patient as "spam" is inappropriate and probably illegal
classification of speech by a citizen. It's your jobs to listen, not to
label speech by patients as spam.
Reprisals
and retaliation in response to speech are what the University appears
to be all about these days. A separate example is included below. But
these two examples are not the only ones my family has seen and
experienced first hand.
Mr. Nichols
and Mr. Entwistle, the University is not a private organization, even as
you both either serve as an enabling force for such an assumption, or
as you actively pursue and attempt to enforce that assumption.
A de facto church being in operation at the U and within the U.
It's par for the course, within Utah.
A
church type culture and organizational structure and response from a
State governmental entity. Belief maintenance. Heresy Trials.
Excommunications. Patients right on the bottom. Doctors & hygienists
and medical assistants and clinical managers - they are all way far
above whatever a lowly patient may claim or state.
THERE WAS CAUSE for my filing complaints. When no cause is the preferred outcome, then no cause will be found.
Why
are the U hospitals & clinics so very averse to complaints, and why
do patients who press for reasonable courteous honest treatment get so
easily booted like trash?
Give an honest account regarding poor treatment.
Get booted in response.
Get blocked on Facebook.
Get your free speech accounting labeled as spam.
The abuses from the University keep piling up.
The
entirety of the response of the University so far to this matter
represents an abuse. More evidence of the abusive culture is quoted
below.
People at the University are more interested in covering their own rear ends, than in quality patient care.
This is the message I shall be sharing with my friends & family, until such time as I am convinced of the counter argument.
Why
does my family continue going to the University? Because the Utah
government is MY government, in spite of all of your efforts to treat
the University like your own personal private club.
And because there are some good providers at the University, who are good IN SPITE OF the abusive culture there.
Sincerely,
Jonathan
--------------quote begins of another example of University abusiveness:
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jonathan
Date: Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:38 PM
Subject:
University of Utah School of Dentistry and Leslie Berg: direct
retaliation and ejection, if you complain about poor treatment.
To: Craig Proctor <craig.proctor@hsc.utah.edu>
Cc: Michael S Bown <Michael.bown@hsc.utah.edu>, david.entwistle@hsc.utah.edu
September 21, 2015 update, regarding the University of Utah School of Dentistry:
On
July 20, 2015 my wife & I had back to back visits at the Greenwood
Center location for the University of Utah School of Dentistry.
Problems noticed:
Problem 1: For the 7-20-2015 visits or myself and my wife the hygienist involved was not particularly friendly.
Problem
2: For the 7-20-2015 visit for myself, my cleaning was incredibly
painful. No anesthesia was offered for me. If in the mind(s) of the
relevant staff root planing was being done, at no time was the option of
anesthesia offered.
Problem 3: For the 7-20-2015 visit for
myself, root planing was billed out for, even though only a regular
cleaning was scheduled. At no time prior to or during our visit did
anyone warn or tell us a non-regular cleaning was going to be done, or
was being done while it was happening.
Problem 4: While I did
receive a few conciliatory phone calls from a dental medical director,
Dr. Craig Proctor, the regular manager for the clinic, a public employee
by the name of Leslie Berg, is very angry that I have complained about
her clinic to people within & outside the University (as per a
9-21-2015 conversation I had with her).
On 9-21-2015 I had an
extended conversation with Ms. Leslie Berg, a public employee of the
University, and manager over the School of Dentistry clinics.
I
wanted to speak with Ms. Berg because of insurance and clerical issues
for the 7-20-2015 claims (in-network vs out-of-network issues), and so
as to help ensure the 7-20 visits for myself and my wife would be
covered as "in network" with my insurance.
Ms. Berg's tone and approach was essentially the exact opposite of Dr. Proctor's.
Ms. Berg was angry, angry that I had complained to anyone about problems with the visits.
Ms.
Berg wanted myself and my wife, out the clinic door, permanently, in as
much as she said to me "I don't know why you want to continue to come
to our clinic if you are going to complain about us to the university
and to other parties." She made this point several times during our
9-21-2015 chat, and was quite upset that I had complained about the
visit to other University entities and to entities outside the
University.
From Ms. Leslie Berg of the University of Utah we
have a direct attempt at retaliation, retaliation in response to my
complaining about what happened during the 7-20 visits for myself and my
wife.
Ms. Berg said that I had "demanded" to speak with her on
9-21. I told her that I had requested to speak with her, because
clerical type network insurance problems which seemed more in her sphere
of influence as opposed to that of Dr. Proctor, and I explained this to
her staff. But Ms. Berg choose to characterize my request as a
"demand."
Ms. Berg said that she "did not like my approach." This
was her first volley in what became an argument with Ms. Berg. In our
9-21 chat she was combative and retaliatory, and her actions directly
served to undercut the otherwise good work of Dr. Proctor. Again Dr.
Proctor was conciliatory and cordial and kind. Ms. Berg was angry and
irritated, and she sought to deflect-at-all-costs any and all complaints
about bad-and-poor actions of her staff.
Ms. Berg's preference
was to call myself and my wife, as patients of the University, liars,
rather than to take ownership of any miscommunication or lack of
communication or inappropriate actions on the part of her staff.
Ms. Berg also did not address the issue of anesthesia during the supposed "root planing:" None Was Offered to me.
At the University of Utah, if you complain as a patient, a game of whack-a-mole is engaged.
Again.
And again.
And again.
Dr.
Proctor tried to not do this, but Ms. Leslie Berg picked up the virtual
mallet today (9-21) as from the referenced game, and began virtually
whacking away at my family.
Examples of how the game has played out with the dental clinic (paraphrasing Ms. Berg's direct responses):
Me and my family: "The hygienist was rude to us."
The
whack received from Ms. Berg in response: No comment, and "we don't
like the fact that you complained to other parts of the University and
to external entities."
Me and my family: "The hygienist never
warned me she would code my visit as 'root planing' even though only a
regular cleaning was scheduled."
The whack received from Ms. Berg
in response: "Our hygienist and the resident doctor involved both claim
they gave you proper notice. So it's your word against theirs, period,
end of story, and I'm probably going to give more weight to what they
claim as opposed to what you and your family are claiming."
My
response to the above whack: My claim is that the hygienist was rude and
that she never warned me about doing any root planing during a
regularly-scheduled cleaning. I was never warned, at all, and no
anesthesia was offered for the supposed 'root planing,' as is common
when such procedures are engaged.
The whack received from Ms.
Berg in response: "I am upset that you complained about our clinic to
other University departments and to external entities. Wouldn't you be
happier going elsewhere?"
My response to the above whack: "Dr.
Proctor's response to our complaint was positive. Ms. Berg's response is
the exact opposite of Dr. Proctor's in tone & substance."
The
reason I felt it necessary to escalate the issue to other parties was
because Ms. Berg was completely unreachable via phone prior to my
escalations. She never returned my phone calls. No return voicemail.
Nothing. And her staff at the clinics never take messages so that she
can call patients back in a timely manner.
But I ask myself now
what would have happened if she would have called me back? Her tone is
so very abusive & negative now, now that I have finally spoken to
her - I bet her tone would have been inappropriate from the beginning,
had spoken with her earlier.
The whack received from Ms. Berg:
You "demanded" to speak with me today even though Dr. Proctor said that
only he should be speaking with you moving forward.
My response:
"I requested to speak with you because of clerical insurance 'in vs out'
of network errors and issues, and it seemed like you would be the best
person to speak to about such issues. I did not 'demand' to speak with
you. I simply explained the situation to your staff today, and that the
problems seemed more relevant to your scope of work.
The whack received from Ms. Berg: "I am going to end this conversation, now." Click.
My
response: Leslie Berg has been the manager of the U of U Dental School
clinics yesterday, today, and she probably will be the manager moving
forward.
With such a manager, one who is fully willing to engage
in direct retaliation against patients who make complaints, first and
foremost because patients have the gall to complain & raise their
voice, is not a person who can be trusted with the medical care of my
family.
Dr. Proctor is a good man.
Leslie Berg is undercutting his good work.
After
Ms. Berg hung up on me today I phoned a professional dental association
and spoke with it's director, to have this man help me as a kind of
sounding-board.
Their director shared with me the following concerns regarding the U dental school, as follows (paraphrasing what he shared):
1. The U School of Dentistry is very top-heavy.
2. The U School of Dentistry has experienced a great deal of turn around regarding their upper leadership.
3.
The U School of Dentistry, and the U hospital generally, doesn't really
care if a patient is unhappy with treatment. Entrenched government
employees don't have any incentive to change or act better.
4.
The U is a government agency, and entrenched employees like Leslie Berg
could apparently care less what patients think or what their experiences
are.
5. Miscommunication is a fact of life in dentistry, and
patients being properly warned about procedures up-front is also a
continuing issue professional dental associations are trying to help
with.
6. Maybe the University will let Ms. Berg go if this is how she's going to act and if this is how she's going to treat patients.
----end of paraphrases & impressions from a director of a professional dental association.
Regarding item 6, one can only hope Ms. Berg will be let go soon from University employment.
But
there is a great tendency within the University to pounce on patients
who complain. To iron-fistedly stand by providers who act badly. To
defend the status quo, even if that means patients who complain are
booted right out the door - booted without any sort of due process.
Not really appropriate actions for a governmental agency, nor for a "caring" hospital.
Step 1: Patient has a bad experience with a given provider.
Step 2: Patient complains.
Step 3: Patient is retaliated against, retaliation which usually includes quick booting out the door in response.
The University cannot and does not tolerate complaints from patients.
Dr.
Proctor is an anomaly within the current abusive culture. A man who did
try to be conciliatory. But his own entrenched staff acts to directly
undercut his good actions & good intentions.
The University
of Utah is not a church, but parts of it still operate like one. Belief
maintenance. Heresy trials. Excommunications. These tools are all
actively used, today, by University staff.
The First Amendment does apply.
"Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Complaining
about the U dental clinic to other U departments, and to relevant
external organizations, are all attempts to "petition my government for a
redress of grievances."
Ms. Leslie Berg acted directly to
attempt to abridge this guaranteed right of my family. The right to
complain about poor treatment from governmental officials who operate
health clinics.
Retaliation in response to my usage of the First Amendment.
Yes
the University is not a church, and it's also bound by the Constitution
and so on. Employees like Ms. Berg don't know who their working for,
nor are they familiar with how good dental practice is and should be
done.
My wife is Chinese, and I wonder if that was the
reason the hygienist was upset during our 7-20 visit? Was that the
reason the hygienist coded the visit for root planing even though no
warning was given for the change? Was that the reason she engaged a very
painful procedure with no anesthesia being offered? Was that the reason
she is now completely misrepresenting what I was told during my visit
regarding what exactly was going to be done?
We came to the
University School of Dentistry because translation services are
offered. We suspect we're being treated badly because of the race of my
wife, and because we have a "mixed-race" family.
Why else would we be treated badly?
Just because U employees & managers really hate complaints from patients?
Thank you for your patience with this process. I have attached an electronic copy of the report sent to you via U.S. Mail. Please let me
know if you have any questions or concerns.
Respectfully,
Brian
Brian Jay Nicholls, J.D.
Equal Opportunity Consultant
Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action
This
email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized
review, use, disclosure
or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,
please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the
original message. Thank you.
P
Please be environmentally responsible and print this e-mail only if necessary.
=========== end of September 22, 2015 addendum ===========
