UCL debate in London - my response to Dana is now on the Internet
Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:31 pm
Dear colleagues,
You may recall my response (shown below) to Dana Ullman's request for information on
the UCL debate on homeopathy in London (digest 4853 of 23 October 2008).
I want to tell you that my response to Dana now appears verbatim on David Colquhoun's
CD Improbable Science on the homeopathy section.
My question is, how did DC get hold of this, considering that this is meant to be a closed
forum for professional homeopaths? I have also emailed Dana to ask for his opinion.
Should we assume that this group has been infiltrated? Or is there another explanation?
Your opinions would be valued. Regards, Grace
PS. Just for your information, and for those who may have infiltrated this group, DC has
today written to me with two apologies, for having posted my photo on his website
without consent, and for misquoting me by publishing something that I had not said, as
well as accusing my husband wrongly. On reflection, it would have been more damaging
for him had I written directly to his manager at UCL to complain about his disgraceful
behaviour; as it stands he has got away with it rather lightly - not that he will publish any
of this on his website. I may however, choose to publish my email exchanges with him
today.
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "Grace Dasilva-Hill" wrote:
but
You may recall my response (shown below) to Dana Ullman's request for information on
the UCL debate on homeopathy in London (digest 4853 of 23 October 2008).
I want to tell you that my response to Dana now appears verbatim on David Colquhoun's
CD Improbable Science on the homeopathy section.
My question is, how did DC get hold of this, considering that this is meant to be a closed
forum for professional homeopaths? I have also emailed Dana to ask for his opinion.
Should we assume that this group has been infiltrated? Or is there another explanation?
Your opinions would be valued. Regards, Grace
PS. Just for your information, and for those who may have infiltrated this group, DC has
today written to me with two apologies, for having posted my photo on his website
without consent, and for misquoting me by publishing something that I had not said, as
well as accusing my husband wrongly. On reflection, it would have been more damaging
for him had I written directly to his manager at UCL to complain about his disgraceful
behaviour; as it stands he has got away with it rather lightly - not that he will publish any
of this on his website. I may however, choose to publish my email exchanges with him
today.
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "Grace Dasilva-Hill" wrote:
but