Interesting JE Hits....

Clancie,

You cannot possibly call the Arizona Experiments "scientific". Sure, JE was tested by a scientist. But the test itself was anything but scientific.

Ergo, JE has NOT been tested scientifically. That's an important point to make.
 
R: Steve, I am not familiar with civil law in NY or Arizona. However, I highly doubt that breach of a confidentiality agreement that threatens 10 years in prison time could be enforceable. I strongly suggest you have a lawyer look at it.


We have the standard verbiage through our instituion and in everything we do. Every employee of every hospital in the U.S.
had to receive training in this and sign such agreements before
April 14, 2003. This law was not in effect when Schwartz' experiments were done but it supercedes NY and Arizona law
now and it applies to all such data, even data collected but not disclosed before the law went into effect on April 14th. Check out the acronym HIPAA for more information. I myself had separate training under Protection of Human Subjects in Experimental
Trials under the National Institutes of Health which was mandated in a weaker version that involved other protections in addition to privacy concerns. All persons working in institutions receiving any type of Federal funds whatsoever are required to
have this. A transfer of data from a person who is so constrained to one who is not is a primie facie violation of the act. Therefore, in order to protect my butt, anyone I give the data to must sign on the dotted line. Then if they release it to someone not bound, it becomes their problem and not mine.

Yup you can doubt the decade behind bars if you want to or the humongous fine but they are real under HIPAA I assure you. We joke now about two prisoners talking:

"What are you in for?" ....

"Releasing someone's X-rays without authorization."

Our in house counsel is very up on this and very strict about disclosures and paperwork permitting same. The same is no doubt true of the University of Arziona and anywhere else getting federal funds and doing experiments on humans or testing and treating humans for medical conditions.
 
Larsen: You cannot possibly call the Arizona Experiments "scientific". Sure, JE was tested by a scientist. But the test itself was anything but scientific.

Larsen: Ergo, JE has NOT been tested scientifically. That's an important point to make.



PLEASE don't state opinion as fact. Thank you.
 
SteveGrenard said:
R: Steve, I am not familiar with civil law in NY or Arizona. However, I highly doubt that breach of a confidentiality agreement that threatens 10 years in prison time could be enforceable. I strongly suggest you have a lawyer look at it.


We have the standard verbiage through our instituion and in everything we do. Every employee of every hospital in the U.S.
had to receive training in this and sign such agreements before
April 14, 2003. This law was not in effect when Schwartz' experiments were done but it supercedes NY and Arizona law
now and it applies to all such data, even data collected but not disclosed before the law went into effect on April 14th. Check out the acronym HIPAA for more information. I myself had separate training under Protection of Human Subjects in Experimental
Trials under the National Institutes of Health which was mandated in a weaker version that involved other protections in addition to privacy concerns. All persons working in institutions receiving any type of Federal funds whatsoever are required to
have this. A transfer of data from a person who is so constrained to one who is not is a primie facie violation of the act. Therefore, in order to protect my butt, anyone I give the data to must sign on the dotted line. Then if they release it to someone not bound, it becomes their problem and not mine.

Our in house counsel is very up on this and very strict about disclosures and paperwork permitting same. The same is no doubt true of the University of Arziona and anywhere else getting federal funds and doing experiments on humans or testing and treating humans for medical conditions.

I see. Can you scan in the agreement, especially the part about 10 year prison term for breach of confidentiality?
 
I see. Can you scan in the agreement, especially the part about 10 year prison term for breach of confidentiality?


__________________


You can find the law and penalties for violating it by looking up HIPAA on the web. I do not have a scanned copy of the forms at home nor polciies, procedures and regs at home so will be happy to privately e-mail to anyone next week as I probably have digital copies on diskette in the lab where I am not. Sample agreements are probably also on the web. I cannot take data out of the lab as this is also a violation without paperwork so I don't. Employees have been fired for this.

Claus: I don't see any point in having you sign anything yet until after the upgrade is complete and Schwartz agrees to give me the EEG and ECG data as discussed above and also agrees for me to send it to Denmark so an independent researcher can look at it as well. I am happy to have independent evaluation of anything I might end up doing with it and I don't know yet as I have not seen it. This upgrade that would enable this will be complete by the end of August so we are looking at the middle of September earliest. This would give you time to find someone to download it and enable reading of it. I suggest any neurophysiology department, sleep lab or EEG department that is
digitized and can convert EDF files. They would have to agree to sign as well.
 
SteveGrenard said:
PLEASE don't state opinion as fact. Thank you.

It's a fact, Steve. Schwartz designed and performed an experiment that was so full of flaws and errors that it is embarrassing to observe.

And what did he get out of it, despite these flaws and errors?

Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Zip. Not one single piece of evidence of an afterlife.
 
Steve,

Just scan it, then. For now.

You do have the form, don't you.....???
 
SteveGrenard said:
I see. Can you scan in the agreement, especially the part about 10 year prison term for breach of confidentiality?


__________________


You can find the law and penalties for violating it by looking up HIPAA on the web. I do not have a scanned copy of the forms at home nor polciies, procedures and regs at home so will be happy to privately e-mail to anyone next week as I probably have digital copies on diskette in the lab where I am not. Sample agreements are probably also on the web. I cannot take data out of the lab as this is also a violation without paperwork so I don't. Employees have been fired for this.


Please do scan it in next week. I am really interested in reading it. When you said you would have Claus and Randi sign the agreements, I assumed you were talking about a standard confidentiality agreement, this is now federal guidelines violations- different things. I am not asking you to take data out of the lab- simply show the agreement you asked Claus and Randi to sign.
 
These WOULD be the agreements Randi, his staff and referees would have been asked to sign if such data was released to them. But this point was never reached. Before this, Randi has backed out of any further involvement with this data. He did this categorically and without doubt. These are agreements that Claus and his consulatnts and anyone made privy to the information would be asked to sign. Randi was asked to agree to such restrictions and refused to be b ound by those kinds of constraints. He ended all dialogue with Schwartz on this and said so very loudly and very publicly citing this as the reason.

I do not need to scan them because they exist in digital form but I do not have them at home.

Yes, these are U.S. Federal Law, violation of which can carry imposing penalties such as those mentioned.
 
How's THIS one: A lady is being read by JE on Crossing over. Out of the blue, he asks why he is getting Ft. Lauderdale or Aventura, Florida. Now, previously in the reading it was acknowledged that the sitters mother lived I believe on the WEST coast of Florida. Yet JE mentions the two cities on the east coast that he did and guess what? The sitter said she was moving to Aventura, in about one month! (And the sitter lives in some other far away state!) Aventura of all places. If JE wanted to even take a stab at Florida cities..why not Miami, or Tampa, or Sarasota, or Naples, or Palm Beach' or Orlando. Ft. Lauderdale...yes, too. But to include some odd town (near Ft. Lauderdale, like this) and it turns out that that is where the sitter was going to be moving to is either, well...JE IS psychic, or a charlatan. I don't think there is any inbetween. As of late, I am leaning toward the latter.

In readings on the show, JE will ask the sitter a question. Then the sitter agrees to the validity of it. So then JE will say, "Yes...because they were showing me (blah blah)" An example recently posted by a poster on the JE board posted part of a transcript where JE asked the sitter about the significance of November. The sitter said that that was her birthday! Then JE follows and says something to the effect that the departed soul said yes, and was wishing her (the sitter ) a happy birthday. Hmmmm. Why doesn't JE just come right out with what the spirit is telling and showing him right off the bat. Why didn't JE FIRST say, "I am being told that someone has a birthday. And I also get the feeling that November has a special significance. Could it possibly BE that you have a birthday in November?" But nooooo. The readings are never done THIS way. JVP (James van Praagh pulls the same thing. He will follow up a sitters validation by saying, "Yes...because they were telling/showing me". Ya...right.:wink8:
 
Posted by Iamme

An example recently posted by a poster on the JE board posted part of a transcript where JE asked the sitter about the significance of November. The sitter said that that was her birthday!
Ummm....which "JE board" and thread is that, Iamme?
 
The following is an excerpt from a CO transcript posted by neo (about a year and a half ago) over at TVTalkshows:

"John: ...Does not care about the whole cigarette thing. My feeling is like, its his torch. He loves it, you know what I'm saying? (Yep) It's like, it's an enjoyment kind of a thing. You you have a child that's getting married?"

Man: She just got married.

John: Okay, he wants me to tell you he was at the wedding. He's acknowleging the wedding. (Okay)"


This is typical of the manner in which JE gives readings: First a question from JE, then an answer from the sitter, followed up with JE pretending the info emanated from him, by saying: "Yes, because they're telling me..."
 
HIPAA Fines and Penalties

Fines and Civil Monetary Penalties


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HIPAA is enforced by the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). See 42 U.S.C. §§ 1320d-5, 1320d-6

HIPAA provides severe civil and criminal penalties for violations:

Fines of up to $250,000

Up to ten years in prison


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For a violation of section 1176 of HIPAA, HHS can impose civil monetary penalties on a covered entity that violated the Amended Privacy Rule. See Part C of Title 11 of the Act. The penalty is $100 per knowing failure to comply with a requirement of the Amended Privacy Rule. That penalty may not exceed $25,000 per year for multiple violations of the identical requirement of the Amended Privacy Rule.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The procedural provisions in section 1128A of the Social Security Act Civil Monetary Penalties are applicable to the imposition of the penalties. The Act also establishes penalties for any person who normally misuses the unique health identifier or obtains or discloses individually identifiable health information in violation of this part.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Misuse of individually identifiable health information carries potential criminal penalties. HIPAA provides that a "person who knowingly ... obtains individually identifiable health information" or "discloses individually identifiable health information to another person" in violation of HIPAA faces a fine of $50,000 and up to 1 year imprisonment. The criminal penalties increase to $100,000 and up to 5 years imprisonment if the wrongful conduct involves false pretenses, and to $250,000 and up to 10 years in prison if the wrongful conduct involves the "intent to sell, transfer, or use individually identifiable health information for commercial advantage, personal gain, or malicious harm."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HIPAA Privacy regulations not only govern entities that have direct access to patient protected health information (i.e., the "covered entities"), but they also indirectly govern the "business associates," which receive protected health information from the covered entities. The HIPAA Privacy Rule requires the discloser and the recipient of the patient information to enter into written agreements under which, among other things, the business associate will protect the patient information, provide access to the patient information, and cooperate with the covered entity in responding to audit and other investigations.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The law provides no private cause of action for patients who wish to sue under the act. They must bring their request to the Office of Civil Rights, which will conduct an investigation.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Resources:

Hayman, Dissecting A Health Care Fraud Investigation, 1129 PLI/Corp 223- 244 (June 1999).

Faddick, Health Care Fraud and Abuse: New Weapons, New Penalties, and New Fears for Providers Created by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 6 Annals Health Law 77-103 (1997).

PLI, Department of Health and Human Services Documents, 1111 PLI/Corp 429-865 (1999); PLI Order No. B0-009J, (April, 1999).

Meador, Health Care Fraud and Abuse, 1175 PLI/Corp 21-80; PLI Order No. B0-00IUL (May 1-2, 2000).

Teplitzky, Medicare and Medicaid Fraud and Abuse Issues, 741 PLI/Comm 397-431, PLI Order No. A4-4502 (1996).

Rovner, Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control after HIPAA, 9 No. 6 Health Law 17-23 (1997).
 
Iamme said:
How's THIS one: A lady is being read by JE on Crossing over. Out of the blue, he asks why he is getting Ft. Lauderdale or Aventura, Florida. Now, previously in the reading it was acknowledged that the sitters mother lived I believe on the WEST coast of Florida. Yet JE mentions the two cities on the east coast that he did and guess what? The sitter said she was moving to Aventura, in about one month! (And the sitter lives in some other far away state!) Aventura of all places. If JE wanted to even take a stab at Florida cities..why not Miami, or Tampa, or Sarasota, or Naples, or Palm Beach' or Orlando. Ft. Lauderdale...yes, too. But to include some odd town (near Ft. Lauderdale, like this) and it turns out that that is where the sitter was going to be moving to is either, well...JE IS psychic, or a charlatan. I don't think there is any inbetween. As of late, I am leaning toward the latter.

In readings on the show, JE will ask the sitter a question. Then the sitter agrees to the validity of it. So then JE will say, "Yes...because they were showing me (blah blah)" An example recently posted by a poster on the JE board posted part of a transcript where JE asked the sitter about the significance of November. The sitter said that that was her birthday! Then JE follows and says something to the effect that the departed soul said yes, and was wishing her (the sitter ) a happy birthday. Hmmmm. Why doesn't JE just come right out with what the spirit is telling and showing him right off the bat. Why didn't JE FIRST say, "I am being told that someone has a birthday. And I also get the feeling that November has a special significance. Could it possibly BE that you have a birthday in November?" But nooooo. The readings are never done THIS way. JVP (James van Praagh pulls the same thing. He will follow up a sitters validation by saying, "Yes...because they were telling/showing me". Ya...right.:wink8:

Welcome back, Phelps!;)
 
Instig8R said:
The following is an excerpt from a CO transcript posted by neo (about a year and a half ago) over at TVTalkshows:

"John: ...Does not care about the whole cigarette thing. My feeling is like, its his torch. He loves it, you know what I'm saying? (Yep) It's like, it's an enjoyment kind of a thing. You you have a child that's getting married?"

Man: She just got married.

John: Okay, he wants me to tell you he was at the wedding. He's acknowleging the wedding. (Okay)"


This is typical of the manner in which JE gives readings: First a question from JE, then an answer from the sitter, followed up with JE pretending the info emanated from him, by saying: "Yes, because they're telling me..."

Hi g8r, I wonder why JE doesn't just say what he's "seeing" or "hearing" instead of asking these questions. I wonder what "symbol" he is "seeing" that would lead him to ask "you have a child that's getting married"? If he would just call out the images he gets or whatever he "hears" then it would look a lot less like guesswork and cold reading, wouldn't it?
 
RC said:

Hi g8r, I wonder why JE doesn't just say what he's "seeing" or "hearing" instead of asking these questions.

Hi, RC-- If JE doesn't ask questions of the sitters, he can't rephrase the information and feed it back for validation!

I have learned that although JE claims to be psychic-medium, his main talent is his hindsight. People have to tell him things before he can know them, and things have to happen before he can predict them. This is difficult when one is a psychic! Remember how he failed to predict the 9/11 terrorist attacks when he was on LKL the night before? Then, he wrote the new chapter ("Postscript") to his book, listing all the premonitions that he had about 9/11... even though he neglected to mention them to anyone before it happened.

I'll bet he can predict the winning lottery numbers, too... after they're selected. :)
 
Instig8r,

...his main talent is his hindsight.
I believe it's known as "clairhindsight".

I'll bet he can predict the winning lottery numbers, too... after they're selected.
Any data to back up this claim, or do you just expect me to accept it? :)
 
SteveGrenard said:

If you want to make a case out of the fact that water breaks and powdering JE's nose is not broadcast you go ahead and argue this. You make yourself into a bigger idiot than I thought. The sponsors are not paying JE to broadcast this and it has nothing to do with the readings.

I doubt that the sponsors are paying for JE flops and misses, so those would be editted out as well. It's just not entertaining to see a cold-reader fail.
 

Back
Top Bottom