I will be putting up a survey shortly and want to hear your stories. One of the recurrent themes I keep hearing from those victimized by PHPs is falsified drug and alcohol tests. Attached is an example of what they are capable of.
Remember, this group has essentially removed themselves from accountability in drug and alcohol testing via the use of Laboratory Developed Tests (LDTs), a loophole which avoids FDA approval and oversight. Whereas most drug testing is transparent and held accountable, the PHPs use testing that is opaque, unregulated and accountable to no one. Accountability demands both the provision of information and justification for ones actions. PHPs block both. While most drug-testing requires the immediate provision of information if the test is questioned (as it should be), PHPs have put forth the logical fallacy that doctors have some sort of inherent expertise in toxicology and pharmacology and can “figure out” how to circumvent the testing process if they were to get copies of their lab results. They block this provision of information. And even if this information is ultimately provided, as seen below, no outside organizations exist to hold them to account. They do not have to justify their actions to anyone. No safeguards exist to assure integrity and honesty of the sample. No safeguards exist to assure the integrity and honesty of those ordering the sample either.
The documents below show forensic fraud. This is undeniable and indefensible. It does not take a toxicologist or Medical Review Officer to understand what “chain-of-custody” is and that “updating” one constitutes misconduct, fraud and (as seen here) criminal activity. These documents were obtained 5 months after a falsified test was ordered by Linda Bresnahan, Director of Operations at Physician Health Services, Inc. (PHS, inc.) the Massachusetts PHP via fax no less. The blood test was drawn on July 1, 2011. On July 19th, 2011 Ms Bresnahan requests (through the PHP secretary Mary Howard) that an already positive test for the alcohol biomarker phosphatidylethanol be “updated” with ID # 1310 and a “chain-of-custody. (which is an oxymoron-a “chain-of-custody” by definition cannot be “updated.” Unveleivably the lab does it without hesitation or any apparent compunction. The documents speak for themselves. ID # 1310 just happens to be my ID number. When I complained that no one ever accused me of ever having an alcohol problem she replied:
For a more detailed analysis see here, here and here. And where was the Medical Review Officer during all of this? Good question and one he will not answer! And no one else is holding him to account. This needs to change.
1. Supression of Dissent: Basic Information
2. The keys to backfire
• “Reveal: expose the injustice, challenge cover-up
• Redeem: validate the target, challenge devaluation
• Reframe: emphasize the injustice, counter reinterpretation
• Redirect: mobilize support, be wary of official channels• Resist: stand up to intimidation and bribery”