2. The suggestion that somebody else went and did the x-ray instead of me was another serious assault. That suggestion was made in ignorance of the fact that on Clark Lab's official (original!) paper IMS (Immigration Medical Service) officer could see my name, date of birth, telephone number, name of the ordering physician, and the number of my medical card (which - everybody knows - has my photo on it). Besides, it mentioned the "MILD PECTUS EXCAVATUM", a cosmetic defect, which I have since birth. Besides, it is known that the film itself has a negative image of the whole ID data! Then this ungrounded abuse was based on nothing and went far beyond any medical or even legal matter.
3. The demand to send an original film from the November 14 x-ray in the light of two above disputed demands might be ungrounded. This x-ray film was already seen by 3 medical doctors: the radiologist at the Clark Lab, dr. Jast (who referred me and evaluated the film), and dr. Giannakis. All three came to a conclusion that there is NOTHING abnormal, not a slightest possibility.
Both dr. Jast and Giannakis also examined me. The official conclusion is NIL ACTIVE. Besides, it was informally evaluated by a chest specialist: with the same conclusion. What else the IMS agent needs? I have a well-grounded concern that 1) he/she will find a black spot even on the whitest paper - because he/she is determined to; and 2) after he/she will find "a black spot" the film will vanish, but not the IMS's "evaluation". Immigration pretended already many times (dates, documents might be provided) that lost our applications, medical data, etc.
4. It was an abuse to mention that "After overview if necessary applicant may have to be referred to the chest specialist." It is a prejudgment and prejudice. "...if necessary", "may" are just a form. It is a very clear message that he/she will not let me alone! Why to speak about next medical procedure before seeing the x-ray?
Lev GUNIN Dec. 01 2000
Copy - DOCUMENT NUMBER FIVE
From Lev GUNIN ( 514-499-1294)
Document 5
LETTER TO THE MONTREAL CHEST INSTITUTE - A Copy
(The letter was submitted on November 09 in respond to an anonymous letter from the Montreal Chest Institute received on November 6 2000; below you can find a modified version (November 12-14), which was submitted to the same destination on November 15).
.
Lev GUNIN
address
telephone
From Lev GUNIN to anonymous person, author of the letter (the copy of the letter is enclosed).
Montreal Chest Institute
3666 St-Urbain
Montreal, QUEBEC H2X 2P4
Sir or Lady! Please, forward this letter to an appropriate Immigration department, which you mentioned on page 1 of your letter.
First of all, any suggestions that I could be infected by tuberculosis were ridiculous. I had some other suggestions, but later a medical doctor I spoke to - as well as my legal advisers - told me that the only answer of what happened is that Immigration might just make a false report on my x-ray. Besides, a x-ray could not determine whether or not any of such shadow means tuberculosis, or simply any kind of pneumonia, bronchitis, or a combination (see medical books). Any conclusions based on only one x-ray are ridiculous, partial, and prejudicial. In modern time - when there are so many flu infections accompanied by pneumonic consequences (side effects) such conclusions are a complete nonsense. It is obvious that your decision to attach me to the Infectious Disease Unit (IDU) before you have a 100 percent proof of any tuberculosis infection and initiate an appropriate legal procedure was a drastic misconduct. The only admissible way to handle the situation was (before sending me to the Infectious Disease Unit)
1) to request a second opinion in existing x-ray
2) to send me a letter for my physician for another x-ray.
On November 14 I did another x-ray. It revealed that there is no any suspicious shadow, no abnormalities - and (as my medical advisers told) could not be 2 weeks before, especially tuberculosis-like shadows. Was my x-ray photo (a negative) replaced by somebody else's or IMS (Immigration Medical Services) just falsified the reading of my x-rays, - I do not know. That all is a subject of a criminal investigation.
Because I am depressed, I did not notice that the Montreal Chest Institute (MCI) belongs to Royal Victoria Hospital, an institution I had several formal conflicts with. Somebody from the hospital's administration used to submit me an offensive number of requests for donation to the hospital even after I have sent a note that by then was on welfare. The hospital's administration also did an attempt to extort money from me for services, which were covered by Medicare. In that hospital I heard several times that people like me are "illegal in Canada and should not be given medical help "for the cost of Canadians". Then I was treated by negligence at the emergency room, then - it was a medical misconduct over my CSST claim. Dr. Evenson's M.D. (Royal Victoria) secretary played games with me, actually denying an appointment from May till November 2000. A number of legal and medical violations used to take place there. And in all such minor incidents immigration matters or even Immigration itself were involved. One of immigration specialists advised me not to turn to Royal Victoria because that hospital is "enormously influenced by Immigration".
The fact that a page with a request for a donation to the Royal Victoria Hospital was included into your letter was another outraged abuse.
Eventually it is possible that doctor Giannakis had sent me for x-ray not to "La Cite" - as my mom and my wife, - or another medical institution but to Montreal Chest Institute because he received an order (not a request but an order, which he could not disobey as an Immigration representative) from Immigration to do so.
By this letter I declare that I am considering your way of handling the situation dangerously offensive and depriving me of my constitutional rights because of the above mentioned as well as the next reasons:
FIRST, I will DISREGARD any anonymous letters like your present one until a letter from you would be signed, addressed from a real person with his/her clear name and telephone number.
SECOND, you have no legal rights to treat me as a contagious carrier until an undeniable medical proof is established.
THIRD, by sending me to the IDU you may expose me to contacts with real infected carriers.
FOURTH, you are not a police, Immigration, secret police or death squads to a) act secretly-anonymously refusing to sign your letter,
b) to write me anything like "by Immigration law, you are requested (...)". Since you are not immigration layers or Immigration officials, you are forbidden to judge in a case like mine what Immigration law requires. Such a statement in a case like mine must be submitted only directly from Immigration. If you are part of Immigration (officially) - then my rights were violated when I wasn't informed about that before doing the x-ray at your unit.
FIFTH, my legal advisors, and me, we are confident that you have no legal rights to deprive me of choosing between medical institutions for medical tests or evaluation. You can not bring me to do a test or an evaluation exclusively in your institution by a forceful order. This will violate my basic human rigDocument 5hts. Even KGB had no official rights to oblige anybody who was not an imprisoned suspect or convinced criminal to do a medical evaluation without some sort of choice.
SIXTH, I would ask Immigration to allow me do another x-ray before doing anything else.
SEVENTH, evaluating my case, some human rights activists think that somebody at Immigration is so furious, so angry about me and that such an outraged misconduct was demonstrated in my case that Immigration is eventually ready to do any damage to my health through blood, e-ray tests or sadistic bureaucratic humiliations.
EIGHTH, I think that the most realistic explanations of an eventual abnormality, which could be seen on the x-ray picture, were:
1) eventual shadow from the underwear, which I did not remove from on beneath of the hospital robe, and the robe itself, which I've putted on in a wrong way
2) a dust spot or another kind of essence on the hospital robe
3) traces of somehow inhaled gas different from air
4) reading of a normal x-ray (with no abnormalities) was deliberately falsified by IMS
NINTH, before doing the e-ray I received a strange call from Immigration, through which I was accused of refusing a "medical treatment".
TENTH, your medical ethics should not allow you to send me to the IDU before making your own medical conclusions (decision) based not on Immigration's rapport but of your own evaluation of my x-ray test result.
ELEVENTH, my legal advisors have told me that I have rights to ask for a possibility to discuss my x-ray result with any of your medical institution specialists dedicated to such evaluations before going further. It is you (on behalf of Immigration or not - it is does not matter) who are sending me to Infectious Disease Unit. Because you are sending me to such a unit, you can not deny me such a discussion. I would like to see the x-ray original, which was made in your institution on November 1 2000 - and also show Document
5it to my medical advisors.
TWELVETH, I prefer not to go through further tests or evaluations in immigration matters (for medical purposes - it's different) at your institution.
Yours truly,
Lev GUNIN
November 2000 Montreal
- Document Number Nine