Make your own free website on Tripod.com
Header


6.1 SUMMARY OF DOCUMENT.



1. The Commonwealth of Australia has exposed the Australian Public to an exotic disease, Kuru, that was known to present in New Guinea by the issuance of a license for CSL to import pituitary glands from New Guinea. The Defendants were aware of the presence of an epidemic of Kuru at the time of issuing the license.

2. The first four batches of pituitary hormones produced were experimental. The Recipients of these products were treated with an expired batch, number 003-02, that was subject to further experimentation by Professor Cox, the treating physician, with the knowledge and approval of the Defendants. CSL Batch 003-02 was administered to the Recipients in 1970, three years after its release as a commodity for sale for profit and at least one year past the recommended expiry date for similar non-experimental products produced by CSL. In 1968 this batch was found to contain pyrogens. Pseudomonas and Hepatitis are amongst the other likely contaminants that are alleged be present by experts familiar with production during this period. The latter could not be excluded from the production process. Despite this finding in 1968 CSL did not issue a recall and continued to distribute the experimental product batch 003-02.

3. Treatment after 1969 using batch 003-02 was unlawful.

4. The collection of many of the glands from corpses of Australians without consent of family members in Australia was illegal As the glands were mixed together in substantial numbers to produce the final product, sale of the product was in fact illegal as it contained pituitaries that had been unlawfully removed for sale. Without any doubt criminal negligence exists yet the Commonwealth of Australia has not instructed the Crown solicitor to prosecute any of the offenders.

With cloning, unknown slow viruses,HIV, other unknown diseases, to ignore negligence that has occurred and simply allow it to be shrugged off as "it happened too long ago" is to do so at one's own peril and to endanger the health of future generations. There has to be a penalty.

5. Any injury recipients of these batches was caused by the actions of the Commonwealth of Australia and CSL.

6. The recipients did not agree to being part of an experimental program nor were they informed of the risks by the defendants. The recipients were not informed of the unlawful use of an expired batch. The recipients did not contribute to the Defendant's negligence.

In relying on res ipsa loquitor the recipients are not required to conclusively eliminate the possibility of all other causes of injury as the Commonwealth of Australia now seeks to do. It is enough that it is "more likely than not" . This document of res ipsa loquitor relies on the ordinary rules of circumstantial evidence to ascertain unusual events and it is appropriately charged when, "upon a common sense appraisal of the probative value of the circumstantial evidence, *** (the) inference of negligence is justified .

Clearly the Commonwealth Department of Health has breached its Duty of Care to the recipients and the Australian public. The facts herein speak for themselves.

The recipients and members of the Australian public respectfully request that you "rule" on the question of negligence. Register your judgement.