I am not going to rebut the scientific methodology used by Dr. Cassidy in this no-fault study since we have reached today a level of social corruption which can be explained simply with our common sense rather than with the expertise of the Cassidys of this world.

We must understand that the Free Market has its own shock absorbers so as to make sure that its performance is always protected; and this is why the free marketeers see the world in its static and reductionist way of divide and conquer rather than in its evolving dynamics.

Yesterday we had the acknowledgment by the University of Saskatchewan that Cassidy's study didn't provide the injured participants with their informed consent. However, on June 30, 2000, Dr. Barry McLennan, assistant dean of research in the college of medicine at the University of Saskatchewan, was writing in the StarPhoenix that a university committee "concluded there was absolutely no evidence of research misconduct." Dr. McLennan also absolutely defended Dr. Cassidy's study when employee Dr. Emma Bartfay, in filing a lawsuit against Dr. Cassidy and the University of Saskatchewan, was stating that she was told to produce statistical results that would prove that whiplash victims recovered faster under the province's new no-fault system. Some weeks ago we learned that Dr. Bartfay agreed to drop her case against Dr. Cassidy and the University of Saskatchewan and that in return she was going to receive an undisclosed amount of money. This is the way public justice is brokered by the confidentiality of the private contract.

Yesterday, we had StarPhoenix journalists who write "Whiplash study remains valid" and that SGI's no-fault insurance keeps costs down. These StarPhoenix journalists along with the conventional insurance companies are all forgetting that Cassidy's study is invalid as there is no way injured people recover faster when they cannot sue for pain and suffering. Also, these journalists and insurance companies are forgetting that insurance is a need to be satisfied rather than a cost to be lowered, and they forget that while the no-fault costs may be kept bureaucratically low so the satisfaction of the injured claimants is kept lower.

References

Pertinent articles published in Ensign

The Coalition Against NoFault-Saskatchewan http://www.againstnofault.ca/aboutus.html

deSantis, Mario and James deSantis The Incredible Abuse of Saskatchewan No-Fault Insurance (Part 2) June 1, 2000 Ensign

Association of Trial Lawyers of America The Fault With The New England Journal of Medicine's No-Fault Insurance Report http://www.atla.org/homepage/nejm-ins.aspx

deSantis, Mario Dr. Cassidy's study: another fraud and no one has run with the money! July 8, 2000 Ensign

deSantis, Mario Dr. Cassidy's study on no-fault insurance: supporting another shock absorber April 21, 2000 Ensign

CBC Saskatchewan SGI Claimants forced to answer personal questions August 6, 2003 http://sask.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/View?filename=sk_sgistudy20030805

Shire, Timothy Research Reputation and Responsibility July 2, 2000 Ensign

deSantis, Mario The Corporative Saskatchewan Justice: Avoiding the court of law by the power of money, private contracts and deceptions May 21, 2003 Ensign

The StarPhoenix Whiplash study remains valid Editorial, (PDF) August 6, 2003 http://www.ftlcomm.com:16080/ensign/desantisArticles/2003_800/desantis822/whiplash.pdf

U of S News Dramatic reduction in claims and improved recovery time with no fault insurance system, April 19, 2000, U of S web site.