LET 'EM GO HOME
In his Letter to the Editor (April 30, Vol 4, No 8, p 12) about your article on IMGs ("So we need a national agency to assess IMG credentials?") Dr Sullivan stated "First we steal them [IMGs] from other countries and then we refuse to recognize their training and experience." I've seen this type of reasoning in a number of articles in different medical sources and on the CMA website. Canadians can sleep with a clear conscience —they never "stole" any IMG.These physicians are surfing the internet looking for jobs and saving money to come here for better opportunities. The IMGs who can't pass the examinations are free to go back to their countries if they want to. I just wonder why those who cannot be licensed are willing to "clean toilets at McDonalds" rather than practise medicine in their home country.Here in Canada, I have the opportunity to work with a new Nikon microscope instead of continuously trying to build one from parts I salvaged from two other dilapidated ones dating from the late 60s.

Dr Nico Brits, MBChB MMed FRCPC, (IMG) pathologist, Prince Albert, SK

UNGAG THAT MD
Thank you for bringing the issue of Dr John O'Connor's mistreatment to public attention in your article "Health Canada muzzles oilsands whistleblower" (March 30, 2007, Vol 4, No 6, page 27). Clearly Dr O'Connor is being muzzled by this threat to his livelihood. It's another shameful symptom of our government selling out to the corporations, without regard for indigenous communities or the environment. I hope there will be plenty of support for Dr O'Connor from his colleagues. This must end.

Connie Kidd, Canadians for Aboriginal Rights,
http://cfar.proboards104.com, Hamilton, ON

DCA LEGAL CHALLENGE
I read with interest your article about dichloroacetate (DCA) ("Quacks pervert U of A doc's discovery" April 15, Vol 4, No 7, p 5). I'm a lawyer, not a physician, but my mother has pancreatic cancer so I've been following this very closely. New Scientist also recently ran an article about the people who are trying DCA on themselves. That article describes the results obtained so far by "Lawrence Burgh" (a pseudonym). I don't know Mr Burgh, but I've been in email contact with him through www.DCAsite.com and he reports no effect by DCA on his cancer. I think it's important to note that he has a metastatic sarcoma, which may not be reflective of the majority of cancers.

Specifically, I refer to the paper by Chen et al (PNAS 79(17) Sept 1982). A later version of this paper was cited by Dr Evangelos Michelakis in his Cancer Cell paper. Chen et al measured the accumulation of Rhodamine 123 in the mitochondria of various cells. Rh123 accumulation was discussed by Dr Michelakis as a proxy for the charge/hyperpolarization of the mitochondria. The important point here is that the only sarcomas mentioned didn't accumulate Rh123, which I think should be taken as evidence that these sarcomas do not exhibit the hyperpolarized mitochondria discussed by Dr Michelakis. The normalization of the charge on the mitochondria is the key point of the mechanism he describes.

For what it's worth from a lawyer, Dr Michelakis's paper still strikes me as earthshaking in its implications.

Graham Blake, (Address not provided)