Support Princess Margaret Hospital Canada .

Princess Margaret Hospital is located in downtown Toronto, Ontario, Canada on University Avenue at College Street. It is part of the University Health Network. Located in the city's Discovery District, Princess Margaret is a cancer research hospital fully affiliated with the University of Toronto, and is under royal patronage of Anne, Princess Royal, as a member of the Canadian Royal Family. The hospital was named after the late Princess Margaret, sister of Queen Elizabeth II.






The hospital specializes in the treatment of cancer, and offers the majority of its services to residents of the Greater Toronto Area. It frequently hosts patients from other parts of Canada for access to a high calibre of treatment.[citation needed]. In particular, the hospital offers expertise in the fields of surgical oncology, medical oncology including bone marrow transplantation, radiation oncology, psychosocial oncology, medical imaging, and radiation therapy.



The hospital houses one of the largest radiation therapy departments in the world. It has 17 radiation treatment machines, all of which are equipped with the latest technologies, a superficial ortho-voltage X-Ray machine, and operates a Gamma Knife stereotactic radiosurgery machine in collaboration with Toronto Western Hospital.






[edit] EducationAs a teaching hospital of the University of Toronto, the hospital provides world class training to various medical professions. Most notable are clinical programs for medical doctors and radiation therapists.



[edit] ResearchIts related research arm, the Ontario Cancer Institute (OCI), has made world-renowned contributions[citation needed], and works in conjunction with the hospital in a mutually beneficial relationship. Many researchers at the OCI hold appointments at the University of Toronto, often within the Department of Medical Biophysics.



[edit] HistoryThe hospital was founded as the Ontario Cancer Institute in 1952 by an Act of the Ontario legislature. Designed by the architect Henry Sproatt, it was originally located at 500 Sherbourne Street, beside the now demolished Wellesley Hospital, on Sherbourne Street north of Wellesley Avenue. The hospital at 500 Sherbourne was completed in 1958 and named the Princess Margaret Hospital after Princess Margaret of the United Kingdom. In 1995, the hospital relocated to 610 University Avenue (the short building once was head office for Hydro Electric Power Commission of Ontario).



During health restructuring legislated by the Harris Government in the late 1990s, Princess Margaret Hospital merged with The Toronto Hospital which was the entity formed by the merger of the Toronto General Hospital and the Toronto Western Hospital. The new entity was named University Health Network and the three hospital sites retain their original names within the new entity. Like many hospitals, Princess Margaret Hospital is served by a charitable foundation, the Princess Margaret Hospital Foundation, which holds numerous events and a lottery to raise philanthropic funds to support research, education, and patient care.



Additional imagesPrincess Margaret Hospital seen from the southwest at sunset.

Princess Margaret Hospital seen from the northeast. Mount Sinai Hospital is to the south.

See alsoList of Canadian organizations with royal patronage

The Ride to Conquer Cancer

 References[edit] External linksOntario Cancer Institute

Canadian Cancer Society

Princess Margaret Hospital

Department of Medical Biophysics, University of Toronto

University of Alberta DCA Research

DCA is an odourless, colourless, inexpensive, relatively non-toxic, small molecule. And researchers at the University of Alberta believe it may soon be used as an effective treatment for many forms of cancer.




Dr. Evangelos Michelakis, a professor at the U of A Department of Medicine, has shown that dichloroacetate (DCA) causes regression in several cancers, including lung, breast, and brain tumors.



Michelakis and his colleagues, including post-doctoral fellow Dr. Sebastien Bonnet, have published the results of their research in the journal Cancer Cell.



Scientists and doctors have used DCA for decades to treat children with inborn errors of metabolism due to mitochondrial diseases. Mitochondria, the energy producing units in cells, have been connected with cancer since the 1930s, when researchers first noticed that these organelles dysfunction when cancer is present.



Until recently, researchers believed that cancer-affected mitochondria are permanently damaged and that this damage is the result, not the cause, of the cancer. But Michelakis, a cardiologist, questioned this belief and began testing DCA, which activates a critical mitochondrial enzyme, as a way to "revive" cancer-affected mitochondria.



The results astounded him.



Michelakis and his colleagues found that DCA normalized the mitochondrial function in many cancers, showing that their function was actively suppressed by the cancer but was not permanently damaged by it.



More importantly, they found that the normalization of mitochondrial function resulted in a significant decrease in tumor growth both in test tubes and in animal models. Also, they noted that DCA, unlike most currently used chemotherapies, did not have any effects on normal, non-cancerous tissues.



"I think DCA can be selective for cancer because it attacks a fundamental process in cancer development that is unique to cancer cells," Michelakis said. "One of the really exciting things about this compound is that it might be able to treat many different forms of cancer".



Another encouraging thing about DCA is that, being so small, it is easily absorbed in the body, and, after oral intake, it can reach areas in the body that other drugs cannot, making it possible to treat brain cancers, for example.



Also, because DCA has been used in both healthy people and sick patients with mitochondrial diseases, researchers already know that it is a relatively non-toxic molecule that can be immediately tested patients with cancer.





"The results are intriguing because they point to the critical role that mitochondria play: they impart a unique trait to cancer cells that can be exploited for cancer therapy"

Dario Alteri

Director University of Massachusetts Cancer Center

Investing in Research



The DCA compound is not patented and not owned by any pharmaceutical company, and, therefore, would likely be an inexpensive drug to administer, says Michelakis, the Canada Research Chair in Pulmonary Hypertension and Director of the Pulmonary Hypertension Program with Capital Health, one of Canada's largest health authorities.



However, as DCA is not patented, Michelakis is concerned that it may be difficult to find funding from private investors to test DCA in clinical trials. He is grateful for the support he has already received from publicly funded agencies, such as the Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR), and he is hopeful such support will continue and allow him to conduct clinical trials of DCA on cancer patients.



Michelakis' research is currently funded by the CIHR, the Canada Foundation for Innovation, the Canada Research Chairs program, and the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research.



"This preliminary research is encouraging and offers hope to thousands of Canadians and all others around the world who are afflicted by cancer, as it accelerates our understanding of and action around targeted cancer treatments," said Dr. Philip Branton, Scientific Director of the CIHR Institute of Cancer.



DCA and Cancer Patients



The University of Alberta's DCA Research Team is set to launch clinical trials on humans in the spring of 2007 pending government approval. Knowing that thousands of cancer patients die weekly while waiting for a cure, Dr. Michelakis and his team are working at accelerated speed, condensing research that usually takes years into months. Fundraisers at the University of Alberta are determined to raise the money to allow this next phase of research to begin. Once Health Canada grants formal approval, the University of Alberta's Research Team will begin testing DCA on patients living with cancer. Results with regards to the safety and efficacy of treatment should be known late this year.



"If there were a magic bullet, though, it might be something like dichloroacetate, or DCA..."

Newsweek, January 23, 2007

National Non-Smoking Week (NNSW) Canadian Council for Tobacco Control

National Non-Smoking Week (NNSW) has been observed for more than 30 years. It is one of the longest running and most important events in Canada’s ongoing public health education efforts. Established in 1977 by the Canadian Council for Tobacco Control (CCTC), its goals are:




to educate Canadians about the dangers of smoking;

to prevent people who do not smoke from beginning to smoke and becoming addicted to tobacco;

to help people quit smoking;

to promote the right of individuals to breathe air unpolluted by tobacco smoke;

to denormalize the tobacco industry, tobacco industry marketing practices, tobacco products, and tobacco use; and

to assist in the attainment of a smoke-free society in Canada.

Want to help support NNSW? Consider a charitable donation to the CCTC.

Your leader wants you to butt out.

Your leader wants you to butt out.




National Non-Smoking Week began Sunday, and Prime Minister Stephen Harper issued a statement encouraging smokers to make a resolution "to quit the habit both for themselves and for their loved ones.



"Every year smoking adversely impacts the health of millions of Canadians - including those affected by second-hand smoke - heightening their risk of cancer, heart disease, emphysema and a number of other conditions. It also costs our healthcare system - and therefore taxpayers - a substantial amount of money" Harper said in the statement released Sunday.



The Ontario Pharmacists' Association (OPA) also took the opportunity to remind Ontarians that eligible patients who want to stop smoking can receive free counselling at many of the province's pharmacies.



According to Health Canada, our government invests $15.8 million annually to help people stop smoking, prevent youth from starting to smoke, and protect Canadians from exposure to second-hand smoke. It says Canada has one of the lowest smoking rates in the world, but that tobacco use is still the most significant cause of preventable disease, disability, and premature death in Canada, and is responsible for more than 37,000 deaths every year.

Canada's justice minister says all same-sex marriages performed in Canada are legally recognized and the government is working to ensure foreign couples married here can divorce if they chose to.

Canada's justice minister says all same-sex marriages performed in Canada are legally recognized and the government is working to ensure foreign couples married here can divorce if they chose to.




"Marriages performed in Canada that aren't recognized in couple's home jurisdiction will be recognized in Canada," Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said Friday in Toronto.



"I want to be very clear that our government has no intention of reopening the debate on the definition of marriage," he added.



The statement comes one day after it was learned Justice Department lawyers were arguing a foreign lesbian couple that married in Canada could not apply for divorce here because their marriage wasn't valid.



Nicholson said the Divorce Act will be updated so those couples can apply for divorce in Canada if they feel the need to.



"I want to make it clear that in our government's view, these marriages are valid," Nicholson said.



The justice minister blamed the former Liberal government that legalized gay marriage for the "legislative gap" that resulted in the confusion.



He also said the Civil Marriage Act will be changed so that all marriages performed in Canada that aren't recognized by the couple's own jurisdiction will still be recognized in Canada.



Political opponents of the Harper government jumped on the opportunity to suggest the Conservatives were reopening the gay marriage debate.



One Canadian legal expert on same-sex marriage said she's quite concerned that the Conservatives have decided to tinker with the Civil Marriage Act.



"With a majority government in place, I think that's a risk that Canadian society cannot afford to take," Queen's University law professor Kathleen Lahey said in a telephone interview from Kinsgton, Ont.



She argues that re-opening the act in Parliament is a back-door way to introduce other changes to the act.



"The real problem with fixing an alleged legislative gap in the Civil Marriage Act is that there is no legislative gap in that act, and therefore, there is nothing to fix in that act," Lahey said. "If opening that act up is supposed to introduce a fix, then presumably someone might want to do something else with it while it is open and in front of Parliament."



She said the government could just simply withdraw its legal case before the courts to resolve the issue.



Critics have questioned why a government lawyer was arguing a marriage was not legal in Canada because the couple's home jurisdiction did not recognize gay marriage. It's unclear where the lawyer's direction was coming from.



Lahey said in her experience, it's unlikely that this specific legal case didn't draw the attention of senior officials.



"Lawyers who are willing to be aggressive in seeking out virtually any argument to defeat equality claims are allowed to do so," she said. "I don't know what level of scrutiny was put in this case, but the fact that both levels of government are in a simple divorce case is an indicator to me that somewhere higher up, someone was watching this.



"I'm not convinced that this is just a fluke or an accident that this argument was raised in this way."



Egale Canada, a lesbian, gay, bisexual,



and transgender (LGBT) human rights group, said it was pleased with the government's quick action.



"We see this as a good first step toward opening dialogue between this government and the LGBT community in Canada. We are open and eager to meet with this majority government to build a credible relationship that is not based on fear," the group's executive director, Helen Kennedy, said in a statement.



The Harper government went into damage control Thursday and has denied that they were looking into reopening any debate on same-sex marriage.



"We're not going to reopen that particular issue," Prime Minister Stephen Harper told reporters Thursday.







Read more:  http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20120113/gay-marriage-legal-nicholson-120113/#ixzz1jNQhxfKO

Eight former CWB directors are asking the Federal Court of Canada to quash the Conservative government's appeal of Justice Douglas Campbell's declaration.

The battle over the Canadian Wheat Board isn't over just yet.




Eight former CWB directors are asking the Federal Court of Canada to quash the Conservative government's appeal of Justice Douglas Campbell's declaration.



Early last month Campbell said federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz had not followed Section 47.1 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act, by having the required farmer plebiscite on major changes to the CWB.



"The Harper government broke the law and insulted farmers when they took away the farmers' right to vote on changes to the CWB," former CWB chair Allen Oberg said in a prepared statement. "The government's action was not legal, fair or constructive, and the government continues to create a huge amount of uncertainty for the western grain trade."



Last year the Conservatives introduced in the House of Commons Bill C-18 to end the CWB's single desk selling of Western Canadian wheat and barley.



Ritz said the federal election results, in which the Tories won a majority, was enough of a mandate to press ahead with the government's agenda for the CWB.



The Conservative government said that a specific plebiscite was not needed.



However opposition to Bill C-18 gave rise to a court challenge by the Friends of the CWB and supported by other pro-CWB groups including eight of the monopoly marketers' 15 directors.



Campbell's declaration stated Ritz did not act democratically, but the judge's findings didn't have any direct affect on the passage of C-18, which was proclaimed by the end of the year.



UPSETS FORMER ELECTED DIRECTOR FROM KANE



Nevertheless the Harper government launched an appeal all the while proceeding with its changes to the CWB.





That's something that rankles one former farmer-elected director from Kane.



"We believe that the Harper government should have to choose - either the government moves ahead to dismantle the CWB without a vote of farmers, or they continue with their efforts to reverse the decision at appeal - but they should not be able to do both at the same time," former District 9 director Bill Toews said.



Once Ritz's legislation came into effect the farmer-elected CWB directors were unilaterally dismissed by the Harper government.



That action put into question who would foot the bill for further legal action.



"We and some other farmers are taking responsibility for that," Toews said.

The Ontario Court of Appeal has sounded a warning to insurers who deny benefits under a policy despite the medical evidence by awarding damages for the loss of the policyholder’s peace of mind.

The Ontario Court of Appeal has sounded a warning to insurers who deny benefits under a policy despite the medical evidence by awarding damages for the loss of the policyholder’s peace of mind.






Laura Hillyer hopes the decision will change the use of the minor injury guidelines.

Defence lawyers hope the decision may bring some balance to what they say is the current arbitrary treatment of minor injury claims.



In its judgment in McQueen v. Echelon General Insurance Co. on Nov. 16, the Court of Appeal refused to overturn an award of $25,000 for mental distress caused by the denial of benefits.



The case involved a plaintiff who had been in a motor vehicle accident in which she sustained injuries. Prior to the accident, she was already suffering from bipolar disorder and upper back pain.



After the incident, the defendant insurer refused to pay for some of the benefits applied for and limited the plaintiff’s access to medical assessments. In fact, there were 21 denials of 16 separate benefits over a period of three years.



As well as the benefits, the plaintiff claimed extra contractual damages, bad faith, mental distress, aggravated damages, and punitive damages.



In supporting the trial court’s finding that the mental distress warranted compensation, the Court of Appeal declared: “People purchase motor vehicle liability policies to protect themselves from financial and emotional stress and insecurity.



An object of such contracts is to secure a psychological benefit that brought the prospect of mental distress upon breach within the reasonable contemplation of the parties at the time the contract was made.



As an insured person entitled to call on the policy, Ms. McQueen was entitled to that peace of mind and to damages when she suffered mental distress on breach.”



Lou Ferro of Ferro and Co. in Hamilton, Ont., notes that it has been easier to get damages for mental distress since Fidler v. Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada. Ferro represented the plaintiff at trial, while lawyer Jane Poproski of his firm acted on the appeal.



As well, he says there are five or six other Court of Appeal and Supreme Court cases that laid the foundation for this judgment. “It takes advantage of what’s gone before,” he says.



Ferro argues that although the insurance industry is slow to change, it would be foolhardy not to take notice of the decision. “This case points out that the claims process is now under scrutiny.



The fairness component applies to the adjuster, and individual decisions made by the adjuster are subject to review.”



Ferro believes the case also confirms that insurance companies can’t be adversarial to the policyholder. “Some insurers just throw their cases into litigation as a standard response.



They use the courts as a profit centre. That’s not wise. You can’t dispute that you should treat the policyholder fairly. It’s like motherhood and apple pie. They go together.



If the adjuster makes an arbitrary or unsupported decision or is derisive or adversarial, it’s difficult to defend it. There will be lots more cases like this to come.”



Laura Hillyer of Martin & Hillyer Associates sees a lot to like in this decision as well. “The Court of Appeal affirmed the messages that insurers use to sell insurance: slogans like, ‘We’ve got you covered’ and ‘You’re in good hands.’ They use peace of mind to sell the product.



This decision confirms that that is what they do. I think of that as obvious, but it’s nice to hear the Court of Appeal saying it.”



Hillyer is happy to see the court holding the insurer to the standard it advertises and not just with the person it contracts with. “Echelon’s contract was not with Mrs. McQueen,” she says.



“It was her husband’s policy. The court chose not to draw a line between people who actually entered into the policy and people covered by the policy. It’s inclusive.”



The judgment criticizes a number of insurance industry practices, such as giving a denial without a reason. “Since Sept. 1, 2010, we are seeing a lot more of that,” says Hillyer.



“The insurer says it is not reasonable or necessary with no explanation. This decision calls on insurers to give more details if the decision is contrary to medical recommendations, which is what the treatment plan really is.”



Another insurance industry practice that the judgment criticizes is choosing to rely on a particular report that supports a denial of benefits. “If there are two reports and one says you should pay and one says you shouldn’t, they will need to think twice before denying it,” says Hillyer.



“That’s very, very helpful, especially if they are relying on what they should know is a short, perfunctory insurer examination. Often, the client says they sat in the waiting room for an hour, they saw the doctor for 10 minutes, and he hadn’t read the file yet.”



Hillyer also likes the fact that the Court of Appeal is sending those messages in relation to a modest claim. “Often, the denials aren’t for a large amount and you wonder if it’s cost-effective to proceed.



This decision makes it cost-effective, assuming you have a true link between the insurer’s behaviour and the claimant’s mental state.”



Hillyer notes that while people who have family and savings are less likely to suffer from mental distress, there are others who aren’t as fortunate and don’t have those fallbacks.



“If insurers engage in these behaviours with them and it detrimentally affects them, they are on the hook,” she says.



Ferro attributes some of the success in the action to the fact that the application didn’t go too far. “We asked the judge for $25,000. That’s not a great deal, but it represents the beginning of a process that has set the floor on damages.”



Hillyer also hopes the decision will change the use of the minor injury guidelines. “The [guideline] is very challenging. It’s very difficult to get someone out of [it] once they are in.



It shouldn’t be, but it is and our remedy is so far away. It’s very frustrating. If you take notice of some of these comments, I’d say keep sending information to the insurer. Indicate that the medical background is there. If they persist with a blanket refusal, they may be in hot water.”



For his part, Ferro is astounded by the practices of insurers who tell their adjusters to throw everything into the minor injury guidelines and then hunker down. Ferro personally knows an adjuster who has resigned upon receiving that instruction.



“He thought it was crazy,” says Ferro. “Eventually, adjusters will have to defend their decisions.”