--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <salsunsh...@...> wrote: > > On Jun 26, 2009, at 7:44 PM, shempmcgurk wrote: > > > I'm going to say what I said about Chopra after he did his piece on > > Maharishi immediately after he died last year. > > > > Recall that Chopra revealed private stuff about Maharishi's sickness > > at a time when Chopra was actually his formal physician (about 20 > > years ago). And death does not sever the patient/doctor > > confidentiality yet here was Chopra -- without consent from > > Maharishi's estate -- revealing personal medical info about Maharishi. > > > > I am convinced if someone wanted to pursue it, they could have > > successfully lodged a formal complaint against Chopra for violating > > that confidentiality. > > > > I don't know if it's the same case here but Chopra is quite quick > > off the starting block to share intimate stuff about Jackson...and > > if Chopra was in any official capacity a counsellor, doctor or > > adviser to Jackson he very well may be violating that same > > confidentiality again by some of the stuff he writes in this article. > > I didn't see anything that looked confidence-violating > in what he wrote. Looked pretty much like just > reflections to me. > > I take it you're not a big Chopra fan, shemp. > > Sal >
I like a lot of what Chopra says and writes. And then there's stuff he is just stupid about. What i object to about him is his "Dauphin" airs, a kinda arrogance about him. The Maharishi piece I refer to above really was beyond the pale...not that I didn't like the piece and the info which I found fascinating...but the mere fact that he left it up to himself to publish stuff that he had no business revealing.
