Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 12:58 AM

Subject: 232:a Vädjan om hjälp.

232:a  Vädjan om hjälp.

Vädjan till Sveriges obarmhärtiga pastorer

Hej!

Tvåhundratrettioandra gången vädjas till kyrkliga institutioner i Sverige om hjälp för två enkla, personliga behov. Jag efterfrågar kyrklig hjälp i sökandet efter både (1) tillhörighet i en kristen kyrka och gemenskap med kristna lärjungar, samt (2) äktenskaplig gemenskap.

Den 231:a vädjan om hjälp kommenterades av en pingstkyrka. Pingstförsamlingen Munka Ljungby (www.pingstkyrkan-munka.se) i Ängelholm (skoldenas@home.se) svarade på följande sätt ”Hej Vi önskar att du upphör med utskicket och åtminstone tar bort vår adress från mottagarlistan. /Hans. Hur träffade du din kärlek? Skicka in er historia och vinn biobiljetter. Ta chansen!” Av obesvarat skäl medskickade pingstkyrkan en länk till en icke-kristen dejtingsida. Den icke-kristna dejtingsidan prisar sex ”Sex är fantastiskt! […] Sex kan också ses som en ren hälsokur!” och positivt värdesätter abort ”I dag kan tjejer i Sverige välja mellan att fullfölja graviditeten eller göra abort och det är bra.” Nej tack, jag är kristen och söker därför endast en kristen kvinna. Kristna singlar bör vistas i kyrkor och bör där våga samtala med varandra.

En gemensam nämnare mellan svenska pastorer och svenska professorer är svenskheten. I andra länder skulle denna följetong av vädjanden till pastorer aldrig kunna fortsätta utan att en vettig pastor ingriper till en god problemlösning. Inte heller i något annat demokratiskt land skulle ett universitets professorer kunna fortsätta att obstruera och diskriminera mot vetenskap på det sätt som Karolinska Institutet gör i avseende till abortvetenskapen (läs bifogad text nedan). Många svenska pastorer och svenska professorer saknar kurage, godhet och omdöme - som ett (modernt?) svenskt kulturarv. Sverige behöver sannerligen omvändas - från svenskhet – till Kristuslikhet.

Jag efterlyser en kristen kyrka som både vill välkomna till lärjungamässig gemenskap och som vill hjälpa i sökandet efter kontakt med en kristen kvinna där en relation eventuellt skulle kunna leda till äktenskap.

Finns en kristen kyrka i Sverige som vill avhjälpa båda behoven?

Med vänlig hälsning,

Torsten Nenzén

Föregående brev via www.kyrkor.be kan diskuteras även med andra genom www.pastorer.se.

----------Svenska professorer vid Karolinska Institutet---------

From: torsten@glocalnet.de

To: talmannen@riksdagen.se

Cc: jan.bjorklund@liberal.se ; lars.leijonborg@liberal.se

Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 6:15 PM

Subject: No justice for science in Sweden

To:          Speaker of the Riksdag, Per Westerberg

Copy:      - Minister for Education, Jan Björklund

               - Minister for Higher Education and Research, Lars Leijonborg

               - selected academic professionals relating to Public Health …

No Academic Justice in Sweden for Abortion Science

The Swedish Agency for Higher Education has made an official decision (2007-09-06) regarding my complaint against the Swedish medical university Karolinska Institutet (www.ki.se) appalling discrimination of my examination work, its unmotivated obstruction of my thesis writing, its evasion of academic dialogue, and its denial of the international evidence-based science which confirm that some women suffer mental ill health related to induced abortion. The Swedish Agency for Higher Education decided that Karolinska Institutet (only Karolinska Institutet professors constitute members of the Nobel Assembly for the Nobel Prize in Medicine) has acted suitably, in spite the KI blatant discriminations, KI unmotivated obstructions, KI evasion of academic communication, and KI denial of the abortion science that jeopardize Swedish abortion policies.

I am still not permitted by the Swedish professors at Karolinska Institutet (KI) within Public Health and Health Promotion to write a master-level thesis on women’s mental ill health related to induced abortion, because Swedish academia at Karolinska Institutet decline the existence of published scientific evidence in worldwide recognised international journals. The KI rejection of the published scientific evidence lack justification. Anyone with access to pubmed.gov knows, however, that Sweden´s academia has aligned itself with Sweden´s national abortion policies rather than conforming with evidence-based abortion science. Since abundant scientific evidence exist, it is perceptible that these Swedish professor-cowards at Karolinska Institutet merely dare not oppose aggressive anti-science opinions from Swedish parliamentarians, interest groups and collegial pressures.

Universities defeat their credibility by refusing academic dialogue. Karolinska Institutet decided (2007-06-29) to terminate all academic communication with me as its master student in Health Promotion, because I had submitted a formal complaint against the Karolinska Institutet to the Swedish National Agency for Higher Education. Karolinska Institutet still refuse academic dialogue. Sweden´s Karolinska Institutet have unsuccessfully argued their position in rejecting the international evidence-based abortion science, KI have refused to counter-argue evidence-based or philosophical arguments, blatantly lie about factual events (Professor Leif Svanström) and disregard any impartial assessment of the Public Health professors’ conduct and their lack of argument (KI President Harriet Wallberg-Henriksson). There is no academic justice in Sweden within the abortion sciences.

The Swedish Professor of International Health, Marcello-Ferrada Noli, at Karolinska Institutet claimed (2007-02-12) that he was unable to supervise abortion-related theses proposals which may suggest a relationship between mental ill health and induced abortion, because according to him "There is no evidence in literature." Additionally, the Swedish Professor in Social Medicine at Karolinska Institutet, Leif Svanström, (also head of the WHO Collaborating Centre on Community Safety Promotion in Sweden) had falsely claimed to Professor Marcello-Ferrada Noli that I did not satisfy formal requirements for thesis-writing. The Swedish Professor Leif Svanström was later confronted by the Student Union in regards to his lies about unsatisfactory formal requirements, resulting in the Swedish Professor´s withdrawal from his false accusation. Swedish Professor Leif Svanström intention was to obstruct a politically sensitive thesis in Sweden. In other words, additional evidence that some women suffer mental ill health related to induced abortion is non-permissible in Swedish academia.

In an email conversation (2006-11-07) with a Swedish researcher referenced by Karolinska Institutet as an authority in abortion questions, a public lecturer of gynecology in Sweden, and appointed in Sweden´s Legal Secretariat at the National Board of Health and Welfare regarding decisions for late abortions, Gynecologist Lotti Helström acknowledges to never previously have heard about Post Abortion Syndrome “Post Abortion Syndrome, something that I never before have heard anything about, in spite many years as a clinician and researcher.” Is this grave academic ignorance or Swedish political denial?

Sweden’s National Institute of Public Health contradict international scientific evidence through their untrue statement “Evaluations show that current abortion legislation [in Sweden] has worked well and has had a positive impact on women’s health.”

The Swedish Professor in Social Medicine at Karolinska Institutet, Bjarne Jansson, stated in conversation (2007-04-11) that the cause for my academic conflict with KI concerning induced abortion is that I am not sufficiently Swedish "The problem is that you are not Swedish." The Swedish professor´s nationalistic deduction would therefore logically derive from the premise: Swedishness is an attribute for uncritically approving Sweden´s abortion policies, rather than non-Swedishly presenting thesis ideas based on published articles in recognised scientific journals.

Examiner Bo Henricsson at the Department of Public Health at Karolinska Institutet underscores Sweden´s nationalistic attitude to abortion science in his written remark regarding Sweden´s abortion policies in relation to international abortion research “Sweden has come further on this matter.”

Strategic Director for the Swedish National Institute of Public Health questions my written affirmation that “All human life deserves equal protection by law.” Deviancy from this statement of assurance for equal human value and human dignity for all humans, regardless of for example ethnicity or age, signal open-mindedness towards systematic discriminations. The international consensus through Articles 1 and 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights “All human life deserves equal protection by law.” appears irrelevant to the Strategic Director of the Swedish National Institute of Public Health, as the Human Rights statement cannot be proven scientifically.

The Swedish Professor in Reproductive Health at Karolinska Institutet, Kyllike Christensson, exploit her position as a representative of science. This Swedish KI professor defends (2007-02-12) her rejection of international abortion-science through her statement “KI work for promoting good health in the world and follow in this regard the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs policy: Sexual and Reproductiv Health and Rights.” According to this Swedish KI Professor, Sweden´s Ministry of Foreign Affairs is the ultimate authority on abortion-science in Sweden - not science itself.

The President of Sweden´s Karolinska Institutet, Professor Harriet Wallberg-Henriksson, presents a series of blatant untruths in her deceptive letter to the Swedish Agency for Higher Education. The KI President does, nevertheless, reaffirm the university´s secondary priority to science and a prioritized relationship with the Swedish Parliamentarians, through her statement “The intervention suggested by Nenzén is not realistic as it contradicts the Swedish Parliament [Riksdag] standpoint concerning abortion and unwanted pregnancies.” Deceivingly, the KI President perverts reality with her concluding statement: “Within the frame of what is possible, KI has put a lot of effort into trying to accommodate his wishes.” The truth is that Karolinska Institutet continuously evade sincere academic dialogue about mental ill health among women related to induced abortion. Still today, KI refuses to communicate academically with me.

The Swedish Karolinska Institutet (KI) has admitted that it lacks scientific competence in abortion science. “We [at KI] don’t have the competence. We don’t have the money to pay for an external supervisor.” [KI Professor Bjarne Jansson cited 2007-03-26]. Scientifically competent and highly merited researchers in Canada and USA have personally expressed support, and one Canadian researcher has in person offered to academically supervise my thesis without requiring monetary compensation for academic supervision and knowledge contributions. The difference in university culture and interpersonal attitudes between Sweden´s Karolinska Institutet and for example American/Canadian universities is distinct. A Canadian environmental health professional in Vancouver summarized the Canadian/American attitudes appropriately “Here, people would bend over backwards to help you proceed with a good thesis.” when I visited in September 2007. At Karolinska Institutet, however, Swedish professors make concerted efforts to make life in Sweden difficult.

The anti-Christian values (worldvaluessurvey.org) and anti-Semitic values (levandehistoria.se) in Swedish society are reflected in surveys. Furthermore, Sweden´s Karolinska Institutet professors and Swedish parliamentarians additionally indicate some anti-science attitudes when it pertains to issues that contradict Swedish government policies – specifically for example policy on induced abortion.

Torsten Nenzen

Email:         torsten.nenzen.917@student.ki.se

Mobile:        +46 707 777754

Landline:     +46 8 7113377

Skype:        blessisrael

www.nenzen.net

----------------------------------------------

Sweden’s Karolinska Institutet continues its discrimination of abortion science

To:                  Karolinska Institutet in Sweden

Department of Public Health

Copy:              academic professionals previously contacted

Karolinska President: Harriet Wallberg-Henriksson.

Sweden’s Karolinska Institutet (ki.se) continues to obstruct and discriminate against international evidence from published articles in internationally recognised scientific journals, regarding the abortion sciences. In addition to Sweden’s sciencephobia related to mental ill health connected with induced abortion, Sweden’s Karolinska Institutet is now also refusing to communicate with me as its student. Because I reported the despicably discriminating Karolinska Institutet to an Agency for Higher Education for investigation of the Swedish medical university’s conduct, the Swedish university stated that it shall not communicate with me. These Swedish professors within Public Health, and the Karolinska Institutet University Board, are therefore conducting themselves like young children with professor titles. It's almost mind-boggling that the highest formal academic authorities in Sweden can be so politically blinded that they deny all the international scientific evidence. These Swedish professors at Sweden’s Karolinska Institutet’s Department of Public Health are proving themselves and non-scientific.

It appears that the Swedish government politics of exporting Swedish abortion policies internationally has greater importance in Sweden than evidence-based science at Swedish universities.

Regards,

Torsten Nenzen

------------------------------------------------

Karolinska Institutet,

Department of Public Health.

Karolinska President: Harriet Wallberg-Henriksson.

Karolinska Institutet has yet not provided any credible argument for its continued obstructions against a master-thesis within abortion sciences. I request that Karolinska Institutet immediately present its rationale for opposing comprehensive scientific research related to induced abortion, or without delay revert to cooperation with international scientific progression.

Karolinska Institutet appears to have adopted also a Swedish policy of refusal to communicate with me – perhaps due to a Karolinska Institutet’s fear of consequences of adherence to evidence within the abortion sciences.

Sweden’s Karolinska Institutet fails to provide any credible argument for opposing my proposed health promotion subject. Annually 38 000 abortions are induced in Sweden. International research shows that many women suffer mental ill health related to induced abortion. 38 000 women per year in Sweden are at risk to mental ill health from induced abortion. To state, as Karolinska Institutet does on June 19, that 38 000 persons annually is not a population issue, and does not pertain to health promotion, lacks argument. I request that Karolinska Institutet explain why 38 000 women is not considered a valid population in Sweden, and why Karolinska Institutet regards these women as irrelevant as to health promotion.

Karolinska Institutet goes on to mention that exposure to living foetuses or aborted foetuses is sensitive. The images are not falsifications, but are mirrors of reality. When reality is sensitive, abortion policies and abortion laws must reflect the sensitivity of reality, and not deny reality. It is unethical to not study post-abortion sequelae. From ethical perspectives, the consequences of induced abortion on population must be explored, and it is unethical to refuse comprehensive scientific research for political sensitivities. Scientific evidence and basic human decency should guide political authorities, and not vice verse. I therefore request that Karolinska Institutet explain the ethical rationale of its opposition to exploring ways of decreasing abortion rate in Sweden.

My proposal for Master thesis remains until Karolinska Institutet can provide valid and credible arguments for its opposition. Researcher (and Psychologist and Psychiatrist) Dr. Philip Ney in Canada is willing to supervise my proposed thesis. Since Karolinska Institutet itself claims to lack competence, why does Karolinska Institutet obstruct by refusing competent and willing international supervision?

In regards to Karolinska Institutet´s discriminatory and obstructing behaviour so far and to Karolinska Institutet´s unwillingness to communicate, Sweden´s Karolinska Institutet is a shame for international science and ethics.

Regards,

Torsten Nenzen

---------------------------------------------------

Sweden’s Karolinska Institutet discriminates abortion science

To:                  Karolinska Institutet in Sweden

Department of Public Health

Copy:              academic professionals previously contacted

Karolinska President: Harriet Wallberg-Henriksson.

Karolinska Institutet’s Department of Public Health continues to obstruct and discriminate. The Department of Public Health recur its maneuver to evade arguments and evade responsibility, with presumed purpose for obstructing progression of a comprehensive approach to abortion science. It is apparent that Karolinska Institutet attempt to prevail on biased results, through elimination of such research which results risks to strengthen indications that women may suffer mental ill health after induced abortion, and through discrimination of research which results might indicate human intrinsic support for lowering the maximum legal gestation age of foetuses for induced abortion in Sweden.

Since Karolinska Institutet fail to present any credible reason for opposing a master-thesis, my proposal for master-thesis within the Health Promotion course of Public Health remain as previously stated, until Karolinska Institutet in Sweden can provide a credible argument for its opposition.

The general aim questions:

Is there human intrinsic support, and hence potential public support, for restricting abortion through lowering the maximum legal gestation age of a foetus for abortion? Could exposure to foetal reality imagery change public support for legislation change?

The specific questions:

How will exposure to reality imagery of a living foetus and an aborted foetus respectively change the observer’s attitude toward induced abortion?

Basic method:

Questions would pertain to how much and when abortion would not be approved. Study groups could consist of, for example, a small sample of university students, journalists, medical physicians (GP), and politicians. A reasonable sample size could be 30 people, using 10 visual analogue questions on visual analogue scales (VAS). Reality imagery of living foetuses could be photographic (example Lennart Nilsson) or recorded ultrasound (2D, 3D, 4D), and reality imagery of aborted foetuses could be attained by permission from example cbrinfo.org.

Karolinska Institutet in Sweden obstructed my master-thesis progression by hindering availability of academic supervision without a true reason. The Swedish professor of Public Health at Karolinska Institutet, Professor Leif Svanstrom, in February 2007 attempted to prevent me from attaining a supervisor. Only hours before my scheduled meeting with a proposed thesis-supervisor, the Swedish Professor in Public Health at Karolinska Institutet obstructed progression by communicating to the proposed supervisor that I was not permitted to avail a supervisor for my thesis. Professor Leif Svanstrom’s official reason was a false claim that I did not fulfil formal requirements for thesis writing. The professor’s claim was untrue. Not until the Student Union had confronted the Swedish professor in Public Health at Karolinska Institutet regarding this untruth did the Swedish professor retract from his false accusation against me.

Furthermore, shifting the Director’s responsibility onto others has previously been attempted by the Department of Public Health, possibly as a tactful delaying of thesis process, and hence as a means of obstructing. For 9 months Karolinska Institutet has thwarted progression towards my thesis and rejected my thesis-proposals without a credible argument. Since 2006-09-01 I have repeatedly inquired with Karolinska Institutet for approval for thesis supervision in the subject of reduction of mental ill health among women related to induced abortion, and methods of reduction of induced abortion. Anew, Programme Director and Professor Bjarne Jansson insist yet another shift to correspondence, instead of providing his arguments for opposition to my above proposed thesis. Professor Bjarne Jansson recently attempted this same procedure of evading responsibility on March 14, 2007. Both Professor Bo Haglund and Student counsellor Gerd Johansson-Hellman then confirmed that Bjarne Jansson had agreed to the responsibility for organizing thesis supervision.

Karolinska Institutet has yet not provided any credible argument for its obstructions against a master-thesis within abortion sciences. I request that Karolinska Institutet immediately present its rationale for opposing scientific research related to induced abortion, or revert to cooperation with scientific progression.

Regards,

Torsten Nenzen

-------------------------------------------------