Copyright issues

Piracy of The Posture Theory

and my other research concepts

(Note that I wrote some of the sections of this page at different times, and after reading it recently I have noticed that there is some repetition, so I may have to rewrite it at a later stage).

In the past some people would sneak into a picture theatre with a camera and take a copy of the movie being screened and then sell it on the streets to make money from a practice called PIRACY.  The movie companies would get less customers and be at risk of going bankrupt, in which case no more movies would ever be made, because the thieves wouldn’t have that ability, so nobody would ever see another good movie again. However the industry adopted tactics to survive.

Similarly many people have been reading my essays, books, and website for many decades, and sneakily rewriting them in different words, and giving them different titles or labels, and passing them off as their own ideas in research papers and books, and gaining profits, promotions, and prizes, and gaining Google search engine rankings which have supplanted mine, so that most people have heard of my ideas and methods, but very few know that I even exist.

In response to that type of PIRACY I have not published any of my good ideas since 2005, and require a fee in advance before I do so again. The people who have been copying me can’t do anything about it because they didn’t do the research required in the first place, and they don’t know all the details required to solve the problems.

My research has become the target of a plague of plagiarism

See how to use my intellectual property properly at the end of this page

See also another website about copyright thieves and corruption in the publication of new ideas in research journals, or in the general literature, and on the internet where the producers of new ideas can become the victims of all sorts of intellectual property thieves, scammers and frauds. The link was provided by James C. Coyne on Twitter, on 14-10-12, and can be seen here.

See also an article about how employees of powerful bosses are sometimes asked to break the rules, and how it creates a conflict in employees who may have high personal or ethical values and think that they may be sacked if they don’t follow the instructions, or may get a promotion if they do. here.

Copyright Theft is not Always Trivial

Stealing someone else’s idea seems trivial to most people, but it can be the equivalent of someone stealing your house, car, and life savings.
In my case I spent 38 years developing ways of treating my own health problems when nobody else could, including doctors, specialists, and the worlds top researchers.
During that period there were seven years when I had cancer, surgery, chemotherapy, and four years of side-effects, and I wrote a 1000 page book, mostly when writing was causing me pain.
Nowadays people don’t seem to fully understand why I object to the anonymous editors of Wikipedia who systematically steal ideas from my research and books while not mentioning my name as the source of the information, and telling administrators that I am stupid, insignificant, and worthless.
They also don’t think that I should be accusing Simon Wessely of stealing my ideas, but he, and many other researchers have been systematically using my descriptions, ideas, and methods of treating the chronic fatigue syndrome and getting funding, promotions, prizes, and a knighthood.
I want you to think about that next time someone steals something of yours which you value, not just small change, or money that you could earn in 10 minutes.

Exercise methods in the Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

A newspaper article from August 5th 1982

In 1982 when I designed a method for exercise in chronic fatigue I knew that it was the first of its type in the world, and so did Tony Sedgewick, who was the head of the South Australian Institute for Fitness Research and Training, which is why he asked me to organise a study to verify it’s effectiveness.

I also knew that all previous methods had failed, or were much less effective or reliable, and that all future researchers would have to use that design, or they would fail. I also knew the value of world firsts in the research community, and that other people would be tempted to copy me, and steal my methods by claiming them to be their own.

As I have found out recently, many people have been copying my ideas, and some have been claiming them to be their own, and some have copied the copiers without knowing that I developed the ideas, and have published articles or books, or guidelines or treatment methods, and gained various prizes and awards etc.

However, any member of the public, or patient, or researcher, or journalist who studies the history of this topic properly can easily see that I was the developer of the modern methods, not someone else.

I started research in 1975 but those who use my ideas since never mention my name.

In the past 12 months I have become absolutely amazed at the number of people who have copied, stolen, used, researched, or peer reviewed my ideas and methods since I started in 1975, without anyone mentioning my name or giving me the credit. It also astounds me to see how many people are claiming those ideas to be their own, and that they were “new” in 1987, or in 1994, or in 2002, or last year, or this month, when they are virtual duplicates of my conclusions. some of which were determined and or published 30 years ago, when the ideas in the literature were completely different, and in fact, almost the opposite. It has come about because I don’t have any medical qualifications, and  my ideas were not published in formal research journals, and the people who have stolen them see me as ‘easy to rob’. Nevertheless, as they say, the copies are never as good as the original.

I suppose I can also say that I had health problems which were not responding to methods available at the time, so I had to develop methods of my own, which therefore had to be “different” or “new”, and the producers of “new” ideas generally get a lot of respect, which is what the people who coped me want.


In 1975 I had many health problems and none of them were responding to any form of treatment, so I had no choice but to start studying them myself to develop my own methods which I published in essays, books, and on my website. Since then there has been a plague of copyright thieves stealing my ideas and claiming that they were the first to develop the “new” concepts.
Countless numbers of my original observations and ideas have been copied, but the main ones relate to the fact that the health problems of sedentary workers are not due to the lack of exercise, or psychological stress, but are in fact due to their posture. My ultimate method of treating that was to stand in front of my computers with the  screens and keyboard in a higher position on platforms, so that I didn’t have to lean forward to read.
My other area of research was the study of chronic fatigue and exercise, and how to do it safely, and then adjustments to daily and weekly activities to prevent bouts of severe fatigue.
Many of my ideas have been stolen by the anonymous editors of Wikipedia, and those about the health problems of sedentary workers, and the standing computer position, have been attributed by South Australian TV station “Today Tonight” to John Coveney, who they describe as Adelaide’s standing professor. He says that he has been using that method to treat his own health for ten years, and that he got the ideas from America, but those researchers would have stolen them from me.
My ideas and methods for treating chronic fatigue have been copied by many individuals, top researchers, and organisations, including Simon Wessely and Peter White of London.
I spent 38 years of personal experimentation developing them, but other people can read and copy them in a few minutes, get them published in official journals, and then take all of the credit for themselves. Nevertheless such ideas did not exist, or were poorly understood until I developed them.

People who owe me their loyalty

In that regard I deserve the loyalty of patients who benefit from my ideas including . . .
1. The general public who have children, family members or friends who have health problems
2. Patients who have any form of health problems related to their posture.
3. CFS patients who now have a recognisable ailment which is not just dismissed as being “all in the mind”
4. Patients with undetectable pain
4. Soldiers who return from war with health problems such as chronic fatigue

Other people who owe me their loyalty include . . .
1. Researchers who are using my 1982 methods as a foundation or major part of their own studies of CFS and exercise etc.
2. Researchers who have read my observations and now Know what to look for with their laboratory methods to develop diagnostic and treatment methods
3. Doctors or other individuals who are teaching my methods to gain gratitude or earn money
4. Individuals who are using my methods and recommendations in their publications and official guidelines, particularly about the nature and treatment of the chronic fatigue syndrome

The world wide epidemic of sociopathic plagiarism

See also this article from the Bendigo Advertiser of 18-9-13, on serial plagiarism as a form of sociopathy where the thieves lack empathy with the developer where, even when the plagiarists are exposed and identified, they make excuses for their criminal behaviour.

This is a quote from it about Australian poet Andrew Slattery  . . . Slattery was recently stripped of two other prizes after being found to have plagiarised dozens of poets including Emily Dickinson and Sylvia Plath. His daring deception is the tip of a worldwide epidemic of poetic plagiarism, partly driven by the increasing use of “sampling” in the arts, and by the ease of cutting and pasting poems on the internet, which also makes plagiarism easy to detect. here


The answers to complicated problems seem obvious to everyone, but only after someone has searched for, and found them. Max Banfield

My understanding of copyright ethics is that people can use my ideas on condition that they acknowledge me as the author. What they can’t do is pretend that they are their own ideas, or that someone else developed the principles, or that they came from the general literature, because that, in effect, sabotages my rights.


It was probably someone like Machiavelli who said something like this about people in positions of power or authority . . . Let the ordinary man take the risk of producing novel ideas, with all the mockery and ridicule that comes with failure, but if, by intellect or chance, any one of the millions actually solves a problem, then save yourself a lot of trouble, and steal it, and claim it to be your own, and gain all of the prestige and glory for yourself.

Copyright thieves in Wikipedia

In 1975 the standard methods of treating my health problems were not effective so I began to study the subject myself and developing more practical ways of relieving the pain and fatigue. I suppose I have spent about half of the 38 years since then trying to solve those problems, and the other half on different activities.

The methods which I developed were effective but the sympoms kept recurring so I had to keep refining them until I achieved reliable results. When I published those ideas to help other people with the same ailments I was aware that some people would be tempted to steal them, but my main priority was to solve the problems, not waste valuable time hunting down copyright thieves. Nevertheless when I joined Wikipedia in 2007 I was soon confronted by two anonymous individuals who were trying to convince other editors that I was a worthless, non-notable fringy kook, and then argue that all of my contributions needed to be deleted. However, when they did that I noticed that similar information was already on other pages, or they soon developed new pages and added it, without mentioning me as the source.

My theory was deleted from Wikipedia in November 2007. The diagram above was not included but it shows how repeatedly leaning forward affects the body. A new page called Poor posture was set up in Wikipedia in March 2008. This is a quote from the current page of 16th August 2013 . . . “Poor posture is the posture that results from certain muscles tightening up or shortening while others lengthen and become weak which often occurs as a result of one’s daily activities. There are different factors which can impact on posture and they include occupational activities and biomechanical factors such as force and repetition”. (end of quote). Compare that with the angle of oscillation (moving back and forward) in my diagrem. Scroll down this page to see more.

They eventually arranged for me to be banned, and since then I decided to document their lies, and  how they were copying me, but I didn’t go any further. Nevertheless, in about November 2012, I learned that a London researcher named Simon Wessely was given the John Maddox Prize for his contribution to medicine which included exercise methods for treating the chronic fatigue syndrome which were almost exactly the same as mine, and soon after that he was knighted for his contributions to medicine. I therefore decided to follow that up, but at this stage the situation is that Simon Wessely is being portrayed as a man of good qualifications and high prestige, and I am being portrayed a fringy kook.

There are two comments which I tend to get about that unsatisfactory situaton. The first is that many so called respectable people who have a lot of initials after their name get the credit for other people’s ideas, and the second, from my critics, or the friends of the thieves, can be summed up with these words . . . “Too bad sucker, get used to it“.

I look at that situation with detachment, and will see how it unfolds in the future. Max Banfield

Meanwhile, most Wikipedia readers, and most members of the public don’t know where medical ideas come from. They just want effective treatment when they need it.


I proved that chronic fatigue syndrome was a real physical ailment here,  four years before Simon Wessely when some researchers were still arguing that the symptoms were caused by depression, or that the symptoms were being “made up” by the patients and were wrongly diagnosed as hypochondria. See here.


Simon Wesseley and others have read my detailed descriptions of the symptoms of chronic fatigue, and my methods of treating them with exercise etc., and have reworded them, and researched them on a larger scale, and had them published in medical journals under their own names, in order to gain the credit under the pretence that they were their own ideas. See here

Chronic fatigue syndrome research

I have been developing methods of treating my own chronic fatigue for 38 years, since 1975, and published my ideas, in essays, newspapers, and books, and on my website,  firstly to establish my intellectual property rights, and secondly to help other patients. e.g. see here.

Seven years later, Tony Sedgewick, the head of The South Australian Institute for Fitness Research and Training, asked me to design and co-ordinate a research project, which I did  between 1982-3, where I developed a reliable method of exercise for some chronic fatigue patients and was able to scientifically prove that it was a physical, and not a mental condition here.

Simon Wessely started researching the same ailment four years later, in 1987. He has been copying the details of my method of exercising safely, and the detailed methods of how I modified my daily and weekly activities to minimise and manage the symptoms.

My main book was first published in 1994, and gradually increased it’s size to over 1000 pages in 11 editions published in the next 8 years. It eventually contained more than 100 pages where I provided information on the nature of chronic fatigue, and gave some analogies to enable people who didn’t actually have the ailment to understand the difference between normal fatigue, and chronic fatigue symptoms. The final printed edition was published in October 2000, and sold to school and public libraries during the next 12 months. See here.

Simon Wessely is reported to have given up research in that year.

This is a quote from an interview with him by  Stefanie Marsh, in The Times  of 6th August 2011 . . .  “He has written more than 600 research papers on the condition . . . ten years ago, Professor Wessely chose to give up his research.” (end of  quote) here.


When I joined Wikipedia in 2007, and added information about my research and methods, two editors became very hostile and determined to delete every word of it. I didn’t know why until much later, when I found a page about Simon Wessely’s research, and it was obvious that they were protecting him from being exposed as a copyright thief.

 The amount of details about the actual nature of symptoms, which I consider when drawing my conclusions about the cause and treatment of disease, is such, that when other researchers later copy my ideas and pretend that is the result of their own research, it makes me grin

A few more details

My understanding of copyright law in 1975

When I began researching the medical literature to develop methods of treating various ailments I was aware of the basic principle of copyright law, which is that if you produce an idea or a book, it is important to get it published with your name or date on it, otherwise someone else can copy the idea, and get it published in a magazine or journal, and claim it to be there own. They can then use that idea to get promotions, research funding, and social and financial benefits.

I therefore spent a small amount of my time trying to find a publisher, and when several of my essays were published in the Australasian Nurses Journal, I kept sending them there. The fact that it wasn’t a medical journal didn’t concern me.

AustAsianNurses1980However I have recently learned that many people have been copying my ideas, in particular Simon Wessely. He claims that he became interested in undetectable illness, but so did I, and that he was trying to help people overcome the stigma relating to those ailments, and so was I, and he is described as defining the chronic fatigue syndrome, but I described the symptoms in great detail earlier, and he is also attributed with developing ‘new’ methods of treating it by using “Graded exercise therapy’, but I developed, and scientifically proved a method of exercising within limits to gradually improve fitness in chronic fatigue patients before he did.

He has also been given various prizes and awards, and a knighthood for his contributions to those studies.

However, when I tried to explain that I had the copyright on those methods because I did them all first I received various responses.

West Australian news item about chronic fatigue and exercise from August 22nd 1983
News item from August 22nd 1983 reporting the success of an exercise program for patients with chronic fatigue. Only those who were able to exercise did so, and were required to train at their own rate, and within their own limits.

For example, a Wikipedia editor said that they couldn’t find anything in the “real” medical literature about it (as if that makes a difference – which it doesn’t), and another person said that we are all insignificant so just get used to it, and another said ‘the evidence isn’t good enough‘, and another tried to discourage me by saying something like this . . .  ‘Stop accusing Simon Wessely of breeching your copyright because no-one is interested in your silly time-frame‘.

I am supposed to accept the fact that anonymous Wikipedia editors can insult me, and defame my character, and that Simon Wessely can steal my ideas and get away with it?

In the meantime, most patients who benefit from my research, don’t know about me, or how all of these major changes came about.

An Extract from Simon Wessely’s Biography

His research began in 1987

The following words are a quote from a brief biography about Simon Wessely here

CHRONIC FATIGUE SYNDROME:   A PERSONAL ACCOUNT Chronic fatigue syndrome has played a big role in my life.  I first started to see patients with the illness as far back as 1987, when I went to work as a junior psychiatrist at the National Hospital for Neurology, usually known as “Queen Square” .  It is breaking no professional secrets to say that the patients weren’t very popular with the neurologists who ran the place, some of whom seemed almost to be irritated by the fact that although many of the sufferers had neurological sounding symptoms, on investigation the same neurologists couldn’t find any abnormalities to account for this.  Some thought that the problem was at best depression, and even occasionally that patients might be making it up, a view that was sadly confirmed for the sufferers when their next port of call was myself. Anyway, I didn’t then, and never have, thought that the patients I saw then, and the ones I still see to this day, are “swinging the lead”, as some put it.  Instead, I became fascinated with the condition, and, even though I was pretty low down in the Queen Square pecking order, decided to start doing some research.  It was the start of my academic career and for the next ten years or so it was the main, but not the only thing, that I was doing.” (end of quote)

You can see the type of problems that I had to deal with as a patient where neurologists were “irritated” by patients instead of “helpful”, and they “couldn’t find any abnormalities to account for it”, so they thought it was “due to depression”, or that “patients might be making it up” (i.e. faking it – malingering, or imagining it – hypochondria). Wessely also complains that he was “pretty low on the pecking order” of researchers. (Where did that put me here?).

Time frame charts for the changes in research direction (below)


BanfieldPortraitI have developed ways of treating my own ailments very effectively, which would obviously help other people who have the same problems, but many researchers have stolen my ideas and created the illusion that they devised them, and then some have tried to give the false impression that nobody agrees with me, and that I am just a fringy kook. Nevertheless, it is my ideas which people now discuss the most, and generally refer to as the best available. See  more about my journal articles and newspaper reports about that research here and here.

Copyright breeches in Wikipedia

Copyright thieves try to conceal their identity, and disguise their crime, and if they get caught, they deny, deny, deny, even when it is obvious to others that they are as guilty as sin. Those editors are jut the “Lance Armstrong’s” of Wikipedia using the same childish Machiavellian scam.

The copyright ethics, laws, entitlements, reasons, and obligations

As a person who had many health problems which were not detectable, understood, explainable, or effectively treated by doctors in 1975, I have made my own attempts to determine the cause and develop methods of treatment.

In that regard I have made detailed observations of the symptoms which have never been made before, and have developed ideas, and combinations of ideas which have not existed before, and have made assessments of history which provide evidence to support them. I have also had those ideas published widely in letters and essays to newspapers and journals, and have published books which I have sold, mainly to school and public libraries, to make them readily available to patients, and parents and teachers who can ensure that they encourage the next generation of children to grow up without developing the same problems.

In that regard I have the copyright on all of those developments, and anyone, as far as I am aware, can read and use those ideas for non-commercial purposes, as long as they comply with their  proper, ethical, and legal obligation to acknowledge me as the origin.

The reasons for such laws existing is so that people have an incentive to make their useful ideas widely available for all to benefit from, instead of keeping them to themselves for their own exclusive use.

The other reason for those laws is to stop other people from reading ideas which are based on years or decades of research and then rewording them in a few minutes and getting them published in their own names to get the social and financial benefits for themselves, when, in fact, they don’t deserve it.

An example of the proper use of my ideas

An example of the proper use of my ideas occurred soon after I joined Wikipedia. That organisation was established with the objective of inviting all members of society to provide information from all sources to become the sum of all knowledge, and make it an improvement on the printed publications which were, of necessity, produced by a small number of usually elitist individuals or groups.

Although anyone could add any information, if they thought that it would improve the content, there was a guideline which recommended that people not add their own ideas, as that may result in other editors making accusations of conflict of interest and deleting it.

However, I wasn’t concerned about that because I had a lot of information, particularly from history, which was not known to modern authors, or had been forgotten, and intended to add about one paragraph of facts per week.

Nevertheless, soon after I started I received an email from a person who said that they read my book at their local library and found it useful in helping them to understand and treat their own health problems.

I later replied, and informed them of the Wikipedia guidelines and asked them if they would be willing to write a summary of my theory and submit it, and that was agreed to. Given that my book contained 1005 pages of detail, I decided to write a summary of the main aspects myself, and then send it off to be rewritten by that person in their own words, with any other content added if they thought it important.

That eventuated and the article appeared as a new page in Wikipedia called “The Posture Theory”, and was actually much better in it’s literary style than I had ever written. Furthermore, within a few weeks several other editors had been to that page and made improvements to the layout and style which made it even better.

At that point in time the use of my ideas was proper, ethical, and legal.

However i then asked my email correspondent to add the word “hypochondria” to a paragraph in the text, which changed it slightly from saying that “poor posture and tight waisted garments compress the chest and abdomen to cause multiple aches and pains” . . . to . . . “poor posture compresses the chest and abdomen to cause the multiple aches and pains of hypochondria”. (which had previously been regarded as imaginary or psychological symptoms).’

The beginning of the breech of my copyright

Within a short time 6 anonymous editors rushed into a discussion on the topic with each of them having their own reason (or excuse) for recommending it’s deletion. They were obviously anonymous psychologists or doctors who took offence at me saying or proving that their old ideas of psychological cause were wrong, and they didn’t want such information in Wikipedia.

That deletion was an interference with Wikipedia’s objective of becoming the sum of all knowledge from all sections of society, and was a serious violation of their ‘neutral point of view’ policy.

I then searched for some other pages to contribute to and found one called “Da Costa’s syndrome” and added some information from top quality independent references, and a small amount from my own research and conclusions. However, within a short time two anonymous editors began teaming up to pick fault with every word I wrote. Typically, they spent 12 months taking turns, with one of them accusing my weekly contribution of breaking a rule, and the other one using that as an excuse for deleting it. They lost almost every argument, but kept setting up new discussions where they would act as if they represented and were supported by the entire Wikipedia community of rule-abiding editors until they managed to get one administrator to use the “ignore all rules” policy to ban me.

In the meantime, while they were calling all of my contributions nonsense and rubbish, they were themselves, or with the help of other anonymous editors rewriting the same facts in different words and furtively adding them to a variety of other topic pages, with  the rather naive and foolish idea that I wouldn’t notice.

They set up a new page called “Poor posture”, and rewrote some of the main elements of my theory

However they did manage to do something which I didn’t notice until recently (five years later), because within a few months they produced a new page called “Poor posture” without putting it on their list of posture related pages (so that I wouldn’t find it).

The page about my research called The Posture Theory was deleted in Novembe/December 2007, and the new page called Poor Posture was established by an editor named Dr nick s 4 months later, at 3:20 on 14th March 2008. My theory has been furtively “nicked’ (stolen). See here. The article has then been added to by other editors with most of the information being an exact copy of some of the finer details which distinguish my research from others, and show the subtle, and gradual effects which have previously gone unnoticed, or been poorly described and poorly understood.

The Posture Theory Diagram coloured
I designed this diagram to summaries my theory. It shows how repeatedly leaning forward through the angle of oscillation has many harmful effects of the body in the long term. My theory was deleted from Wikipedia in November 2007, and an anonymous editor set up a new page called Poor Posture in March 2008. This is a quote from it dated 16-8-2013 “Poor posture . . . There are different factors which can impact on posture and they include occupational activities and biomechanical factors such as force and repetition.

In summary it says that sitting in a truck, or at a desk, and leaning forward for long periods of time is likely to make changes in the shape of the spine occur so slowly that the person won’t notice. They may even feel comfortable in the early stages until some years have passed when the begin to get neck and back aches and injuries, and the forward position of the head and shoulders prevents the proper upward movement of the lungs which disposes to breathlessness and breathing disorders in the future. Those postural pressures cause many other health problems (end of summary).

Those editors know that the ideas are accurate, so they want them in Wikipedia, but they don’t want anyone to know that I developed them, so they haven’t mentioned my name, and as such they are intellectual property thieves.

I would therefore ask the ethical and honest administrators of that organisation to investigate their behaviour and have them permanently banned, and my theory reinstated.

They set up a new page called “Corset controversy”, and rewrote most of the main elements of my research

The internal anatomy was crushed and displaced  by nineteenth century whalebone corsets
The internal anatomy was crushed and displaced by nineteenth century whalebone corsets

The same two editors who tried their hardest to defame my character by  ridiculing me and deleting all of my contributions for a year were arguing that they were nonsense, rubbish, and cruft, which was based on old references which were out-of-date, and obsolete, and which no-one in the modern research literature agreed with. They managed to get me banned in January 2009 by using the “ignore all rules” policy, and then less than four months later another editor set up a brand new page at 17:42 on 15th May 2009, called “Corset controversy” which contains the same sort of information here. Those liars, cheats, and copyright thieves are stealing my ideas, and hence also stole my Google search engine rankings on those topics and belong in jail for their blatant and disgusting internet crimes. See my webpage on that topic here, and the section of that page called “The Corset Controversies” here, and my ebook here.

Another website has a summary article which is almost an exact copy of my observations and theories

At noon of  29th May 2013 the website for The Times of India had an article entitled  ”Avoid these common causes of bad posture”.

It mentions the causes as “Pain of past injuries”, “Low nutritional state”, “Heredity”, “Extra Weight”, “Your job” with reference to desk work, and “Lifestyle and fashion” with reference to high heel shoes, tight belts, and tight clothing. See here.

Nineteenth century corsets were available in a variety of designs to change the shape of the womans spine and posture in particular ways. There was the slouched posture, the angled back, and sway back appearance, and some women bound their shoulders to create the round shouldered appearance because they thought it was attractive. Many people who do not do their research properly, or who do not study history thoroughly enough make the mistake of leaping to the conclusion that a persons posture is determined by emotional or personality factors such as  whether or not they are happy or sad.
Nineteenth century corsets were available in a variety of designs to change the shape of the womans spine and posture in particular ways. There was the slouched posture, the angled back, and sway back appearance, and some women bound their shoulders to create the round shouldered appearance because they thought it was attractive.

It refers to the long term gradual effects of poor posture, and in order to avoid the appearance of “obvious” copyright theft they changed the words from “poor posture causes many and varied symptoms and illnesses” to “harming overall health”, and it changes the words “caused by tight waisted nineteenth century corsets” to “wide belts”, and “tight fitting clothes”. See my first website here.

Copyright thieves are like any other thief – they wear a mask, and they hide their crime in one way or another to avoid being caught.

Their problem with me would be solved if they just had the human decency to acknowledge the fact that the top quality and useful observations and conclusions came from me, and apologise for not mentioning my name before. Max Banfield

More information

I recently read parts of a book about Fibromyalgia by Christine Craggs-Hinton.

It contained extensive sections which were obvious breeches of my copyright where she had copied entire slabs of my ideas, reworded them, and included them in her book which has several editions. An example is on pages 62-63 of one of those editions and relates to details about posture, and the standing computer posture more specifically.

A book summary claims that “Christine now passes her experience and knowledge on to others so that they do not have to spend their precious time researching what she has already done” and it is signed by Pam Stewart MBE.

Christine Craggs-Hinton has most probably stolen my many years of research to make herself look as if she is the one who developed the ideas so that she can get all the money from book sales, and all the gratitude from patients.

I doubt that she has mentioned my name as the source, but if she can show that she has I will apologise.

She has also written a book called “How to Manage Chronic Fatigue” published by Sheldon Press

 How to use my intellectual property properly at the end of this page

I have evaluated thousands of ideas over a period of 38 years, and drawn countless conclusions, many of which have never been thought of or properly assessed before, so people who read them should respect my ownership of that intellectual property which is related to copyright. Anyone who develops uses those ideas has to understand that they didn’t exist before, and could not be used by anyone until I produced them, and as such you are the beneficiaries of them, and if anyone develops similar ideas since, they are still my property because I was the first.

In particular, my ideas about Posture, and it’s cause and relationship to multiple undetectable symptoms and illnesses, and more particularly to the flow of blood throughout the body and it’s efficiency.

More particularly, the standing computer posture took me 23 years of evaluation to develop as a prevention and treatment method which will be valuable to many patients.

My ideas about the cause, treatment, and nature of chronic fatigue, and particularly how to exercise safely, and how to manage various daily, weekly, or monthly activities to prevent or manage persistant fatigue as well as numerous suggestions about how to prevent, diagnose, or research the ailment.

If any of those concepts are mentioned in any essay, research paper, book, or unofficial or official guidelines the person should take into account that the fact that my essays were not published in formal research journals, does not give them an excuse for using them without mentioning my name or the article.

Texts on those topics should include my name, and the ideas or methods I developed as the foundation for any similar research or guidelines which have been developed since, and reference lists should include my articles or books, and links to the relevant sections of my website.

I may be more specific later, but honest people with common sense and gratitude  will use anything they read of mine as a reference, and if I bring to their attention that my ideas preceeded modern ones, they should co-operatively follow that principle.

If they do such things they will also be protecting my copyright from thieves, and for that you will have my gratitude. Max Banfield

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


three + = 9