Before you continue to defend the work of Mr White citing the work of Paul Cameron, perhaps you should read Paul Cameron’s biography. It is available here.

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/HTML/facts_cameron_sheet.html

I have contacted my own insurance broker, as well as the Canadian insurance companies that link through your web site, and also provided them with a copy of Mr. White’s work, which you so handily have posted on this site. I can only relate to you that my own broker now takes a very dim view of insure.com and its ethical (or lack thereof) practices. Undoubtedly, Canadian insurer’s will as well.

The remainder of this comment is a word-for-word copy of this comment earlier in this thread. Since Mr. Bland is no longer interested in actually discussing anything and would rather instead simply cut and paste his previous comments in mindless repetition, we will be placing him on moderation. When he has something original to say, we will approve it for publication.

On a drop down menu I see Canadian provinces, so I’m assuming insure.com solicits Canadians.
Insure.com appears to offer Canadians travel insurance, long term care insurance has a none-US field. There may be sections I’ve missed.

I’ll be phoning my insurance company, they are listed on the site. I’ll be contacting my broker, the regulatory board and the provincial liason dept.

Individuals and groups can be notified to The Canadian Council of Insurance Regulators and the companies using the site.

If the site is hosted in the US, there may not be much that can be done except expose this and sent formal complaints.

Insurance regulation is shared with provinces, and complaints certainly don’t have to come from ‘gay activists’ this information may violate Canadian regulations.

It would be helpful to have a Canadian in the insurance industry weigh in.

http://www.ibc.ca/en/Need_More_Info/Links/Regulators.asp

False information available to Canadian insurers isn’t necessary.

Would these boards benefit from contact regarding insure.com’s misinformation?

http://www.ccir-ccrra.org/CCIR/links/web_sites_members_en.htm

I need expert advice on how to proceed and how to help others proceed.

a) a list of exclusively Cdn companies on insure.com
b) a list of US companies doing business in Canada
c) a brief and succint description of the article misinformation fora check against Canadian consumer law and the Regulatory board and for complaintants.

While this article on insure.com is ‘informational’ it may violate Canadian provincial and federal regulations.

If Mr. Bland doesn’t feel the article doesn’t need to be taken down, I would think insurers operating in Canada would want to make informed choices about their connection to insure.com.

The complaints we can register in Canada need to be brief, accurate, specific and clear.

My insurance company is there, I’ll be phoning them tommorw.

Any Canadians with regulatory information able to weigh in?

In contrast, if we were to repeat this analysis today the life expectancy of gay and bisexual men would be greatly improved. Deaths from HIV infection have declined dramatically in this population since 1996. As we have previously reported there has been a threefold decrease in mortality in Vancouver as well as in other parts of British Columbia .

It is essential to note that the life expectancy of any population is a descriptive and not a prescriptive mesaure. Death is a product of the way a person lives and what physical and environmental hazards he or she faces everyday. It cannot be attributed solely to their sexual orientation or any other ethnic or social factor. If estimates of an individual gay and bisexual man’s risk of death is truly needed for legal or other purposes, then people making these estimates should use the same actuarial tables that are used for all other males in that population. Gay and bisexual men are included in the construction of official population-based tables and therefore these tables for all males are the appropriate ones to be used.

Here Hogg et al are saying that for actuarial purposes, their study is irrelevant. The lifespans would be expected to improve coming out of the AIDS crisis and their work should not be used in the way your writer used it. Is this not reason enough to remove the article until you can say something relevant and accurate to your readers?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/11/12/01124/752

If, as you say, Mr. Bland, you neither attest to or deny “the accuracy of the third party research” — which has been debunked repeatedly, as has the so-called “researcher,” Paul Cameron — then why would anyone trust your opinion about life insurance, or any other subject? It sounds to me like you don’t do your homework very thoroughly.

Face it, Mr. Bland: You got busted. You have a very clear political agenda indeed, and by refusing to remove the article, you’re doing no favors to your own credibility — or the credibility of Insure.com, or any other business you run.

There will be a point at which any customer of Insure.com, or its affiliated insurers, particularly those customers who were denied coverage, offered sub-prime coverage, or offered coverage with additional fees or contingencies, will appropriately wonder if the material on Insure.com’s website contributed in any negative way to the underwriting process.

Consumer confidence is particularly critcial to an industry that, in essence, sells it reputation for trustworthiness.

I’ve verified it. It is the same Robert Bland.