The Future is in Our Hands
Information, Awareness, Prevention / United to End Cancer

Dear President Barack Obama, Dear leaders responsible for the future of our planet, Thank you President Obama for your numerous messages during the past months. I agree with you that we need all of us to take responsibility to make a better world for all of us. We need many more people to support advancement in science, to fight the world most deadly and costly calamity, cancer. During the past months I am receiving an average of eight emails per day from you, your wife, Vice-President Joe Biden, Donna Brazile, or others from DNC. I am respectful to you and the people you represent that you are able to express your ideas sending millions of emails more than eight times a day. I am respectful to people who express and send ideas opposite to yours such as “Free Bacon” and others or to the New York Times for informing us about the More Than 150 Republican Leaders Don’t Support Donald Trump, comforting us with an example that shows a world of REASON in a civil country is more important than a party line.

Dear leader responsible for the future of our planet, on behalf of taxpayers and cancer patients please support the request to receive an answer/REASON/resolution to the seven questions reported below. Please take action to correct unfair, illegal action by DOE Director of Research and Technology Glen Crawford in order to be able to give $4.2 million to Wesley Smith this year and taxpayer money to others among his friends he eliminates competitors by blocking their email to any DOE employee as he did with me, and surprisingly someone also wiped out all my information from DOE offices. On July 2016 I formally requested to the DOE Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to provide all records at DOE that mentioned: my name, United to End Cancer, my 413 page application #0000222704, the 3D-Flow OPRA (Object Pattern Recognition Algorithm) the 3D-CBS, the evaluation of my proposal, Crawford’s reasons why in his opinion my proposal is not sound and feasible or any evaluation he might have. On October 6, 2016, I received a CD from FOIA containing very few documents. Not a single page for the #0000222704 proposal for which I have receipts it was received, nothing about the 3D-Flow OPRA, 3D-CBS, its evaluation by the reviewers. No trace of the email Crawford sent me on May 19, 2016 with statements incriminating himself, None of my emails exchange with Jim Siegrist from May 2015 where he solicit me to submit a formal proposal of my invention to DOE (last of his email dated December 3, 2016), I ask him what is new in the Level-1 Trigger of CMS and Atlas, Siegrist responds that there is nothing new, they are working on the Region of Interest (ROI). I replied that ROI was discussed 24 years ago when I was at the Superconducting Super Collider… It looks like everything has been wiped out from DOI records.


Please anyone of you receiving this email, could you forward it to the Secretary of Energy and other leaders at DOE because Crawford blocked my email, so he can give $4.2 million to Wesley Smith with no competitors: ;  ; ; ; ; ; ;  and also support receiving an answer/REASON/resolution of the seven questions below?


Please, President Obama, could you appoint someone to investigate on Glen Crawford’s not doing his job, obstructing advancement in science and possibly replacing him with someone who can take responsibility for the job description of his position?  


I respectfully ask the recipient of this email not to take any action that would be harmful to taxpayers, cancer patients or to the advancement in science by silencing the following legitimate questions. Also, I am asking people who filter SPAM on the internet not to filter this message which is not SPAM since they do not filter thousands of messages sent by the leaders listed above to millions of people 8 times a day. There may be reports by some who do not like the messages who want to shut them down, but these negative reports are not censuring and/or silencing the freedom of expression.


This is the beauty of a civilized democratic country; let’s not have these rights of freedom of expression of ideas and innovations taken away by people with personal interests who take taxpayer and donation money allocated for research, break the ethics of a scientist, without going through a public scientific procedure of a fair competition, who are pursuing instead their and their friends greed for power and money to the detriment of taxpayers, cancer patients and humanity.  Here are the questions for which citizens of a civilized, democratic country should be receiving the answer for a world of REASON/SCIENCE:


1.       Why did the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) give $4.2 million of taxpayer money in 2016 to Wesley Smith after he wasted over $50 million building hundreds of crates with 4,000 electronic data processing board of the CMS Level-1 Trigger systems costing over $100 million which did not work and had to be trashed knowing that it can be replaced with one 3D-Flow OPRA crate at 1/1000 the cost with staggering performance improvements?


2.       Why did the U.S. National Institutes of Health give $3,314,184 of taxpayer money in 2016 (out of $15.5 million, $3,054,873 delivered in 2015) to the team of the Explorer project  made of 491,520 expensive LYSO crystals, 12 crates with 120 data processing boards and 6 racks of computer processing 40 TB data acquired and stored on hard drives every day for a total power consumption of 60 kW, which cannot save many lives because it cannot acquire and process 40,000 TB data per day, knowing that the 3D-CBS device can make a paradigm change in molecular imaging because it has the capability to acquire and process over 40,000 TB data each day, using one 3D-Flow OPRA VME crate for a total power consumption of the entire system of only 4 Kw, at less than 1/10 the cost of the Explorer? Why, knowing that the 3D-CBS could have saved millions of lives with an effective early cancer detection, reduce radiation dose to less than 1/50, reduce healthcare costs and these results can be proven on a sample population, has it not been funded?


3.       Why, after informing President Obama that more than one year after having proof that Glen Crawford, Director of Research and Technology at DOE is not doing his job and five months after his 8-line email incriminating himself with statements in violation of DOE rules and contradicting his own statements, does he still hold the same position and continues to waste taxpayer money and be the internal arm of a circle of friends of corrupted scientists? Why, after Crosetto notified the DOE FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) agent by phone about this document published at proving that Crawford ordered DOE Security to block Crosetto’s messages to all DOE employees, including the Secretary of Energy, FOIA and OHA so he and his group (e.g. Helmut Marsiske) could continue to give millions of dollars to Wesley Smith and others without accountability is illegal and an abuse of power, Crosetto cannot send these facts to DOE?


4.       Why, after Informing President Obama and Vice-President Joe Biden that Michael Laurer, Director of the Extramural Research at the National Institute of Health, does not want to hear Crosetto’s inventions, does not want to organize a public scientific review of the 3D-CBS because he believes this would not be fair to all scientists, but does not give the same importance to be fair to the public or to serve the President and Vice-President who promise to give the public the greatest benefits for their tax-dollars, no action is taken depriving instead taxpayers from the benefits from innovations that would emerge from a fair scientific competition?  Why, after proving in this document that the $15.5 million given to the Explorer project is a waste of money because the 3D-CBS can acquire and process over 40,000 TB data in one day providing an effective early cancer detection and a much more powerful research tool at less than 1/10 the cost, does Laurer not respond to hear about Crosetto’s invention, organize a scientific review or consider resigning if he is being impeded from doing his job by someone, instead of complying with the ethics of a scientist and do what it is best for taxpayers?


5.       Why, 3 days after Crosetto explained the reason of the great damage to the advancement in science and benefit to humanity for the rejection of his papers and providing facts proving reviewers of this year as well as previous years were either incompetent or did not tell the truth because facts and documents refute reviewers claims that they did not know about Crosetto’s work, do leaders of the Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference in Strasbourg which takes place in 2 days, still not respond to let Crosetto know if he can present his inventions for the benefit of humanity at the Conference or if they will consider resigning if they are being impeded from doing their job by someone, instead of complying with the ethics of a scientist and do what it is best for taxpayers?


6.       Why, 3 days after Crosetto informed the Presidents and board of Directors of IEEE, the world’s 400,000 member largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for the benefit of humanity, that facts show that the organizers of the 2016 IEEE-NSS-MIC-RTSD Conference in Strasbourg which takes place in 2 days, have rejected three papers regarding innovations proving to replace hundreds of crates of electronics with one crate at 1/1000 the cost and provide staggering performance improvement that has  been proven feasible by 59 quotes from reputable industries, still do not respond about the logic and compliance with the scientific integrity that would call for IEEE to disassociate itself from the Strasbourg’s conference organizers who are contrary to advancing technology for the benefit of humanity, and remove its endorsement of the conference.


7.       Why, a) after Crosetto and two friends drove to Davos, Switzerland, to hand-deliver a letter containing Crosetto’s 271-page proposal and 155-page report of 59 quotes from reputable industries to Vice-President Joe Biden who organized a forum among scientists of the Cancer Moonshot task force, b) after Crosetto sent an additional copy of the proposal to the physical address provided by Ms. Brazile who Crosetto met at an event at the University of Arlington in Texas, and c) after Mr. Charles Conner, a veteran who worked for Lyndon B. Johnson from 1959 to 1964, wrote a personal letter to Vice-President Joe Biden asking him to address the specific items in Crosetto’s letter, clear out bureaucratic hurdles and have Crosetto be part of the Task Force to defeat cancer, did Mr. Conner not receive a reply, the specific items in Crosetto’s letter were not addressed, and Crosetto was not included in the Task Force to defeat cancer?


161,765,000 people have died from cancer since Crosetto’s invention was crushed (11,984,000 were Americans), many of them could have been saved with his 3D-CBS (3-D Complete Body Screening) technology and hundreds of millions of dollars of tax-payer money could have been saved in High Energy Physics experiments, while providing a very powerful tool to discover new subatomic particles and advance science in different fields. This needless loss of lives, waste of taxpayer money, and loss of advancement in science calls for the reform of the peer-review process to be independent from money and politics as expressed by the National Academy of Science


I very much agree with you President Barack Obama  to make a world of REASON.


Mr. President, this can work also to defeat the most deadly and costly calamity, cancer. It is not sufficient to send a one-time email, but it is necessary to send millions of emails, eight times a day, every day for several months so that the scientific truth for the benefits of humanity emerge and cancer is defeated once and for all.


Thank you.







From: Barack Obama []

Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 1:02 PM

To: Dario Crosetto <>

Subject: I need you to do this, Dario


Dario —


At tonight’s debate, we’ll see two very different paths for our future.


One candidate is simply unfit and unprepared for the office. He likes to talk tough, but he’s spent most of the last week refusing to take responsibility for his actions and complaining to the refs.


The other is the most qualified person to run for the presidency.


I’m all in to elect my friend Hillary Clinton. She needs your help right now, too.


Tonight is the final debate of this campaign. Every supporter who steps up before then joins the official record of Final Debate Donors, the folks standing shoulder to shoulder with Hillary when it matters most.


Hillary’s one of the smartest, toughest, best-prepared, most experienced people ever to run for this job. As First Lady, as a U.S. Senator, and as my Secretary of State, she’s spent every day fighting for justice, equality, and the belief that everybody deserves a fair shake. She never ever quits.


That’s who she is.


This debate isn’t just about who wins on November 8th. It’s a showdown between the politics of fear and blame and the hope and optimism that make America the greatest nation on Earth.





[See this document at:   or at the Google Drive]


Respectfully bringing to your attention facts proving that:


Innovations saving millions of lives and hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are suppressed and its inventor threatened to involve security instead of providing scientific and economic reasons why hundreds of chasses of electronics that do not provide a powerful tool to save lives and to discover new subatomic particles are funded knowing that breakthrough 3D-Flow and 3D-CBS inventions proven feasible by 59 quotes from reputable industries can replace them in one chassis at a fraction of the cost providing a staggering performance improvement.


Hundreds of millions of taxpayer and donation dollars are being wasted and millions of lives are being needlessly lost from cancer because innovations are suppressed by a flawed peer-review process and funding agencies are complicit with scientists who do not have scientific integrity and break their professional ethics instead of making them accountable.


The value of Crosetto’s inventions have been recognized and endorsed by hundreds of scientists, the concepts have been proven feasible and functional in hardware, providing staggering performance improvements as confirmed in a public scientific review held at FERMILAB in December 1993, where Crosetto answered objections from other scientists. Recently it was  proven feasible by 59 quotes from reputable industries to replace hundreds of crates of electronics with one crate at 1/1000 the cost.



350 years after Galileo was threatened for stating scientific truths,
Crosetto is threatened for stating scientific truths.

     I.        SUMMARY: Innovation is suppressed when scientists do not stand up for SCIENCE.

Galileo was threatened by the Church for asserting that the Earth is not at the center of the Universe.

Dario Crosetto has been threatened by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Citigroup to involve Security if he continues to insist on the feasibility of his inventions in medical imaging, high energy physics and other fields capable of replacing hundreds of crates of electronics with one crate at 1/1000 the cost, while providing staggering performance improvements: in discovering new subatomic particles, saving millions of lives with a cost-effective early cancer detection and reducing healthcare costs.

Why did it take 350 years for the Church to recognize Galileo was right, and why for 25 years have hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money continued to fund less efficient, more costly systems than Crosetto’s life-saving and money-saving inventions, which continue to be ignored? Why does Crosetto receive threats as Galileo did?

History repeats itself. If influential scientists of his time had stood strong in defense of science, Galileo might not have been forced to recant empirical evidence to avoid the consequences of the Church’s threat to chop off his head, and humanity would have received the benefits of his discoveries earlier.

If the majority of scientists (and specifically those handling taxpayer and donated funds) stood in defense of science today, Crosetto would not receive threats from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Citigroup, and humanity would enjoy the benefits of his inventions.

The value of Crosetto’s inventions have been recognized and endorsed by hundreds of scientists, the concepts have been proven feasible and functional in hardware, providing staggering performance improvements as confirmed in a public scientific review held at FERMILAB in December 1993, where Crosetto answered objections from other scientists. Recently it was  proven feasible by 59 quotes from reputable industries to replace hundreds of crates of electronics with one crate at 1/1000 the cost.  Yet Crosetto is boycotted, ignored and prevented from presenting his papers at conferences, even having his microphone removed when he asks legitimate and pertinent questions.

It is akin to an athlete with superior skill being blocked from Olympic competition by competitors who would lose the competition should the better athlete be allowed to participate.

Instead of implementing a world of reason/science, critical members of the scientific community are succumbing to a world of power/money and influence because of the rigged peer-review process which invites corruption.

To implement independence for the peer-review process expressed by the National Academy of Science, reform is needed. See Crosetto’s answer to the President of IEEE, the world’s 400,000 member largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for the benefit of humanity.

Decision makers in the field of medical imaging research who consider Crosetto a competitive adversary and prevent him from publicly discussing the utility of his 3D-CBS (3-D Complete Body Screening) invention, should realize there is only one true adversary and it is one we share – the plague of cancer. Everyone must cooperate to advance science and technology against cancer at every opportunity, which will enable us to reduce the economic burden, suffering, and loss of lives which this calamity represents. We must allow the science of medical imaging to proceed freely through fair, open, public competition.

Likewise, colleagues in high energy physics research at DOE and at CERN should not consider Crosetto an adversary, but a collaborator who can provide experimental physicists the most powerful tool available for efficiently executing their preferred Level-1 Trigger algorithms, enabling them to quickly and economically confirm or rule out the existence of new particles, and do so with the highest certainty.

Governments allocate vast sums of money for eradicating cancer, while leaders of funding agencies do not want to hear solutions from inventors, giving the excuse that they want to be fair to all scientists, while their circle of scientist friends meet behind closed doors to split taxpayer money among themselves for their own interest and are not fair to the public. The Media and everyone should take responsibility by passing along this information and stand up for JUSTICE. Support the Crosetto Foundation with a tax-deductible donation at:

Be the change you want to see in a world of reason and respect for your children and future generations by demanding that the DOE Director or Research and Technology who wrote an 8-line email in which he incriminates himself and proves he cannot do his job, reflect and resign because he broke government rules and reveals how corruption works in assigning taxpayer money to research projects. Demand also NIH organize a PUBLIC scientific review to learn how Crosetto’s invention which can slash cancer mortality by 50% and reduce healthcare costs compares to the Explorer project funded by NIH for $15.5 million that can do neither. (CLICK HERE FOR FULL DOCUMENT).

    II.        Crosetto’s inventions endorsed by top world experts in the field and other professionals

Research scientist Dario Crosetto worked on leading edge physics experiments at the world’s largest laboratories (CERN in Geneva, Superconducting Super Collider -SSC- Texas, FERMILAB and Brookhaven National Laboratory -BNL-), won the Leonardo da Vinci Prize for his invention for early cancer detection, was awarded one million dollars in government grants, and received $10,000 for the best Business Plan reviewed by Venture Capitalists in a start-up competition.

His inventions were endorsed in writing by over 50 top scientists and experts in the field as reported in excerpts from their letters.  Here is a list of a few letters in their entirety which represent less than 50% of the entire set:

·      Andrew Lankford, University of California, Irvine, former Deputy Spokesman of the CERN-Atlas experiment, now Chairman of the HEPAP (High Energy Physics Advisory Panel), who was charged in 2013 by DOE and NSF to develop an updated strategic plan for the U.S. High Energy Physics (HEP) that can be executed over a 10-year timescale, in the context of a 20-year global vision for the field, and was recently charged by the DOE Director of the Office of Science, Dr. Cherry Murray, to assemble a COV committee to assess the operations of HEP during fiscal years 2013, 2014, 2015;

·      Joel Butler, head of the Computing Division at FERMI National Laboratory, now Spokesman of the CERN-CMS experiment;

·      Barry Barish, California Institute of Technology (see in session 3, pp. 15-23 an interview about the SSC, CERN-Courier GDE 2008, and Dr. Barish’s lecture at CERN 2016), now Plenary Speaker at the 2016 IEEE-NSS Conference on October 31, 2016;

·      Ralph James, Associate Director of Science and Technology at the Savannah River Nat. Lab., Co-Chair of the 2016 IEEE-RTSD workshop;

·      Livio Mapelli, CERN leader in Atlas experiment, member of the review panel of the 3D-Flow basic invention held at FERMILAB in 1993;

·      Maris Abolins, Michigan State University, who endorsed Crosetto’s 3D-Flow invention to be used in the D0 experiment in 1994;

·      Michael Shaevitz, Columbia University, Co-leader, electronic group at the SSC-GEM experiment;

·      Mike Harris, Chief Engineer at the SSC-GEM experiment;

·      John People, Director of the SSC (also Director of FERMILAB and representing Universities Research Association, Inc. and the U.S. DOE)

·      Sergio Cittolin, CERN Group Leader, Readout Architectures Group;

·      Francoise Bourgeois, Deputy Division Leader of CERN Electronics and Computing for Physics;

·      Pier Giorgio Innocenti, Division Leader of CERN Electronics and Computing for Physics;

·      Walter Selove, Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of Pennsylvania offers collaboration.

·      Laura Mantegazza, Medical Information Division, Radiology Department, University Hospital of Geneva, Switzerland

·      Paul Jerabek, University of Texas, PET Division Chief, San Antonio, TX, who endorsed Crosetto’s 3D-CBS to be used at his Research Imaging Center,

·      Joseph Dent, Assistant Professor, Department of Biology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada

·      Hon. Jane Nelson, Texas State Senator, who raised $3 billion for cancer research, however, Crosetto’s 3D-CBS was triaged out and not even reviewed

·      Stephen Fluckiger, Partner at Jones Day, among the world’s largest law firms covering 5 continents, Dallas, Texas

·      Hon. Kay Bailey Hutchison, United State Senator,

·      Robert Turner, Partner at Jones Day, among the world’s largest law firms covering 5 continents, Dallas, Texas

·      Paul Bartholdi, Observatory of Geneva, Switzerland;

·      Catharinus Verkerk, Group Leader Data Handling Division at CERN and Director of the ICTP Colleges on Microprocessors;

·      Domenico Scannicchio, Medical Physics Director at University of Pavia, Italy, who endorsed Crosetto’s 3D-CBS to be used at his hosp.

The superiority in efficiency of Crosetto’s 3D-CBS (3-D Complete Body Screening) medical imaging invention made Siemens take a second look at their PET (Positron Emission Tomography) devices and had to agree that the electronics could be improved after insisting (in a meeting with Crosetto that lasted an entire day) the efficiency of their electronics had reached the limit.

Crosetto’s basic 3D-Flow invention was recognized valuable by a major public scientific review held at FERMILAB in Dec. 1993, endorsed for the D0 experiment at FERMILAB, adopted by thousands of scientists at the GEM experiment at the SSC and the LHCb experiment at CERN, but never funded to completion, while alternative projects were funded, ultimately failed and were trashed. Recently the 3D-Flow was proven feasible by 59 quotes from industries to replace 4,000 CERN electronic boards with 9 boards.

Crosetto’s 3D-CBS invention that can slash cancer mortality by 50% was endorsed for use in hospitals in S. Antonio, TX, the RHD hospital and Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, TX, and S. Matteo hospital in Pavia, Italy, but was never funded, while NIH funded the Explorer project for $15.4 million that cannot make such a claim.  Crosetto’s 3D-Flow and 3D-CBS inventions along with his subsequent inventions were recognized valuable in several scientific reviews including most notably:

·         Silvio Turrini, co-inventor in 1993 at DIGITAL Inc. of the first 300MHz 115W 32b Bipolar ECL Microprocessor 

·         Jerry Merryman, co-inventor with Nobel Prize winner Jack Kilby of the pocket calculator.

Crosetto has also proved the concepts of his inventions feasible and functional in hardware.

To support transparency in science, request a PUBLIC review of Crosetto’s inventions and make a tax-deductible donation to the Crosetto Foundation at: or at: ABA: 114000093, SWIFT: FRSTUS44, cc. 98-2046679.

Share it!Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on LinkedInPin on PinterestShare on TumblrEmail this to someone

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *