T
Todd Gastaldo
Guest
I recently wrote to ATTORNEY ANTHONY MANCINI:
I don't think OB/GYNs *want* to ignore the medical
literature (and simple biomechanics) and close birth canals
up to 30%.
I think OB/GYNs HAVE to close birth canals because it's such
obvious criminal negligence that stopping it will be
tantamount to admitting it.
What you need, Anthony, is a BRAVE OB/GYN - a man willing to
speak up and render his whole profession susceptible to
criminal prosecution and massive civil liability.
See Attorney looking for 'credible' OB/GYNs... http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-
list/message/2360
I think OB/GYNs have HIRED people to help hide their massive
crime against babies.
I think this is at the crux of the Schroeder/Rule 302
matter...
Brenda Copeland-Moore just threw the Schroeder/Rule 302
matter in my face...
Brenda wrote:
"Just found this, interesting?" http://lists.topica.com/lis-
ts/erbs/read/message.html?mid=808763762
Brenda,
That Schroeder/Rule 302 matter *is* interesting!
REPUBLICAN Attorney Michaeal Schroeder and the Calif. State
Board of Chiro. Examiners are remaining silent as Brachial
Plexus Injured/BPI children suffer PERMANENT PARALYSIS
because they had their spines GRUESOMELY manipulated by MDs
senselessly closing birth canals up to 30%.
MDs are violently PUSHING on tiny spines (with oxytocin,
Cytotec, PGE2) and gruesomely PULLING (with hands, forceps,
vacuums) - with birth canals senselessly closed up to 30%.
(ALL spinal manipulation is gruesome with the birth canal
senselessly closed up to 30%.)
Why do you suppose "chiropractic" Attorney Schroeder and the
Calif. Board of Chiro Examiners are remaining silent about
MDs closing birth canals up to 30% and gruesomely
manipulating most babies' spines?
(I ask because you found the article about the
Schroeder/Rule 302 matter interesting.)
Why do you suppose the Schroeder-influenced "chiropractic"
newspaper from which you copied (see below) is remaining
silent about the massive MD spinal manipulation crime?
Could it be that REPUBLICAN politico attorney Schroeder (and
politico/chiro confederates including the editor of the
newspaper) are PLAYING SILENT POLITICS for profit - "for
chiropractic"?
What if the late RC Shafer, DC, PhD was right in his
suggestion that political chiropractic is being run from
behind the scenes by political medicine?
What POLITICAL PLUMS might be won from organized medicine
were REPUBLICAN chiros (or Democratic chiros for that
matter!) to keep the chiro trade unions silent about the
obvious massive MD spinal manipulation crime? I personally
think organized medicine has been attacking chiropractors
for causing strokes and for adjusting kids because organized
medicine fears exposure of the gruesome mass spinal
manipulation by MDs at birth.
NOTE: There is NO scientific evidence that DCs should be
adjusting kids (someone correct me if I am wrong) -
but neither is there evidence that MDs should be
closing birth canals and GRUESOMELY manipulating most
babies' spines!
Chiro/politicos are having some successes! Florida
REPUBLICANS reportedly just got MILLIONS for a brand new
chiropractic college to be built at Florida State University
in a time when chiropractic enrollments nationwide have
reportedly shrunk drastically!
(Don't get me wrong! I am PLEASED that the State of Florida
is investing in chiropractic! I just think the State of
Florida should FIRST stop MDs from closing birth canals and
gruesomely manipulating most babies' spines! This would
probably save BILLIONS by the way - not to mention saving
tiny lives and tiny limbs and PREVENTING more vertebral
subluxations than DCs will ever be able to adjust by hand.)
Brenda, you did not like me saying that RAHUL K. NATH, MD
who directly PROFITS from brachial plexus injury is
remaining silent about OBs senselessly closing birth
canals...
I SAY AGAIN: Rahul indicates on his website that LARGE SIZE
babies contribute to brachial plexus injury but makes NO
MENTION of the fact obstetricians are knowingly closing
birth canals up to 30%!
See Silent Dr. Nath: BPI malpractice suits as prevention http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-
list/message/2357
See also BRENDA'S "response" to "Silent Dr. Nath - with
Gastaldo's reply to Brenda... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-
list/message/2359
Brenda - besides publicly pretending that RAHUL K. NATH, MD
isn't being silent about the obstetric crime that brings him
business - what ELSE are you doing to help BPI children?
(NOTE: I am NOT saying that Rahul isn't a fine surgeon!
Indeed, I've acknowledged that he's probably the best! WHY
though is he silent about MDs closing birth canals?! Why is
he ignoring his ethical obligation to do simple things that
- given his own LARGE SIZE baby verbiage - would PREVENT
that which he charges to treat?)
Powerful people are known to bring libel lawsuits to stifle
freedom of speech. Indeed, there is a "SLAPP" law in
California that recognizes this fact. (I think SLAPP stands
for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.)
I would *love* to have had the money to go down and argue
that Schroeder/Rule 302 matter in California.
Incidentally, early on, I asked Schroeder what it would take
to make his libel lawsuit go away. Schroeder wanted me to
give him $1000 dollars and sign a statement that contained
obvious lies. I refused. I still have his faxes and surface
mail. (It's legal to force someone to sign lies to make a
lawsuit go away - or rather - "negotiations" to make a
lawsuit go away are not admissible if the legal proceedings
go forward - or so I was informed by an attorney.)
Schroeder's Rule 302 is now being challenged in court in
Tain et al. v. Calif. State Board of Chiropractic
Examiners et al.
I believe Schroeder in effect helped 10 MD-obstetricians
judicially rubberstamp an illegal regulation - Rule 302 - to
keep DCs from thinking about birth - to cover-up GRUESOME
spinal manipulation by MDs.
I have no proof - but regardless though whether I am
right (I believe I am of course), WHY is "chiropractic"
Attorney Schroeder ignoring the obvious MD spinal
manipulation crime?!
Schroeder's Rule 302 explicitly prohibits Calif. DCs - who
used to attend homebirths - from so much as severing the
umbilical cord!
IMAGINE THAT! MDs can close birth canals gruesomely
manipulate most babies' spines - and sometimes sever spinal
NERVES - and DCs can't even sever *umbilical cords*!?
And Atty Schroeder remains silent!
WHY?!
I can see why Brenda finds the Schroeder/Rule 302 matter
interesting!
BTW Brenda, I mentioned Tain et al.'s challenge to
Schroeder's Rule 302 in a recent post to [email protected] as
follows....
>>>>BEGIN excerpt of What is Erb's?/Dr. Hein on Erb's &
>>>>Gherman/Erb's class
action http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-
list/message/2349
ABOUT TODD D. GASTALDO, DC...
Some may remember me from the now-defunct Erbs Coollist,
[email protected].
I am a retired^^^ doctor of chiropractic/DC.
I am interested in PREVENTING Erb's/brachial plexus injury -
or - in any event - halting the bizarre routine
obstetrician/CNMwife practice of closing birth canals up to
30% at delivery.
^^^What do I mean by "retired"?
Since my "retirement," I have been working nearly non-stop
making NON-SPINAL (educational) chiropractic adjustments
that ANYONE can make - licensed, degreed or not.
Dr. DD Palmer, Founder of chiropractic, defined chiropractic
in part as "the mental act of accumulating knowledge."
[1910:19] DD's definition of chiropractic is not so
crazy as it sounds since medicine is RESTRICTING "the
mental act of accumulating knowledge" - especially in
regard to birth.
HOW I CAME TO BE "RETIRED"
Back in the early 90s, after a man claiming to be Michael
Schroeder attorney for the California Board of Chiropractic
Examiners told me it was not within my scope of practice to
tell pregnant women that obstetricians were/are closing
birth canals...
So I became unlicensed by choice: I saw NO reason to pay a
chiropractic board to tell me I can't work to save tiny
live and tiny limbs and PREVENT more vertebral subluxations
than licensed DCs will ever be able to adjust by hand. (I
would LOVE to hear though that the Calif. Board of
Chiropractic Examiners finds my non-spinal practice of
chiropractic legal...)
I now devote near full-time to helping pregnant women engage
in "the mental act of accumulating knowledge" - esp.
regarding obstetricians/CNMwives gruesomely manipulating
most babies' spines.
NOTE: ALL spinal manipulation is gruesome with the birth
canal senselessly closed up to 30%.
MORE ON (ANOTHER?) SCHROEDER...
Incidentally, an Attorney Michael Schroeder, attorney for
the California Board of Chiropractic Examiners helped 10 MD-
obstetricians judicially rubberstamp his (Schroeder's) Rule
302 which explicitly made it illegal for Calif. DCs to so
much as sever umbilical cords!
This same Attorney Michael Schroeder - who subsequently
became Chairman of the Calif. Republican Party - later sued
me for one million dollars for publicly suggesting that his
Rule 302 illegally narrowed the California scope of
chiropractic practice. I spent about $2500 dollars trying to
move the trial to Oregon - but Atty Schroeder won that
jurisdiction battle and - in his jurisdiction was awarded a
default judgement of $25,000 dollars - the merits of the
case never having been argued.
"Chiropractic" Attorney Schroeder is STILL not helping me
stop OBs from closing birth canals and gruesomely
manipulating most babies' spines at birth...
Attention Calif. DCs: JUST THINK Calif. OBs can gruesomely
manipulate babies' spines and sometimes sever spinal nerves
- but under Schroeder's Rule 302 - Calif. DCs - who used to
attend homebirths - explicitly can't sever umbilical cords!
(Schroeder's Rule 302 is now being challenged in court in
Tain et al. v State Board of Chiro Examiners. See Dorland's,
URL below.)
Key quotes...
"Chiropractic Education...include...OBSTETRICS..." --
American Chiropractic Association/ACA Chairman James
Edwards, DC and Cynthia Vaughn, DC
http://www.jamesedwards.com/educate.htm (emphasis added)
"Obstetrics is the art of midwifery...If the accoucheur is a
Chiropractor, he can adjust...thereby preventing disease."
--Dr. DD Palmer, Founder of Chiropractic [1910:789]
I personally think autonomous homebirth midwifery licensure
is the way to go...
Chiropractors don't need to attend births to prevent disease
- to stop OBs from closing birth canals!
MY DEFINITION OF CHIROPRACTIC ("a science of applied
neurophysiologic diagnosis") appears in three editions
of Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary [1988,
1994, 2000]...
See Dorland's: Preventing VS by educating OBs (also: New
defn of chiro in Dorland's) http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-
list/message/2318
>>>>END excerpt of What is Erb's?/Dr. Hein on Erb's &
>>>>Gherman/Erb's class
action http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-
list/message/2349
Readers,
Brenda's Original Message is below...
Brenda forgot to mention the name of the source - Dynamic
Chiropractic. Schroeder has done legal work for Dynamic
Chiropractic publisher Donald Petersen....
Please note that Schroeder's Rule 302 isn't mentioned
anywhere in the article - but Schroeder's Rule 302 and my
complaints about it were the subject of the libel lawsuit!
Dynamic Chiropractic/Petersen also isn't covering the Tain
et al. challenge to Schroeder's Rule 302 - at least I
haven't seen any coverage yet....
I think I was sued by Schroeder to shut me up about the
obvious obstetric crime and the fact that Schroeder's Rule
302 - if enforced - stops DCs from thinking about birth...
Again, Schroeder's Rule 302 explicitly prohibits Calif. DCs
- who used to attend homebirths - from so much as severing
the umbilical cord!
Bottomline, MDs can close birth canals gruesomely manipulate
most babies' spines - and sometimes sever spinal NERVES -
and DCs can't even sever *umbilical cords*!?
As noted above, a man calling himself Michael Schroeder,
attorney for the Calif. Chiro Board of Examiners, told me it
was outside my scope of practice to tell pregnant women that
MDs are closing birth canals.
Obviously, I think the two Schroeders are the same man - but
I have no proof.
Similar to Schroeder, I think Brenda is trying to cover up
the fact that Dr. Nath is remaining silent about obvious
obstetric crime...
Again, I have no proof regarding Brenda either - but she
never answered my reply to her "response" at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-
list/message/2359
All Brenda has done is post the article below and say, "Just
found this, interesting?"
I find THAT interesting.
Thanks for reading,
Sincerely,
Todd
Ds. Gastaldo [email protected]
----- Original Message ----- From: Mike and Brenda Moore
To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 8:13 AM
Subject: The Cost of Voicing Opinions on the Internet
Just found this, interesting?
The Cost of Voicing "Opinions" on the Internet
------------------------------------------------------------
----------------
--
Court Orders DC to Pay $25,000 in Damages
The internet is a marvel. It allows people everywhere to enter chat rooms,
bulletin boards and list servers and "speak one's mind." While there is a
certain feeling of anonymity and an "anything goes" atmosphere in the cyber
realm, it is an environment where one comment on a single email can, for
instance, be replicated and re-emailed to a few people or even millions of
people around the world in seconds.
This revolutionary technology is taking free speech to a new level. Yes,
you can say anything you want on the internet, but just as in any other
context of communicating with our fellow terrestrials, you may pay the
consequences for what you say.
What some people apparently are failing to comprehend is that presenting
your opinions in a chat room, on a bulletin board or an email list is not
like shooting the breeze with friends or new acquaintances at a party.
Everything displayed on any aspect of the Web is documented, recorded and
reproducible. It is the electronic equivalent of publishing, not talking.
All of the liabilities of slander and defamation are in full force.
Todd Gastaldo,DC, just learned that lesson the hard way. Dr. Gastaldo made
comments about Michael Schroeder, an attorney who worked for the California
Chiropractic Association. Apparently assuming he was safe to say anything on
the Web, Dr. Gastaldo made this comment on Chiro-List, a chiropractic email
discussion list:
"...Mr. Schroeder bilked $800,000 in DC licensing fees when he jumped from
CCA to the Chiro. Licensing Board..."
Legally, slander of someone's trade or business carries with it damages
that are assumed by the court. As an attorney, Mr. Schroeder knew Dr.
Gastaldo's false comments were actionable. He demanded a retraction and
public apology. When Dr. Gastaldo did not meet that demand, Mr. Schroeder
filed a lawsuit in California, initially seeking $500,000 in compensatory
damages, and later requesting an additional $500,000 in punitive damages.
Dr. Gastaldo, a resident of Oregon, asked the court to move the venue to
Oregon "to make for the fairest trial possible." The venue question was
interesting because of the global aspect of the internet. The judge reasoned
that because the comments were made on a chiropractic discussion list, and
at least twice as many chiropractors live in California than in any other
state in the country, that California was the appropriate venue for the
trial.
Not successful in getting the trial moved to Oregon, Dr. Gastaldo simply
failed to respond to the lawsuit. This gave Mr. Schroeder a victory by
default, although Mr. Schroeder still had to demonstrate to the court that
he had suffered damages.
Perhaps the only good news for Dr. Gastaldo is the challenge the court
faced in determining who and how many people read the comment, whether on
the post or via email. On January 5, 2000, Mr. Schroeder was awarded $25,000
in damages (that's almost $1,400 per word of Dr. Gastaldo's defamatory
comment), plus court costs of $192.
Now begins the process of filing the judgment in Oregon in order to have
the right to recover his damages. Once Mr. Schroeder does that, he can seek
damages from Dr. Gastaldo's bank accounts, put liens on any real property
(such as his home), and garnish his wages until the $25,192 judgment is paid
in full.
We don't image that this case is the first lawsuit against a DC spawned by
comments made on the Web, but it should help remind doctors who post
messages and sent emails that the liabilities are quite real. There are at
least two ways to protect yourself. Discuss issues, not people. And if you
want to talk about people, purchase a minimum of $5 million of liability
insurance specifically for the internet
I'll copy this to Dynamic Chiropractic publisher Don Petersen, Jr via
[email protected]
This post - Chiros ignoring BPI crime - will be instantly archived for
global access at:
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/2362
I don't think OB/GYNs *want* to ignore the medical
literature (and simple biomechanics) and close birth canals
up to 30%.
I think OB/GYNs HAVE to close birth canals because it's such
obvious criminal negligence that stopping it will be
tantamount to admitting it.
What you need, Anthony, is a BRAVE OB/GYN - a man willing to
speak up and render his whole profession susceptible to
criminal prosecution and massive civil liability.
See Attorney looking for 'credible' OB/GYNs... http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-
list/message/2360
I think OB/GYNs have HIRED people to help hide their massive
crime against babies.
I think this is at the crux of the Schroeder/Rule 302
matter...
Brenda Copeland-Moore just threw the Schroeder/Rule 302
matter in my face...
Brenda wrote:
"Just found this, interesting?" http://lists.topica.com/lis-
ts/erbs/read/message.html?mid=808763762
Brenda,
That Schroeder/Rule 302 matter *is* interesting!
REPUBLICAN Attorney Michaeal Schroeder and the Calif. State
Board of Chiro. Examiners are remaining silent as Brachial
Plexus Injured/BPI children suffer PERMANENT PARALYSIS
because they had their spines GRUESOMELY manipulated by MDs
senselessly closing birth canals up to 30%.
MDs are violently PUSHING on tiny spines (with oxytocin,
Cytotec, PGE2) and gruesomely PULLING (with hands, forceps,
vacuums) - with birth canals senselessly closed up to 30%.
(ALL spinal manipulation is gruesome with the birth canal
senselessly closed up to 30%.)
Why do you suppose "chiropractic" Attorney Schroeder and the
Calif. Board of Chiro Examiners are remaining silent about
MDs closing birth canals up to 30% and gruesomely
manipulating most babies' spines?
(I ask because you found the article about the
Schroeder/Rule 302 matter interesting.)
Why do you suppose the Schroeder-influenced "chiropractic"
newspaper from which you copied (see below) is remaining
silent about the massive MD spinal manipulation crime?
Could it be that REPUBLICAN politico attorney Schroeder (and
politico/chiro confederates including the editor of the
newspaper) are PLAYING SILENT POLITICS for profit - "for
chiropractic"?
What if the late RC Shafer, DC, PhD was right in his
suggestion that political chiropractic is being run from
behind the scenes by political medicine?
What POLITICAL PLUMS might be won from organized medicine
were REPUBLICAN chiros (or Democratic chiros for that
matter!) to keep the chiro trade unions silent about the
obvious massive MD spinal manipulation crime? I personally
think organized medicine has been attacking chiropractors
for causing strokes and for adjusting kids because organized
medicine fears exposure of the gruesome mass spinal
manipulation by MDs at birth.
NOTE: There is NO scientific evidence that DCs should be
adjusting kids (someone correct me if I am wrong) -
but neither is there evidence that MDs should be
closing birth canals and GRUESOMELY manipulating most
babies' spines!
Chiro/politicos are having some successes! Florida
REPUBLICANS reportedly just got MILLIONS for a brand new
chiropractic college to be built at Florida State University
in a time when chiropractic enrollments nationwide have
reportedly shrunk drastically!
(Don't get me wrong! I am PLEASED that the State of Florida
is investing in chiropractic! I just think the State of
Florida should FIRST stop MDs from closing birth canals and
gruesomely manipulating most babies' spines! This would
probably save BILLIONS by the way - not to mention saving
tiny lives and tiny limbs and PREVENTING more vertebral
subluxations than DCs will ever be able to adjust by hand.)
Brenda, you did not like me saying that RAHUL K. NATH, MD
who directly PROFITS from brachial plexus injury is
remaining silent about OBs senselessly closing birth
canals...
I SAY AGAIN: Rahul indicates on his website that LARGE SIZE
babies contribute to brachial plexus injury but makes NO
MENTION of the fact obstetricians are knowingly closing
birth canals up to 30%!
See Silent Dr. Nath: BPI malpractice suits as prevention http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-
list/message/2357
See also BRENDA'S "response" to "Silent Dr. Nath - with
Gastaldo's reply to Brenda... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-
list/message/2359
Brenda - besides publicly pretending that RAHUL K. NATH, MD
isn't being silent about the obstetric crime that brings him
business - what ELSE are you doing to help BPI children?
(NOTE: I am NOT saying that Rahul isn't a fine surgeon!
Indeed, I've acknowledged that he's probably the best! WHY
though is he silent about MDs closing birth canals?! Why is
he ignoring his ethical obligation to do simple things that
- given his own LARGE SIZE baby verbiage - would PREVENT
that which he charges to treat?)
Powerful people are known to bring libel lawsuits to stifle
freedom of speech. Indeed, there is a "SLAPP" law in
California that recognizes this fact. (I think SLAPP stands
for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.)
I would *love* to have had the money to go down and argue
that Schroeder/Rule 302 matter in California.
Incidentally, early on, I asked Schroeder what it would take
to make his libel lawsuit go away. Schroeder wanted me to
give him $1000 dollars and sign a statement that contained
obvious lies. I refused. I still have his faxes and surface
mail. (It's legal to force someone to sign lies to make a
lawsuit go away - or rather - "negotiations" to make a
lawsuit go away are not admissible if the legal proceedings
go forward - or so I was informed by an attorney.)
Schroeder's Rule 302 is now being challenged in court in
Tain et al. v. Calif. State Board of Chiropractic
Examiners et al.
I believe Schroeder in effect helped 10 MD-obstetricians
judicially rubberstamp an illegal regulation - Rule 302 - to
keep DCs from thinking about birth - to cover-up GRUESOME
spinal manipulation by MDs.
I have no proof - but regardless though whether I am
right (I believe I am of course), WHY is "chiropractic"
Attorney Schroeder ignoring the obvious MD spinal
manipulation crime?!
Schroeder's Rule 302 explicitly prohibits Calif. DCs - who
used to attend homebirths - from so much as severing the
umbilical cord!
IMAGINE THAT! MDs can close birth canals gruesomely
manipulate most babies' spines - and sometimes sever spinal
NERVES - and DCs can't even sever *umbilical cords*!?
And Atty Schroeder remains silent!
WHY?!
I can see why Brenda finds the Schroeder/Rule 302 matter
interesting!
BTW Brenda, I mentioned Tain et al.'s challenge to
Schroeder's Rule 302 in a recent post to [email protected] as
follows....
>>>>BEGIN excerpt of What is Erb's?/Dr. Hein on Erb's &
>>>>Gherman/Erb's class
action http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-
list/message/2349
ABOUT TODD D. GASTALDO, DC...
Some may remember me from the now-defunct Erbs Coollist,
[email protected].
I am a retired^^^ doctor of chiropractic/DC.
I am interested in PREVENTING Erb's/brachial plexus injury -
or - in any event - halting the bizarre routine
obstetrician/CNMwife practice of closing birth canals up to
30% at delivery.
^^^What do I mean by "retired"?
Since my "retirement," I have been working nearly non-stop
making NON-SPINAL (educational) chiropractic adjustments
that ANYONE can make - licensed, degreed or not.
Dr. DD Palmer, Founder of chiropractic, defined chiropractic
in part as "the mental act of accumulating knowledge."
[1910:19] DD's definition of chiropractic is not so
crazy as it sounds since medicine is RESTRICTING "the
mental act of accumulating knowledge" - especially in
regard to birth.
HOW I CAME TO BE "RETIRED"
Back in the early 90s, after a man claiming to be Michael
Schroeder attorney for the California Board of Chiropractic
Examiners told me it was not within my scope of practice to
tell pregnant women that obstetricians were/are closing
birth canals...
So I became unlicensed by choice: I saw NO reason to pay a
chiropractic board to tell me I can't work to save tiny
live and tiny limbs and PREVENT more vertebral subluxations
than licensed DCs will ever be able to adjust by hand. (I
would LOVE to hear though that the Calif. Board of
Chiropractic Examiners finds my non-spinal practice of
chiropractic legal...)
I now devote near full-time to helping pregnant women engage
in "the mental act of accumulating knowledge" - esp.
regarding obstetricians/CNMwives gruesomely manipulating
most babies' spines.
NOTE: ALL spinal manipulation is gruesome with the birth
canal senselessly closed up to 30%.
MORE ON (ANOTHER?) SCHROEDER...
Incidentally, an Attorney Michael Schroeder, attorney for
the California Board of Chiropractic Examiners helped 10 MD-
obstetricians judicially rubberstamp his (Schroeder's) Rule
302 which explicitly made it illegal for Calif. DCs to so
much as sever umbilical cords!
This same Attorney Michael Schroeder - who subsequently
became Chairman of the Calif. Republican Party - later sued
me for one million dollars for publicly suggesting that his
Rule 302 illegally narrowed the California scope of
chiropractic practice. I spent about $2500 dollars trying to
move the trial to Oregon - but Atty Schroeder won that
jurisdiction battle and - in his jurisdiction was awarded a
default judgement of $25,000 dollars - the merits of the
case never having been argued.
"Chiropractic" Attorney Schroeder is STILL not helping me
stop OBs from closing birth canals and gruesomely
manipulating most babies' spines at birth...
Attention Calif. DCs: JUST THINK Calif. OBs can gruesomely
manipulate babies' spines and sometimes sever spinal nerves
- but under Schroeder's Rule 302 - Calif. DCs - who used to
attend homebirths - explicitly can't sever umbilical cords!
(Schroeder's Rule 302 is now being challenged in court in
Tain et al. v State Board of Chiro Examiners. See Dorland's,
URL below.)
Key quotes...
"Chiropractic Education...include
American Chiropractic Association/ACA Chairman James
Edwards, DC and Cynthia Vaughn, DC
http://www.jamesedwards.com/educate.htm (emphasis added)
"Obstetrics is the art of midwifery...If the accoucheur is a
Chiropractor, he can adjust...thereby preventing disease."
--Dr. DD Palmer, Founder of Chiropractic [1910:789]
I personally think autonomous homebirth midwifery licensure
is the way to go...
Chiropractors don't need to attend births to prevent disease
- to stop OBs from closing birth canals!
MY DEFINITION OF CHIROPRACTIC ("a science of applied
neurophysiologic diagnosis") appears in three editions
of Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary [1988,
1994, 2000]...
See Dorland's: Preventing VS by educating OBs (also: New
defn of chiro in Dorland's) http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-
list/message/2318
>>>>END excerpt of What is Erb's?/Dr. Hein on Erb's &
>>>>Gherman/Erb's class
action http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-
list/message/2349
Readers,
Brenda's Original Message is below...
Brenda forgot to mention the name of the source - Dynamic
Chiropractic. Schroeder has done legal work for Dynamic
Chiropractic publisher Donald Petersen....
Please note that Schroeder's Rule 302 isn't mentioned
anywhere in the article - but Schroeder's Rule 302 and my
complaints about it were the subject of the libel lawsuit!
Dynamic Chiropractic/Petersen also isn't covering the Tain
et al. challenge to Schroeder's Rule 302 - at least I
haven't seen any coverage yet....
I think I was sued by Schroeder to shut me up about the
obvious obstetric crime and the fact that Schroeder's Rule
302 - if enforced - stops DCs from thinking about birth...
Again, Schroeder's Rule 302 explicitly prohibits Calif. DCs
- who used to attend homebirths - from so much as severing
the umbilical cord!
Bottomline, MDs can close birth canals gruesomely manipulate
most babies' spines - and sometimes sever spinal NERVES -
and DCs can't even sever *umbilical cords*!?
As noted above, a man calling himself Michael Schroeder,
attorney for the Calif. Chiro Board of Examiners, told me it
was outside my scope of practice to tell pregnant women that
MDs are closing birth canals.
Obviously, I think the two Schroeders are the same man - but
I have no proof.
Similar to Schroeder, I think Brenda is trying to cover up
the fact that Dr. Nath is remaining silent about obvious
obstetric crime...
Again, I have no proof regarding Brenda either - but she
never answered my reply to her "response" at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-
list/message/2359
All Brenda has done is post the article below and say, "Just
found this, interesting?"
I find THAT interesting.
Thanks for reading,
Sincerely,
Todd
Ds. Gastaldo [email protected]
----- Original Message ----- From: Mike and Brenda Moore
To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 8:13 AM
Subject: The Cost of Voicing Opinions on the Internet
Just found this, interesting?
The Cost of Voicing "Opinions" on the Internet
------------------------------------------------------------
----------------
--
Court Orders DC to Pay $25,000 in Damages
The internet is a marvel. It allows people everywhere to enter chat rooms,
bulletin boards and list servers and "speak one's mind." While there is a
certain feeling of anonymity and an "anything goes" atmosphere in the cyber
realm, it is an environment where one comment on a single email can, for
instance, be replicated and re-emailed to a few people or even millions of
people around the world in seconds.
This revolutionary technology is taking free speech to a new level. Yes,
you can say anything you want on the internet, but just as in any other
context of communicating with our fellow terrestrials, you may pay the
consequences for what you say.
What some people apparently are failing to comprehend is that presenting
your opinions in a chat room, on a bulletin board or an email list is not
like shooting the breeze with friends or new acquaintances at a party.
Everything displayed on any aspect of the Web is documented, recorded and
reproducible. It is the electronic equivalent of publishing, not talking.
All of the liabilities of slander and defamation are in full force.
Todd Gastaldo,DC, just learned that lesson the hard way. Dr. Gastaldo made
comments about Michael Schroeder, an attorney who worked for the California
Chiropractic Association. Apparently assuming he was safe to say anything on
the Web, Dr. Gastaldo made this comment on Chiro-List, a chiropractic email
discussion list:
"...Mr. Schroeder bilked $800,000 in DC licensing fees when he jumped from
CCA to the Chiro. Licensing Board..."
Legally, slander of someone's trade or business carries with it damages
that are assumed by the court. As an attorney, Mr. Schroeder knew Dr.
Gastaldo's false comments were actionable. He demanded a retraction and
public apology. When Dr. Gastaldo did not meet that demand, Mr. Schroeder
filed a lawsuit in California, initially seeking $500,000 in compensatory
damages, and later requesting an additional $500,000 in punitive damages.
Dr. Gastaldo, a resident of Oregon, asked the court to move the venue to
Oregon "to make for the fairest trial possible." The venue question was
interesting because of the global aspect of the internet. The judge reasoned
that because the comments were made on a chiropractic discussion list, and
at least twice as many chiropractors live in California than in any other
state in the country, that California was the appropriate venue for the
trial.
Not successful in getting the trial moved to Oregon, Dr. Gastaldo simply
failed to respond to the lawsuit. This gave Mr. Schroeder a victory by
default, although Mr. Schroeder still had to demonstrate to the court that
he had suffered damages.
Perhaps the only good news for Dr. Gastaldo is the challenge the court
faced in determining who and how many people read the comment, whether on
the post or via email. On January 5, 2000, Mr. Schroeder was awarded $25,000
in damages (that's almost $1,400 per word of Dr. Gastaldo's defamatory
comment), plus court costs of $192.
Now begins the process of filing the judgment in Oregon in order to have
the right to recover his damages. Once Mr. Schroeder does that, he can seek
damages from Dr. Gastaldo's bank accounts, put liens on any real property
(such as his home), and garnish his wages until the $25,192 judgment is paid
in full.
We don't image that this case is the first lawsuit against a DC spawned by
comments made on the Web, but it should help remind doctors who post
messages and sent emails that the liabilities are quite real. There are at
least two ways to protect yourself. Discuss issues, not people. And if you
want to talk about people, purchase a minimum of $5 million of liability
insurance specifically for the internet
I'll copy this to Dynamic Chiropractic publisher Don Petersen, Jr via
[email protected]
This post - Chiros ignoring BPI crime - will be instantly archived for
global access at:
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/2362