Gastaldo's complaint to ADA (dietitians)

Discussion in 'Health and medical' started by Todd Gastaldo, Apr 27, 2004.

  1. ADA = American Dietetic Association...

    ADA (via [email protected]): Please see my complaint
    comment below... Anyone who wishes to join me in making an
    official WRITTEN complaint to ADA, see below for details and
    please contact me ([email protected]).

    Many ADA dietitians work in hospitals where...

    Obstetricians are knowingly closing birth canals up to 30%.
    See the PROOF below.

    PREGNANT WOMEN: It's EASY to allow your birth canal to OPEN
    the "extra" up to 30%. See the very end of this post.

    Dr. Andrew Saul suggests:

    "[C]ontact Todd Gastaldo, D.C. [email protected] for
    postural information that can help to insure that MDs and CN
    Midwives don't complicate delivery by closing the birth
    canal by up to 30%."
    http://www.doctoryourself.com/pregnancy_lactation.html

    Thank you Dr. Saul...

    Ds. ANDREW SAUL VS. AMERICAN DIETETIC ASSOCIATION

    Just as the American College of Obstetricians and
    Gynecologist/ACOG's pretends that it's OK for MDs to close
    birth canals up to 30% and keep birth canals closed when
    babies' shoulders get stuck...

    The American Dietetic Association/ADA pretends that "Dietary
    supplements...have not been proven to...prevent or cure
    diseases." (Dietary Supplements: Do You Know All the Facts?
    (March 24, 2004 http://www.eatright.org/Public/NutritionInf-
    ormation/index_19201.cfm)

    Or maybe this isn't a pretense - a LIE?

    It seems to me to be so...

    In his DOCTOR YOURSELF NEWSLETTER (Vol. 4, No. 11, May
    5, 2004)...

    Dt. Saul wrote:

    HITTING A NERVE

    The last Doctor Yourself Newsletter provoked something of an
    outcry from a number of dietitians who were offended by my
    comment that successful vitamin therapy "threatens
    dietitians because the fallaciousness of their food-groups-
    always, supplements-never dogma will be exposed."

    In a way, I am slightly surprised that that was the ONLY
    statement that caused offence. After all, the title and
    thrust of that issue
    (http://www.doctoryourself.com/news/v4n10.txt) was the
    safety of vitamin megadoses. Up to 20,000 mg/day of vitamin
    C for a man wanting have children? 3,000 to 10,000 mg of
    vitamin C per day for a healthy woman during pregnancy?
    14,000 mg/day of vitamin C for a 75-pound child? I would
    have thought that these would be the lightning rods for any
    controversy.

    No, it was that "food-groups-always, supplements-never"
    phrase that did it.

    <SNIP correspondence from dieticians>

    The DOCTOR YOURSELF NEWSLETTER's RESPONSE:

    The core of my correspondents' complaints seems to center on
    my being out of date or misinformed. To remedy that, and to
    provide a current source of my information, I refer all
    interested to the official website of the American Dietetic
    Association, www.eatright.org , which I accessed in April,
    2004. That's pretty much up-to-date, wouldn't you say? Here
    is what the 70,000 members of the "world's largest
    organization of food and nutrition professionals" (Press
    Release January 03, 2000) collectively state about
    supplements:

    "Dietary supplements cannot make up for poor food choices.
    They have not been proven to boost energy or prevent or cure
    diseases." (Dietary Supplements: Do You Know All the Facts?
    (March 24, 2004 http://www.eatright.org/Public/NutritionInf-
    ormation/index_19201.cfm)

    Right out the door, such a statement is both pontifical and
    factually incorrect. And please note that the ADA authored
    that statement on March 24, 2004, only weeks before my
    Newsletter went out.

    Recent though the ADA statement is, I ask my critics to
    consider if, just possibly, it may be the American Dietetic
    Association that remains out of date. Supplements not curing
    disease, not even preventing disease? Oh, please! Prevention
    and cure of disease by vitamins is thoroughly established
    and repeatedly demonstrated by decades of well-controlled
    studies, literally numbering in the thousands. I have taught
    nutrition at the college level and clinical nutrition at the
    graduate level. What I have learned in the process is
    collected into the hundreds of articles and numerous major
    bibliographies at my searchable website
    (http://doctoryourself.com). But my work is hardly the
    authoritative source. Look instead to the experience of
    respected researchers and eminently qualified physicians
    such as Abram Hoffer, M.D., Robert F. Cathcart, MD, Thomas
    Levy, MD, Hugh D. Riordan, MD, and many others. I have about
    4,000 references at my website to back me up. Links to the
    doctors' work are provided further below, and also at
    http://www.doctoryourself.com/links.html .

    Judging from the more polite feedback I received, it would
    appear that a goodly number of registered dietitians (RDs)
    personally and professionally use supplements. I admire and
    applaud their individual use of vitamins for themselves and
    their clients. I have my doubts as to just how high a dose
    they're using; I will be pleased to receive email from
    dietitians on their usage of megadoses anytime
    ([email protected]).

    However, I must first ask all supplement-friendly dietitians
    a question:

    Exactly how do you feel about your Association's making that
    previous statement ("not been proven to prevent or cure
    diseases")? Furthermore, how do feel about the following ADA
    statement, accessed April 2004:

    "Registered dietitians and other nutrition experts agree
    that if you make healthful food choices, you will get all
    the vitamins, minerals, and other nutrients you need for
    good health."

    (Vitamin & Mineral Supplements: Do I need to take a
    supplement?

    http://www.eatright.org/Public/NutritionInformation/92_-
    11826.cfm)

    Now I have a follow-up question: Are you personally one of
    those dietitians who "agrees" with this foods-only, supplement-
    negating statement, or aren't you? Do you agree word-for-
    word, or would you like to modify it a bit? Exactly how
    would you change it?

    And, as of April 2004, why have you not yet done so?

    The two statements at the ADA's website are particularly
    broad ones, and all-inclusive in tone. If you are advocating
    supplement use beyond a low-potency multivitamin, I believe
    you have broken ranks with the American Dietetic
    Association. If you personally use high-dose vitamin
    therapy, or even recommend it, I believe you may be skating
    on thin ice with the ADA leadership.

    PRESSURE TO CONFORM

    In 1994, the American Dietetic Association disciplined Shari
    Lieberman, Ph.D., R.D., for "alleged nonadherence" to the
    ethical standards ADA set out in 1985. The association
    suspended Dr. Lieberman's R.D. credential for three years
    because Lieberman was supposedly not in line with Principle
    7 of the ADA Code of Ethics, the part that states, "The
    dietetic practitioner practices dietetics based on
    scientific principles and current information." After Dr.
    Lieberman sued the ADA for $40 million for defamation, her
    R.D. was reinstated.

    Anyone looking even briefly at Dr. Lieberman's work can see
    that she has long been a proponent of megavitamin therapy.
    She is one of the authors of The Real Vitamin and Mineral
    Book (NY: Avery, 2003) which, the publisher says, "explains
    exactly why you need vitamin and mineral supplements not
    only to protect yourself against disease, but to reach the
    highest levels of mental and physical well-being. . .The
    authors then provide a scientifically documented Optimum
    Daily Intake (ODI) to follow, which is generally well above
    the government's Recommended Daily Intake (RDI)."

    I think Dr. Lieberman's book (which I recommend you read)
    constitutes an unmistakable departure from the party-line of
    the American Dietetic Association. And by that, I mean the
    Association's published stance, as of today. The ADA states
    repeatedly on their website and in their press releases
    that, with precious few exceptions, 100% of the government
    standard is all that people need to take in a supplement, if
    they even need a supplement at all, which they probably
    don't. While Dr. Lieberman's "Optimum Daily Intake"
    recommendations certainly have my support, I am unaware that
    ADA has either proposed or endorsed any such increases in
    nutritional intake recommendations for the public.

    Check their website. ADA's statements are what their
    membership empowers them to make. If you agree with the
    ADA's statements, as written, it would seem that I was
    right, rhetorical hyperbole notwithstanding.

    If you do not agree with the Association's statements, it is
    your professional and ethical duty to have them rescinded.
    Better yet, substitute in some new, positive, supplement-
    assertive language. For it is supplement-unfriendly content
    that the public and the media are currently seeing at the
    American Dietetic Association's website. It is there right
    now as you read this.

    Progressive dietitians are to be commended at every turn.
    But when their own Association openly negates them, we must
    admit that the progressives speak with an unofficial, though
    laudable, minority voice. I welcome all dissenters into the
    Doctor Yourself family.

    ON A POSITIVE NOTE, ONE LAST LETTER:

    "I recently read your article on vitamin supplementation,
    in which you indicated dietitians do not believe in
    vitamins nor recommend them. Unfortunately, you are
    correct, when looking at our profession as a whole. I
    have been a dietitian for 27 years, and one of the first
    things I learned in school was that I'd better keep my
    mouth shut about vitamins if I wanted to get my degree.
    Most of my colleagues continue to state we should just
    eat right. I respond with all the studies that prove that
    we are NOT eating right. I believe we should stop beating
    this dead "just eat right" horse, and meet people where
    they need help.

    "I also do not believe we can get everything we need
    from food even if we make wise food choices, but do not
    use organic sources, are exposed to pollution,
    chemicals, stress, etc. And who among us is not exposed
    to all those things?

    "So, I apologize on behalf of my profession that we are not
    the nutrition experts we need to be. And I apologize for
    dietitians who have probably criticized and ridiculed you
    for your stance. However I would also like you to know that
    there is an increasing number of us who are practicing the
    type of nutrition intervention and support that I believe
    you would be proud of. Keep up the good work. Hopefully, as
    we all pull together, we can help turn the health status of
    our citizenship around. It will happen . . . one by one."

    LET'S CALL THE QUESTION

    I propose a simple, if blunt, "litmus test" to indicate a
    practitioner's fundamental attitude about HIGH-DOSE vitamin
    therapy (which was what my last Newsletter was REALLY
    about). I now ask any physician, nurse, PA, dietitian, or
    dietetic association, to "answer me these questions three":

    1) Do you agree that enormous (100,000 mg/day) intravenous
    doses of vitamin C are preferentially toxic to cancer
    cells in the human body, killing cancer cells as
    chemotherapy does, only more safely? (References 1,2,3)

    2) Do you agree that cardiovascular deaths can be reduced by
    40% in people who take regular megadoses (400-800 IU/day)
    of vitamin E? (4,5)

    3) Do agree that thousands of milligrams of niacin a day
    constitutes effective treatment for schizophrenia and
    psychosis? (6,7,8,9)

    Please send me the answers you get, and own thoughts, too.
    This Newsletter will value, and perhaps publish, continued
    input, pro or con, from all interested readers. (Comments
    may be sent to [email protected])

    But as for my opinions, bear in mind that is a subscription
    Newsletter. If you do not like my periodical peaches, why
    shake my editorial tree? Unsubscribe now (the link is right
    the top) and thank you for your past readership.

    References:

    4.) Riordan, N.H., Riordan, H.D., Meng, X., Li, Y.,
    Jackson, J.A. Intravenous ascorbate as a tumor cytotoxic
    chemotherapeutic agent. Medical Hypotheses 44:3 (March,
    1995): 207-13.

    5.) Padayatty SJ, Sun H, Wang Y, Riordan HD, Hewitt SM,
    Katz A, Wesley RA, Levine M. Vitamin C pharmacokinetics:
    implications for oral and intravenous use. Ann Intern
    Med. 2004 Apr 6;140(7):533-7.

    6.) Riordan HD, Hunninghake RB, Riordan NH, Jackson JJ,
    Meng X, Taylor P, Casciari JJ, Gonzalez MJ, Miranda-
    Massari JR, Mora EM, Rosario N, Rivera A. Intravenous
    ascorbic acid: protocol for its application and use. P R
    Health Sci J. 2003 Sep;22(3):287-90.

    7.) Stampfer, M.J., Hennekens, C.H., Manson, J., Colditz,
    G.A., Rosner, B. and Willett, W.C. (1993) Vitamin E
    consumption and the risk of coronary disease in women.
    New England Journal of Medicine. 328:1444-1449.

    8.) Rimm, E.B., Stampfer, M.J., Ascherio, A., Giovannucci,
    E., Colditz, G.A. and Willett W.C. (1993) Vitamin E
    consumption and the risk of coronary heart disease in
    men. New England Journal of Medicine 328:1450-1456.

    9.) Hoffer A and Osmond H: How To Live With Schizophrenia.
    University Books, New York, NY, 1966. Also published by
    Johnson, London, 1966. With Fannie Kahan. New and Revised
    Ed. Citadel Press, New York, NY, 1992. Revised Ed. Quarry
    Press, Kingston, ON 1999.

    10.) Hoffer A: Orthomolecular Medicine for Physicians. Keats
    Pub., New Canaan, CT, 1989.

    11.) Hoffer A: Vitamin B-3 and Schizophrenia: Discovery,
    Recovery, Controversy. Quarry Press, Kingston, ON 1999.

    12.) Hoffer, A. Orthomolecular Treatment For Schizophrenia.
    Keats, 4255 West Touhy Avenue, Lincolnwood, Ill 60646-
    1975, 1999.

    AND NOW A WORD FROM OUR SPONSOR

    For information about my in-your-face megahealth book,
    "DOCTOR YOURSELF: Natural Healing that Works" please take a
    look at http://www.doctoryourself.com/saulbooks.html . When
    purchased directly from me, I am of course happy to
    autograph your book for you.

    AUTHOR SIGNING

    Okay, it's pretty much in the middle of nowhere, but
    should you happen to be in the general vacinity of Walla
    Walla, Spokane, or Pasco, I will be doing a book signing
    at the Kennewick, WA Barnes and Noble bookstore on Tues,
    May 4, at 7 PM.

    SOME ADDITIONAL "INFLAMMATORY" WORDS

    It is highly unlikely that the ADA will be putting up a link
    to http://www.doctoryourself.com or recommending this
    Newsletter to its membership anytime soon. In addition to my
    strong advocacy of high-dose vitamin therapy, there are just
    a few other areas where we may disagree.

    For example, the American Dietetic Association's website
    endorses the use of saccharin and aspartame ("Nutrasweet")

    http://www.eatright.org/Public/Other/index_adap0598.cfm and
    promotes fluoridation of water
    (http://www.eatright.org/Public/Other/index_adap1000.cfm).
    The Doctor Yourself Newsletter is opposed to those
    practices, and has been for some 85 issues now.

    (More on fluoridation:
    http://www.doctoryourself.com/fluoridation.html and
    http://www.doctoryourself.com/fluoride_cancer.html

    (More on artificial sweeteners:
    http://www.doctoryourself.com/fakesweet.html (saccharin)

    and especially http://dorway.com , Dave Reitz's non-
    commercial aspartame ("Nutrasweet") information supersite.)

    The American Dietetic Association also supports more
    governmental restriction and FDA regulation of supplements
    including vitamins. (American Dietetic Association statement
    to FDA on Regulation of Dietary Supplements, June 8, 1999.
    June 8, 1999

    http://www.eatright.org/Public/GovernmentAffairs/98_lg06089-
    9.cfm) This Newsletter thinks such restriction is
    unwarranted and bordering on the tyrannical. Vitamins are
    extraordinarily safe substances. There is not even one death
    per year from vitamin supplements (American Association of
    Poison Control Centers' Toxic Exposure Surveillance System).

    (More on vitamin safety:
    http://www.doctoryourself.com/safety.html)

    (More on recent governmental efforts to restrict your access
    to supplements, including vitamins:

    http://www.doctoryourself.com/limitUSA.htm)

    <SNIP>

    Copyright c 2004 and prior years Andrew W. Saul
    [email protected] . Permission to reproduce single
    copies of this newsletter FOR NON-COMMERCIAL, PERSONAL USE
    ONLY is hereby granted providing no alteration of content is
    made and authorship credit is given. Additional single
    copies will be sent by postal mail to a practitioner or
    patient, free of charge, upon receipt of a self addressed
    envelope with THREE first-class stamps on it (offer good in
    the USA only), to Number 8 Van Buren Street, Holley, NY
    14470 USA. (585) 638-5357.

    To UNsubscribe: [email protected]

    To subscribe for free: [email protected]

    >>>>END excerpt of Dr. Saul's DOCTOR YOURSELF NEWSLETTER
    >>>>(Vol. 4, No. 11,
    May 5, 2004)...

    GASTALDO'S COMPLAINT TO ADA...

    AMERICAN DIETETIC ASSOCIATION CODE OF ETHICS

    "The enforcement process for the Code of Ethics establishes
    a fair system to deal with complaints about members and
    credentialed practitioners from peers or the public."
    http://www.eatright.org/Public/index_8915.cfm

    COMPLAINT: ADA appears to be lying - in violation of its own
    stated Principles (quoted below)...

    Does anyone wish to join me in making a written
    complaint to ADA?

    Here are the ADA rules...

    The complaint must be made within 1 year of the date that
    the complainant (person making complaint) first became aware
    of the alleged violation...

    The complainant need not be a member of The American
    Dietetic Association or a practitioner credentialed by the
    Commission on Dietetic Registration. The complaint must
    contain details on the activities complained of; the basis
    for complainant's knowledge of these activities; names,
    addresses, and telephone numbers of all persons involved or
    who might have knowledge of the activities; and whether the
    complaint has been submitted to a court, an administrative
    body, or a state licensure board. The complaint must also
    cite the section(s) of the Code of Ethics for the Profession
    of Dietetics allegedly violated.

    The complaint must be signed and sworn to by the
    complainant(s).
    http://www.eatright.org/Public/index_8915.cfm

    ADA Code of Ethics Principles (excerpts)

    The dietetics practitioner conducts himself/herself with
    honesty, integrity, and fairness. The dietetics practitioner
    practices dietetics based on scientific principles and
    current information. The dietetics practitioner presents
    substantiated information and interprets controversial
    information without personal bias, recognizing that
    legitimate differences of opinion exist... The dietetics
    practitioner accepts the obligation to protect clients, the
    public, and the profession by upholding the Code of Ethics
    for the Profession of Dietetics and by reporting alleged
    violations of the Code through the defined review process of
    The American Dietetic Association and its credentialing
    agency, the Commission on Dietetic Registration.
    http://www.eatright.org/Public/index_8915.cfm

    For questions, comments and requests for information
    regarding ADA's Code of Ethics...Email: [email protected]
    http://www.eatright.org/Public/index_13343.cfm

    COMMENT: ADA should look into Dr. Saul's criticisms. If ADA
    finds itself be in violation of its own Code of Ethics - ADA
    should protect the public. Personally, I would like to see
    ADA link to Dr. Saul's website: www.doctoryourself.com

    Also, every dietitian in every hospital with a maternity
    unit should work to stop OBs from closing birth canals...

    PROOF that OBs are knowingly closing birth canals up to
    30%...

    According to the Merck Manual:

    "When shoulder dystocia occurs...the mother's thighs are
    hyperflexed to increase the diameter of the pelvic
    outlet..." http://www.merck.com/mrkshared/mmanual/section18-
    /chapter253/253g.jsp

    WHY are OBs and CNMwives (nurse midwives) waiting until the
    head is out and shoulders get stuck before giving the baby
    maximum pelvic outlet diameter?

    WHY are we letting OBs and CNMwives force babies' heads
    through birth canals senselessly closed up to 30%?

    OBs and CNMwives are SLICING vaginas (euphemism "routine
    episiotomy") - surgically/FRAUDULENTLY inferring everything
    possible is being done to OPEN birth canals - even as they
    CLOSE birth canals - up to 30%!

    See Criminal medical CAM at Hawai'i's John A Burns School of
    Medicine http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-
    list/message/2256

    PREGNANT WOMEN: It is EASY for you to allow your birth canal
    to OPEN the "extra" up to 30%. Just roll onto your side as
    you push your baby out - or deliver on hands-and-knees,
    kneeling, standing, squatting, etc.

    BEWARE though: Some MDs and MBs will let you "try"
    "alternative" delivery positions but will move you back to
    dorsal or semisitting (close your birth canal!) as you push
    your baby out!

    Talk to your MD or MB about this TODAY. (For further details
    see the "Criminal medical CAM" URL above.)

    MDs/MBs: If you must push or pull - and sometimes you must -
    first get the woman off her sacrum - off her back/butt.

    Thanks for reading everyone.

    Sincerely,

    Todd

    Dr. Gastaldo [email protected]

    This post will be archived for global access. Search
    http://groups.google.com for "Gastaldo's complaint to ADA
    (dietitians)"
     
    Tags:


Loading...