Dr. Gastaldo replies to CDC's Homer Simpson (someone writing from [email protected])

DR. GASTALDO REPLIES TO CDC's HOMER SIMPSON (someone writing from
)

Readers,

I received the following sordidly humorous non-responsive email signed by
the "CDC Division of Oral Health"...

My comments are interspersed below ######.

I would like to know the name and title of this CDC Homer who wrote the two
emails from CDC below.

Maybe two separate CDC Homers replied to me?

Sorry for the name calling - but CDC is blithely promoting mass child abuse.

I would like to know the name and title of this CDC Homer.

Dr. Gastaldo


PS Again, my comments are interspersed below ######.

----- Original Message -----
From: NCCD/DOH Information
To: Todd Gastaldo
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 1:03 PM
Subject: Isn't fluoridation child abuse?


Dear Mr. Gastaldo,

We have received your [post titled "Isn't fluoridation child abuse?" - TG]
According to many federal and independent sources, adding fluoride to the
water in the small amounts that make it effective for preventing tooth decay
is quite the reverse [- not child abuse - TG]. It saves many children from
unneeded oral pain and disability, days lost from school, etc.

###### Dear CDC Homer: You totally missed the point of my post. Even if
care is medically indicated, if informed consent is not obtained a battery
occurs. Battery against a child is child abuse.

###### The California Supreme Court wrote in 1993: "The common law has
long recognized this principle: A physician who performs any medical
procedure without the patient's consent commits a battery irrespective of
the skill or care used." [Thor at 5659]

Perhaps you have not personally experienced seeing a child who is in
severe dental pain.

###### CDC Homer, I have personally experienced reading that fluoridated
and unfluoridated communities show virtually the same amount of tooth decay!

###### Here's a relevant excerpt from The Fluoride Deception by
Christopher Bryson [2004]:

"The most visible effects from fluoride in Newburgh water are not fewer
cavities, but...high rates of speckled and mottled teeth...known as dental
fluorosis....[A]fter fifty years Newburgh children have virtually the same
amount of dental decay as their counterparts in the neighboring town of
Kingston, which was the 'control' city in the original experiment. Kingston
has resisted all efforts in subsequent years to add fluoride to the water
supply...following Newburgh's fluoridation, the rate of fluorosis was always
higher than in Kingston..." [The Fluoride Deception 2004:217-218]

##### CDC Homer continued...

Prior to joining CDC, I worked with poor women and children from an inner
city community. One day, as I was assisting mothers during the afternoon,
one of the children came back to the facility after being treated for severe
tooth decay in the emergency room of that city's hospital. The child had
had 5-6 of his teeth filled and some pulled (at one time) due to severe
tooth decay. He was perhaps 8-9 years old. He evidently came from a family
where oral health was not stressed, and because of poverty had not had
access to routine dental care until his mother entered a facility where all
health needs of a family were assessed and then addressed. For poor people,
fluoridation is one means to help decrease such inqualities (disparities) in
oral health.

##### READERS: Anecdotes are always compelling - CDC Homer offers a
doozy - QUITE compelling - but anecdotes are not sufficient to cover-up
blatant child abuse - or anti-science emanating from CDC. See George
Glasser's critique of other info from the same CDC email address, below.

##### CDC has flip-flopped - if fluoride works - its action is TOPICAL -
the poison should NOT be swallowed to prevent cavities - this according to
CDC itself.

##### See The Fluoride Deception - and see the THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT in
the Escondido lawsuit noted below.

##### Why aren't pro-fluoridation dentists - which is MOST dentists -
grokking the significance of this? They should be campaigning for
federally-subisidized TOPICAL fluoride fundinig for the poor - not stumping
for OBVIOUS (see THOR) mass child abuse by forced chemotherapy of children
of parents (rich and poor) opposed to fluoridation.

##### Further interspersions below...


-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Gastaldo ]
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 1:40 PM
To:
Cc: ; ; ;
; ;
; ;
; ;
; ;
;
Subject: Isn't fluoridation child abuse?


ISN'T FLUORIDATION CHILD ABUSE?

OPEN LETTER (archived for global access; see below)

Attorney Kyle R. Nordrehaug
(State Bar #205975)
BLUMENTHAL & MARKHAM
2255 Calle Clara
La Jolla, California 92037
(858)551-1223
via David Markham

Kyle,

Shouldn't you be filing 11165PC Suspected Child Abuse Reports?

Shouldn't Judge Dana M. Sabraw IMMEDIATELY grant your public prayer "For
a
temporary and permanent injunction that enjoins the Defendant CITY
and/or
its agents and employees from injecting hydrofluorosilicic acid into the
Escondido drinking water supply at excessive levels"?

You wrote in your THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT (Macy et al. v. City of
Escondido
et al.^^^):

"[T]he CITY has utterly failed to obtain the informed consent of those
individuals it now seeks to medicate with contaminated
Hydrofluorosilicic
acid. The requirement of obtaining a person's informed consent before
initiating treatment is an elementary requirement of the common
law..."^^^

The California Supreme Court wrote in the 1993 case of Daniel Thor v.
The Superior Court of Solano County 93 C.D.O.S. 5658:

"The common law has long recognized this principle: A physician who
performs any medical procedure without the patient's consent commits a
battery irrespective of the skill or care used." [Thor at 5659]

The CITY is committing MASS battery - involuntary mass chemotherapy
("fluoridation")...

Mass battery committed against children is mass child abuse.

Shouldn't you be filing 11165PC Suspected Child Abuse Reports?

Shouldn't Judge Dana M. Sabraw IMMEDIATELY grant your public prayer "For
a
temporary and permanent injunction that enjoins the Defendant CITY
and/or
its agents and employees from injecting hydrofluorosilicic acid into the
Escondido drinking water supply at excessive levels"?

(Isn't involuntary mass chemotherapy obviously illegal at ANY level?)

Please respond.

Thanks.

Sincerely,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo



^^^SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
SHIRLEY MACY, an individual; PAUL
COSHOW, an individual; ROBIN WINTON,
an individual; SABRINA GESE, an
individual; OWEN MORRISON, an
individual; DOTTIE GLEN, an individual;
JOY ALSOBROOK, an individual; AL
MCGOWEN, an individual; JIM
PETERSEN, an individual, ROES 1 through
1,000, Inclusive, on behalf of themselves, on
behalf of the general public, and on behalf of
all persons similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
CITY OF ESCONDIDO; STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, and DOES 1 through 100,
Inclusive,
Defendant.
CASE NO. GIN 015280
CLASS ACTION
THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR (1)
DECLARATORY RELIEF AGAINST CITY
OF ESCONDIDO, (2) DECLARATORY
RELIEF AGAINST STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, AND (3) INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF
[Filed in accordance with Order of the Court
dated September 6, 2002]
Judge: Hon. Dana M. Sabraw
Dept.: 24
K:\D\NBB\Citizens.Water\ESCONDIDO\p-complaint-3AMD.wpd
http://www.keepersofthewell.org/cour..._Complaint.pdf


OREGON'S LYNNE CAMPBELL CALLS FLUORIDATION "FORCED MEDICATION"...

"...Tim Erwert, Hillsboro city manager [said] 'There are a lot of
political questions...'...[Hillboro Mayor] Tom Hughes said he needs more
information from the city staff before he makes a decision on the
issue...Oregon Citizens for Safe Drinking Water, executive director Lynne
Campbell, considers fluoridation forced medication..."
http://www.fluoridealert.org/news/1131.html

Copied to: Lynne Campbell, Executive Director of Oregon Citizens for
Safe
Drinking Water PO Box 1045, Lake Oswego, OR 97034; 503-675-7451;


Copied to: Jim Martin, Lic. Ac, Dipl. Ac. (NCCAOM) via


DENTISTS OPPOSE FLUORIDATION

Attorney Kyle Nordrehaug wrote:

"ROBIN WINTON and her family have been told by their dentist, Merritt
Barber, DDS. to avoid the ingestion of fluoride due to dental
concerns..."

"SABRINA GESE and her family have been told by their dentist, Grant
Layton,
DDS. to avoid the ingestion of fluoride due to dental concerns..."
http://www.keepersofthewell.org/cour..._Complaint.pdf

Copied to: Merritt Barber, DDS and Grant Layton, DDS via Attorney Kyle.


PETER GLICKMAN FORGOT SOMETHING!

Peter Glickman, President of Pinellas Citizens for Safe Water recently
wrote to the St. Petersburg Times:

"Dr. Heilman of the County Health Department was willing to bring an
expert
to talk to each one of the [Pinellas County] commissioners privately in
order to convince them that administering a drug treatment through the
public water supply was correct even though no doctor is permitted to
prescribe medicine without monitoring side effects and drug dosage for
any
individual."

PETER FORGOT TO MENTION THAT FLUORIDATION IS INVOLUNTARY MASS
CHEMOTHERAPY...

Did Dr. Heilman (and Peter) forget to mention to Pinellas County
Commissioners that no doctor is permitted to administer therapy WITHOUT
CONSENT?

Or did Pinellas County commissioners just not listen...

Pick Talley's Pinellas Utilities FAQ indicates that about 10% of
Pinellas County residents do NOT give their consent to be medicated with
this toxic waste "nutrient" as Pick calls it...

Pinellas County commissioner: Please hold an emergency meeting and stop
the obvious mass child abuse.

See my Open Letter to Peter...
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2653

Copied to the following PINELLAS COUNTY Commissioners (Florida)

Comissioner KAREN SEEL

464-3278

Commissioner ROBERT STEWART

464-3363

Commissioner CALVIN HARRIS

464-3360

Commissioner SUSAN LATVALA

464-3276

Commissioner JOHN MORRONI

464-3276

Commissioner KENNETH WELCH

464-3614

Commissioner BARBARA SHEEN TODD

464-3365


READERS:

Please don't forget my PRIORITY - stopping mass child abuse by
obstetricians.

Obstetricians and CNMwives are knowingly closing birth canals up to 30%.

For simple PROOF - and simple instructions on how pregnant women can
allow their birth canals to OPEN the "extra" up to 30%...

See I ain't no Semmelweis, but...
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2591

With birth canals senselessly closed, OBs are pushing violently on tiny
spines
(with oxytocin/Cytotec) and pulling gruesomely (with hands, forceps,
vaccuum)...

Sometimes OBs pull so hard they rip spinal nerves out of tiny spinal
cords.

Some babies die, some are paralyzed - most "only" have their necks
gruesomely
wrenched.

ALL spinal manipulation is gruesome with the birth canal closed.

See also: ACOG birth crime video evidence
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2300

OBs are SLICING VAGINAS en masse (euphemism "routine episiotomy") -
surgically/fraudulently inferring everything possible is being done to
OPEN
birth canals - even as they CLOSE birth canals - up to 30%.

OBs are also slicing ABDOMENS en mass ("c-section") -
surgically/fraudulently
inferring they HAVE done everything possible to open birth canals even
as they
close birth canals.

Now, to be sure, allowing the birth canal to open maximally is not going
to
prevent all birth injuries - but it can't hurt!

I mentioned all this in my Open Letter to Peter Glickman, cited above -
which was copied to CDC's Center for Injury Prevention...

No response from CDC's Center for Injury Prevention yet - so I'll cc
them this post too...

Maybe we could end many forms of mass child abuse at once?

Governments would save a lot of money - and children might appreciate it
too.

Just a thought.

Sincerely,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo


PS Jeffrey Nowicki, DC, Secretary for the California Chiropractic
Association - Orange County Chiropractic District (CCA/OCCD) wrote:

"Please take me off your list."

Hopefully someone at CCA/OCCD will forward this to CCA/OCCD officer Jeff
and ask him if CCA/OCCD is TRULY interested in freedom of choice in health
care as mentioned in the CCA/OCCD Mission statement...

"...Mission and purpose...to enhance the general welfare,
professionalism and unity of chiropractic in the State of California, so as
to provide its citizens with both high quality and freedom of choice in
health care."
http://www.occhiro.org/Definitions/Our_mission.htm

Why would chiros be silent about mass involuntary chemotherapy?

It's sort of like how they are silent about MD-obstetricians closing
birth canals and gruesomely manipulating most babies' spines. See above.

I think Honorary CCA Member Michael Schroeder - former Chairman of the
California Republican Party - might have been dealing with the issue when he
jumped to the California Board of Chiropractic Examiners and defended his
Rule 302 against the 10 MD-obstetricians who (I say) sued to intentionally
lose and thereby get Schroeder's Rule 302 judicially rubberstamped.

I think Schroeder's libel lawsuit against me was a SLAPP - a Strategic
Lawsuit Against Public Participation - to get me to shut up about his role
as a public official in narrowing the chiropractic scope of practice in
California.

The 10 MD-obstetricians likely did not want California DCs even THINKING
about the gruesome spectacle of MD-obstetricians closing birth canals up to
30% and gruesomely manipulating most babies' spines at birth.

I still think Attorney Schroeder should send back the $25,000 check I
just sent him to pay him for the default judgement he won because I did not
realize what SLAPP meant. I think Attorney Schroeder should let me give
that $25,000 to the Orange County Chiropractic District to help them end
mass child abuse in California.

See $25,000 for OC chiros for Disneyland antifluoridation work?
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2643

Hopefully the Disneyland DA - Tony Rackauckas - who Attorney Schroeder
got elected - will finally help stop the mass child abuse.

I will cc Disneyland DA Tony (yet again) at
(Maybe DA Tony's spokeswoman - Deputy DA Susan Kang Schroeder - Attorney
Schroeder's wife - can contact the media about the mass child abuse.)

Finally, I think two-time CCA president Bob Dubin, DC played the biggest
SILENT role in keeping CCA from helping to stop the mass spinal manipulation
child abuse.

See Dr. Dubin and birth terrorism by OBs...
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2648


Thanks for reading everyone.

Sincerely,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo



This Open Letter will be archived for global access within 24 hours in
the Google usenet archive. Search http://groups.google.com for "Isn't
fluoridation child abuse? Atty Nordrehaug"




####### Here is the first post I received from CDC Homer (maybe there are
two?)...

###### My comments are interspersed.

----- Original Message -----
From: NCCD/DOH Information
To:
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 9:29 AM
Subject: WATER FLUORIDATION

###### CDC Homer wrote:


Dear Mr. Gastaldo,

We have received your comment in the Division of Oral Health public box.
Mr. Duchon recently joined our staff as our fluoridation engineer.

##### Ah, "recently joined" - THAT'S the likely reason I could not find Mr.
Duchon when I searched the CDC site.

I believe that when Mr. Duchon made that ["safe and non-toxic"] comment, he
was referring to adding fluoride to the water in the very small amounts
needed to protect teeth from decay.

##### CDC Homer, you are ignoring Reason #1 in fluoride toxicity expert Dr.
Paul Connett's "50 Reasons Not to Fluoridate":

1) Fluoride is not an essential nutrient (NRC 1993 and IOM 1997). No disease
has ever been linked to a fluoride deficiency. Humans can have perfectly
good teeth without fluoride.
http://www.fluoridealert.org/50-reasons.htm

##### Again, the point you missed in your "response" to my post: Even if
fluoride is necessary medical care, MDs and DDS's prescribing must obtain
informed consent. Since MDs and DDSs obviously have not obtained informed
consent (for example from the 10% opposed to fluoridation in Pinellas County
Fluorida) - a battery is committed against every child forced to drink the
poison against their parents' wishes. See above.

At those very small amounts (1 part per million/ppm = 1 milligram per
liter), there is no risk for skeletal fluorosis.

##### WHAT A HOMER!!! As I've indicated, in The Fluoride Deception [2004]
one reads that according to the National Academy of Sciences, CRIPPLING
skeletal fluorosis can occur in 10 years if someone drinks 5 liters per day
of 2ppm fluoride. CDC Homer, how on earth can you know that 5 liters per
day of **1**ppm fluoridated water won't cause LESS-than-crippling skeletal
fluorosis in 10 years? How about 20 years? Does skeletal fluorosis have to
be CRIPPLING before we stop poisoning children?

The maximum level (mcl) allowed for fluoride in water is set by the
Environmental Protection Agency, which carefully considers such health
risks. The mcl for fluoride is currently set at 4 ppm.

[signed] CDC Division of Oral Health
National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention
and Health Promotion

###### GOOD ONE CDC HOMER! "Health Promotion" - LOL! SUUUUURRRRE EPA
"carefully considers health risks" - LOL! EPA set the maximum permissible
level at 4 ppm because the State of South Carolina SUED EPA because it did
not want to bring its fluoride level down to EPA's PREVIOUS maximum
permissible level of 2.3ppm! So EPA just raised the level to 4ppm children
be damned - over the (ongoing) protests of EPA scientists! (READERS: READ
THE FLUORIDE DECEPTION. I am sure CDC Homer already knows this info.)

##### Some final remarks below. Don't miss George Glasser's response to
(another?) CDC Homer, below.


-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Gastaldo ]
Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2004 7:57 PM
To:
Cc: ; ;
;
Subject: Involuntary mass chemotherapy: Do you suspect child abuse?


INVOLUNTARY MASS CHEMOTHERAPY: DO YOU SUSPECT CHILD ABUSE?

"[C]hemotherapy...treatment of disease by chemical agents; originally
applied to use of chemicals that affect the causative organisms unfavorably
but do not harm the patient."
--Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary [2000:333]

CDC's "national fluoridation engineer" Kip Duchon LIED to the St. Petersburg
Times when he indicated he (or CDC) knows that fluoride ions are "safe and
non-toxic" to humans. Our own National Academy of Sciences indicates that
low dose fluoride ion chemotherapy ("fluoridation") can cause "crippling
skeletal fluorosis." See Christopher Bryson's The Fluoride Deception [2004]
and the forwarded post below.

OPEN LETTER

Peter Glickman
President
Pinellas Citizens for Safe Water


Peter,

CDC's "national fluoridation engineer" Kip Duchon was quoted in The St.
Petersburg Times:

"[W]hen hydrofluorosilicic acid is added to drinking water in small amounts
below standard levels approved by the EPA, the fluoride elements separate
into ions that are safe and non-toxic, Duchon said...'I can tell you, if you
stick your hand in [hydrofluorosilicic acid], it is going to burn your hand
off, because that is a very strong acid...But that's not what you are going
to have in your water.'"
http://stpetetimes.com/2004/07/09/Ta...icize_fl.shtml

As noted above, CDC's "national fluoridation engineer" Kip Duchon LIED to
the St. Petersburg Times: Our own National Academy of Sciences indicates
that low dose fluoride ion chemotherapy ("fluoridation") can cause
"crippling skeletal fluorosis." See Christopher Bryson's The Fluoride
Deception [2004] and the forwarded post below.

I strongly suspect that injecting the toxic fertilizer waste
hydrofluorosilicic acid into drinking water is criminal. (Dr. Hardy Limeback
used the word "criminal" in The Fluoride Deception [2004].)

I have reported the crime as suspected child abuse...

See Chemically beating children: Dr. Gastaldo's SUSPECTED CHILD ABUSE REPORT
to Pinellas County Sheriff Everett Rice...
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2646

My suspected child abuse report was apparently mentioned in the same St.
Petersburg Times article that quoted Kip Duchon. (See
http://stpetetimes.com/2004/07/09/Ta...icize_fl.shtml - and
see the forwarded post below.)



SNIP



FINALLY...

Here is the excerpt of George Glasser's response to (another?) CDC Homer
Simpson (someone writing from )

GEORGE GLASSER WROTE...

The NIEHS nomination stated: "Toxicological studies may be considered when
results of chemical characterization studies are available for review". At
first glance, this caveat appears to present a very high hurdle indeed,
which might be seen to provide a loophole by which the USEPA and the NIEHS
could avoid recommending research conducted with either of the fluoridation
agents.

As will be shown, the "characterization" criteria were met by Bauman in
1947.

Therefore, the Government agencies should act immediately by requesting the
National Toxicology Program to determine the safety of the fluoridation
agents.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

OBSERVATIONS

The NIEHS/NTP, EPA and Centers for Disease Control have consistently denied
that fluoride speciation occurs in drinking water. They have not exhibited
any interest in the toxicological implications of fluoride species added to
community drinking waters, nor those which may be created during the water
treatment process, e.g., fluoroaluminum complexes. Indeed, the agencies
continue to assure citizens that speciation does not occur. See, for
example, the following excerpt from a recent CDC email to a member of the
public:

Added to the drinking water in very small amounts, the fluoride chemicals
dissociate virtually 100% into their various components (ions) and are very
stable, safe, and non-toxic.

We, the scientific community, do not study health effects of concentrated
chemicals as put into water, we study the health effects of the treated
water, i.e., what those chemicals become: fluoride ion, silicates and the
hydrogen ion. The health effects of fluoride have been analyzed by literally
thousands of studies over 50 years and have been found to be safe and
effective in reducing tooth decay. (email from CDC
Division of Oral Health, July 17, 2002, 10.05 AM.).

The Oral Health information department of the CDC apparently has no
knowledge of a paper dated June, 2000, in which Urbansky and Schock (USEPA)
wrote:

There are many metal cations competing for the fluoride; therefore, the
free fluoride available to complex with the lead (II) ion is very small. In
addition, most, if not all, of the competing metal cations are in greater
abundance than the lead (II) by orders of magnitude . . . That drinking
water contains a substantial fraction of fluoroaluminum complexes rather
than free fluoride was highlighted by Pitter [1985] as a concern because
free fluoride is more effective in protecting against tooth decay." (1)

The Oral Health information department is also in the dark about a report,
dated October 2000, entitled "Aluminum Compounds: Review of Toxicological
Literature, Abridged Final Report." This Review, also prepared for Scott
Masten, PhD, accorded substantial space to both speciation and the potential
neurological effects of aluminum/fluoride in drinking water.(2)

However, the findings reported in June and October 2000 were certainly not
new.

BACKGROUND

In "Fluoride Drinking Waters" (Ed. F.J. McClure, 1962, USPHS), speciation of
fluoride in drinking water is discussed in several articles and studies,
e.g., "Fluoridation of Public Drinking Water", F.J. Maier, pp. 258-263. The
section on "Side Effects," (page 261), is noteworthy in the context of the
NIEHS "characterization" criteria:

Fluoridation will provide all or part of the fluorides needed to remove
silica from boiler water. An ion exchange process is reported to require 1.0
ppm fluoride for each 0.5 ppm silica removed. On the other hand, if sodium
silicofluoride is used for fluoridation, about 0.5 ppm silica is formed when
1.0 ppm is added from this source. (Bauman 1947, cited by Maier.)(3)

We can see from Bauman's experimental findings, which were acknowledged and
accepted by Maier and McClure, that (a) the fluorosilicate radical does
exist in some form in water, and, (b) that complete dissociation does not
occur.

Therefore, the NIEHS "characterization" criteria were met by Bauman more
than 55 years ago!
http://www.npwa.freeserve.co.uk/Public_comment.html

END George Glasser excerpt

CDC Homer, I say again - the California Supreme Court indicates that a
BATTERY is occuring every time a child is forced to take a drink of poison
that his parents don't want him to have.

Battery against children is child abuse.

You are promoting mass child abuse with anecdotes that do not appear to bear
any relationship to the reality of low dose fluoride (and other ion) mass
chemotherapy.

Thanks for "responding."

Sincerely,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo