Chiros ignoring BPI crime and the Schroeder/Rule 302 matter - was The Cost of Voicing Opinions on the Internet

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...t/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/lists/erbs/r...?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...t/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 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...t/message/2349

ABOUT TODD D. GASTALDO, DC...

Some may remember me from the now-defunct Erbs Coollist, .

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[s]...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...t/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...t/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

Dr. Gastaldo



----- Original Message -----
From: Mike and Brenda Moore
To:
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



This post - Chiros ignoring BPI crime - will be instantly archived for
global access at:
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2362