Some key vaccination fraud history (and Schroeder's SLAPP)

Attention Dan Rather/CBS 60 Minutes (via ) and Chiro Censor
Bob Dubin, DC...

SOME KEY VACCINATION FRAUD HISTORY

The obvious vaccination fraud is **MD** fraud...

Yet Univ of Calgary's Margaret L. Russell MD Ph.D. FRCPC et al. write in
this December's journal VACCINE:

"Concerns have been raised about the beliefs and behaviours of
*chiropractors* related to [vaccination]..."
Vaccine. 2004 Dec 2;23(3):372-9. PubMed abstract (emphasis added)

Yet again I raise concerns about the beliefs and behaviors of **MDs**
related to vaccination.

MDs are engaging in truly bizarre vaccination behavior...

Pseudonymous vaccine fraud promoter PF Riley, MD alleges that *I* am lying
by omission.

As discussed below, MDs are STILL lying by omission - failing to file MANY
serious vaccine adverse event reports YEARS after Congress demanded that MDs
file serious vaccine adverse event reports. (Why did Congress have to
DEMAND that MDs make these reports that are crucial for determining vaccine
safety?)

I call for...

PARDONS FOR MDs - EVEN FOR VACCINE FRAUD PROMOTER PF RILEY, MD...

It's not just the vaccination fraud - it's other massive MD felonies too...

As naive med students, MDs are TRAINED to perform felonies.

We should pardon them in advance to help them end their felonies more
quickly.

See below...

Usenet pediatrician "PF Riley" MD wrote in message
...
Todd Gastaldo, D.C., said:

"It is extremely COMMON... for MDs to fraudulently promote their
vaccines as being 100% effective."

Yet he is unable to produce anything to support this claim.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...7a1p%404ax.com

A VACCINATION CHARADE: INFORMED CONSENT

....[O]ne could argue we should dispense with the consent charade..."
--Mark D. Fox, MD, PhD. Pediatric Annals. (Jul)2001;30:422-23

Fuller excerpt from Dr. Fox's comments...

"The thrust of the immunization spiel (as I learned it) is to elicit
*assent* from parents...[L]iterature provided does not disclose risks or
alternatives in sufficient depth to qualify as 'informed' consent.
Moreover, these machinations mimicking [obtaining informed] consent are
employed despite the fact that [vaccinations] are virtually mandatory.
Informed consent...requires not only sufficient information, but also the
presence of legitimate choice...[O]ne could argue we should dispense with
the consent charade..."
--Mark D. Fox, MD, PhD. Pediatric Annals. (Jul)2001;30:422-23

MDs don't NEED to dispense with the consent charade because...

Parents learn from MD threats to send only vaccine exempt children home that
vaccinations are 100% effective, as in,

"Parents should be advised of state laws...which may require that
[unvaccinated] children stay home from school during outbreaks."
--American Academy of Pediatrics/AAP^^^

^^^From Informing patients and parents. In: Pickering LK, ed. 2000 Red Book:
Report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases, 25th ed. Elk Grove Villiage,
IL: American Academy of Pediatrics 2000:4. Quoted in Frederickson et al.
Pediatric Annals. (Jul)2001;30:401

Parents are asked to SIGN the obvious fraud:

"If my child does not receive the vaccine(s)...consequences may
include...the need for my child to stay out of daycare or school during
disease outbreaks."
--American Academy of Pediatrics 2002
http://www.cispimmunize.org/pro/pdf/...Vaccinate2.doc

There is NOTHING whatsoever on the AAP form about the need to send ALL
children home because
many vaccinated children are not immunized by their vaccinations - which
brings me to...

THE FOUNDATION OF THE FRAUD

Vaccinations are NOT immunizations. Even though MDs fraudulently call them
immunizations, vaccinations are only ATTEMPTED immunizations. Sometimes
vaccinations fail to immunize.

KEY POINT: FAR more children are not immunized by vaccinations than are not
immunized because they are exempted from vaccinations.

It is fraudulent - illegal actually - to protect (send home) vaccine exempt
children during disease outbreaks and endanger (not send home) the far
greater number of children not immunized by their vaccinations.

While medicine's fraudulent vaccination promotion does endanger vaccinated
children (above and beyond any danger caused by vaccine toxicity)...

THE TRUE POWER OF THE FRAUD is promotion of vaccination by causing "hardship
for the [vaccine exempt] child and parent," as in this quote from the
website of CDC's maximum vaccination cheerleader Deborah Wexler, MD:

"What if you don't [vaccinate] your child?...During disease outbreaks,
[unvaccinated] children may be excluded from school or child care until the
outbreak is over...for their own protection...This causes hardship for the
child and parent."
--Wexler's Immunization Action Coalition/IAC
http://www.immunize.org/catg.d/p4017.htm

When I called the registered nurse/RN bureaucrat here in Oregon, she assured
me that even if there is a small
outbreak, vaccine exempt children will be sent home.

The RN bureaucrat sort of orgasmed as she told me that if people don't have
their children
vaccinated - they will have to stay home from work and hire tutors - VERY
EXPENSIVE - she climaxed. : )

It was obviously fraudulent MD vaccination promotion - assisted by a
willing MD-handmaiden/RN...

Pseudonymous pediatrician PF Riley, MD pretends that his profession isn't
fraudulently promoting vaccinations as being 100% effective thereby
selectively applying a financial cattleprod to those seeking vaccine
exemptions - causing "hardship for the [vaccine exempt] child and parent."

Pseudonymous pediatrician PF Riley, MD understandably does not wish to
address the FACT that American medicine's most frequent surgeries constitute
obvious criminal negligence that sometimes escalates to criminally negligent
homicide...

See Pediatrician 'ethics' (Attn: Gesundheit et al.)
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2908

MASS IMUNOLOGIC CHILD ABUSE...

MDs are mostly ANTI-immunization.

The vaccination consent charade is just more fraudulent vaccination
promotion as MDs lie by omission and deny massive numbers of babies massive
numbers of free daily immunizations.

In their lie of omission...

MDs are failing to explicitly state that breastfeeding women scan for
pathogens and manufacture IMMUNIZATIONS which they "inject" with their
breasts daily.

MDs are failing to explicitly state that these breastimmunizations
reportedly make MD-needle-vaccinations work better.

Very few women explicitly informed of these facts would fail to at least
ATTEMPT to breastfeed/immunized their babies daily.

MDs are ignoring a way to make the immunization rate skyrocket.

MDs are mostly ANTI-immunization.

MDs are committing mass IMMUNOLOGIC child abuse as they commit mass PHYSICAL
child abuse.

See again: Pediatrician 'ethics' (Attn: Gesundheit et al.)
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2908

I must concede, though, that MDs can legally commit felonies - which is not
the same as saying that what they are doing is legal - it isn't...

Pseudonymous usenet pediatrician PF Riley, MD continues...

He LIES by
omission by claiming this is promoted only by school policies
excluding unvaccinated children in the event of a disease outbreak,
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...7a1p%404ax.com

FALSE.

The MD mass immunologic child abuse felony is promoted by state
"immunization" laws which fail to state that vaccinations are NOT
immunizations - which fail to state that most immunizations are derived from
mother-administered breastfeedings.

Talk about lies of omission!

Congress had to DEMAND that MDs make serious adverse vaccine reaction
reports - the FDA commissioner indicated MDs were failing to make up to 99%
of such reports years after Congress demanded them!

SOME KEY VACCINATION FRAUD HISTORY...

One of the saddest commentaries on organized medicine's attitude regarding
establishing vaccine safety is pediatrician Martin Smith's essay about the
passage of the "National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Act,"
published in the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics. [Pediatrics
1988;82(2):264-9]

In his essay, Smith [1988] wrote that "members should be informed of the
necessity that led to the inclusion of some of the provisions in the act as
they now exist."

Specifically, Smith [1988] noted that "many [vaccine] administrators have
not heretofore practiced" reporting adverse events; but that "these
requirements *had to be accepted* in the process of negotiations through the
years - because "Congress had *demanded* the inclusion of the reaction
reporting requirement as a condition to the legislation." (Emphasis added.)

In noting that Congress's adverse reaction reporting requirement will give
"a better epidemiologic store of information," Smith [1988] admitted a key
point: No one knows "the real facts" about vaccine reactions/vaccine
safety! [Smith M. National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Act.
Pediatrics 1988;82(2):264-9]

According to the subsequent National Academy of Sciences vaccine safety
report mandated by the Act, "many gaps and limitations of knowledge
bear...directly and indirectly on the safety of
vaccines...[including]...limited capacity of existing surveillance systems
of vaccine injury..." [Howson CP, Howe CJ, Fineberg HV. Adverse effects of
pertussis and rubella vaccines. National Academy Press 1991]

How bad are existing physician surveillance systems of vaccine injury?

Hopefully they are better than they were in 1993 when former FDA
commissioner David Kessler, M.D. reported evidence that physicians fail to
report up to 99% of serious adverse events.
[Kessler DA. Introducing MEDWatch: a new approach to reporting medication
and device adverse effects and product problems. JAMA
(Jun2)1993;269(21):2765-68]

Again that 2002 quote from Moore and Weiss...

"It is almost certain that the overall total of death and serious injury
associated with drug adverse events is substantially higher than reported
here. According to a recent FDA report, 'About 90% of serious or fatal
adverse drug reactions are never reported. Some studies have found reporting
rates around 1%.''
--Moore TJ, Weiss SR, et al. Reported adverse drug events in infants and
children under 2 years of age. Pediatrics, November 2002:110(5), p. e53.
www.pediatrics.org/cgi/reprint/110/5/e53

Kessler [1993] said that in spite of the fact that reports from health
professionals are "essential" to ensure safety of medicines, physicians "do
not think to report adverse events."

Also according to Kessler [1993], physician reporting of serious adverse
events "is not in the culture of US medicine" because, as of 1985, only 14%
of US medical schools had required courses in "therapeutic decision making."

Unfortunately, I do not have the CDC Vaccine Information Sheet for Hep
B...but the CDC's Vaccine Information Sheet for Measles, Mumps and Rubella
(MMR) states, "As with any medicine, there are very small risks," which
implies that "any medicine" carries "very small risks"

Given FDA commissioner Kessler's statement that one study found that
physicians fail to report 99% of serious adverse events, "any medicine"
might actually be quite risky. And since the CDC Vaccine Information Sheet
compares vaccine risk with the risk of "any medicine," vaccines might be
just as risky as "any medicine." Thus the CDC Vaccine Information Sheet
"warning" (that vaccines carry "very small risks") is worthless.

Incidentally, although the courts claim that parents are "warned" about
vaccines, the word "warning" does not appear anywhere on the CDC MMR Vaccine
Information Sheet; nor, incidentally, does the MMR Vaccine Information Sheet
state that some states have "religious" and "philosophical" exemptions.

FDA Commissioner Kessler's 1993 report states, "If an adverse event occurs
in perhaps one in 5000 or even one in 1000 users, it could be missed in
clinical trials but pose a serious safety problem when released to the
market."

It bears repeating that, given that American physicians are refusing to
report serious adverse events (Congress had to DEMAND that MDs report!); and
given that risk can be calculated only if physicians report serious adverse
events, the CDC has no business claiming, as it does in its MMR Vaccine
Information Sheet, that, "The risks from the vaccine are *much smaller*
[original italics] than the risks from the diseases if people stopped using
vaccine."

In fact, we just don't know that vaccine risks are "much smaller" than the
risks of natural disease. More importantly, we will never know - as long as
M.D.s refuse to report as many as 99% of serious adverse events.

Most of the info above was derived from my previous article, "Oregon's
FRAUDULENT vaccination game"...
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...729%24Nq.15673
5%40dfiatx1-snr1.gtei.net


BACK TO PSEUDONYMOUS USENET PEDIATRICIAN PF RILEY, MD...

PF continued...

when it is in fact extremely COMMON for "MDs" otherwise to
specifically and clearly state that vaccines are NOT 100% effective.


I do not dispute that MD literature states that vaccines are not 100%
effective.

Rather, I point out the FACT that MDs are powerfully promoting their
vaccines as being 100% effective as they lie by omission and deny massive
numbers of babies massive numbers of free daily immunizations.

See above.

He LIES by omission when he cites only these exclusion policies and by
obfuscation when he pretends not to understand their rationale,


The MD "rationale" is an obvious FRAUD - as in the statement from CDC's
maximum vaccination cheerleader Deborah Wexler, MD's website:

"What if you don't [vaccinate] your child?...During disease outbreaks,
[unvaccinated] children may be excluded from school or child care until the
outbreak is over...for their own protection...This causes hardship for the
child and parent."
--Wexler's Immunization Action Coalition/IAC
http://www.immunize.org/catg.d/p4017.htm

It is a financial vaccination cattle prod FRAUD to promote vaccinations by
SELECTIVELY threatening "hardship" for exempted children and their
parents...

If it is safe for children not immunized by their vaccinations to stay at
school during disease outbreaks - MDs should either 1) stop threatening
exempted children and their parents with the "hardship" - or 2) apply it
evenly so that ALL children are protected/sent home.

namely, that since unvaccinated children vs. vaccinated children as a
group can be up to 35 times MORE LIKELY to contract a
vaccine-preventable disease (and thus pass it along to other
susceptible individuals),

Selectively threatening exempted children and their parents with "hardship"
is vaccination promotion FRAUD that is embellished by other vaccination
promotion fraud - i.e. the vaccination consent charade mentioned by Dr. Fox,
quoted above.

and, given the choice of the following
EMPIRIC exclusion policies (recognizing that serologic testing acutely
to determine immunity in the setting of an outbreak is highly
impractical and would be untimely): (1) no exclusions at all, (2)
exclusion of an easily identifiable group of children (the
unvaccinated) which, on the whole, are more likely to contract the
disease and thus perpetuate the outbreak, or (3) shut down the whole
school, Todd believes that (3) is the "correct" choice...

#3 *is* the correct choice when MDs are saying that unimmunized children are
endanger. It is a FRAUD to protect vaccine exempt children and not protect
the children not immunized by their vaccinations.


when he has
failed to produce any evidence that the overall cost vs. benefit of
(3) is favorable compared to (2), and nonetheless concludes that the
only reason "MDs" choose (2) is not because this more conservative
approach has indeed been shown in real outbreaks to be helpful but
instead because "MDs" are trying to fool people through a "subtle
though powerful statement" that this choice means they believe
vaccines are 100% effective even though ANY OTHER TIME the overall
effectiveness of vaccines is EVER addressed, such "MDs" explicitly
state that they are not.

MDs *are* fooling parents! MDs are trying to FORCE parents into VACCINATING
using a "hardship" fraud that endangers vaccinated children not immunized by
their vaccinations.


When called on this, he simply accuses me of "pretending" the above is
true when he can't explain why it isn't,


False. See above. The vaccine exemption "hardship" is just part of
organized medicine's informed consent CHARADE...

and falls back on his usual
complaining about breastfeeding, circumcisions, and obstetrics.

False. I note that MDs are committing OTHER obvious frauds - felonies
actually...

1. Mass (sometimes fatal) immunologic child abuse: lying by omission -
failing to state the CRUCIAL fact that breastfeeding is immunization that
reportedly makes MD-needle-vaccinations work better;

2. Mass (sometimes fatal) PHYSICAL child abuse: telling lies as they slice
infant penises and mothers vaginas and abdomens en masse...

See again: Pediatrician 'ethics' (Attn: Gesundheit et al.)
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2908

He
believes that parents only see the exclusion policy, somehow missing
everything else written about the effectiveness of vaccine, and are
fooled.

Yep. Right here in Oregon, parents are not explicitly informed that if they
don't want their kids vaccinated all they have to do is sign their names.

These parents - who don't want their children vaccinated - are threatened
with "hardship" (see Wexler, above)...

That is, MDs are SELECTIVELY threatening the "hardship" - FRAUDULENTLY
promoting vaccination - and endangering some vaccinated children in the
process.

(How stupid does he think parents are?)


When parents are INFORMED instead of being offered the MD consent CHARADE
(see Dr. Fox quoted above) - they are NOT stupid - not stupid at all!

He continues to cite
sentences which themselves imply quite plainly that vaccines are NOT
100% effective yet, through intentional, deceptive, and careful use of
ellipses, tries to make them appear otherwise.

Gastaldo is a FRAUD and a LIAR.



Pseudonymous usenet pediatrician PF Riley belongs to a profession committing
OBVIOUS mass felonies against mothers and babies...

It is natural that a promoter of the mass criminal enterprise called
medicine would shout "FRAUD" "LIAR" when the obvious MD crimes are exposed.

As usual, I am in favor of pardons in advance for MDs...

I am in favor of a pardon in advance even for the pseudonymous crime
promoter PF Riley, MD...

MDs are just academic prime cuts forced through this culture's most powerful
mental meatgrinder - medical school.

As naive med students, MDs are TRAINED to perform felonies.

I know, I know - MDs can legally perform felonies - but that does not mean
that their felonies should not be identified as such.

Thanks for reading,

Sincerely,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo


PS As noted above, Margaret L. Russell MD Ph.D. FRCPC et al.^^^ write that
"Concerns have been raised about the beliefs and behaviours of chiropractors
related to [vaccination]..."
Vaccine. 2004 Dec 2;23(3):372-9. PubMed abstract

^^^Russell ML, Injeyan HS, Verhoef MJ, Eliasziw M.

I am raising concerns about the beliefs and behaviors of **MDs** related to
vaccination and other obvious MD frauds...

I will cc Margaret and some of her colleagues. Hopefully, they will do
something about the obvious MD vaccination fraud - and the other obvious MD
frauds.

At the very least, I hope Margaret and colleagues will tell pregnant women
in their family circles that OBs are closing birth canals up to 30% and that
it is easy for women to allow their birth canals to OPEN the "extra" up to
30%.

I will also cc the usual law enforcement suspects - Oregon Attorney General
Hardy Myers and Disneyland DA Tony Rackauckas.

Again - I know, I know - MDs can legally commit felonies - but I think law
enforcement should help identify the felonies as felonies.

Finally, I will cc Bob Dubin, DC...

CENSOR BOB DUBIN, DC...

Bob is the Chiro Censor, who suddenly welcomed me back to the list he
censors after I cc'd him:

Vaccines: Mom to Dan Rather/60 Minutes
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2940

Bob, you don't need to subscribe me. I will cc you my posts and you can
censor them - or post them - as you like.

Whatever your reason for censorship Bob - it is still censorship.

Bob, you apparently read:

PTs: a legal OB felony (also: Bob Dubin and SLAPP/Rule 302)
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2936

You wrote:

[Dubin] If Todd is watching -

Yes, Bob, I am watching - but only because after you censored me a member of
the list you censor started forwarding posts from your censored list so that
I could see what you were saying behind my back.

[Dubin] ...he was sued and LOST for defaming Mike Schroeder, and...

I was sued and LOST ON JURISDICTION. The merits of the case were never
argued. I tried to get the case moved to Oregon where I could afford to
fight it. I did NOT defame Mike Schroeder. I petitioned for a redress of
grievances caused by PUBLIC OFFICIAL Mike Schroeder and was SLAPPed by a
Strategic Lawsuit to Prevent Public Participation. I learned only too
late - $25,000+ dollars too late - that SLAPP suits are generally easily
defeated...

[Dubin] ...the list adminstrators could have easily been included in that
lawsuit.

Yes, they were sort of SLAPPed too - and you are helping to continue the
SLAPPing.

[Dubin] It is painfully obvious to all but a handful of people that DCs
NEVER had the right to deliver babies in California, as proven by the voter
pamphlet that preceded the initiative act that licensed DCs there.

False statement. Before the initiative act and the voter pamphlet, DCs
*were* licensed to deliver babies - under the Medical Practice Act. Bob
pretends I wish for California DCs to again attending homebirths - I do
not - there are plenty of direct entry homebirth midwives for that...

[Dubin] I refused to allow Todd back on the chirolist, as I have no wish to
be named in lawsuits due to the blathering of others.

Ah, more SLAPPing from Bob...

[Dubin] I also, believe it or not, agree with much of what he says,
especially as regards the delivery of infants.

Then please, Bob, ask "Chiropractic" Attorney Schroeder to use his legal
skills to help stop the obvious OB felonies... See SURELY below...

....My priority would
be stopping OBs from closing birth canals up to 30% and keeping birth canals
closed when they use forceps and vacuums to pull on tiny spines...

END excerpt of Scratch a liar (Dubin)...
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2937

Bob Dubin, DC is a LYING censor - and he "forgot" to mention his obvious lie
when he so graciously invited me back...

His second statement is the obvious lie...

"I have unsubscribed Todd Gastaldo from the Chirolist..."
--Bob Dubin, DC 2003

"I did not unsubscribe Gastaldo..."
--Bob Dubin, DC 2004


Censor Bob, you violated your own no-defamation rule then "graciously"
("generously") invited me back by suggesting that *I* violated your
no-defamation rule! LOL!

Your "gracious" "generous" invite gently perpetuated Schroeder's
SLAPP/censorship attempt.

I will send my posts to you for censorship - or posting - whichever you
prefer.

You are a censor - and chiro-list is censored. You need to openly admit
that.

The COURTS (and juries) are the arbiters of who defamed - at least I think
that principle is making its way through the courts in the Barrett v.
Rosenthal case...

I discovered $25,000+ too late that Schroeder had only SLAPPed me to censor
me for petitioning for redress of grievances he caused while functioning as
a PUBLIC OFFICIAL

Schroeder is now reportedly DEPUTY SHERIFF Schroeder - and he is ignoring a
massive spinal manipulation felony - as you say you agree with "much" of
what I say!

Why not telephone your deputy sheriff buddy...

Why not tell "chiropractic" attorney Schroeder - DEPUTY SHERIFF Schroeder -
about the massive spinal manipulation felony being committed by MDs?

And while you have him on the phone - ask him if he got the $25,000 I sent
him and ask him how much more I owe him in court costs and interest for his
SLAPP - OK?

Thanks Censor Bob.

Oh - and if this post is over your 30K limit - just divide it up and post it
in parts - assuming you don't want to censor it. (I ALWAYS respected the
size limit back when chiro-list was "unmoderated means uncensored - anything
goes." EVERYONE respected the limit - they HAD too.)

Again, I know - I know - MDs can legally commit felonies. It helps to admit
that.

But it's mandatory for DCs (California DCs at least) to report felonies
committed against children if they so much as SUSPECT them.

California Penal Law is pretty clear. I quoted a 1986 version of the law in
the post excerpted above:

Scratch a liar (Dubin)...Also: pregnant in California?
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2937

I also quoted the law in a 1997 post: See A chiropractic 'laughing stock'?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...tput =gpla\in

Deputy Sheriff Schroeder - a "chiropractic" attorney - will no doubt want to
start exposing the obvious mass spinal manipulation felony of the
MD-obstetricians who he helped judicially rubberstamp his Rule 302...

SCHROEDER AND UMBILICAL CORDS...

Deputy Sheriff Schroeder's Rule 302 explicitly prohibited DCs - who used to
be licensed in California (under the Medical Practice Act) to attend
homebirths - from cutting umbilical cords.

Years before I was SLAPPed by Michael Schroeder, former attorney for the
California Board of Chiropractic Examiners, a Michael Schroeder calling
himself attorney for the California Board of Chiropractic Examiners told me
it was outside my scope of practice to tell pregnant women that OBs are
closing birth canals up to 30%.

My suspicion, Censor Bob, is that with his Rule 302 explicit umbilical cord
cutting prohibition PUBLIC OFFICIAL Schroeder was making it outside the
scope of chiropractic practice for DCs to criticize MD-obstetricians for
temporary asphyxiation of babies to rob blood from them.

Since mass temporary asphyxiation of babies is also IMMUNOLOGIC child
abuse - I may as well offer the gory details here...

As I noted for Dan Rather/CBS 60 Minutes...

One last OB surgical felony - it is a doozy... American MDs are abusing
their MOST frequent surgery - temporarily asphyxiating babies by IMMEDIATELY
clamping/cutting umbilical cords to rob massive amounts of blood from
babies. (My thanks to Donna Young for calling my attention to this latter OB
felony - and to Kelly Moscarello for calling my attention back to it when
her little Bella suffered cerebral palsy after an unthinking paramedic aped
his MD handlers and immediately clamped the cord of a baby who was not yet
breathing.)

Here is ACOG Practice Bulletin B138 (re-affirmed Feb 2002):

"...Immediately after delivery of the neonate, a segment of umbilical cord
should be doubly clamped, divided, and placed on the delivery table pending
assessment of the five minute Apgar score."
--1991 (re-affirmed Feb 2002) ACOG Committee opinion: Bulletin 138 - April
1994 (replaces #91, February 1991)
From quotes compiled mainly by Eileen Simon from the Harvard Medical School
Libraryhttp://www.cordclamping.com/History.htm

Here is commentary by George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG:

"ACOG's routine treatment (B138) of these depressed neonates is immediate
cord clamping to obtain cord blood pH studies. The child's only functioning
source of oxygen - the placenta - is amputated together with 30% to 50+% of
its natural blood volume. Total asphyxia is imposed until the lungs
function, and the depressed (asphyxiated, hypovolemic) child starts its
extra-uterine life in hypovolemic shock...

"B138 was first published in 1993. Every cesarean section baby, every
depressed child, every premie, and every child born with a neonatal team in
the delivery room has its cord clamped immediately to facilitate the
panicked rush to the resuscitation table. The current epidemic of immediate
cord clamping coincides with an epidemic of autism.

"For the trial lawyers, it is essential that the 'true genesis' of cerebral
palsy remains unknown, because that 'true genesis' (B.138) is a standard of
medico-legal care..."
http://www.cordclamping.com/acog-cp.htm

George Morley, the retired OB quoted above - as valiant as he is - does not
want to see child protection laws used to stop the mass baby asphyxiation he
is exposing.

George and I disagree on this point...

Why would we NOT use laws designed to protect children - to protect
children?

See Babies gasping: Michigan sheriffs to do "child abuse raid" on hospitals?
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2618


Again Censor Bob, when you talk to deputy sheriff/"chiropractic" attorney
Schroeder - would you ask him how much more I owe him in court costs and
interest for his SLAPP win?

THINK ABOUT IT Chiro-list censorship BEGAN with Schroeder's SLAPP suit.

As a PUBLIC OFFICIAL, I don't think "chiropractic" attorney Schroeder was
doing chiropractic any favors.

Via ongoing silence regarding the massive MD-obstetrician felonies -
Schroder isn't doing babies any favors.

He is though doing MD-obstetricians a HUGE favor.

Maybe Schroeder's silence about massive MD crimes is part of the reason he
became California Republican Party Chairman?

Again, I'm cc'ing Dan Rather/CBS 60 Minutes )

Who knows - maybe 60 Minutes will do a story about the massive MD
felonies...

Thanks for reading everyone.

Sincerely,

Your friend,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo


This post will be archived for global access within 24 hours in the Google
usenet archive. Search http://groups.google.com for "Some key vaccination
fraud history (and Schroeder's SLAPP)"