ATTN:  GESUNDHEIT ET AL.  (See the postscript)

Mark Lowry, III, MD wrote:

"...You cannot compel a physician to operate in a manner that violates their
ethics or the standard of care..."

Mark is sort of right...

American pediatricians operate in a manner that violates their ethics every
day...

They do so quite willingly - or seemingly so - for a fee - $150 for a 5
minute procedure that makes infants scream and writhe and bleed. (Rarely,
infants die or lose their penises.)

It's called routine infant circumcision, American medicine's most frequent
surgical behavior toward males.

Stopping it would nearly instantly save America an estimated $400 million
per year - and preserve the surgery as a CHOICE American males could make
for themselves in adulthood.  (The estimated $400 million per year savings
would likely be permanent.  The British infant circumcision rate plummeted
to near zero when NHS stopped paying for routine circumcision after Gairdner
demonstrated that infant foreskin retraction "care" was causing the need for
circumcision.  "Ethical" American pediatricians recently promoted this
infant foreskin retraction "care." (!)  See the URL at the very end of this
post.)

In late 1987, I called attention to the spectacle of the American Academy of
Pediatrics/AAP perpetuating the phony "babies can't feel pain" neurology
that MDs had long-used to "inform" parents deciding whether to have their
babies' foreskins amputated.

I called for an immediate end to the mass MD child abuse for profit scheme
and for religious exemptions for Jews.

(I am still in favor of a religious exemption for Jews - for the ancient
tradition that leaves most of the foreskin on the penis.  See the
postscript.)

In the January 1988 issue of Pediatrics, the AAP came out against ALL
religious exemptions.

In the February 1988 issue of Pediatrics, the AAP came out for anonymity of
PERPETRATORS of child abuse.

In March 1988, the California Medical Association/CMA ignored its own
Scientific Board and instantly created "an effective public health measure"
out of "no medical indications" routine infant circumcision.

By voice vote of the CMA House of Delegates, routine infant circumcision
prevented transmission of HIV/AIDS - even though - just months previous -
the CMA's own Scientific Board rejected that very proposal.

Weeks later, the American Academy Pediatrics apppointed a Task Force on
Circumcision that elicited a year of pro-circumcision headlines that were so
compelling that when the Task Force finally decided that there still weren't
any medical indications - pediatricians had to be informed that AAP had not
changed its position.

Of course, the 1989 report of the AAP Task Force on Circumcision failed to
mention that the CMA had declared the mass child abuse "an effective public
health measure" after the CMA's own Scientific Board rejected that proposal.

To their credit, American pediatricians ultimately didn't abuse science -
but they did take action that perpetuated (and perpetuates) mass child abuse
in America.

American pediatricians who perform routine infant circumcisions violate
their own ethics every day:

"[T]he pediatrician's responsibilities to his or her patient exist
independent of parental desires...

"...A[n infant's screaming writhing and bleeding obviously constitutes
the - TDG] patient's reluctance or refusal to assent [and - TDG]
should...carry considerable weight when the proposed intervention is not
essential to his or her welfare
and/or can be deferred without substantial risk...

"[T]hose who care for children need to provide for measures to solicit
assent and to attend to possible abuses of 'raw' power over children when
ethical conflicts occur."
AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS
Informed Consent, Parental Permission, and Assent in Pediatric
Practice(RE9510)
Pediatrics Volume 95, Number 2 February, 1995, p. 314-317
http://www.aap.org/policy/00662.html

In 1980, one pediatrician wrote:

"[Routine infant circumcision] constitutes child abuse...an acknowledged
hazard to health." [Michael Katz, MD: Letter. AJDC, 1980]

Yep.

It's time to pass a religious exemption for the ancient Jewish ritual that
leaves most of the foreskin on the penis - see the postscript.

I'm also in favor of pardons in advance for MDs.  MDs are just academic
prime cuts forced through this culture's most powerful mental meatgrinder -
medical school.

As med students, MDs are TRAINED to perform felonies - and it's not just
routine infant penis slicing amid tiny screams of agony...

THE MAJOR MD BIRTH FELONY

OBs are knowingly closing birth canals up to 30% and keeping birth canals
closed when babies get stuck.

OBs are performing forceps and vacuum deliveries - and slicing vaginas and
abdomens en masse - thereby surgically/fraudulently claiming they are
doing/have done everything possible to open birth canals - even as they
close birth canals up to 30%.

OBs are violently pushing on tiny spines (with oxytocin/Cytotec) and
gruesomely pulling on tiny spines (with hands, forceps and vacuums)...

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

ALL spinal manipulation is gruesome with the birth canal closed up to 30%.

OBs are committing a massive spinal manipulation crime complicated by felony
surgical assaults on women.

Remember, OBs are KEEPING birth canals closed when babies get stuck and
hands, forceps and vacuums are used.

It may still be possible to purchase ACOG's video of this obvious felony:

See ACOG birth crime video evidence
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/2300

American medicine's most frequent surgical behavior toward males and females
is also an obvious felony - the way it is performed - immediately after
birth...

Immediate cord clamping affects "EVERY CESAREAN SECTION BABY" according to
retired obstetrician George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG who writes of this
obstetric insanity...

"[ACOG Practice Bulletin 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."

This obvious felony of asphyxiating babies to "obtain cord blood pH studies"
by robbing them of massive amounts of blood - is the obstetric *standard of
care*!!!

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 a fuller excerpt of Dr. Morley's writing:

"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/chiro-list/message/2618

Further MD fraud...

MDs fraudulently promote their
vaccines as being 100% effective - saying that during disease outbreaks they
will keep all vaccinated children in school and only send home/protect
vaccine exempt children.  ALL children should go home/be protected during
disease outbreaks because some children (no one knows who they are) are not
immunized by their vaccinations.  Vaccination is ATTEMPTED immunization.
Vaccines are not 100% effective.

Finally, there is the matter of MDs being mostly ANTI-immunization.

MDs are failing to tell pregnant women that they scan for pathogens and
manufacture IMMUNIZATIONS which they "inject" with their breasts DAILY.  MDs
are *lying by omission* thereby denying massive numbers of babies massive
numbers of free daily immunizations. There is a kicker:  These daily
mother-administered immunizations (breastfeedings) reportedly make MD-needle
vaccinations work better.

MDs are ignoring an *eminently* simple way of making the
immunization/breastfeeding rate skyrocket.  What woman - informed that she
can immunize her baby DAILY - and make MD-needle vaccinations work better -
is going to fail to at least ATTEMPT to breastfeed.

From mass IMMUNOLOGIC child abuse to mass PHYSICAL child abuse...

Mark Lowry, III, MD has been silent about these obvious crimes against
babies. (At one time, pediatrician Mark publicly called for the rape/murder
of a man already convicted of shaking his baby to death.  The man was later
released from prison.  Why was Mark so exercised about a man already
convicted of abusing his baby to death (I don't think he did it) - but
silent about mass (sometimes fatal) child abuse by American MDs?)

Most ALL pediatricians have been remaining silent.

Again quoting pediatrician KC Finkel, MD:

"What a terrible indictment...guilty of failing those for whom we have
chosen to be advocates." [Finkel KC: The failure to report child abuse.
AJDC, 1986;140:329-330]

It's time for pardons in advance for MDs - so that they can stop all the
felonies - and save lives senselessly being lost or destroyed - not to
mention saving America billions of dollars per year.

Thanks for reading...

Sincerely,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo
t...@chiromotion.com

PS I recently repeated my call for a religious exemption by way of reporting
on the American Academy of
Pediatrics/AAP perpetuating the notion that American medicine's most
frequent surgical behavior toward males - total foreskin amputation - is the
same as ancient Jewish ritual circumcision which left most of the foreskin
on the penis.

Here is that post...

From: Todd Gastaldo (tgasta...@earthlink.net)
Subject: Gesundheit! Two circumcision procedures!
Newsgroups: misc.kids.pregnancy
Date: 2004-10-12 00:00:26 PST

On October 11, 1987, I called attention to the American Academy of
Pediatrics/AAP perpetuating phony babies-can't-feel-pain neurology...

On October 11, 2004 (today), I call attention to the American Academy of
Pediatrics/AAP perpetuating the notion that American medicine's most
frequent surgical behavior toward males - total foreskin amputation - is the
same as ancient Jewish ritual circumcision which left most of the foreskin
on the penis.

BENJAMIN GESUNDHEIT, MD et al. write in PEDIATRICS, the journal of the
American Academy of Pediatrics/AAP:

"Historically, Jewish ritual circumcision consists of 3 parts: 1) the
excision of the OUTER PART of the prepuce (milah), 2) slitting [ripping? -
TG] of the foreskin's inner lining to facilitate the total uncovering of the
glans (peri'ah), and 3) the sucking of the blood from the wound."
--Gesundheit et al.^^^ PEDIATRICS Vol. 114 No. 2 August 2004, pp. e259-e263
[OUTER PART emphasis added]
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/114/2/e259

OPEN LETTER (archived for global access; see below)

BENJAMIN GESUNDHEIT, MD and colleagues (Galia Grisaru-Soen, MD, David
Greenberg, MD, Osnat Levtzion-Korach, MD|, David Malkin, MD, Martin Petric,
PhD, Gideon Koren, MD, Moshe D. Tendler, PhD, Bruria Ben-Zeev, MD, Amir
Vardi, MD, Ron Dagan, MD and Dan Engelhard, MD)
via rda...@bgumail.bgu.ac.il

Dr. Gesundheit et al.,

First you indicate that some foreskin is left on the penis, as in,

"Jewish ritual circumcision consists of...the excision of the OUTER PART of
the [foreskin] (milah)...[and]...slitting of the foreskin's inner lining to
facilitate the total uncovering of the glans (peri'ah)..." [emphasis added]

Then you indicate that NO foreskin is left on the penis...

"Pathologic phimosis and paraphimosis [are] precluded by the ABSENCE of a
foreskin..."

(Note: Fraudulent infant penis care now recommended by AAP can cause both
pathologic
phimosis and paraphimosis.  See below.)

Obviously, there cannot be "absence" of a foreskin in the Jewish ritual if
only the "outer part" of the foreskin is amputated and foreskin still covers
the glans.

You write:

"Biblical sources dictate routine ritual circumcision at 8 days of age for
Jewish boys....60% to 90% of newborn boys of the Jewish population in the
United States undergo this procedure..."
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/114/2/e259

It appears that most Jewish (and non-Jewish) boys in the United States
undergo TOTAL foreskin amputaton - not the original procedure dictated by
Biblical sources...

The late Edward Wallerstein won an American Medical Writers Award for
gathering much of the historical evidence in "Circumcision: An American
Health Fallacy" [NY: Springer 1980]

Wallerstein wrote in a subsequent 1983 article:

"Originally, the surgery involved only cutting the tip of the foreskin.
This was changed in the Hellenic Period to prevent [Jews from]
elongat[ing] the foreskin stump in order to appear uncircumcised."
[Wallerstein E. Humanistic Judaism 1983;11(4):46]

Wallerstein's research is supported by The Jewish Encyclopedia which
indicates that a Jewish "rage for athletics" occurred around 175 BCE
when the Seleucid king Antiochus IV offered citizenship to those who
adopted the athletic Greek way of life.

ANCIENT NUDE WRESTLING AND CIRCUMCISION

According to The Jewish Encyclopedia...

Jason, high priest of Jerusalem, offered to increase his tribute to
Antiochus IV if he would build a Greek-style gymnasium in Jerusalem.  The
gymnasium was built.

As Jews began participating in the nude games, "devout Jews" (a minority
of Jews) found to their horror that a partially exposed glans (i.e., a
"mini"-circumcised penis) was considered vulgar.  Compounding the horror
(of this minority of "devout Jews") was the fact that many Jews -
including perhaps Jewish priests - were stretching their "mini"
circumcisized foreskins so as not to appear circumcised.

According to the Jewish Encyclopedia:

"[D]evout Jews began to look upon the exercises with horror, especially
because most of them were practised "in puris naturilibus" and the
Covenant of Abraham had become an object of derision.  Nevertheless, for
a time at least, the rage for Athletics spread even to the priests...
[See Athletics in Singer I (and 400 others, eds.) The Jewish
Encyclopedia. New York: Ktav 1901.]

"...[T]he consequence was [the] attempt to appear like the Greeks by
epispasm ('making themselves foreskins')... [See Circumcision in Singer
I (and 400 others, eds.), 1901]

Forty years later (134 BCE), the high priest of Jerusalem, John
Hyrcanus, forcibly circumcised the Idumeans, "leading them to think they
were Jews." [Gribetz J, Greenstein EL, Stein RS. The Timetables of
Jewish History. New York: Simon and Schuster 1993.  Judah Gribetz is
president of the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York.]

It was during this period that Jewish priests apparently decided that
stretching the foreskin was wrong and threatened the extermination of
those Jews who stretched their foreskins:

"The Book of Jubilee (xv. 26-27), written in the time of John Hyrcanus,
has the following:  '...God's anger will be kindled against the children
of the covenant if they make the members of their body appear like those
of the Gentiles, and they will be expelled and exterminated from the
earth.'" [Charles, The Book of Jubilees iv.-ix. iii. 190-192, under
Circumcision in Singer I (and 400 others, eds.) The Jewish Encyclopedia.
New York: Ktav 1901.]

But Jews of this period apparently construed the "no stretching" decree
to mean that it was all right not to circumcise; for when the son of
John Hyrcanus took power in 104 BCE (by imprisoning his mother and
killing his brother), he forced circumcision on the residents of Galilee
- "many of them Jews." [Gribetz 1993]

THE SHIFT TO TOTAL FORESKIN AMPUTATION

The shift to total foreskin amputation is believed to have occurred one
hundred years later, after the unsuccessful Bar Kokba uprising against
the Roman Emperor Hadrian (who had completely outlawed circumcision):

"In order to prevent the obliteration of the "seal of the
covenant"...the Rabbis, probably after the war of Bar Kokba (see Yeb.
l.c.; Gen. R. xivi.), instituted the 'peri'ah' (the laying bare of the
glans), without which circumcision was declared to be of no value (Shab.
xxx. 6)." [See Circumcision in Singer I (and 400 others, eds.), 1901]

"Thenceforward [total foreskin amputation - the laying bare of the
glans] was the mark of Jewish loyalty." [See Circumcision in Singer I
(and 400 others, eds.), 1901]

God originally/allegedly told Jews to leave most of the foreskin on the
penis - and rabbis are
ignoring Him...

Thanks for reading.

Sincerely,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo
t...@chiromotion.com

A month after my Oct. 11, 1987 calling for an end to the obvious mass child
abuse by American MDs...

On November 19, 1987, the New England Journal of Medicine published
Harvard pain expert KJS Anand's admission that he and others had used
phony "babies can't feel pain" neurology for decades. [N Eng J Med
1987;317:1322]

Anne B. Fletcher, M.D. editorialized, in that same November 19 issue of
the Journal, that the pain of circumcision is "incurred by infants."

Anand later told me that he had submitted his paper to the Journal the
year before, but was told it would be "too inflammatory."

Finally, as alluded to above, the AAP got rid of its "Leave it alone" advice
and substituted penile cancer scare/penile cleansing advice that can only
increase the "need" for circumcision of intact infants...

See Chiro care of baby penises (also: Dr. Poland never sued Dr.
Gastaldo)
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/2430

Thanks for reading everyone.

Sincerely,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo
t...@chiromotion.com

It appears I did not copy Gesundheit et al. so I will copy them this post
via rda...@bgumail.bgu.ac.il