Poor Dr. S. ???

Chiropractic Healthiness » Chiropractic College » Poor Dr. S. ???

Question:

> Moses here: As I recall Mister S didn’t claim to a medical doctor > on his web site; rather, he claimed to be a quack. While the web > name Doctor S isn’t one I’d choose, one would have to be pretty > silly to take a web name at face value. My take is that his name > choice was an attempt to "rawhide" the orthodox medical > supporters here on this ng.

i agree. and it sure seems to have worked quite well. <G> as i have stated all along, anyone who actually took the time to read his site would see that he *certainly was NOT* attempting to portray himself as a medical doctor. and i certainly dont see anyone here providing any proof of their assertions and insinuations that he was somehow ‘playing doctor’ and dispensing medical advice or using the ‘doctor’ title to somehow lure in unsuspecting alt-head gullibles. i have seen more ‘medical advice’ here at mha over the last year from posters like DW and AF than i have from saul. i am sick of watching the sci-meds portray the pro-alts who post here as mindless, clueless zombies. (ie, anyone who saw him calling himself dr.s will be contacting him for health care advice) this persistent insinuation is ludicrous. almost every regular pro-alt poster here has struck me as intelligent and capable of making their own decisions regarding health care. and quite capable of figuring out for themselves whether someone IS or IS NOT qualified to give ‘medical advice’. — "Have a couple Noni trees in my back yard. The fruit looks ugly, the smell quite strong but I have been ingesting it for years and feel like I can live forever." Kalalau Rich http://www.primenet.com/~lippard/stupid-skeptic-tricks.txt "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality." Albert Einstein http://www.discord.org/skeptical/Critiques/index.html

Response:

> > > silly to take a web name at face value. My take is that his name > > choice was an attempt to "rawhide" the orthodox medical > > supporters here on this ng. > i agree. and it sure seems to have worked quite well. <G> > Actually, it seems to me that the one who has been rawhided is Saul, and > that you mistake his passive-aggressive debating style for good humor, as > he intends you to do.

yes, of course, af……. i have been snookered as usual, eh? puhleeze. > as i have stated all along, anyone who actually took the time to read > his site would see that he *certainly was NOT* attempting to portray > himself as a medical doctor. > The law says no prospective "client" should have to read his website > below the line where he claims the title "doctor." > I assume you believe that people should observe the law?

it depends. i’m a rather heavy-footed driver and tend to roll thru stop signs on a daily basis. (course, i dont live in NYC. i’m in a rather bigger, open road section of the USA. but when i visited NYC many years ago i saw groups of folks smoking the big whacky weed not 100 feet from a few of NYC’s finest. i guess ‘the law’ has its ups and downs…..and priorities.) > and i certainly dont see anyone here providing any proof of their > assertions and insinuations that he was somehow ‘playing doctor’ and > dispensing medical advice or using the ‘doctor’ title to somehow lure in > unsuspecting alt-head gullibles. i have seen more ‘medical advice’ here > at mha over the last year from posters like DW and AF than i have from > saul. > David and I don’t go around calling ourselves "doctor" or claiming > clinical experience. Nor do we advertise our "consultations" for "a fee." > Until two weeks ago, Saul’s site specifically invited visitors to contact > him for consultations, for a fee.

for a ***nutritional*** or ***educational*** consultation, right? > That was an egergious violation of the > laws of his state.

really? those ‘on the job’ are hot on the trail of nutritional advice bandits up there in the big apple?! > almost every regular pro-alt poster here has struck me as intelligent > and capable of making their own decisions regarding health care. and > quite capable of figuring out for themselves whether someone IS or IS > NOT qualified to give ‘medical advice’. > Not every potential visitor to Mister Saul’s website is as intelligent or > as capable of deciding Mister Saul’s credentials as you and some other > intelligent pro-alts may be.

sorry, i disagree. if they have a computer and are surfing around for info on nutrition then i reckon they can manage. > The law specifically protects people from > their own gullibility in this case. The issue is not, and has never been, > the legality of Mister Saul’s comments in this newsgroup. While they are > deceptive and factually incorrect and grossly biased, they are probably > legal (though in some jurisdictions, his use of the title "doctor" even in > usenet postings may well be illegal if he is offering specific medical > advice on this group, which I contend he has done.) The issue, for me at > least, has always been the legality of his website and the overlap with > the group has always been his insistence on *advertising* that illegal > site in this forum, which is itself arguably illegal conduct in New York > State, where I for one read this newsgroup.

so, you have alot of rather unintelligent, illiterate sorts up there in NY state, do ya? > There is a category of legal > exception for cases where a victim is faulted for her/his own gullibility. > But in general, the gullibility of the victim of a con, a > misrepresentation, or a fraud is not an excuse for the perpetrator of a > crime of that sort.

nothing of that sort occurred on saul’s site, af. as much as you WANT TO BELIEVE that it did. > Many elderly people fall for telephone sales scams > that you and I would find laughable; the scammers specifically target the > elderly because they come from a generation that accepted some kinds of > representations as factual that you or I would immediately distrust; or > because they are lonely and easily seduced into talking to a telemarkting > con artists, or because they are mentally impaired by age and unable to > discern facts you and I would immediately discern. The law also > specifically protects children, who are assumed to be more gullible than > adults, at a higher level than competent adults. Saul’s website remains > readily accessible to both children and the elderly,

bullcrap. how many dottering elderly and curious (parentless) kindergarteners are out there reading sites like sauls? any elderly folks with computer skills are prolly gambling (hey! THERE’s a CAUSE for ya, af!) and any net-literate kids are searching for either PORN or music genre info. (my own is rather entranced with nickjr.com) > not to mention many > other categories of people who through no fault of their own are > susceptible to claims you believe an "intelligent" person would find > laughable prima facie. I know many competent adults, in fact, who don’t > know the difference between a real PhD and a real MD, let alone between a > real PhD and a fraudulent one. They may even be intelligent people, who > are nonetheless ignorant or illiterate or do not know enough English to > make rational distinctions based on reading English language > representations, distinctions you and I as native English speakers can > make without conscious effort.

whatever. if they can read and if they have enough skills to manage net surfing then they could see that saul wasnt an md. HEY! i wonder how long it takes most INTELLIGENT sorts to realize that QW is a total slap in the face to scientific impartiality and objectivity? > Those are the sort of people the laws protect, and I believe the law is > justified in doing so.

sure it is. and i shall continue to do five-ten over the speed limit. and those rowdy groups in the big apple are doing their drugs on the corner. (not near your house, i’m sure!!) — "Have a couple Noni trees in my back yard. The fruit looks ugly, the smell quite strong but I have been ingesting it for years and feel like I can live forever." Kalalau Rich http://www.primenet.com/~lippard/stupid-skeptic-tricks.txt "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality." Albert Einstein http://www.discord.org/skeptical/Critiques/index.html

Response:

Helloooooo David!! I thought you had me killed filed?? Get a rise out of ya over posting the truth huh?? Got any grandkids who play this kind of music David?? Jan – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Ya mean like all the heavy metal talkin bout killin themselves, >gettin high using the f word in every line?? The only thing I can say >for it is it’s LOUIDER! And speaking of no God, I’d say this group >of music writers and those who listen to this crap are pretty well >Good grief. She’s channelling the Church Lady! > – David Wright :: wright at ibnets.com :: Not a Spokesman for Anyone > These are my opinions only, but they’re almost always correct. > The Millennium actually begins on January 1, 2001 > So Get Ready for a Second Round of Parties

Response:

>Not to mention, Fluoridated drinking water!

But there are a few in this genenration who have the* honesty* to tell us that But hey Andrew, maybe you can help to find why we have so many needless deaths Hmmm. Jan

Response:

>He he. Well, I consider the Paul Whiteman Orchestra, the Andrews Sisters, >Pat Boone, and Lawrence Welk to be quite close to diabolically bad myself.

You’re just being ridiculous here, AF. Except for Pat Boone. There’s something really spooky about him. Especially that last album. — David Wright :: wright at ibnets.com :: Not a Spokesman for Anyone These are my opinions only, but they’re almost always correct. The Millennium actually begins on January 1, 2001 So Get Ready for a Second Round of Parties

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->(David Wright) >Helloooooo David!! I thought you had me killed filed?? Get a rise out of ya >over posting the truth huh?? Got any grandkids who play this kind of music >David?? >You are killfiled. But occasionally I see your postings anyway. >Sometimes I get curious about whether you’ve changed. Guess not.

>Didn’t get a rise out of me; I just thought you sounded a lot like >the Church Lady.

What Church Lady?? Are your naughty parts engorged and tingling? Say what?? >Oh, and I don’t have any kids. Or grandkids, by a remarkable >coincidence.

Hmmm. A bachelor?? Jan – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> – David Wright :: wright at ibnets.com :: Not a Spokesman for Anyone > These are my opinions only, but they’re almost always correct. > The Millennium actually begins on January 1, 2001 > So Get Ready for a Second Round of Parties

Response:

>Helloooooo David!! I thought you had me killed filed?? Get a rise out of ya >over posting the truth huh?? Got any grandkids who play this kind of music >David??

You are killfiled. But occasionally I see your postings anyway. Sometimes I get curious about whether you’ve changed. Guess not. Didn’t get a rise out of me; I just thought you sounded a lot like the Church Lady. Are your naughty parts engorged and tingling? Oh, and I don’t have any kids. Or grandkids, by a remarkable coincidence. — David Wright :: wright at ibnets.com :: Not a Spokesman for Anyone These are my opinions only, but they’re almost always correct. The Millennium actually begins on January 1, 2001 So Get Ready for a Second Round of Parties

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Speak for yourself, there are quite a few here who do believe he has much >good > information. >They would be wrong. No law against being wrong, but it’s not a good idea. >AF

Hmmm. Some of us here were teaching right and wrong before you were ever It never fails that some young whipper-snapper comes along to set us all straight, seen um come and go….. Jan

Response:

REPOST of part of, For Aaron: Why dogs lick their testicles… http://www.remarq.com/read/14325/q_j2dqtP20P8AAAAA Jul 24, 07:39 PM A. Fox (in response to Dr. S.) Message 32 of 32 Re: Poor Dr. S. ???

Response:

>Ya mean like all the heavy metal talkin bout killin themselves, >gettin high using the f word in every line?? The only thing I can say >for it is it’s LOUIDER! And speaking of no God, I’d say this group >of music writers and those who listen to this crap are pretty well

Good grief. She’s channelling the Church Lady! — David Wright :: wright at ibnets.com :: Not a Spokesman for Anyone These are my opinions only, but they’re almost always correct. The Millennium actually begins on January 1, 2001 So Get Ready for a Second Round of Parties

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Hmmm. Some of us here were teaching right and wrong before you were ever >Ah, that explains why the world was so perfect before I was born, >especially that first 2/3 of the 20th century. Why, there hasn’t been >anything to top the Holocaust, colonization, the My Lai Massacre, the >Tuskegee experiment, the radiation tests on veterans, lynching, segregated >schools and public facilities, etc. since . . 1964! Wonder why your >generation had right and wrong down so pat and mine didn’t?

*think* they already know it all. Then there is a group who believe there is no >Not to mention we got better music. >AF

Ya mean like all the heavy metal talkin bout killin themselves, gettin high using the f word in every line?? The only thing I can say for it is it’s LOUIDER! And speaking of no God, I’d say this group of music writers and those who listen to this crap are pretty well under the influence of Jan

Response:

Nutritional counseling, or, as it is more commonly called, nutritional consulting, is not licensed in New York State. Not many years ago, the word "dietician" was reserved by law for RD’s and involves a license. You need to spend more time in health food stores. — Over 130 articles (indexed by topic, or keyword with an on-site search engine) plus nearly 1,200 scientific references on nutritional therapeutics are posted at http://doctoryourself.com Links to other clinical nutrition and alternative medicine sites are provided. In article <Pine.GSO.4.10.10007221345190.21720- – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Moses here: As I recall Mister S didn’t claim to a medical doctor > on his web site; rather, he claimed to be a quack. While the web > name Doctor S isn’t one I’d choose, one would have to be pretty > silly to take a web name at face value. My take is that his name > choice was an attempt to "rawhide" the orthodox medical > supporters here on this ng. > Sincerely Moses Clarke > My contentions are three: > 1) that there are plenty of people "silly" (actually, gullible or ignorant > would be better words) enough to mistake Mister Saul’s use of the title > "doctor" for a claim to be a medical doctor, or at leasta clinical > professional with a doctoral education (he is neither). His disclaimers > do not do the trick for me. Besides being too inconspicuously placed to > satisfy the law (see pont 3 below), they do not specifically disclaim > that Saul is a licensed cliniciain of any sort. The law protects the > gullible, not just the perceptive and skeptical. > 2) that Mister Saul is not *any* kind of "doctor" under the conventions of > academic honesty in representation of credentials, and under the laws > governing such representations in New York State and most American states. > He claims, without disclaimer, to possess a "PhD" in "human ethology." > But he does not possess a PhD that would be recognized as a credential by > any professional organization or educational institution in the developed > world (actually, the vice-chancellor of his own alma mater admits that it > would not be a recognized doctorate *anywhere* in the world!) Since he > does not disclaim his PhD, his use of the title "doctor" is deceptive > whether or not he disclaims the specific title of "MD." > 3) That the laws in effect in the state where Mr. Saul and I both live and > teach specifically and clearly prohibit his use of the title "doctor" > (regardless of the validity of point 2 above, and regardless of ANY > disclaimer) in contexts where the title is used to market medical > services, advice, or products, extending well beyond the confines of the > specific laws governing medical practice in particular. (I cite the > general business statutes, not the medical practice statutes). No > disclaimer can supercede the law here. The law says he would have to put > the disclaimer on an equal billing with his title, in letters the same > size, on the same line, with his actual degree and licensure stated > immediately after his name and title. Since he does not possess an > actual degree, nor any valid license to offer any medical advice, service, > or product to specific individuals with specific health concerns, his site > was (and in my opinion remains) in blatant violation of the law. One can > complain fairly about the justness of any law, but one is obligated, in a > free society, to observe the law even if one disagrees with it. One is > always free to work within the law to have the law changed. The only > category of exception recognized by the courts is a case where a higher > moral principle can be clearly demonstrated as a basis for violating an > existing law, usually on a specific and temporary basis. Even then, the > burden of proof is high; for example, you cannot shoot someone who comes > into your house in New York State, even if they come uninvited and with > the intention to rob from you, unless there is a reasonable expectation (a > grand or trial jury must decide this) that you feared for your own life > and were forced to use deadly force (more relaxed laws still exist in some > states on this matter). Likewise, if you are a conscientious objector to > military service, a court may clear you of draft evasion if you can > demonstrate that your religious or ethical principles are deeply held and > exemplified in a history of conduct; but you are not automatically exempt > from prosecution because you claim to have a religious exemption. > To answer the charges of censorship, I simply state that I believe Mister > Saul is free to say anything he wants about medicine on his website. I > would defend that basic right to the death on his behalf. However he is > not free to do so for money, as he specifically claimed to be doing until > he recently removed the statement about "a fee for all consultations" from > the site; and he cannot do so, even for free, by claiming the title > "doctor" when he is neither an MD nor a PhD and possess no license to > practice medicine or any medical specialty, including nutritional > counseling, which is a licensed profession in NYS. > AF

– Over 125 articles (indexed by topic, or keyword with an on-site search engine) plus nearly 1,200 scientific references on nutritional therapeutics are posted at http://doctoryourself.com Links to other clinical nutrition and alternative medicine sites are provided. Before you buy.

Response:

>To summarize… >1. Mr. Thorson overreaches the facts. The word doctor derives >from the Latin meaning teacher. Dr. Saul is a teacher. Dr. >Saul is a doctor.

So, by your standards, anyone who "teaches" may rightly call themselves a "doctor". By that standard, the title "doctor" is meaningless. If you personally wish to define titles that way for your own purposes, that’s fine. But don’t expect any rational person to agree with you. How would you feel if I said anybody who knows how to crack a back may rightly be called a DC? I know how to do that, and I could teach it to anybody in about 5 minutes. Would it bother you in the least if I or any of my "students" were to take on the title of DC? >2. Whereas Mr. Thorson suspects that Dr. Saul does not meet >"certain requirements that are recognized in law" – I suspect >Dr. Saul **DOES** meet those requirements. See Dr. Saul’s >statement above.

You "suspect"? Your suspicions don’t carry a lot of weight. Don’t expect any rational person to accept your suspicions as fact without hard proof.

Response:

-=> Quoting A. Fox to All <=- 07-20-00 00:54

GL> Could "Dr. S." find himself in the same legal fix as Hulda Clark GL> did in Indiana by holding oneself out to be a practicing medical GL> professional without the proper state license? Especially if he GL> charges a "fee" for health consultations? AF> Absolutely, George, and NY’s laws are tougher than Indiana’s on this. AF> Merely by advertising his "for fee" "consultations" and using the AF> title "doctor" Mister Saul may have been risking a felony charge. "Dr. S." should have used a "handle" like "A. Saul" or "Health Nut" from the beginning. Also, I wonder if NYS has any rules/regulations/educational requirements for folks doing nutritional work????? AF> I believe that he has made the recent changes precisely because he AF> heard from the authorities. Certainly, he didn’t do it because I was AF> insisting he do it — he managed to ignore and obfuscate my points for AF> months without making changes, so why the sudden fold-up? The NY authorities probably said a name/title of "A. Saul, PhD" followed by other info was necessary so no implication of him being a medical doctor would be made by site vistors. AF> Without meaning to crow, the following changes in Mister Saul’s AF> website now seem to have been made: AF> 1) Loss of HONcode seal Of course, an alt health web site featuring strictly articles on diet & nutrition most likely would not get the HONcode seal, anyways. I am surprised if QW has the HONcode seal. If that QW site is one-sided, just maybe they really don’t make the HONcode seal grade, either?????? AF> 2) Removal of libelous articles about Dr. Barrett followed by formal AF> retraction here of libelous statements AF> 3) Removal of "fee for consultation" language AF> 4) Removal of prominent "doctor" title from the site masthead IMHO, "Dr. S." should have never used that handle either on the ng or his web site. AF> He still has a ways to go, IMHO — he’s got himself billed as "Doctor AF> Saul" all over the articles on the site. And he is still using the AF> "doctorsaul" email address, and he still claims to have a PhD, which IMHO, his "doctorsaul" email address should be changed in both places, too. AF> he doesn’t have (but that’s probably not a crime unless SUNY is paying AF> him a PhD level adjunct salary). But clearly he is running scared of AF> the law at this point, which he wouldn’t do if I wasn’t right about the AF> marginal illegality of his use of the title "doctor" in the context of AF> his activities. He should make it clear he has interest in nuritional health only. State clearly that he is only a lay person with 25 years of personal self experience in using nutrition to resolve some health aliments. AF> He has hubris. He believes he knows much more than he does about AF> medical topics that are quite complex and beyond him. Eventually, my AF> worry has always been that he will overstep his comptence when advising AF> a patient, whether in a for-fee "consultation" or in the implied AF> advisory setting of this newsgroup where he fails to disclaim his title AF> or expertise and often offers very specific and very bad advice. God AF> willing, nothing bad will even happen. But the chance exists, and I’d AF> say the odds are good. I tend to doubt he has any liability insurance, AF> either. I wonder if NYS has any legal stuff regarding one’s background in nutrition if one engages in nutritional work??????? AF> In any case, I congratulate Mister Saul on the wisdom of his recent AF> display of contrition and observance of the law. I do not intend AF> (sorry Kaalga) to crow about it. But I do intend to continue observing AF> his site and his usenet posts, and reminding new readers that this man AF> who posts with the title "doctor" is not a doctor by any possible AF> definition of the word, neither medical nor any other sort. AF> Case not closed. Plea bargain not accepted. Will you keep after him until he drops that "Dr. S." ng handle and becomes just "A. Saul" ????? .. End of message 20 Jul 00 01:24 ___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR] *—– GratisNet – Tulsa, OK —–*

Response:

Well, there *is* a parental guidance warning on my main page… — Over 130 articles (indexed by topic, or keyword with an on-site search engine) plus nearly 1,400 scientific references on nutritional therapeutics are posted at http://doctoryourself.com Links to other clinical nutrition and alternative medicine sites are provided. In article <Pine.GSO.4.10.10007221401380.21720- – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > silly to take a web name at face value. My take is that his name > > choice was an attempt to "rawhide" the orthodox medical > > supporters here on this ng. > i agree. and it sure seems to have worked quite well. <G> > Actually, it seems to me that the one who has been rawhided is Saul, and > that you mistake his passive-aggressive debating style for good humor, as > he intends you to do. > as i have stated all along, anyone who actually took the time to read > his site would see that he *certainly was NOT* attempting to portray > himself as a medical doctor. > The law says no prospective "client" should have to read his website > below the line where he claims the title "doctor." > I assume you believe that people should observe the law? > and i certainly dont see anyone here providing any proof of their > assertions and insinuations that he was somehow ‘playing doctor’ and > dispensing medical advice or using the ‘doctor’ title to somehow lure in > unsuspecting alt-head gullibles. i have seen more ‘medical advice’ here > at mha over the last year from posters like DW and AF than i have from > saul. > David and I don’t go around calling ourselves "doctor" or claiming > clinical experience. Nor do we advertise our "consultations" for "a fee." > Until two weeks ago, Saul’s site specifically invited visitors to contact > him for consultations, for a fee. That was an egergious violation of the > laws of his state. > almost every regular pro-alt poster here has struck me as intelligent > and capable of making their own decisions regarding health care. and > quite capable of figuring out for themselves whether someone IS or IS > NOT qualified to give ‘medical advice’. > Not every potential visitor to Mister Saul’s website is as intelligent or > as capable of deciding Mister Saul’s credentials as you and some other > intelligent pro-alts may be. The law specifically protects people from > their own gullibility in this case. The issue is not, and has never been, > the legality of Mister Saul’s comments in this newsgroup. While they are > deceptive and factually incorrect and grossly biased, they are probably > legal (though in some jurisdictions, his use of the title "doctor" even in > usenet postings may well be illegal if he is offering specific medical > advice on this group, which I contend he has done.) The issue, for me at > least, has always been the legality of his website and the overlap with > the group has always been his insistence on *advertising* that illegal > site in this forum, which is itself arguably illegal conduct in New York > State, where I for one read this newsgroup. There is a category of legal > exception for cases where a victim is faulted for her/his own gullibility. > But in general, the gullibility of the victim of a con, a > misrepresentation, or a fraud is not an excuse for the perpetrator of a > crime of that sort. Many elderly people fall for telephone sales scams > that you and I would find laughable; the scammers specifically target the > elderly because they come from a generation that accepted some kinds of > representations as factual that you or I would immediately distrust; or > because they are lonely and easily seduced into talking to a telemarkting > con artists, or because they are mentally impaired by age and unable to > discern facts you and I would immediately discern. The law also > specifically protects children, who are assumed to be more gullible than > adults, at a higher level than competent adults. Saul’s website remains > readily accessible to both children and the elderly, not to mention many > other categories of people who through no fault of their own are > susceptible to claims you believe an "intelligent" person would find > laughable prima facie. I know many competent adults, in fact, who don’t > know the difference between a real PhD and a real MD, let alone between a > real PhD and a fraudulent one. They may even be intelligent people, who > are nonetheless ignorant or illiterate or do not know enough English to > make rational distinctions based on reading English language > representations, distinctions you and I as native English speakers can > make without conscious effort. > Those are the sort of people the laws protect, and I believe the law is > justified in doing so. > AF

Before you buy.

Response:

>This is hysterical given the acceptance many have shown toward >Hulda, Devi, Saul, and many other Health Pornographers. When it >comes right down to it, most of your flock are not only unable to >distinguish legitimate alt-meds from Health Porn, many don’t even >recognize the existence of the latter. Talk about the blind & >dysphoric leading the ignorant & paranoid….

LOL…..and many who can distinguish are getting well! >Talk about the blind & >dysphoric leading the ignorant & paranoid….

Results are the key…… Jan

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > If you take Saul’s instransigent, foot-dragging, subject-changing, > > passive-aggressiveness as good humor, it seems to me the answer is > "yes." > Ever been a salesperson or known one well? One of the first > lessons is to get smarmier the more you are challenged. Every good con > artist knows the drill. Watch *Glen Garry Glen Ross* some time. > Really, Aaron! Isn’t that a bit clever-clever for the likes of Kaalga > and her health slut buddies? > I prefer not to use inflammatory terms like "health slut," or even "health > pronography," although I know what you mean. I certainly wouldn’t > classify kaalga as unintelligent or incapable of reasoned discussion of > these issues, which is why I am engaging in reasoned discussion. So far, > I hope she would agree, our disagreement about Saul in particular has been > a polite and substantive exchange even when we have had heated differences > of opinion; I’d like to keep it that way, because I like Kaalga, and > because I think she represents the kind of reasonable fan of altmed > positions I find untenable or dubious I would like to convince of the > validity, if not the ultimate superiority, of my own views.

AF, you know that i am a fan of your intelligence and i think you are a fella who i would prolly have fun playing darts with in real life. ((i would hope that you would handle the darts butt-kicking (that i would undoubtedly serve you up) with charm and wit—although i know that you live up north, i sense a southern charm and courtliness buried deep in there somewhere)) i always enjoy OUR exchanges. you generally put up with my impishness without getting too macho or going over to the kali/andy/yarrow excessive personal-trashing end of things. it’s just that sometimes i think that your personal distaste for certain posters (and you can count those on one hand) gets the better of you and i get a bit disappointed about that loss of objectivity. (you being a teacher and all) dang it, i just have high hopes for you as a teacher here at mha too! but losing it with the ‘foe’ certainly doesnt help a person get the lesson across. i do agree with many things that you say with regards to law. but you must remember that when i am telling you about rolling ‘thru stop signs’ and ’speeding’ and telling you that i live in a ‘bigger’ area of the US…well, everyone knows i live in FL: let’s just say that there are still the odd wide open spaces in FL. and i am not some idiot driver who flaunts traffic laws and is about to kill innocent neighborhood children. (my neighbors all own at least 10 acres. and the odd horse or cow….and UNowned black bear.) my point in my prior post was that a lot of our laws have varying degrees of impact and/or usefulness. and i was trying to think of some analogy to show that (to me, anyway) saul’s website is certainly not a dire and urgent thing to be corrected. obviously….it’s taken you umpteen years to get things rolling against him, eh? you say that i give the ‘public’ far too much credit when it comes to intelligence. i only say that i think you dont give them *enough* credit. i have travelled all over the US like you have. i certainly know that there are many uneducated sorts in our great country. say, have you ever read any tony hillerman novels? or sharon mccrumb? i find it tirelessly interesting that so many ‘uneducated’ folks in the US could take me and my college-educated-ass-self to town when it comes to certain realms of info. one of whom was my very own grandmother. be patient, observe, and don’t push your views on people with arrogant disregard for their own intelligence is my motto. your dislike of saul is obvious. but you felt that way about jan for a long time, as i recall. things change, or at least morph into something else if you let them. i still say that if we MHAers could all end up at an actual real-life dinner/social occasion we would be rather mushy with each other rather than throwing punches. <G> PS…i was just showing my son some roly poly bugs the other day….i was trying to explain what they were / what they ate etc, and lo and behold, i had no idea….so i looked them up online. i had no idea that roly polys were known as ‘pill bugs’. in my 30+ years, i had never heard the term ‘pill bug’. then i found an interesting site about linguistics and cultural social thangs regarding certain english words and phrases….i thought of sharing with you, but i figured that you already knew all about it!! — "Have a couple Noni trees in my back yard. The fruit looks ugly, the smell quite strong but I have been ingesting it for years and feel like I can live forever." Kalalau Rich http://www.primenet.com/~lippard/stupid-skeptic-tricks.txt "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality." Albert Einstein http://www.discord.org/skeptical/Critiques/index.html

Response:

Moses here: As I recall Mister S didn’t claim to a medical doctor on his web site; rather, he claimed to be a quack. While the web name Doctor S isn’t one I’d choose, one would have to be pretty silly to take a web name at face value. My take is that his name choice was an attempt to "rawhide" the orthodox medical supporters here on this ng. Sincerely Moses Clarke Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com. Up to 100 minutes free! http://www.keen.com

Response:

Jul 21, 07:39 PM Mark Thorson (in response to Todd Gastaldo) Message 10 of 10 Re: Poor Dr. S. ???

To summarize… 1. Mr. Thorson overreaches the facts. The word doctor derives from the Latin meaning teacher. Dr. Saul is a teacher. Dr. Saul is a doctor. So, by your standards, anyone who "teaches" may rightly call themselves a "doctor". By that standard, the title "doctor" is meaningless. doctors. Individual doctors give meaning to the title. In addition to his current teaching, Dr. Saul taught clinical nutrition to student DCs and New York Chiropractic College Press published his book. If you personally wish to define titles that way for your own purposes, that’s fine. But don’t expect any rational person to agree with you. hail as legitimate doctors MDs who tell obvious lies and inflict mass human suffering. Surely if people who lie and commit mass child abuse can call themselves doctors, people who don’t lie and commit mass child abuse can do the same. (!) How would you feel if I said anybody who knows how to crack a back may rightly be called a DC? I know how to do that,… ancient art of spinal manipulation. ..and I could teach it to anybody in about 5 minutes. Most doctors can teach anyone spinal manipulation in 3 minutes. : ) people learn immediately. But Dr. Palmer also said there was much more to chiropractic than the art of spinal adjusting. spinal adjusting than "cracking backs." I believe they are right; but this goes to the sham adjusting argument I think. Would it bother you in the least if I or any of my "students" were to take on the title of DC? that it is perfectly legal for non-DCs to call themselves DCs in Oregon – as long as they do not induce belief that they are practicing chiropractic. Also, as I have long noted, there is a huge part of chiropractic – education – which anyone may practice – licensed, degreed or not. 2. Whereas Mr. Thorson suspects that Dr. Saul does not meet "certain requirements that are recognized in law" – I suspect Dr. Saul **DOES** meet those requirements. See Dr. Saul’s statement above. You "suspect"? Your suspicions don’t carry a lot of weight. are not law enforcement or the judiciary. Don’t expect any rational person to accept your suspicions as fact without hard proof. suspicions. better relative to medical doctors who tell obvious lies and inflict mass human suffering – as two of their cheerleaders mentally masturbate about whether Dr. Saul can call himself doctor. Todd D. Gastaldo, D.C. 8948 SW Barbur Blvd Box 6 Portland, OR 97219 FAX (815) 366-2814 TEL (503) 640-0456 http://www.egroups.com/group/chiro-list Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com. Up to 100 minutes free! http://www.keen.com

Response:

>>>><<<<[W]hen [Andrew Saul] calls himself "doctor" to gain the

confidence of his for-profit patients, and when he is no such thing, that’s an entirely different matter and it _is_ the core issue.<<<< Todd D. Gastaldo, DC remarks: Mr. Thorson overreaches the facts. The word doctor derives from the Latin meaning teacher. Dr. Saul is a teacher. Dr. Saul is a doctor. He *is* "such thing." Mr. Thorson writes further: >>><<<<The title "doctor" has certain requirements that are

recognized in law, and Mr. Saul does not meet those requirements.<<<< I believe Dr. Saul *does* meet "certain requirements that are recognized in law" – but neither Mr. Thorson nor I have the authority to decide the issue. Dr. Saul apparently did make some changes in response to Aaron’s posts on the subject. >>><<<<I believe that he has made the recent changes precisely

because he heard from the authorities…<<<< To which Dr. Saul replied, >>><<<<<I received neither nudge nor inquiry of any kind from

New York State. Health education, personal, public or published, is quite distinct from medical practice and requires no license. I have specific oral confirmation and written documentation from the state about this from when I researched the (very natural) question years ago. It is obvious to anyone reading my site that my more than 135 separate statements, "Consult your doctor before making any health decision" (a statement which has always been there, and always will be there) is a crystal clear statement of common sense: Look, folks, this is information. Before you use it, or any information, check with your own doctor.<<<< To summarize… 1. Mr. Thorson overreaches the facts. The word doctor derives from the Latin meaning teacher. Dr. Saul is a teacher. Dr. Saul is a doctor. 2. Whereas Mr. Thorson suspects that Dr. Saul does not meet "certain requirements that are recognized in law" – I suspect Dr. Saul **DOES** meet those requirements. See Dr. Saul’s statement above. Mr. Thorson overreaching the facts reminds me… >>>I also detect a note of anti-Semitism in some of Mr.

Gastaldo’s posts, but that is another matter. <<<< Aaron later joined Mr. Thorson in suggesting that I "hate Jews"… New thread… Dr Saul/Thorson (Also: Aaron promotes formula marketing in the Third World)… http://www.remarq.com/read/14325/qA23bT3D2YAgAAAAA Todd D. Gastaldo, D.C. 8948 SW Barbur Blvd Box 6 Portland, OR 97219 FAX (815) 366-2814 TEL (503) 640-0456 http://www.egroups.com/group/chiro-list Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com. Up to 100 minutes free! http://www.keen.com

Response:

GL> Also, I wonder if NYS has any rules/regulations/educational requirements GL> for folks doing nutritional work????? AF> Absolutely. NYS licenses dietitians and clinical nutritionists. You AF> just guessed my next line of attack on doctoryourself.com NYS may only care if A. Saul does actual nutrition work on "clients" over the Internet. NYS may not care if a person only has an alt health nutritional education web site by itself. One providing only nutritional education without the web site owner trying to give nutritional advice on the side. GL> Will you keep after him until he drops that "Dr. S." ng handle GL> and becomes just "A. Saul" ????? AF> That is the least of my concerns. That is merely a pretentious, AF> overweening, self-important, and utterly pathetic gesture. No, I’ll AF> keep after him until his website reflects the laughable reality of his AF> lack of qualifications to give medical advice. As long as A. Saul drops his "Dr." title claim and his doctoryourself web site only provides nutritional education in the form of many natural health articles, how can NYS close down his web site? Any alt health lay person in this ng could run a similiar alt health web site like www.doctoryourself. Of course, his web site could not be USED as a forum for him giving any type of nutritional advice to paying "clients". .. End of message 21 Jul 00 00:24 ___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR] *—– GratisNet – Tulsa, OK —–*

Response:

>Moses here: Whether Mister S is wrong or right isn’t the core >issue, rather it is the that State could step in and tell him not >speak. A web site is speech. First it is the marginal that are >restricted and then the more mainstream that aren’t in power. And >then there will be large pictures of our new fearless leader on >ever public building and with ever flag, Look what the beef >goons/social parasite class/ big money Texas types tried to do to >Oprah for expressing an opinion.

You’ve reframed the issue in a dishonest way. Mr. Saul is perfectly free to put whatever garbage he wants on his web site. But when he calls himself "doctor" to gain the confidence of his for-profit patients, and when he is no such thing, that’s an entirely different matter and it _is_ the core issue. The title "doctor" has certain requirements that are recognized in law, and Mr. Saul does not meet those requirements. Do you really think anybody should be able to call themselves anything and get away with it? Would you find me completely blameless if I claimed to be a qualified Boeing 747 pilot and took a job with a major airline, when in fact I have no flying experience (except as a passenger)? What if I had some phony documentation to back up my "credentials"? Would that make my claim more legitimate? Or, should I be punished for such behavior? Are the big airlines trying to squeeze out the little guy by creating unreasonable barriers to entry in terms of training and qualification testing? Or, should my theoretical explanation of how airplanes _really_ work be given the same respect as allopathic theories that only accept aerodynamics and completely reject any contributions from the Earth’s magnetic field or the gravitational forces exerted by the Moon and the Sun? I think if I had a web site that proposed such "holistic" theories about aircraft flight, nobody would or should be able to stop me. But if I applied to American Airlines to pilot the Chicago-Seattle run, don’t you think the State would have a reasonable motive for stopping me?

Response:

>> Also, I wonder if NYS has any

rules/regulations/educational requirements – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> for folks doing nutritional work????? > Absolutely. NYS licenses dietitians and clinical > nutritionists. > You just > guessed my next line of attack on docteryoself.com > Will you keep after him until he drops that "Dr. S." ng handle > and becomes just "A. Saul" ????? >That is the least of my concerns. That is merely a >pretentious, >overweening, self-important, and utterly pathetic gesture. No, >I’ll keep >after him until his website reflects the laughable reality of >his lack of >qualifications to give medical advice. >AF

Moses here: Whether Mister S is wrong or right isn’t the core issue, rather it is the that State could step in and tell him not speak. A web site is speech. First it is the marginal that are restricted and then the more mainstream that aren’t in power. And then there will be large pictures of our new fearless leader on ever public building and with ever flag, Look what the beef goons/social parasite class/ big money Texas types tried to do to Oprah for expressing an opinion. Expressing an opinion Moses Clarke Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com. Up to 100 minutes free! http://www.keen.com

Response:

Topic: Poor Dr. S. ??? AF> legal remedies available. Since he presents himself here and on his AF> website as a credentialed medical professional offering advice and (in AF> fact, i just discovered) charging a fee for "consultations" over the AF> internet, he opens himself to investigation of his credentials and AF> complaints about his misconduct under New York State law. I am a AF> citizen of NY State and so is he. We are bound by the same laws, and AF> as a fellow citizen I am obligated to point out his violations of the AF> law. <snip> AF> give him. He hosts a website offering for profit medical information, AF> products, and consultations, he advertises said site on this group, and AF> he presents himself as a professional academic. He is therefore AF> accountable to the New York State laws on the display of credentials AF> and the offering of medical services for profit, and to academic AF> conventions regarding the verification of credentials and the <snip> AF> posted the fact that they had been verified. By claiming the title AF> "doctor," and offering medical advice and services, Mister Saul AF> subjects himself to New York State laws respecting the use of such a AF> title. Could "Dr. S." find himself in the same legal fix as Hulda Clark did in Indiana by holding oneself out to be a practicing medical professional without the proper state license? Especially if he charges a "fee" for health consultations? Hulda Clark lucked out because the law people never tried to find her. .. End of message 11 Jul 00 01:50 ___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR] *—– GratisNet – Tulsa, OK —–*

Response:

I received neither nudge nor inquiry of any kind from New York State. Health education, personal, public or published, is quite distinct from medical practice and requires no license. I have specific oral confirmation and written documentation from the state about this from when I researched the (very natural) question years ago. It is obvious to anyone reading my site that my more than 135 separate statements, "Consult your doctor before making any health decision" (a statement which has always been there, and always will be there) is a crystal clear statement of common sense: Look, folks, this is information. Before you use it, or any information, check with your own doctor. One of the most frequent criticisms I’ve heard made of alt health people and sites is that they are just thinly-varnished moneymaking sites. In the recent process of tripling the number of links at http://doctoryourself.com/links.html , I noticed how many of my favorite sites are free and uncommercial. I admire that where I can find it, and wanted my site to be as uncommercial as possible. And one of my traditionally-credentialled near-peer reviewers wanted HEALTH HOMESTEADING up there, so I agreed. I like it, too. — Over 130 articles (indexed by topic, or keyword with an on-site search engine) plus nearly 1,400 scientific references on nutritional therapeutics are posted at http://doctoryourself.com Links to other clinical nutrition and alternative medicine sites are provided. In article <Pine.GSO.4.10.10007191011040.28852- – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Could "Dr. S." find himself in the same legal fix as Hulda Clark > did in Indiana by holding oneself out to be a practicing medical > professional without the proper state license? Especially if he > charges a "fee" for health consultations? > Absolutely, George, and NY’s laws are tougher than Indiana’s on this. > Merely by advertising his "for fee" "consultations" and using the title > "doctor" Mister Saul may have been risking a felony charge. > I believe that he has made the recent changes precisely because he heard > from the authorities. Certainly, he didn’t do it because I was insisting > he do it — he managed to ignore and obfuscate my points for months > without making changes, so why the sudden fold-up? > Without meaning to crow, the following changes in Mister Saul’s website > now seem to have been made: > 1) Loss of HONcode seal > 2) Removal of libelous articles about Dr. Barrett followed by formal > retraction here of libelous statements > 3) Removal of "fee for consultation" language > 4) Removal of prominent "doctor" title from the site masthead > He still has a ways to go, IMHO — he’s got himself billed as "Doctor > Saul" all over the articles on the site. And he is still using the > "doctorsaul" email address, and he still claims to have a PhD, which he > doesn’t have (but that’s probably not a crime unless SUNY is paying him a > PhD level adjunct salary). But clearly he is running scared of the law at > this point, which he wouldn’t do if I wasn’t right about the marginal > illegality of his use of the title "doctor" in the context of his > activities. > He has hubris. He believes he knows much more than he does about medical > topics that are quite complex and beyond him. Eventually, my worry has > always been that he will overstep his comptence when advising a patient, > whether in a for-fee "consultation" or in the implied advisory setting of > this newsgroup where he fails to disclaim his title or expertise and often > offers very specific and very bad advice. God willing, nothing bad will > even happen. But the chance exists, and I’d say the odds are good. I > tend to doubt he has any liability insurance, either. > In any case, I congratulate Mister Saul on the wisdom of his recent > display of contrition and observance of the law. I do not intend (sorry > Kaalga) to crow about it. But I do intend to continue observing his site > and his usenet posts, and reminding new readers that this man who posts > with the title "doctor" is not a doctor by any possible definition of the > word, neither medical nor any other sort. > Case not closed. Plea bargain not accepted. > AF

Before you buy.

Response:

>where most of the gobbledygook he believes is not considered rational or >serious,

Speak for yourself, there are quite a few here who do believe he has much good information. What is really showing is another one of your obsessions. The Jan

Response:

>… The > Jan

Interesting. I always thought that QuackWatch is highly reliable and responsible. Can you point out some examples of what you’re talking about? – Robb

Response:

>>… The > Jan >Interesting. I always thought that QuackWatch is highly reliable and >responsible. Can you point out some examples of what you’re talking >about? >- Robb

Sure, his know-it-all attitude about most anything alternative, but especially the fact that he only chooses studies that support his pov. Then states that no further research needs done, he is completely bias. He is also dead wrong about the mercury amalgam issue. Jan

Response:

AF> To answer the charges of censorship, I simply state that I believe AF> Mister Saul is free to say anything he wants about medicine on his AF> website. I would defend that basic right to the death on his behalf. AF> However he is not free to do so for money, as he specifically claimed AF> to be doing until he recently removed the statement about "a fee for AF> all consultations" from the site; and he cannot do so, even for free, AF> by claiming the title "doctor" when he is neither an MD nor a PhD and AF> possess no license to practice medicine or any medical specialty, AF> including nutritional counseling, which is a licensed profession in AF> NYS. Question: Do you know what the educational requirements are in NYS to become a licensed nutritionist? And I wonder why Andrew Saul has not bothered to try to become .. End of message 23 Jul 00 11:41 ___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR] GratisNet – Tulsa, OK FIDO – usenet gateway

Chiropractic Healthiness

Poor Dr. S. ???

Question:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Leave a Comment

Recent Posts

Categories