Please Note: THIS FORUM IS PATIENT MODERATED AND IS NOT CONNECTED TO ANY CLINIC OR DOCTOR. IF YOU WISH TO CONTACT A CERTAIN DOCTOR OR CLINIC, PLEASE LOOK IN THE ASK THE DOCTOR SECTION FOR DOCTOR OR CLINIC PHONE NUMBERS AND EMAIL ADDRESSES.

                        Home || Contact Us || Help Registering and Participating || Disclaimer


 SeaChange now offers CBD Oil

 

Barbara and Jeannine's Book

Bea Luis Memorial

 


Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Dr Dan Royal makes illegal threats according to university professor

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,818
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default Dr Dan Royal makes illegal threats according to university professor

    Click on the second link and scroll down to read the correspondence from Dan Royal and Ms. Gallagher. Royal works with BioRegenesis Institute aka Heygen aka who knows what for those that may not be familiar. I have also been told by many patients that he has made derogatory remarks about me. I severed ties with BioRegenesis as many of you know and for good reason. Apparently, Royal's rules don't apply to himself or patients would not be relaying this information to me. An update of Ms. Gallagher's postings is in the works. She has written many articles concerning the lax oversight of doctors in Nevada. If you choose to get treatment in that state you need to be aware of this. I certainly wasn't, but what I have learned in the last few months is factual information that can be verified. I literally have enough to write a book and plan to do so. I am posting this because it is important for patients to fully understand that experimental medical treatment is risky and even more so when state medical boards are so lackadaisical

    (http://www.reportingonhealth.org/blo...ng-your-doctor).

    Link to full article by Susan Gallagher

    http://faculty.uml.edu/sgallagher/Br...Regulation.htm

    AN OPEN LETTER TO NEVADA STATE GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS

    TO:

    NEVADA STATE BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS; NEVADA STATE BOARD OF HOMEOPATHIC MEDICAL EXAMINERS; NEVADA ATTORNEY GENERAL CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO; NEVADA GOVERNOR JIM GIBBONS

    FROM:

    SUSAN E. GALLAGHER

    SUBJECT:

    THE BREAKDOWN OF HEALTHCARE REGULATION IN NEVADA

    DATE:

    9/12/2007

    CC:

    VARIOUS MEMBERS OF THE NEVADA STATE LEGISLATURE

    I am not a medical expert, lawyer, or lobbyist, but I began to research medical misconduct in Nevada after my late sister, Ellen M. Gallagher, who died of an undiagnosed brain disease in September 2006, was mistreated by Frank Shallenberger, MD, HMD, at the Nevada Center for Anti-Aging and Alternative Medicine in Carson City. In the course of my research, I discovered so much dangerous disarray within your system of healthcare regulation that I created a web page based on my findings on my faculty web site at the University of Massachusetts, Snake Oil Salesmen Hit Jackpot in Nevada ( http://faculty.uml.edu/sgallagher/NIRB.htm ). The web page documents ongoing efforts by homeopaths and legislators to promote health tourism by establishing mechanisms to legalize medical devices and treatments that are outlawed elsewhere in the country. Since the Nevada State Board of Medical Examiners (NSBME) and the state legislature have so far turned a blind eye to the unethical, illegal, and unprofessional conduct of the charlatans involved in this scheme, I offer the following summary of their activities in hopes that you will act to restore the integrity of health care regulation in your state.

    When I first looked into Dr. Shallenberger's past and found that the Medical Board of California had forced him to surrender his medical license in 1995, I assumed that his history of negligence and dishonesty was anomalous among physicians in Nevada. Since his treatment plan for my sister, which he formulated before he had ever met her or reviewed her medical records, included infusing her with anabolic steroids to prepare for stem cell therapy that is illegal in this country, I thought that he was an unrepresentative renegade who had somehow fallen through the cracks. That's when I discovered that healthcare providers in Nevada are not subject to the standards that prevail in other states. In contrast to what happens elsewhere, even in states where homeopaths are licensed, Nevada permits medical doctors such as Shallenberger to violate ordinary standards of medical practice if they are also licensed as homeopaths. Moreover, dually licensed doctors in Nevada can avoid discipline for providing incompetent or negligent care even when their treatments have nothing in common with homeopathy.

    Thus, after my sister, Anne K. Gallagher, and I filed a complaint with the NSBME detailing Shallenberger's clear-cut violations of basic rules of medical care, we were told that the Medical Board might not be able to discipline him because he claimed that his misconduct fell within the scope of his homeopathic license. Having first assumed that this defense was irrelevant because his treatments did not resemble homeopathy, we soon learned that other homeopathic doctors in Nevada had successfully employed the same excuse. For example, when James Forsythe, a dually licensed physician, was indicted for drug smuggling in 2006, the Reno Gazette Journal revealed that 19 people had filed complaints against him with the NSBME, and a state investigator described him as ʺone of the five most serious physician offenders known in the state of Nevada." However, the Medical Board failed to act on any of these complaints because Forsythe claimed that his mistreatment of these patients fell within the scope of his homeopathic license and, consequently, did not affect his status as a licensed MD.

    One might expect that injured patients and their loved ones could turn to the Nevada State Board of Homeopathic Medical Examiners for relief in such situations. Unfortunately, according to public records, the Homeopathic Board has never followed any coherent procedures, nor has it properly disciplined incompetent physicians since its inception in 1983. In fact, according to two state audits conducted in 2006, the Homeopathic Board did not formulate any written policies until after the audits had gotten underway. Moreover, during 2005 and early 2006, under the leadership of Daniel Royal, DO, HMD, JD, the Homeopathic Board ran up a debt of at least $83,000 to the Attorney General's Office, mainly for litigation to carry on disputes among members and defend itself against lawsuits brought by its own licensees. According to the audits, the Homeopathic Board not only failed to make any effort to recover legal costs or fine errant licensees, it also failed to follow proper reporting procedures and to keep adequate records of payments made to Board members and their business associates for travel expenses and lobbying fees.

    Remarkably, the state legislature has ignored the obvious incompetence at the Homeopathic Board and decided to provide its members with extraordinary power over medical research and treatment in Nevada. In 2005, after less than five minutes of discussion in the Senate Committee on Commerce and Labor, legislators created the Nevada Institutional Review Board (NIRB), which was designed to promote medical tourism by permitting a select group of homeopaths to approve and help to sell medical devices and treatments that are illegal in other states. Then, in June 2007, after this dubious scheme nearly collapsed amid months of irrational bickering among Homeopathic Board members, under the guise of a bill that would have eliminated the NIRB in July, the legislature voted without any public discussion to extend its existence for two more years.

    It's not clear how this legislation, an amended version of SB432 , came to pass, but one of its most disconcerting features is that it authorizes the NIRB “to contract with a private company to conduct studies or other work related to non‐embryonic stem cells in bio-regenerative technology.” What is amazing about this turn of events is that the legislature took this action without hearing any public testimony from anyone with any expertise or credentials related either to institutional review boards or to stem cell research. According to meeting minutes, public discussion of an earlier version of the final bill occurred on April 13, 2007, when unlicensed pharmacist Dean Friesen, Director of Dan Royal's New Hope Medical Clinic, testified before the Senate Committee on Commerce and Labor. In unanimously supporting the proposed bill, which was sponsored by Senator Michael Schneider, Committee members stressed that they had worked closely with Friesen to refine provisions on stem cell research and "transitioning" to clinical applications. But even though they are charged with overseeing state licensing boards, no Committee members expressed concern about Friesen's status as an unlicensed pharmacist. Silence likewise prevailed in regard to Friesen and Royal's obvious lack of knowledge about this area of medical science, nor did lawmakers call attention to ongoing investigations by the Attorney General's Office of Friesen and Royal's apparent violations of state and federal law during and after their tenure on the NIRB.

    While I have no idea how these men managed to gain so much influence over state legislators, I do know that Royal has no compunction about violating professional codes of conduct in order to intimidate his critics into silence. For instance, on May 25, 2007, Royal faxed a letter to my university demanding that I "cease and desist" from assaulting him with "libelous accusations that are false on their face" (see facsimile below). Royal contended, without citing any evidence, that I have "a history of purveying falsehoods as facts, and inaccuracies as truth, with clear malicious intent." Royal also demanded that I publish corrections of defamatory assertions that I had made about him both on my web page and in e-mails sent to state legislators. However, just as he failed to supply any support for his claims about my history, Royal failed to identify a single inaccuracy in either the web page or in my e-mail, which, by the way, he somehow obtained even though he was not among its recipients.

    What is most significant about Royal's attempt to curtail my right to free speech is that he focused on an email sent to state legislators summarizing documented aspects of his performance as a public official. Since Royal is an attorney, he certainly knows that citizens' communications with lawmakers are absolutely protected as essential to open political debate. Moreover, his threatening letter violates various provisions of the Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct, which prohibit attorneys from issuing insupportable statements and from representing themselves in matters related to their service as public officials.

    Public records indicate that Royal has yet to be held to account for other violations of state law related to his activities as President of the Homeopathic Board, as a paid lobbyist, as a fundraiser for the NIRB, and as a member of both the Homeopathic Board and the NIRB. Consequently, I doubt that he will get into trouble for making illegal threats against me. Like who knows how many other homeopathic physicians who have engaged in illegal or unethical behavior, Royal has every reason to feel complacent. As you can see if you visit my web site, he and his fellow homeopaths have kept up a host of questionable activities for years without eliciting any appropriate response from other government boards and agencies.

    For example, at its public meeting last December, the allopathic Medical Board gave Shallenberger a forum to discuss his reckless use of human growth hormone. After listening to Shallenberger describe how he administers human growth hormone to elderly patients and others in violation of FDA regulations, a few doctors present said that they prefer to follow FDA rules in their practices. However, it never occurred to any NSBME members to suggest that Shallenberger stop his unorthodox therapies. Instead, the discussion ended when Board President Dr. Javaid Anwar said that the Board does not issue any guidelines, though it "does look at what falls within the good practice of medicine and what falls outside of it." In other words, even the head of the Medical Board seems not to realize that its fundamental mandate is to stop physicians such as Shallenberger from flouting clear-cut standards of medical care. It is, consequently, not surprising that Nevada's Board of Medical Examiners ranks 46th in Public Citizen's latest survey of the effectiveness of state medical boards, despite a $3.35 million surplus that it has been trying to spend down since 2003.
    The time is long overdue for you to abolish the Board of Homeopathic Medical Examiners and to force the NSBME to hold homeopathic physicians to the same standards that apply to ordinary MD's. After all, the ongoing chaos at the Homeopathic Board and its offshoot, the NIRB, is due, not to any problems inherent in alternative medicine, but to the consistent refusal of the practitioners involved to conform to state and federal rules and regulations. If Nevada truly wants to move ahead in promising areas such as stem-cell treatment, the state needs to enlist the help of legitimate researchers with appropriate credentials rather than pinning its hopes on unlicensed pharmacists and other snake oil salesmen. The notion that "anything goes" may have enabled your state to rake in millions from gambling and prostitution, but as you can see from the ridiculous schemes of Dan Royal and Dean Friesen, as well as the irrational treatments pushed by the likes of Frank Shallenberger and James Forsythe, adopting this mentality in healthcare is an obviously irresponsible error.

    Susan E. Gallagher, Associate Professor, Political Science Department
    University of Massachusetts at Lowell
    Director of Digital Resource Development, 2007‐2008
    http://faculty.uml.edu/sgallagher
    Susan_Gallagher@uml.edu
    Author: Susan E. Gallagher, Associate Professor, University of Massachusetts Page updated 1/30/08
    *All of the criticism offered on these pages is directed at elected representatives, political appointees, government officials, and public figures who have made information about their public activities freely available on the Internet. All assertions are documented by links to public documents, and all commentary springs from a sincere commitment to promoting good government by providing accurate information about significant social and political problems. If you find any misinformation on this site, please send specific evidence to Professor Susan E. Gallagher. Keep in mind that empty declarations and idle threats will be ignored.

    Sources:

    Senate Bill No. 361—Senator Schneider
    Audit Report on the Nevada State Board of Homeopathic Medical Examiners, Legislative Counsel Bureau
    Medical Board of California, Accusation against Frank Shallenberger
    " Maverick Doctor Under Fire,” Reno Gazette Journal, October 8, 2006. (James Forsythe)
    Meeting Minutes, Nevada State Board of Medical Examiners, December 1 & 2, 2006
    Public Citizen Survey of State Medical Boards
    Nevada Legislature, Senate Daily Journal, 73rd Session, June 3, 2007, 386‐390.
    Infomercial for New Hope Medical Clinic (annotated)
    Senator Schneider's Royalist Healthcare Agenda
    Snake Oil Salesmen Hit Jackpot in Nevada
    First treatment in 2007. Pioneering ever since.

    Barbara

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,818
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default Ms. Gallagher points out Schneider's past

    Pool of candidates running for office thins because of harassing tactics
    http://www.newsreview.com/reno/ordea...nt?oid=2343654
    By Dennis Myers
    dennism@newsreview.com

    Read the 2 reader submitted comments at the end of the article. The first one is from Susan Gallagher.

    This article was published on 06.16.11.


    “Tor Akman”: You know, I am not a businessman. I’m a holistic healer. It’s a calling. It’s a gift. You see, it’s in the best interest of the medical profession that you remain sick. (“The Heart Attack” episode, Seinfeld)

    Clark County Sen. Michael Schneider’s bill to replace the Board of Homeopathic Medical Examiners with a Board of Complementary Integrative Medicine became one of those wonderful experiences that politics so often generates in the 21st century. It roused alternative health activists on the internet across the nation.

    The bill, Senate Bill 412, which passed the Senate only to die when legislators failed to make a deadline in the Assembly, would have brought other fringe or dubious healthcare practices under the same kind of regulation as homeopathy. Homeopathy, a practice popular in the 1800s that began a revival in the U.S. during the 1970s, has little scientific support and is considered a threat to health by most health care practitioners.

    Among the practices that would have been brought under the Board’s authority were applied kinesiology (Rationalwiki.org lists the names of two people it says were killed by this practice), aquastretch, aromatherapy, bio-oxidative therapy, biofermentics, cell therapy, colon therapy (four names), cranio-sacral therapy (two names), dietary supplement practices, electrodiagnosis, environmental therapy, healing art, healing touch, herbal therapy (nine names), holistic therapy, magnetic and electromagnetic therapy, naturopathic therapy (14 names), neural therapy, neuromuscular, integration, noble metal therapy, nutrition therapy, orthomolecular therapy, peptide therapy, pharmaceuticals, reiki, therapeutic touch, thought field therapy, wellness programs, and xenobiotics.

    Schneider was targeted less by these groups than by the diet supplement industry that sells vitamins, herbal remedies and other products, all of which are shielded under the law from food safety regulation. The industry is known for National Rifle Association-style tactics. Its hand is rarely seen. Rather, it stirs up diet supplement users with automated phone calls who then call their legislators.

    “They’re just out of control,” Schneider said. “My cell phone has been ringing. They’re doing robocalls to legislators and into my district. They have all sorts of misinformation. People started calling our office with misinformation.”

    The language used helps fuel these campaigns. There were two online essays against the Nevada bill, and they were both duplicated many times on numerous websites. One was headlined “Nevada SB 412 to make felons out of natural health practitioners.” It was posted on more than 41,000 websites. It read in part, “In virtually every state simultaneously, are bills criminalizing anything but state sanctioned and approved healthcare choices, brought to you by the Republican party with a few stray Democrats thrown in. (Have to make it appear ‘bi-partisan,’ you know) … The bill does one other very important thing; it controls who can access the healthcare market, very successfully ending competition for anyone other than big medical campaign donors … like the AMA and local doctors who resent the competition. This bill is an overt assault on your rights.”

    Schneider is a Democrat, and every Republican but one in the Senate voted against his bill, an indication of the lack of knowledge of the Nevada situation by distant critics.

    The other opposition piece, which appeared on more than 5,000 websites, read “Nevada Senate Bill 412 to establish medical monopoly, squelch natural and alternative medicine.” A sample of its prose: “Just imagine when, as with other such medical boards, the power seekers and control freaks who naturally gravitate to positions of power in government come to have the say over what type of natural medicine may be practiced and what type may not. Will your favorite form of natural medicine survive? Or will it be branded a heresy and persecuted? … This is the Medical Monopoly at its finest, acting to stifle their competition and those they disagree with, the natural-health practitioners, all in the interest of course of ‘protecting’ the public.”

    This piece appears to have originated with the National Health Federation of Monrovia, Calif., an organization that promotes alternative medicine.

    “They get mad and yell and scream,” Schnedier said. “They don’t listen and try to understand. They need all the facts. Instead they say this horrible thing is going to happen, and by God they got it off the internet, and so it’s true. … They have zero education in the legislative process, and they get themselves all worked up and get out of control.”

    Supplements are often marketed as medicine, but supplement manufacturers oppose letting the Food and Drug Administration or other agencies investigate whether their products do what is claimed and whether they are safe or harmful. So far, U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch—whose home state of Utah contains many supplement manufacturers—has been able to limit the FDA’s authority in the field. Some death-dealing food supplements remain on the market because Hatch’s 1994 Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) allows dietary supplements to be sold without prior testing for safety or effectiveness and hampers the FDA in getting risky products off the market.

    What happened to Schneider is also experienced by other legislators over other issues and legislation. Indeed, Schneider himself was attacked on two different bills whose content overlapped. While shepherding an Assembly bill dealing with dieticians through the Senate, he said that measure, too, generated furious opposition.

    “It has been unbelievable how this robocall has been going around,” he told the Senate about the dietician bill. “There have been calls to our offices from the robocalls. They are lighting up the public by having them think that we are going to make people who sell vitamins be licensed. That is anything but the truth. I am upset about this and the actions of the people out there. They have accused members of my committee and other members of the Legislature of doing something that is not in the law. I encourage everyone to vote this and to send a real message to these yahoos who are out of control in this state right now.”

    Another legislator identified with a different issue said she had been similarly targeted.

    “And the thing is, the attacks are all based on stuff that isn’t in the bill,” she said. “These industries get people stirred up with selective quotes from the bill.”

    Political scientist Fred Lokken said these kinds of tactics drive good people out of politics and are part of the reason that legislative bodies are becoming more and more filled with zealots.

    “It’s why we don’t get things done because the fear factor comes into it. It’s kind of a modern day version of bullying. … You know, they know that they can intimidate a process, in this case by sheer numbers. When maybe a hammer would do, they use a sledgehammer. They just go to an overkill stage. The issues become completely clouded. … And in [Schneider’s] case, you see something that’s direct and personal that can clearly have ramifications if he wants to serve in office.

    “He’s well intended. It’s an area that probably begs for regulation, and it reminds us that no good deed goes unpunished, that there are those out there who are always trying to stop commonsensical activities. And some of them … have become extremely well organized. They have studied and learned, quite effectively, intimidating tactics. For anyone watching the process, it’s a lesson that says, ‘Why do I want to put myself through all of that?’ ”



    Reader Comments - the first is from Ms. Gallagher



    Posted 06/17/2011 5:39PM by susanekg
    This is an interesting distortion of Schneider’s longstanding campaign to put more money and power into the hands of his friend, Dr. Daniel Royal, a homeopathic physician and lawyer who has been trying for years to get the legislature to legalize a wide array of dubious medical treatments. A few years ago, Schneider and Royal tried to pass legislation that would supposedly make NV a mecca of medical tourism by allowing charlatans to offer the crazy treatments listed above. Thus Schneider’s goal was and apparently still is not to reign in the medical fringe, but to provide practices such as “bio-oxidative therapy, biofermentics, cell therapy,” and the like with more legitimacy, while also making them more lucrative by getting insurance companies to pay for them. I haven’t had time to keep up with medical antics in NV, but people can learn about Schnieder’s history by visting this archive: http://faculty.uml.edu/sgallagher/NIRBArchive.htm.

    Posted 07/14/2011 10:27AM by iJoe
    “Intimidating tactics” are threats. Threats are illegal, immoral and unethical. All people are required to comply with law. A threat is a statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done. A threat is an act of coercion wherein an act is proposed to elicit a negative response. A threat is a communicated intent to inflict harm or loss on another. _____________________________ A threat is a violation of law as it is a civil tort. A threat is the civil tort of assault. At Common Law, assault is an intentional act by one person that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact, which is what a threat is. _______________________________ A threat is also a trampling on the right to Free Speech. _________________________________ Lawyers are held to a higher standard than non-lawyers. That higher standard is because all lawyers are officers of the court. All court is government. A threat is an assault which is a civil tort, a violation of law. A threat by a lawyer is also an ethical (Canons) violation. ______________________________ If a lawyer files a lawsuit for an opinion, blog or even Yelp posting one can and should certainly hollar Abuse of Process and trampling of free speech and SLAPP. Abuse of Process is also common law intentional tort. Abuse of process refers to the improper use of a civil or criminal legal procedure for an unintended, malicious, or perverse reason. Abuse of process is the use of legal process to accomplish an unlawful purpose. To silence Free Speech is malicious and perverse and unlawful. FYI anonymous free speech is constitutionally protected. ____________________________________________ A lawyer is obligated to comply with a code of ethics that is adopted by the state in which the lawyer practices. ________________________________________________ Also, fiduciary breach is legal malpractice when committed by an attorney. ____________________________________ That’s how it was taught when I attended the University of California Hastings College of the Law. ___________________________________________ Just Keep On writing, blogging, Yelping, etc. Do not use intimidating tactics.
    First treatment in 2007. Pioneering ever since.

    Barbara

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Copyright 2007 - 2011 Stem Cell Pioneers