Powered by
Movable Type 3.2
Design by
Danny Carlton

Made with NoteTab

June 20, 2005

Medical experts refute Terry's Autopsy findings

Statement from Dr William Hammesfahr:

We have seen a lot on the autopsy of Terri Schindler Schiavo in recent days, that I feel needs to be addressed. To ignore these comments will allow future 'Terri Schiavo's' to die needlessly after the wishes of clinicians and family are ignored.

Considering that there were so many physicians and therapists who were willing to step forward to treat Terri Schiavo, from university based practitioners to those in private practice, it clearly shows that the mainstream medical community across the board, those involved in treating patients, knew that they could help Terri.

The record must be set straight. As we noted in the press, there was no heart attack, or evident reason for this to have happened (and certainly not of Terri's making).

Unlike the constant drumbeat from the husband, his attorneys, and his doctors, the brain tissue was not dissolved, with a head of just spinal fluid. In fact, large areas were "relatively preserved."

The purpose of the therapies offered by so many, from major universities, brain injury centers, and from private practice physicians, is to improve and restore quality of life, and function, which the mainstream medical community clearly tried to get to her.

I have had a chance to look at Dr. Nelson's analysis of the brain tissue, and essentially, as a clinician, these are my thoughts.

The autopsy results confirmed my opinion and Dr. Maxfield's opinions, that the frontal areas of the brains, the areas that deal with awareness and cognition were relatively intact. To use Dr. Nelson's words, "relatively preserved." In fact, the relay areas from the frontal and front temporal regions of the brain, to the spinal cord and the brain stem, by way of the basal ganglia, were preserved, thus the evident responses which she was able to express to her family and to the clinicians seeing her or viewing her videotape. The Spect scan confirmed these areas were functional and not scar tissue, and that was apparently also confirmed on Dr. Nelson's review of the slides. Dr. Maxfield's estimates of retained brain weight were apparently accurate, although there may have been some loss of brain weight due to the last two weeks of dehydration.

Dr. Maxfield and myself both emphasized that she was a woman trapped in her body, similar to a child with cerebral palsy, and that was borne out by the autopsy, showing greater injury in the motor and visual centers of the brain. Obviously, the pathologists comments that she could not see were not borne out by reality, and thus his assessment must represent sampling error. The videotapes clearly showed her seeing, and even Dr. Cranford, for the husband, commented to her that, when she could see the balloon, she could follow it with her eyes as per his request.

That she could not swallow was obviously not borne out by the reality that she was swallowing her saliva, about 1.5 liters per day of liquid, and the clinical swallowing tests done by Dr. Young and Dr. Carpenter. Thus, there appears to be some limitations to the clinical accuracy of an autopsy in evaluating function.

With respect to the issue of trauma, that certainly does not appear to be answered adequately. Some of the types of trauma that are suspected were not adequately evaluated in this assessment. Interestingly, both myself and at least one neurologist for the husband testified to the presence of neck injuries. The issue of a forensic evaluation for trauma, is highly specialized. Hence the wish of the family to have observers which was refused by the examiner.

Ultimately, based on the clinical evidence and the autopsy results, an aware woman was killed.

Dr. Hammesfahr has worked extensively with brain damaged patients such a stroke victims and has the first patent in history granted for a process which treats neurological diseases such as coma, stroke, brain injury, cerebral palsy, hypoxic injuries. The treatment he developed uses medication to restore blood flow to the brain.

After reading the autopsy report, I have to admit the medical examiner seems to go way over the line in attempting to conclude things he would have no way of knowing from an autopsy. But then the ability of people to rationalize evil has always been astounding.

Media coverage: WorldNetDaily, NewsMax

Blog Coverage: BlogsForTerri, ProLifeBlogs, Teknosis

Posted by Danny Carlton at June 20, 2005 07:34 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:



Posted by: MARY at June 23, 2005 04:43 AM

You're a "fan" of an innocent woman being murdered?!?

"Letting go" would mean they do nothing and allow another family to suffer the same way. I applaud them for sticking to the fight and protecting other lives.

How can Terri "rest" when her murderer remains free, gloats even on her own tombstone and other innocent people will be murdered the same way?

Posted by: Danny Carlton at June 23, 2005 08:58 AM

Danny Carlton, are you American? Do you consider yourself a GOOD american?

Its amazing how quick the pro Schindlerites are to cast away the constitution when it suits them- such as when they pronounce Michael Schiavo guilty of some crime he has not been charged with and has not been convicted of. The attempts to implicate him in crimes have been many and so far all unproven by any supporting facts or evidence.

Florida DCF investigated what? Over 80 complaints naming him as a suspect or perpetrator in the abuse, neglect or exploitation of his wife and all those investigations end up with no prosecutable offenses and all end up "unsubstantiated" and unproven but still we have slanderous and libelous statements being posted on blogs all over the web.

So called good americans who embrace "guilty until proven innocent". SO called good americans with no respect for the rule of law or separation of powers. So called good americans who fail to inform themselves on the facts before blindly parroting the rumors, speculation and disinformation that came out of the pro life deception engine that the Schindlers whored themselves to for the money and other resources they needed to get their own way at any cost.

The Schindlers told the court that they would disregard their daughters wishes. They told the court they would subject her to whatever horrors they deemed necessary in order to keep her alive, even multiple amputations were not out of the question in their mind. Not a word about giving consideration to what their daughter would want- only self centered pathological commitment to the goal of getting their own way at any cost.

What is really astounding is peoples ability to disregard science, facts, evidence, testimony and even truth when it impedes some strongly held belief that doesn't quite coincide with reality.

What is really astounding is that the probate courts had decided similar cases by the thousands prior to anyone ever hearing the names Schindler or Schiavo. Astounding that such cases continued to be decided in county court houses during a period of time when congress and the president chose to single out one family dispute for a very costly and divisive intervention of FEDERAL government. Astounding that even today these cases continue to be decided in local county court houses.

Somehow the probate system, even if flawed, endured and functioned without FEDERAL intervention for decades prior, during and hopefully for decades after this unique and altogether uncalled for FEDERAL intervention.

Just as the constitution will survive small minded men with their transparent agendas forgetting what it means to be a "good american" and using their positions and their platforms to declare a man guilty who has not stood trial nor been charged with any crime.

Posted by: Amazed at June 26, 2005 12:09 AM

By the way Danny Carlson the banner at the top of your post states "Medical EXPERTS" as in plural- but I only read the opinion of ONE doctor who is definately not an EXPERT when it comes to performing an autopsy- which would be WAY OUTSIDE the scope of his chosen specialty field which is nuerology. He has no credentials as a pathologist or medical examiner.

As a matter of fact he was informed by the Nobel foundation that his claim of being Nobel nominated is false and deceptive and they asked him to stop making such claims.

It seems that ONE letter written by a Florida congressmen does not qualify as a nomination according to the Nobel foundation.

This is easily ascertainable and is irrefutable as a matter of fact and truth. Why would you perpetuate a falsehood?

As for Dr Hammesfahr refuting the autopsy- well thats just plain self serving. The autopsy clearly and concisely proved Dr Hammesfahr wrong in nearly all his pro life bought and paid for opinions on the Mrs Schiavo evaluation he performed.

Just as the autopsy finding that Mrs Schiavo was blind due to the destruction of the vision centers of her brain clearly discredited the carefully edited video snippets that the Schindlers released. Not that they weren't already discredited:
"Let’s look back at some of those videos. Start with Terri watching a balloon. It shows her eyes gliding up, down, this way, and that as a doctor entreats her: “Look over here. Terri? Terri.. there you go. Can you follow that, Terri? There you go. Can you follow that at all? Terri? Come on. Terri, no, no... Can you see that? Okay. Look over here. Look over here. That’s fine. Look over here.”

You can watch the video and draw your own conclusions. But what’s striking in retrospect is what you can’t see: the balloon. Without it, you can’t tell whether she’s following it. In fact, her eyes dart back and forth too quickly to reflect the movements of a balloon, even if it were jerked by a human hand. It’s easy to overlook this, because your brain succumbs to the audio: “You see that, don’t you, huh? You do follow that a bit, don’t you?” You didn’t see her eyes following the balloon. You heard that you saw it. And when you see the full text of the doctor’s words — “Terri? Come on. Terri, no, no. I’m using both sound and..” — you can catch the warning signs you didn’t initially hear."

Excerpted from an aricle by William Saletan at www.slate.com

You should do better research Danny.

Posted by: Amazed at June 26, 2005 12:27 AM

“Amazed” you are obviously another Nazi in full rationalization mode, drooling over the possibility of snuffing out more cripples.

Posted by: Danny Carlton at June 26, 2005 05:56 AM

Can't refute the truth?

Use the school yard bully tactic of name calling. Not that I expected maturity or a well reasoned argument.

Ignore the science, evidence, testimony and truth and what you are left with is passion and the need to cling to your belief system no matter how out of synch with reality it might be.

Because the likes of you don't have time to inform yourself on the issue and actually research anything. The likes of you are much more comfortable rumor mongering, speculating, building elaborate conspiracy theory,perpetuating lies and generally doing your best to evidence the limits of your understanding of what it means to be a good American.

Honestly your silence on the issues is probably more informative and thought provoking than anything you would have to say at this point.

By the way, this case was about the very AMERICAN concept of self determination and had nothing to do with German history, NAZI German history, the holocaust or "snuffing cripples".

When the Schindlers could not win their case with the judiciary they withdrew to the court of popular public opinion.

No worries about perjury in the court of popular public opinion. You can lie your ass off in front of the cameras and microphones and not risk being held in contempt- except by free thinking educated men who take the time to do research of their own.

They enlisted the money and resources of a giant deception engine known as pro life.

They knew they could not win the public popularity contest based on taking a stand against carrying out the wishes of their daughter. After consulting with their new pro life handlers they reinvented the case and started using phrases like judicial tyranny and state sanctioned MURDER- phrases that were carefully calculated to inflame the passions of an otherwise indifferent public.

Just like the carefully edited video snippets taken out of context from hours of available video- NONE OF THE REMAINDER OF WHICH THEY WILL EVER RELEASE, because together with the autopsy findings of Mrs Schiavos BLINDNESS the release of the remainder of the video would only serve to further discredit them.

But hey, the Schindlers and their supporters have demonstrated time and again that the truth is not something they value very highly.

Maybe its better for them that it has so little value. Otherwise it might be worth defending. Especially if you were with it and not against it. Especially when you cannot refute it.

Right Danny?

Posted by: Amazing at June 26, 2005 09:28 PM

I have a fellow church member who is in worse shape than Terri ever was. I see how her family loves and cares for her. Michael wanted the money -- Terri's family wanted her to live, and offered to care for her. You and your ilk want all those people who don't fit your standard of "human" to be extreminated, that makes you a Nazi. The fact, and the science were on Terri's side. Evil, corrupt judges and lazy politicians were on Michael's side. Spouting idiotic rationalization can't change the truth.

Posted by: Danny Carlton at June 27, 2005 09:52 AM

You still manage to avoid actually responding to the issues.

Dr Hammesfahr is not a nobel prize nominated physcian- no retraction issued.

Dr Hammesfahr was proven wrong at autopsy and issues a self serving refutation of the autopsy findings not supported by the facts or the science, and for which he lacks the credentials and qualifications to provide- no retraction issued.

I am happy that you have an example in your church of a undivided family that is in agreement as to the expressed wishes of their loved one and that this family is working together toward the common goal of carrying out those wishes.

Thankfully in America we have a proper forum for resolving conflicts when they arise- particularly when a family is not so cohesive and cannot agree on what their loved one would want for themselves under horrible and unthinkable circumstances.

More importantly that forum hears evidence and testimony and is guided by legal principles and the rule of law when making determinations- it is a dispassionate forum unwilling to be swayed by testimony that is obviously biased and lacking credibility no matter how passionate.

You and your ilk, Danny, long to see a return to days of old when disputes are settled in the streets rather than in the courts of law. You and your ilk see justice being determined not in the dispassionate courts of law- which are guided by rules of procedure, rules of law and the determination of facts, viewing of the available evidence and the hearing of testimony.

You and your ilk see justice as better being determined in the fluid and ever changing court of popular public opinion where the loudest, most inflammatory, best financed, compelling story telling, aided by the best acting, wins the day.

A forum not bound by rules. Where perjury is not an issue. Where the interest in science, evidence, testimony and the truth takes a back seat to the interest in being entertained and propelled in to a new world for which the average man has no experience.

A world of family shattering conflict, bare agony and torment, misdirected hate and a massing of the misinformed, underinformed and those with an agenda to decieve and lie if it suits their purposes.

Because of the court of popular public opinion the founding fathers of this country insisted on a separation powers. The founding fathers saw how easily the politicians could be swayed by popular public opinion of the day- and how quickly.

Because of these concerns the judiciary was meant to operate outside the sphere of such radical influences. It was meant to operate outside the sphere of a misinformed, underinformed and intentionally deceived body politic.

In your opinion, Danny, any judge or politician not in agreement with your personal reality is evil and corrupt or lazy.

Not WRONG. Just evil and corrupt.

You carefully avoided using the word WRONG- even if you don't realize it. Because the word WRONG doesn't fit even into your reality.

Again, the issues you fail to address appear to be the ones you cannot refute.

If you are a good American then you know it is wrong to presume a man guilty until proven innocent. If you were a GOOD American, and not just a resident of America, you would presume a man innocent until he has been proven guilty in a court of law.

Its very telling that you have not retracted on this issue- or even addressed it at all.

Apparently you are not a good American and this is something you cannot refute. It is not even something you feel so strongly about that you would attempt to refute.

Maybe the truth hurts.

Posted by: Amazed at June 27, 2005 04:48 PM

I can find no where where Dr Hammesfahr has made the claim that he was nominated for a Nobel Prize, even though he was nominated. The Novel Prize is a sad joke, and I'm sure he'd rather not be associated with it.

Dr Hammesfahr has not been proven wrong. The autopsy made numerous claims outside the scope of what an autopsy is able to reveal.

It seems your only real evidence is that you think you're right. Pretty much the way Greer worked. Perhaps we now know who you are.

Posted by: Danny Carlton at June 28, 2005 01:49 PM

Post a comment

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)

Security verification

Type the characters you see in the image above.