Diagnosis Of "Aggressive Brain Atrophy" Is Wearing Off With Time
It has been asserted since 1997 in unchallenged court testimony that Terri Schindler (Schiavo) had progressed from a full-sized brain in 1993 - the last known date of any meaningful medical treatment - and 1996, the date of the alleged CT brain scan. The elapsed time between her full-sized brain and her late-stage "cortical atrophy" was around three and a half years.
Since the time of the alleged scan, however, almost nine years have passed. And yet, according to a mountain of eyewitness and diagnostic testimony, Terri has displayed none of the symptoms of a late-stage hydrocephalus patient: fetal position, closed eyes, no sounds, no pain, no memory, no emotions and so forth.
The question some have struggled with is: what explains the rapid deterioration in the brain between 1993 and 1996 (over three years) if the brain has apparently been healthy enough to forestall death for another nine years (with the kinds of interactions revealed in her medical charts no less?)
No credible medical explanation has ever been given for such a rapid decline from a full-sized brain. Nor for the type of miraculous (and temporally consistent) abilities seen in Terri's neurological exams and personal interactions over time.
More importantly: if someone were going to substitute the brain scan of a late-stage hydrocephalus patient in place of Terri's - perhaps in order to improve the odds of a favorable verdict - why would they employ such a risky strategy, knowing their deception would backfire on them when the brain "suddenly" refused to deteriorate any further?
Obviously: No one expected Terri's appeals to drag out for eight years. At the time the medical data was presented in court, someone faking the medical records would not have to plan on Terri remaining alive much longer. They could figure that a quick death (by whatever means) would tie in nicely with the diagnosis presented in court: that of a terminal and hopeless patient. If someone were to raise any suspicions about the evidence, they could argue the court found in their favor (the favorite argument of the Schiavo clan even today) and count on disposal of the evidence to protect the crime.
There is an inescapable lesson in this: By having successfully delayed Terri's [court] appointment with death, we have falsified two claims made by the medical data presented in court:
1. Late-stage cortical atrophy ("liquified brain") - new exams and eyewitness testimony [that were never planned to be granted, as all subsequent exams happened upon appeal under protest from Michael] refute it on its face;
2. Aggressive nature ("three and a half years from onset to catastrophe") - elapsed time in clinical stability since then refutes the claim on its face.
That means the CT scan evidence must be bogus.
Realize that, by delaying her termination for this long, we have successfully employed one of the most powerful tools for detecting medical records fraud (at least of the kind used to justify homicide on the basis of "aggressive" pathologies): time.
Had the case not been successfully held up in court, the deception might never have been established.
[P.S. The only truly amazing thing is that it is 2005, yet none of those who provided the original medical documents have been challenged on it.]
[CLICK to read article: What if the CT Brain Scan Isn't Terri's?]
Since the time of the alleged scan, however, almost nine years have passed. And yet, according to a mountain of eyewitness and diagnostic testimony, Terri has displayed none of the symptoms of a late-stage hydrocephalus patient: fetal position, closed eyes, no sounds, no pain, no memory, no emotions and so forth.
The question some have struggled with is: what explains the rapid deterioration in the brain between 1993 and 1996 (over three years) if the brain has apparently been healthy enough to forestall death for another nine years (with the kinds of interactions revealed in her medical charts no less?)
No credible medical explanation has ever been given for such a rapid decline from a full-sized brain. Nor for the type of miraculous (and temporally consistent) abilities seen in Terri's neurological exams and personal interactions over time.
More importantly: if someone were going to substitute the brain scan of a late-stage hydrocephalus patient in place of Terri's - perhaps in order to improve the odds of a favorable verdict - why would they employ such a risky strategy, knowing their deception would backfire on them when the brain "suddenly" refused to deteriorate any further?
Obviously: No one expected Terri's appeals to drag out for eight years. At the time the medical data was presented in court, someone faking the medical records would not have to plan on Terri remaining alive much longer. They could figure that a quick death (by whatever means) would tie in nicely with the diagnosis presented in court: that of a terminal and hopeless patient. If someone were to raise any suspicions about the evidence, they could argue the court found in their favor (the favorite argument of the Schiavo clan even today) and count on disposal of the evidence to protect the crime.
There is an inescapable lesson in this: By having successfully delayed Terri's [court] appointment with death, we have falsified two claims made by the medical data presented in court:
1. Late-stage cortical atrophy ("liquified brain") - new exams and eyewitness testimony [that were never planned to be granted, as all subsequent exams happened upon appeal under protest from Michael] refute it on its face;
2. Aggressive nature ("three and a half years from onset to catastrophe") - elapsed time in clinical stability since then refutes the claim on its face.
That means the CT scan evidence must be bogus.
Realize that, by delaying her termination for this long, we have successfully employed one of the most powerful tools for detecting medical records fraud (at least of the kind used to justify homicide on the basis of "aggressive" pathologies): time.
Had the case not been successfully held up in court, the deception might never have been established.
[P.S. The only truly amazing thing is that it is 2005, yet none of those who provided the original medical documents have been challenged on it.]
[CLICK to read article: What if the CT Brain Scan Isn't Terri's?]
posted by RD at 2:59 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home