Posted on 06/19/2005 6:35:16 PM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
Refuting the findings of the county medical examiner, a neurosurgeon who examined Terri Schiavo before her death says the autopsy report confirms she was aware of what was going on around her.
Dr. William Hammesfahr, nominated for a Nobel Prize for his work in medicine and known as a pioneer in approaches to helping the brain injured, said to ignore the facts would "allow future Terri Schiavos to die needlessly."
"The record must be set straight," he said. "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.'"
He said the autopsy results confirmed his opinion that the frontal areas of the brains, the areas that deal with awareness and cognition were relatively intact.
"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," he said. "The Spect scan confirmed these areas were functional and not scar tissue, and that was apparently also confirmed on Dr. (Stephen) Nelson's review of the slides."
Dr. Hammesfahr describes Terri as "a woman trapped in her body, similar to a child with cerebral palsy, and that was born 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."
He was critical of the findings that she was not capable of swallowing on her own. He cited her ability to swallow up to about 1.5 liters per day of liquid, confirmed, he said, by two other physicians.
"With respect to the issue of trauma, that certainly does not appear to be answered adequately," he added. "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."
Hammesfahr concluded: "Ultimately, based on the clinical evidence and the autopsy results, an aware woman was killed."
Click For Freedom!
His statements concur with others who have conducted analyses of the autopsy results. Last week, an attorney specializing in medical ethics cases, Jerri Lynn Ward of Austin, Texas, made similar observations. She particularly took note of this autopsy finding: "The frontal temporal and temporal poles and insular-cortex demonstrated relative preservation."
"What this tells us is that her cortex retained function and that her brain was more normal in the area that controls higher-level thinking," said Ward, who has weighed in on the case in her weblog and in an interview with "Joseph Farah's WorldNetDaily RadioActive" show.
Schiavo died March 31, nearly two weeks after the feeding tube that had kept her alive was removed under a court order obtained by her husband, Michael Schiavo. Her parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, said they were willing to care for their daughter, insisting she had a strong will to live.
Experts supporting Michael Schiavo – contending Terri Schiavo's brain cortex essentially was missing and filled with fluid – concluded she was in a persistent vegetative state. The Schindlers, arguing that their daughter recognized and responded to family members, produced neurologists who diagnosed her as "minimally conscious."
Pinellas-Pasco medical examiner Jon Thogmartin, speaking at a news conference Wednesday, said the damage to Terri Schiavo's brain was "irreversible, and no amount of therapy or treatment would have regenerated the massive loss of neurons."
But Ward, pointing to the autopsy report, noted the brain's frontal lobe plays a part in impulse control, judgment, language, memory, motor function, problem solving, sexual behavior, socialization and spontaneity.
"It is very possible that she remained cognizant of sounds and other things without being able to communicate," Ward said. "It's possible Terri was aware of everything being done to her – yet could do little to make people aware that she was there."
Ward pointed out that major damage to Schiavo's brain was shown to be toward the back – the areas that affect motor skills.
So the question remains, says Ward, was Terri Schiavo still a thinking, aware human being?
In fact, neuropathologist Nelson, whose assessment is included in the report, conceded there is no way of determining through an autopsy whether a person was in a persistent vegetative state.
Thank you, Trinity! I see documents which actually state the truth are being purged as we speak; so glad you saved that one.
Good to see you, too, meema. Truth has flown the coop.
I started saving stuff months ago when I saw they were removing it, or replacing it with unofficial "summaries" - so did AnnieO7... We might get it all up on my site today or tomorrow... just be a bit before I get all the links written. ; )
I'm also going to add to and organize the Hammesfahr stuff - he should have stayed under his rock. lol
Thanks for the awesome job you've done!
What is really sad is that you would take all this time to start a website about someone who was starved to death and whose family is in pain? And you talk about others being obsessed?!?! Do you spend all this time on researching this so you can feel good about a person being starved to death?
See post #60....everything else is just window dressing.....
Thank YOU, Trinity. I'll be sure to check in with your site later. Your research has been exemplary...among the best I've seen on FR, considering the amount of paperwork you've waded through.
No, YellowDog. I did not support the way the whole thing went down. I have always expressed concerns about certain critical elements that went into the decision.
But I think credibility counts, so in my world, facts *do* matter and lies *should* be exposed, no matter whose side they purport to support.
I find it shameful that so many facts were treated with scorn - why feel threatened by the whole truth? Shouldn't we realize the threat of having our overall message's credibility damaged by needless lies?
Anyway, I was asked by someone in the media to do the research and report. What you see, I put up as a balance, to counter the lies that were being spread here and by gullible conservative leaders. Most didn't know they were lies. They heard Nobel Prize Nominee, and claims that they wanted to believe, and ran with it.
Many freepers wanted the information handy, and I was burned out, so I put it up for everyone's reference ...unpolished as it is...and left y'all to it.
FWIW, I think Hammesfahr's lack of credibility made the 2002 trial impossible for the Schindlers to win. Had the doctor who submitted the affidavit that provoked the Fla 2DCA to order that trial not backed out of testifying, there may have been a very good chance. IMO
Great post. Thanks.
Anyway, I was asked by someone in the media to do the research and report.
Then I completely understand your website and where you are coming from. Work is work and should be separated from our feelings. Please forgive me for questioning your motives when it appears it is only work related.
It's also not an absolute that she was or wasn't the victim of foul play but to assert it without evidence is wrong, just as asserting she was bulemic and that her arrest was due to systemic low K level is wrong.
To repeat what we know for sure is that we don't know why she arrested and we will never know her state of consciousness but we do know that absent conclusive evidence of either the State of Florida oredered her dehydrated to death.
We do know for sure what her potassium levels were when she was admitted to the hospital. We do know for sure, according to the Merck manual, that people with her level of potassium, are twice as likely to have cardiac arrest. Which is what the attending physicians who admitted her said she had.
3.7 potassium level make you 2x more likely to have cardiac arrest (which is not a heart attack) hers was a 2.0.
We do know for sure, based on her parents and friends testimony, that she drank 10-15 glasses of ice tea a day. That level of caffeine will severely deplete the potassium levels.
And the cause of her low K was what? Emergent care? Overdose of iced tea? Ingestion of caffeine straight up? You don't know, the ME says it is inconclusive but that's not gonna deter you from making unfounded assertions one bit, is it?
OMG. How many times do you have to be told this?
She admitted to the hospital. She had attending physicians. They took her blood. They put in her chart, which was later entered into evidence during one of the many court trials about this, that her potassium level was 2.0. Anything under 3.5 is enough to make you twice as likely to suffer cause cardiac arrest, per the Merck manual.
The doctors who were treating her for her inability to have children testified under oath they hadn't tested her blood/potassium levels, which was deemed negligent.
The court awarded MS several million dollars but later reduced it to $700,000 because they found that Terri was herself 70% responsible for her condition. She drank ice tea excessively and her rapid weight loss, etc.
Note the undernourishment, low calcium, raised glucose, (caused by chronically low potassium), and at admittance, "severely low" potassium at a 2. At 3.5 we are twice as likely to have cardiac arrest.
She was 5'3" and weighed well over 200 pounds when she was 18. Within a few years, she had lost over a hundred - and was seeing an infertility specialist (the guy who was sued for not noticing that her chems, etc., just screamed eating disorder)
She complained of fatigue and irregular periods and infertility.
Remember that women with eating disorders can lose 30& of their bone mass in a single year. It causes "brittle bones".
The malpracice trial
2 suits
Terri's general practitioner settled out of court, giving the Schiavos $250,000.
The infertility clinic was sued for 20-30 million for the same thing (the Schindlers helped and testified for Michael in that trial). The jury found them guilty, but after subtracting 70% of their award to account for what they considered Terri's culpability, awarded ~$750,000 to a trust fund for Terri's care.
They awarded $300,000 to Michael for his loss of consortium.
You don't know squat and if you persist in making claims that are not supported by the medical record that's entirley up to you.
Do you honestly believe that an autopsy 15 years later is going to find that someone's potassium levels were depleted when they suffered cardiac arrest?
Some day science may reach that level, but it isn't there right now.
And you seem to disbelieve all her attending physicians, is that your stance? Even though they testified under oath, you believe those physicians who said her potassium level was severely low and that it was lower than what the Merck manual says can cause cardiac arrest.
Is that your position? Because frankly, reading your posts, it's hard to understand where you're coming from.
Even though they testified under oath, you believe those physicians who said her potassium level was severely low and that it was lower than what the Merck manual says can cause cardiac arrest.
Should have read "...you don't believe..."
Of course not. The ME read the same reports we read. He interviewed all of her acquaintences. He concluded the diagnosis of bulemia could not be made based on testimony and the medical record. You insist that the exact opposite is true when you have interviewed nobody and you are not a medical examiner. I think you should get your mcg/ml of hubris looked at.
Some day science may reach that level, but it isn't there right now.
Science will never reach the level you speak of.
And you seem to disbelieve all her attending physicians, is that your stance?
Incorrect, the attending physician noted that her urine screen was normal. You understand that an attending physician who saw fit to mention the patient drinking lots of iced tea in the report would surely have screened for elevated caffeine levels, right? You also understand that the body metabolizes caffeine at a rate allowing the physician to make a good estimate of her peak reading during the day, right? And now you should understand that her urine screen came back clean meaning she had no elevated caffeine level in her urine when they screened her.
Even though they testified under oath, you believe those physicians who said her potassium level was severely low and that it was lower than what the Merck manual says can cause cardiac arrest.
Her K level was low when tested. Why it was low can not be said with any degree of certainty based on the contemporaneous testing. The emergent care which would have lowered her K reading prior to hospital admittance per the ME.
Is that your position? Because frankly, reading your posts, it's hard to understand where you're coming from.
My posts are very clear, it your mind that is muddled. Stop making false assertions. How much clearer can I get?
You're posts are incorrect and not clear at all.
Here's her discharge summary. I don't give a fig what you've read into what the ME said; the doctors who actually attended her in the hospital have been clear.
http://home.comcast.net/~trinity_tx/terrischiavo/Humana_Discharge_Summary_050990.pdf
Included in there you will find:
She had cardiac arrest, severely low potassium (3.7 is low enough to make you 2x more likely to have cardiac arrest (which is not a heart attack) hers was a 2.0,
She was in a coma, on a ventilator, and her tube was put in there at the hospital, NOT "at Michael's request for the convenience of the nurses"
She was malnourished and low in calcium
The subject is an innocent woman was murdered by the state for no other reason than she was ill. There is no changing that.
FYI
Nonsense.
"The state" didn't do anything. Her husband followed an established, legal medical procedure for ending the life of a patient in a persistent vegitative state. It was his right to choose such a course of treatment. The issue was thoroughly adjudicated in the courts, and her husband's course was backed up by courts all the way up the line. The only thing separating this from all the other examples of removing a feeding tube is the media attention. If her parents hadn't fallen out with her husband, we never would have heard about this.
Emotional hyperbole doesn't help anything.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.