CodeBlueBlog Issues $100,000 Challenge to Terri Schiavo Neurologist Experts

I'm getting tired of hearing what neurologists have to say about Terri Schiavo's CT of the brain. Real Tired. The Florida Sun Sentinel had a gang of neurologists analyze one of Terri's CT's of the brain. Here's what they said:

About 70 percent to 90 percent of Schiavo's upper brain is gone, and there's also damage to her lower brain that controls instinctive functions such as breathing and swallowing, said three Florida neurologists who viewed 12 of her CT "computed tomography" X-ray scans Tuesday and Wednesday.

"This is as severe brain damage as I've ever seen," said Dr. Leon Prockop, a professor and former chairman of neurology at the University of South Florida College of Medicine in Tampa, upon viewing the scans.

Then there's the infamous Dr. Ronald Cranford, who has the double-whammy credentials of neurologist AND bioethicist (have you had enough of bioethicists for a while? Why is it they all have the same opinion and they all start out their spiels by saying "this is a tragic case for everyone involved...") who also defined Terri's CT of the brain as being as bad as he's seen.

I've watched a steady stream of neurologists, bioethicists, and neurologist/bioethicists from Columbia, Cornell, and NYU interviewed all week on Fox and CNN and MSNBC. They all said about the same thing, that Terri's CT scan was "the worst they'd ever seen"or "as bad as they've ever seen."

Here's the problem with these experts: THEY DON'T INTERPRET CT SCANS OF THE BRAIN. RADIOLOGISTS DO.

" Radiologists certainly do review CTs, but so to Neurogists"

In reference again to the statement you made pasted above.

Just because you have the letter's M.D behind your name qualify's you through medicare ,insurance , medicaid ec cetera to bill and interp radiology report's. You alsoo know that if you are not comfortable in your expertise in that area ,if you were to bill one of the above agency's for the interp of these studie's and you were WRONG ...well malpractice, would follow ...so ofcourse MOST Physicians don't bill for the interpt's of these studie's ,but rather let the radiologist do that ,since that is there expertise.

See the whole system is messed up .... The government is in the dark about medical billing and whom should be qualified for many different medical modalitie's. IF they knew HOW bogus all this was and really cared ...it would be stopped ..But it's just too messy and time consuming ,so it is ignored.

You know I speak the truth and if you say different ...well you know what that makes you.

Just because you have the letter's M.D behind your name qualify's you through medicare ,insurance , medicaid ec cetera to bill and interp radiology report's. You alsoo know that if you are not comfortable in your expertise in that area ,if you were to bill one of the above agency's for the interp of these studie's and you were WRONG ...well malpractice, would follow ...so ofcourse MOST Physicians don't bill for the interpt's of these studie's ,but rather let the radiologist do that ,since that is there expertise.

I don't have a ton of time to answer this (busy seeing patients and reviewing x-rays)... but suffice to say... I have little clue what your point is as your grammar and spelling are so horrendous I'm not even sure what language you are typing in.

I never tried to claim that other medical specialties are AS GOOD at reading imaging films as Radiologists, only that other specialties DO it from time to time and certainly work with the Rads in forming a definitive diagnosis. To dismiss the diagnosis of a Neurologist who made his decision on the basis of reading a CT simply because he isn't a Rad is SILLY! How do you know the Neuro guy didn't extensively consult with a Rad?

Gotta run, I have a meeting with my Rad guy to do over some films with him. ;-)

Sorry about my spelling ,I typed it way too fast.

Robert... Ypu say::: Someone disagree's and it makes them what ...

Nothing in the comment's I made have any ROOM for dis-agreement.."precisely my point", when I said ..if you disagree that makes you ???

See ,it's true and anyone in the med imaging field would attest to it ..so I simply stated my CONFIDENCE in the post by adding that little tid bit . Yes I have very strong feeling's on many med issues'.....

I won't apologise for it . There are people in the med field who are raping the insurance co's , medicare ,medicaid. ...Now ,with that said ,let me say ; not all physician's are doing this ,but SO MANY that I truly fear for the future of my children's medical care....because of the extent of the problem...totally unecessary tests run at a rampant rate , to rake in MORE MONEY!...yet here in Terri's case ....No MRI ? No swallowing test?

I am bothered by the people I see on TV who are identified as medical ethicists, because they don't seem to be talking about ethics. I double checked the meaning in the dictionary before I opened my mouth, but, as I thought, ethics is about good and bad. These people, instead, are advancing what seems to be some consensus that people should just choose, preferably in writing ahead of time.

Who are these people. What is their training? How did they get to be the arbiters? I saw one doc say that the doctors in Terri's case had been marginalized. Who stepped in and supplanted this simplistic thinking for the professional ethics that had been developed over 2000 years? I suspect that the answer is lawyers and politicians.

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.