I appreciate the links to the testimony. While I do not believe I can be disuaded from my current opinion, I will certainly avail myself of the opportunity to do more homework.
BTW - The thalmic (sp?) probes were supposed to have been removed, but are now a 'reason' for not doing an MRI. It's a problem for me when people (attorneys and parties to the suit) disregard expert advice and subsequently find the consequences useful for disregarding other expert advice. I try to be a logical thinker, and cannot find any logic in the "probe sequence", personally.
"BTW - The thalmic (sp?) probes were supposed to have been removed, but are now a 'reason' for not doing an MRI."
Do you by chance a link to where this is coming from? Something new, old? Sounds interesting.
Thanks
Hi, MOrtMan.
I'm trying to find out whether experts recommended the probes be removed as well; I don't know for fact that it was recommended.
Just as a side note, I'm not trying to persuade anybody. I couldn't do that because I don't even have a strong feeling about what is right or wrong to do in this case.
What I don't like to see are continuous mis-representations by various freepers and have tried, along with a host of other freepers, to make sure that we aren't like DU in spreading lies.