Posted on 03/29/2005 9:45:05 PM PST by flixxx
What are you talking about?
You aren't making any sense. I posted those pictures as a convenience for those who don't like to go to links.
I do it all the time.
If you are just looking for someone to argue with, you have picked the wrong girl.
Let me get this straight: You think people with severe brain damage should be put to death?
I never said anything even remotely close to that.
My opinion could be the very same as your opinion for all you know. I have never posted it.
How about this, Tex:
This is a CT scan from 1996, she didn't have one in 2002, or since 1996. You might want to change the headline, lest you be accused of carelessness or something.
The left/right comparison was prepared by Dr. Cranford, who is a neurologist with an agenda, not a radiologist (the latter being qualified to interpret the CT Scan - neither you nor Dr. Cranford). The anatomical slices are clearly different in level and incomparable except in the grossest anatomical sense.
A CT Scan is only diagnostic in the context of the entire series, not an isolated, selected slice, and never diagnostic for PVS. This one, however does show the presence of some cerebral cortex, it appears, in 1996; other slices would help determine how much remained at that point.
No CT scan allows one to discern functionality. MRI and/or PET are more helpful in that regard.
No one disagrees with the conclusion that she has serious brain damage. The issue is one of function. That is a clinical diagnosis, appropriately involving a series of examinations over a period of years, which she never had. Even then, that evaluation involves subjective interpretations by the neurologists. That's why (in addition to other biases) neurologists argue with each other in the best of times.
Your tone, out of the chute, was one of deprecating anyone who didn't agree with you ('can't you see what's in front of you?'). I'm disappointed by your rigidity. Remind me never to employ you if I ever do a locum down there.
This is not my thread and DON'T call me Tex.
This scan shows atrophy. That's all I said.
I made no comment about her capabilities. Why in the world are all of you people so interested in what I have to say?
Exactly.
"Whether this affects Michael's thinking remains to be seen. He famously loves money, of course, but I'm not turning this into a prediction. We'll just watch and see."
His betrayal of Terri Schindler and the Schindlers four months after he recieved money from the malpractice suit, is a good indication of his future behavior regarding the money he will make after Terri's death.
Michael is going to be a VERY WEALTHY man and he knows it.
Your tone, out of the chute, was one of deprecating anyone who didn't agree with you.
Read this, it's fascinating.
Really? I posted to someone who chose to bash the doctor because he is a bioethics specialist in addition to being a neurologist.
The scan is clear. It is a point of fact. Not to be dismissed simply because someone disagrees with a doctor's interests.
As I have said before, I made no judgment about her capabilities.
Agreed.
Yes, I have recently heard some experts on TV explain the ability of the brain to compensate and reassign functions. The description of the brain of one person in that article is truly quite amazing.
Yes it is and it should give many pause for thought. Neurologists can neither explain that case away nor explain it period.
You favor the STARVATION and DEHYDRATION of an innocent woman and her extraordinary suffering. You aren't fooling anyone. You are a pro-death advocate.
You are wrong on all counts.
I wonder how many more cases there are that might be similar to that one?
So by you saying this you belive she is brain dead and not alive?
What exactly are you trying to get out of me?
Just trying see what you thought about this.
Here's a tip.... you will not get me to tell you what I really think.
Sorry my mistake. Didn't know you didn't want to discuss this. You made a post and I asked.
If you weren't from Texas, I'd tell you what horse to get on, but we already know, don't we.;-)
I'm not saying she's brain dead. I'm not saying she's not.
That is not something I know one way or the other.
My opinion of this case is meaningless.
You may be able to tell that I am not guided by emotion when it comes to this case, but that doesn't mean it I don't care.
And you are wrong, you opinion does matter, just like your vote.
I am glad to know you care.
I think he has several reasons for killing her. Money is one of them and in time it will give him away, for anyone with eyes to see. But I also think he is acting out of hatred for Terri, and he's said a couple of times -- once during testimony -- that he's doing it to spite the Schindlers.
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.