Posted on 06/19/2005 6:04:50 PM PDT by wagglebee
Dr. William Hammesfahr, nominated for a Nobel Prize for his work in Medicine, has been recognized by agents for Medicare, the federal government, and others for new approaches to helping the brain injured.
Dr. Hammesfahr has been identified in helping patients with chronic brain injuries from many causes actually leave long term disability, and return to work.
Dr. Hammesfahr was identified the first physician to restore deficits caused by stroke.
Dr. Hammesfahr has released the following statement in response to the autopsy report on Terri Schindler Schiavo:
We have seen a lot on the autopsy of Terri Schindler Schiavo in recent days, that I feel needs to be addressed. To ignore these comments will allow future 'Terri Schiavo's' to die needlessly after the wishes of clinicians and family are ignored.
Considering that there were so many physicians and therapists who were willing to step forward to treat Terri Schiavo, from university based practitioners to those in private practice, it clearly shows that the mainstream medical community across the board, those involved in treating patients, knew that they could help Terri.
The record must be set straight. 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."
The purpose of the therapies offered by so many, from major universities, brain injury centers, and from private practice physicians, is to improve and restore quality of life, and function, which the mainstream medical community clearly tried to get to her.
I have had a chance to look at Dr. Nelson's analysis of the brain tissue, and essentially, as a clinician, these are my thoughts.
The autopsy results confirmed my opinion and Dr. Maxfield's opinions, that the frontal areas of the brains, the areas that deal with awareness and cognition were relatively intact. To use Dr. Nelson's words, "relatively preserved." 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. The Spect scan confirmed these areas were functional and not scar tissue, and that was apparently also confirmed on Dr. Nelson's review of the slides. Dr. Maxfield's estimates of retained brain weight were apparently accurate, although there may have been some loss of brain weight due to the last two weeks of dehydration.
Dr. Maxfield and myself both emphasized that she was 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, and even Dr. Cranfoed, for the husband, commented to her that, when she could see the balloon, she could follow it with her eyes as per his request.
That she could not swallow was obviously not borne out by the reality that she was swallowing her saliva, about 1.5 liters per day of liquid, and the clinical swallowing tests done by Dr. Young and Dr. Carpenter. Thus, there appears to be some limitations to the clinical accuracy of an autopsy in evaluating function.
With respect to the issue of trauma, that certainly does not appear to be answered adequately. 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. The issue of a forensic evaluation for trauma, is highly specialized. Hence the wish of the family to have observers which was refused by the examiner.
Ultimately, based on the clinical evidence and the autopsy results, an aware woman was killed.
s/Dr. W. Hammesfahr
[Dr. Hammesfahr was nominated for the Nobel Prize in Medicine and Physiology in 1999. The Nomination was for work started in 1994. In 2000, this work resulted in approval for the first patent in history granted for the treatment of neurological diseases including coma, stroke, brain injury, cerebral palsy, hypoxic injuries and other neurovascular disorders with medications that restore blood flow to the brain. It was extended to treat successfully disabilities including ADD, ADHD, Dyslexia, Tourette's and Autism as well as behaviorally and emotionally disturbed children, seizures and severe migraines.]
That was a major screw-up that can be corrected. A $1 Billion doller lawsuit against the state for wrongful death is winnable. This lawyer I know make a few million a year.
Well, in that case, we can overlook that comment, LOL!
Do you really want the state to initiate the death of a non-dying woman?
Do you really want a sick person to be judged as to whether or not they still are entitled to their constitutional rights as an American citizen?
Do you really want to allow SOME to write criteria that tells you when your relative cannot be considered worthy of life - as they are classed as a non-person in a state not worthy of constitutional rights, life, or further care?
"So according to you Terri was not swallowing her own saliva."
Not according to me, according to those who are experts in the field including the coroner who examined the body.
How would you interpret the findings on pg 34 number 3 of the autopsy, including the references to historic medical records indicating she couldn't consume sustenance safely?
Funny how rarely Dr. Cheshire is mentioned, particularly by our friends on the otherside.
Since Terri didn't drool, I'm wondering what the heck she did with all that saliva.
"Well, in that case, we can overlook that comment, LOL!"
Thanks for your understanding. Guess I went looking for my "inner child" and found it. LOL
Why did that word always send us into fits of laughter as children?
Frist relied, at least in part, on the "balloon video."
The Daily Show ran a tape of Frist on the Senate floor stating that he saw the video and as a doctor it was his opinion that she was NOT in a PVS.
Then they ran a tape of Frist after the autopsy report came out, the next day. Apparently Frist didn't know the
c-span cam was running when he stated "I never said she wasn't in a PVS.
Most embarrassing I thought.
So, if at one time the Schlinders' loved Michael as a son-in-law of their daughter - they never can change their minds when, after receiving the settlement, Michael suddenly remembers their daughter advised she never wanted to live with "tubes".
Since they made the earlier statement of support - they are not allowed to realize that Michael is trying to kill the daughter they love. They must support him in his efforts or just fade away and give him free reign to kill?
Not in any families I know. No man is going to have free reign to kill my son or daughter based on a suddenly remembered casual statement only remembered once he received funds to pay for her lifetime care.
Most people would find that a little troubling. Most parents would think - the heck he is is. That is my daughter and I will not allow him to just decide to kill her.
However, your family may be different.
I wonder why there is such a need to kill an unwanted spouse here. Or, is this a case to set the precedent to allow for the "killing" of a spouse with hearsay evidence only?
The state did no such thing. The state failed to prevent her lawful guardian from initiating her death, which is a very different thing.
You might not like what her husband did, but what he did was entirely proper under Florida law.
Hyperbole doesn't help here.
The *coroner* is an objective party.
I don't know why we found that term so funny, but perhaps it was just another part of that "potty talk" phase? I still remember laughing myself silly with my grandmother (from Tennessee). She always referred to "farts" as "toots". She'd say, "who tooted"? Ah, God bless her, she was a dear woman.
Felos announced to the press that the state had ordered the tube removed and MS couldn't stop it if he wanted to. There was a lot of chatter here on FR after that statement.
I will give you that.
I just don't know if I would call that grandstanding. I mean in the sense that he is pleasing his base and I don't think he has sinister motivations for getting involved in this case. I feel that is what our elected Reps are supposed to do when a case takes on a life like this one has.
And perhaps I am being idealistic when I hope that this investigation does go somewhere- however, you are right there as well, it doesn't seem like it is going anywhere.
YOu and I may disagree here, I think the reasons for that are because of the pressure put out by people on Greer's side.
I keep talking about the power of the citizens to put pressure upon their reps to make their voices heard.
And I realize that the worm turns both ways- If the majority of citizens in this country really want A county judge to have the power that Greer wielded in this case, I will have to accept it.
(Of course that doesn't mean I will stop fighting that at this point.)
So then if Michael was stripped of part of his guardianship why would his testimony carry such an enormous amount of weight and that of his blood relatives?
Unless all the court was looking at was his potential inheritance of the estate?
Do you know if there was ever even a hint that the court considered Michael's new family involvement to be a potential detriment to his ability to make adequate decisions for Terri? That just seems like psych 101 to me.
The "coroner" did not examine Terri while she was alive, and cannot use his finding to "diagnose" her.
Very.
What if this is just Step One that is being launched?
I would expect that Jeb discovered a great deal about the laws of Florida, the power lobbyists' activities, the ties of the individuals involved. I would expect he found that there was absolutely nothing, without overstepping the bounds of his office, that he could do to save Terri.
But, he found enough to make him follow-up with the investigation. If nothing else, it is pure fairness to the Schlinders who have been treated horribly through this whole mess. Why are they not allowed to have the facts of their daughter's injuries investigated?
I am not writing Jeb off and I do not believe that Jeb is a grandstander - especially not on Terri's back.
You should never write off George Bush and I feel the same applies to Jeb.
That is funny and cute, and sounds far nicer! It sounds like you had a lot of fun with your grandmother!
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.