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.]
Michael Schiavo was never going to bury her body anywhere. He wanted her cremated ASAP. Where are you getting this info anyway? The Schindler's wanted her body buried but were refused repeatedly.
As I said, I didn't attack (or address anyone) with the intention of changing the subject. The subject was the recent findings of Dr. Hammesfahr, and if his competency and claims of nominations for expertise are not fair game, I'm not sure what is. And it may be off the subject, ut yet it was you who raised it and then object to anyone responding. If, as you say it does not matter, why then did you refer to it?
It's a left-handed compliment to Dr. Hammesfahr. If he had not been an effective spokesman for treating Terri, he would not be getting the disparaging comments he does from those on the other side of the question.
Unfortunately there are not two neatly established sides of the question. If Dr. Hammesfahr is to be afforded respect for his "findings" based on his "experience" with such cases, then it would have been far better if he had not been sanctioned by the Florida Board of Medicine. You mentioned the little issue of Dr. Hammesfahr's advertising. Actually the Department charged that Hammesfahr engaged in false and misleading advertising, exploited a patient for financial gain, and engaged in gross or repeated malpractice. Though all of it was not upheld by the Board, Hammesfahr was fined, placed on probation and forced to work under close supervision. If you knew this would you go to him after suffering a stroke? Most would not.
Those who questioned Hammesfahr's basic competence had nothing to do with the Schiavo affair. Prior to Terri's death, Dr. Hammesfahr stated she was not even in a coma and was treatable. So he had a vested interest in ratifying his earlier statements, which have been apparently refuted by the Medical Examiner.
Given all of that baggage not to mention his alliance with Randall Terry during the Schiavo affair, does it not appear prudent to get another opinion?
Look - once and for all I used the word "attack" not considering that you all were going to imply a sinister connotation to it. Even if a person sneezes it could be considered an allergy attack. So please move on from this implication that I somehow was insinuating something sinister. Is the word incident better to describe what happened that night? Would that be more in line with not disturbing the sensitivity's of Michael supporters.
I spoke the exact truth. I am interested in Terri's case. I don't give a bleep whether Dr. Hammesfahr was or was not nominated for a Nobel. It has nothing to do with Terri. That what ad hominem means -- the point is irrelevant. It is of no interest. It is not germane. It is not useful. It is a waste of time. It is a waste of bandwidth. It is not worth discussing.
Lay off the personal remarks, please.
Sure. See post #466.
Are you unaware that the Court controlled that money? Sheesh.
This is the Catholic Church's position on dehydration and feeding tubes; it is MUCH more nuanced than you indicatd Adam.
http://www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/euthanas/nutqa.htm
He STILL was never censored by anyone, even though people continue to claim it.
Just a couple of comments. First I saw no notation that the Administrative Law Judge was a medical doctor. The Petitioner was the Department of Health made up entirely of medical personnel. Finally the State Board of Medicine imposed extremely harsh penalties on Hammesfahr which reflected the case put on by the Dpt of Health. In other words...it was in fact far more than a simple advertising case. But with all of that, and with Hammesfahr's statements prior to Schiavo's death that she was very treatable and not even in a coma, it would seem rather prudent to get the opinion of someone who does not have such a vested interest in one particular outcome.
Yeah, well, "alternative" medicine, for me, connotes some of those dreadnoughts I used to observe in Berkeley eating holistic organic herbs, clicking their heels three times, and chanting, "Every day in every way I am gedding a widdy biddy better."
LOL
Dr. H came with so much baggage, it is indeed unfortunate the Schindlers used him when given the opportunity to use any two doctors they chose in their court case.
Dr. H is considered a quack, and has lied so many times about this case that nothing he says can be taken at face value.
But he was one of the few doctors willing to say that Terri wasn't PVS. The other doctor couldn't distinguish between PVS and a coma. But I know I'm repeating myself.
WASHINGTON (CNS) -- The autopsy results on Terri Schindler Schiavo are irrelevant to the church's stand in support of her human dignity and against removal of her feeding tube in March, a Catholic pro-life official said June 16.
"Our position was not based on predictions about her likelihood of recovery," said Richard M. Doerflinger, deputy director of the U.S. bishops' Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities, in a telephone interview from Chicago. "It was based on her dignity as a human person."
Sounds pretty inept to me. You can do better than that.
So between your link and mine, you can see there is not even agreement in the church.
As well, the church's position on birth control is disregarded every day by millions of practitioners.
If you didn't read the link I provided, it discussed in great detail when dehydration may be discontinued. In fact, it mentioned PVS patients specifically.
Yawn. Where is the crime?
It would seem that there is a great deal of disagreement everywhere on this subject. Discourse is a good thing as people are forming opinions on where they stand. The more info, the better.
It is not a personal remark to note that you raise points, then when they are successfully refuted, you claim they no longer matter and are completely irrelevent.
I'll continue to point it out when you do that when I see it.
That is what they tried to prove alright. It didn't work out your way however.
I'm sorry, but while I'm certainly familiar with that use of the word "attack" that's not how it read. Your explanation is now understandable, but I didn't need the "Look", since you weren't clear at all prior to this post.
I've had to clarify my meaning before. No need to take umbrage when it becomes necessary to do so.
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.