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.]
But don't you know, if you don't agree with people about this matter you're the devil and you're certainly not pro life.
Have you seen the posts from freepers who don't want anyone to have a living will and want to take away our right of self determination?
And, as another freeper just mentioned, what terribly intersting is that the very same freepers who didn't want a husband to make that choice for his wife want to make that choice for US.
Oh, is that what this is all about? LOL
How could I have missed that.
You comment was in response to a post I made regarding how the death of Terri is not a big conspiracy as some have stated - I went on to say that the outcome of her death only required a bad judge, a creep of a husband and some pro euthanasia lawyers and doctors. To which you replied with your comment about the Schindlers motives - which made no sense given the context of the post to which you replied to.
I have work with many in the brain damaged community for over twenty years. I am also married to a person who is brain damaged.
There are so many variables involved in each individual who is brain damaged that we could discuss Terri condition until the end of eternity and never have a clear picture of her level of damage without actually seeing her ourselves.
My position is that I love those brain damaged individuals that I have had the pleasure of knowing in this life and they have something to contribute to society especially to their families that love them. They seem to love life while they are here and most of them are relieved of the burden of analyzing anyones quality of life. Unlike all of us who are so disparately trying to understand it all.
I commend anyone who remains on these threads no matter what "side" you have taken on any of the issues involved.
I appreciate your desire for fact finding.
I hold that medical science and the law are not absolutes and there is so much gray area that needs to be addressed.
It is discussions like we are having here now that will help to fill in those gaps.
The fact that you say her brain was g-o-n-e leads me to believe that the distinction between brain dead and brain damaged is still not clear or has little meaning.
I so wish you could see the brain damaged people I love so much and then it would much more clear.
There is a movement by the Scientologists to erase this distinction and It scares the disabled community. At the same time there is a group of pro life people that are doing more damage than good in there agendas.
At the same time there are "good" smart people that may lean toward pro life but don't believe that if it is a person's time to go that they should be keep alive against their wishes.
I believe most of us here fall somewhere in that later category. Each person has true life experience that leads them to believe as they do about Terri. I would love to hear what those experiences are from everyone who is posting here now so that we can better understand each other.
Regards, Earthdweller.
Which the autopsy does not support.
Would you have preferred that Terri had been killed ten years earlier so the autopsy results would have been available to support the poor doctor being sued? The autopsy doesnt prove it wasnt bulimia, it just doesnt provide evidence that it was. Lack of evidence is not necesarily evidence.
There we go again - the big conspiracy. Give it a break. It is not a BIG conspiracy it never was. It was and always will be a simple case of a BAD judge, a creepy husband - and a bunch of pro euthanasia advocates that have an agenda. All those forces were at play and Terri never had a chance.
How do you connect the above with the outcome of Terri being killed? None of what you mentioned had any bearing on the court order to kill Terri. Are you saying that Terri's parents conspired to get Michael to ask judge Greer to kill Terri? Makes no sense.
Blueriver, are you really that stupid? Are you so focused on poor Terri's death that everything else floats over your head? What was said above is that a huge myriad of people all of them had their own agendas, many in direct opposition such as Felos and the Pope but this Terri episode all worked to raise money, get face time, satisfy voters, etc for both sides. The Schindlers wanted Michaels money. MS wanted to piss off the Schindlers for the living hell they had put him through, et.
?
accepts cash only
WRONG!
and is considered an alternative medicine doctor.
WRONG!
When asked in court to provide evidence of his assertion that he's cured people like Terri, he couldn't do it.
TERRI WAS NOT BROUGHT UP IN HIS COURT BATTLE - ANOTHER WRONG!
Lies. Provable lies. I've posted links to his testimony and links to his lies.
Post #715 was a reply to a post I made #627 to which I responded with post#732 - because post #715 had nothing to do with post # 627. Try reading the posts before you make your comments.
I suppose for some the distinction is just too abstract to comprehend, or maybe it's just a matter of reading comprehension?
Too abstract for me right now :-)
"But don't you know, if you don't agree with people about this matter you're the devil"
More than once people have said to me "oh you lil devil you." I think they were referring to a different set of horns though? LOL
"You comment was in response to a post I made regarding how the death of Terri is not a big conspiracy"
And I made a equal counter arguement. It does indeed make sense if you aren't blinded by emotions.
"Ok..since these threads are civil now I will reveal to you my position."
God bless you. I can only imagine what these discussions must be like for you.
I suppose is safe to say, in the end we all hope we make the right descision and know that our love ones somehow know so.
Terri was the apple of her father's eye.
"Blueriver, are you really that stupid? Are you so focused on poor Terri's death that everything else floats over your head? What was said above is that a huge myriad of people all of them had their own agendas, many in direct opposition such as Felos and the Pope but this Terri episode all worked to raise money, get face time, satisfy voters, etc for both sides. The Schindlers wanted Michaels money. MS wanted to piss off the Schindlers for the living hell they had put him through, et."
Bingo! LOL
Other people have other motives. Imagine that.
Thanks but no sympathy is needed. I'm a pain in the ass in a debate no matter what the subject so don't hold any punches. hehehe.
Now that the dust of emotion is settling for everyone, I hope others will share why they are so passionate about the Terri issues that they continue to come here day after day.
Everyone involved would have to have some really strong reason to continue to go through all the waves of insults, accusations, etc. that we have all been put through in past Terri threads.
Just curious what keeps others coming back.
Yes. She was so much the apple of her father's eye that when asked in court if he'd keep her alive even if she didn't want that, he responded that he would.
He further responded that he'd keep her alive even if she needed to have all her limbs amputated as a result of poor circulation.
That's not love.
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.