Pathologists
Experts

[2009 Jan] The pathologist challenging shaken baby syndrome

[2008 Oct] Inquiry blasts pathologist Smith and his overseers

[March 2007 Jean Charles de Menezes] Dr Kenneth Shorrock

"Death was certified to be due to the Shaken Baby Syndrome on the evidence of Pathologists, Paediatricians and Radiologists when all the haematological and biochemical evidence clearly indicated death was due to a coagulopathy following hepatic insufficiency and malnutrition."--Michael D Innis

The coroner said it would be two weeks before a cause of death could be determined. The coroner and police treated me like I had committed a crime, taking pictures of her old bottles and formula. They questioned me over and over. It was not the kind of situation a mother should be in when her child has just died.
   About two months later, we received a telephone call from a Dr. Thomas Gill, of the Marion County Coroner's Office. He told us the cause of death was the Hepatitis B virus - which she could only have gotten form the vaccine. He told me that he would get the death certificate out to me very soon.
    Sixteen weeks later, we received the death certificate in the mail and the cause of death was "natural causes" otherwise known as "SIDS" (Sudden Infant Death Sudden). I was shocked to say the least. I called the Coroner's Office and spoke to Dr. Manders, the Coroner of Marion County and was told that Dr. Gill had been asked to resign.
    Dr. Manders stated that he had signed the death certificate. I asked how he could sign the death certificate if he did not perform the autopsy. He told me that he had done so since Dr. Gill was no longer there. We have not been able to determine how he came to the cause of death since he did not perform the autopsy and that Dr. Gill told us something very very different. He told me that if I had questions, to call a Dr. Pless, a pathologist at Indiana University. I did call and made an appointment to speak to Dr. Pless. He was a man with out compassion. The most cold-hearted I have ever met. He told me to stop trying to place the blame of my child's death on someone and go on with my life. He also stated that if the vaccine did kill my daughter that it was saving more live than it was taking. Testimony Of Tonya and Gerald Nelson

[2009 Jan] The pathologist challenging shaken baby syndrome  The problem with the shaken baby controversy is that it's very dogmatic. If I don't accept religious dogma (and I don't), I'm not going to accept scientific dogma. If it's there, it can be proven. I do recognise that some adults are capable of doing nasty things to children, but I'm uneasy about people saying: "Oh, if a baby has got subdural haemorrhage (SDH), retinal haemorrhage and brain swelling, it can only be shaken baby syndrome." I'm trying to find out the mechanism of bleeding in the brain in babies who have not been shaken.
     I'm exploring all sorts of theories. My colleague Marta Cohen from Sheffield Children's Hospital and I have just published a paper with observations of our autopsy work on fetuses and babies over the last couple of years. We selected 55 cases - 25 late third trimester fetuses who died shortly before delivery and 30 newborns - who had haemorrhage within the membrane that covers and separates the two halves of the brain, and compared this with the level of brain hypoxia, or oxygen deficiency. We knew that none of these cases could possibly be inflicted trauma. We found that all those with severe brain hypoxia and half of those with moderate brain hypoxia had SDH. This is the same type of SDH that some people describe as specifically indicative of shaken baby syndrome. A similar pattern of haemorrhages has been described in the retinas of newborn babies dying of natural causes. We think that in these cases the haemorrhaging is caused by the hypoxia.
    My concern is that by relying on this famous triad of symptoms - brain hypoxia, SDH and retinal haemorrhages - to diagnose shaken baby syndrome, when there's no evidence of inflicted trauma, we may be sending to jail parents who lost their children through no fault of their own. As scientists it's our duty to be cautious when we see the triad, and to take each case on its merits. We owe it to the children and their families.

"Furthermore, much depends on how statistics are gathered. Until recently most autopsies on infants were carried out in a haphazard fashion. Often, no autopsies were performed. Now, in most parts of the western world, strict criteria are applied and autopsies performed by specialist teams. Many cases that previously would be considered as qualifying for the diagnosis of SIDS are now excluded. This artificially reduces the incidence compared to pre-autopsy and specialised consideration times. To accurately follow recent trends one needs to look at the overall infant mortality rate. This is the bottom line and cannot be easily manipulated."--Dr Kalokerinos MD (Medical Pioneer of the 20th century p178)

"Mr. Henry May, Medical Officer of Health, candidly states as follows: "In certificates given by us voluntarily, and to which the public have access, it is scarcely to be expected that a medical man will give opinions which may tell against or reflect upon himself in. any way. In such cases he will most likely tell the truth, but not the whole truth, and assign some prominent symptom of the disease as the cause of death."---Alfred Wallace