Circumstantial Evidence is Good Enough

[Guest guest]

Circumstantial Evidence is Good Enough I am going through case after case where circumstantial evidence has yet again put the innocent parents lives in turmoil with the last parent present getting the prison term. Based on circumstantial evidence plus a fictitious build up of quack science running parallel to the quack science in UK of Sir Professor Roy Meadow. It seems as if the same or better degrees of evidence are being accepted for vaccine harm and the Zeller case mentioned in EOH is one good exaple. (already posted) http://tinyurl.com/8qwxbj But this can case file and many others can be found from: US Court of Federal Claims 717 Madison Place, NW Washington, DC 20005 Cisr See their web site at: http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/historyjurisdiction J Zeller born in November 2003 and not without problems probably in my view from earlier vaccines eventually arrives for his definitive and life destroying MMR vaccine on 17 November 2004. His adverse events to this vaccine began in earnest on 27 November 2004 with a seizure. He had done well having this seizure his notes say! But on 12 December he was admitted to hospital for 11 days after intractable seizures. Evidence from Dr Marcel Kinsbourne was favourable for the family in that he states There is reliable medical evidence that the MMR vaccines can cause seizures particularly in the second week after it has been administered. Evidence from Dr Max Wiznitzer a man who would see daylight as night (EISEGESIS or his own brand of interpreting data) says this: But first let us remind ourself of this dubiously GREAT man: Dr Wiznitzer has testified before the Court on numerous occasions and is very knowledgable and erudite. He says for example of this infant: This is a child with an abnormal brain and he’s destined to have seizures. The degeneration began before the vaccinations and was an independent process, rendering the vaccination as an insignificant and unrelated event. Dr Wiznitzer goes on to say that the court must rely on solely on the medical records that support his experience and knowledge and ignore the medical records that do not support his EISEGESIS. The court decreed this approach was indeed EISEGESIS or the taking of information and placing your own ideas on them rather than the alternative idea obviously given by the statement. In simple English I think the court was saying that if a seizure and decline in health occurs after a vaccination then why not take the vaccine as the cause of this seizure and decline. I think they also imply that if seizure and decline was inevitable then the insult of vaccination which added to this seizure and decline in health was contraindicated. I would like to say in my own words if a little boy is going to get seizures and become a vegetable then kicking him in the head is not going to make him better and will certainly make him WORSE. Are you listening Max old boy? It would be better to give non invasive therapy or no therapy rather than aggravating a pre-existing condition. My own personal view is the Dr Max Wiznitzer would be equally as deserving of the same Knighthood and Professorship etc we have showered upon the Good Doctor Meadow and his SBS, MSBP, Salt Poisoning, Dirty Doctor followers. I feel any witness by Dr Max Wiznitzer either for the opinion that vaccines harm or that vaccines don’t harm are effectively of ZERO value. Well perhaps in fact less than ZERO. I would be very interested to know of any other verdicts given by this man and the result. In fact as for Professor Sir Roy Meadow and now for Dr Max Wiznitzer it is LONG OVERDUE that an accurate and independent review of his work should be undertaken as per . He seems and I would agree to give evidence that that the court describes as EISEGESIS and I might be a little less kind than this. Circumstantial Evidence is Good Enough