Terri Schiavo’s CT Scan
CodeBlueBlog has this interesting analysis of Terri Schiavo’s CT scan.
If there are any other medical professionals out there with a view about this, I’d love to hear it.
CodeBlueBlog has this interesting analysis of Terri Schiavo’s CT scan.
If there are any other medical professionals out there with a view about this, I’d love to hear it.
Pronounced "Patter-EE-koh"
E-mail: Just use my moniker Patterico, followed by the @ symbol, followed by gmail.com
Disclaimer: Simpsons avatar may resemble a younger Patterico...
The statements made on this web site reflect the personal opinions of the author. They are not made in any official capacity, and do not represent the opinions of the author's employer.
M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
Powered by WordPress.
The scan seems fake, however the analysis of it is accurate.
Ladainian (91b3b2) — 3/22/2005 @ 12:07 amThe problem with CTs is that they are not the final word. I had a minor, transient stroke earlier this year. Got a CT and it showed nothing. A subsequent MRI determined that I did have a stroke, and its location.
Let me add that the CT in question was done some years ago. I dare say a CT done today would show a different situation.
Alan Kellogg (efce3e) — 3/22/2005 @ 12:28 amThis is great. The bloggers are going to free us from the tyranny if the MD’s.
actus (e8ffe9) — 3/22/2005 @ 6:05 amWhich MDs? The ones who agree with you, or the ones who disagree?
Xrlq (c51d0d) — 3/22/2005 @ 7:18 amAny 75-85 year old with that scan is Terri Schiavo. The amount of brain tissue missing is stunning. The enlarged ventricles [central space, )( ] are frightening, the highlighted sulci-gyri [peripheral frond-like structures] are macbre. This is not your grandmother.
[I did not “read” c-t’s, but saw many normal and abnormal ones. Nothing compares to Terri’s. Why would it?]
J. Peden (ffccb8) — 3/22/2005 @ 8:03 am“macabre” – I need a scan.
J. Peden (ffccb8) — 3/22/2005 @ 8:05 am“Which MDs? The ones who agree with you, or the ones who disagree? ”
Which ones agree with me? I think this whole thing is fantastic. Distributed diagnosis. Where is the Kerning in the CT scan? Ahh.. the web.
actus (ebc508) — 3/22/2005 @ 8:32 amSome technical analyses can be followed quite adequately by an interested, informed layperson. Others can’t.
The logic–or illogic–underlying a position is almost always accessible to such a person.
Some welcome this unexpected increase in transparency; others don’t. Either way, these aren’t hard concepts to grasp.
AMac (b6037f) — 3/22/2005 @ 11:20 am