Spoken by somebody with no balls of their own an anon CJD lol lol.

“How exactly were the experts for the plaintiff and defense able to come to their conclusions then?”

The plantiiff’s conclusions aren’t based on the evidence in the literature. Please do feel free to review it anytime. The breast implant cases were not based on objective data either. Goes to show you there are whore’s in any profession. They will spin their tune based on what you pay them, evidence be damned.

How exactly were the experts for the plaintiff and defense able to come to their conclusions then?

No, just that there is no way to distinguish such a case from one where no negligence occurred. They are indistinguishable to any objective observer.

“A small number of children have cerebral palsy as the result of brain damage in the first few months or years of life, brain infections such as bacterial meningitis or viral encephalitis, or head injury from a motor vehicle accident, a fall, or child abuse.”

http://gait.aidi.udel.edu/res695/homepage/pd_ortho/clinics/c_palsy/cpweb.htm#RTFToC3

“Nevertheless, the birthing process can be traumatic for the infant, and injuries occurring during birth do sometimes cause cerebral palsy. Modern prenatal care and improved obstetric care have significantly reduced the incidence of birth injury, but it is unlikely that it will ever be completely eliminated.”

Are you guys arguing that there is literally no way that a physician’s actions or omissions during the birth of a cihld can cause brain damage resulting in CP?

If one were to assume that C-sections were only done in certain types of cases, we might be able to reach that conclusion. However, C-sections are done for a variety of reasons, including physician and patient convenience, so simply saying there are additional C-sections tells us little.

His logic is not hard to follow, it’s just poor logic.

I’ve read the ACOG study, and agree with it. What’s your point? It doesn’t say that CP is never caused by malpractice.

Given that you haven’t reviewed the evidence, how can you say this case was wrongly decided? How is it possible that you are obviously right, and the physician who testified for the plaintiff obviously wrong?

This assumption can be applied to all CP cases though where they claim that a C section was not done soon enough… I don’t think his logic is that hard to follow?

PS: Yet again I will say LOOK UP THE RESEARCH ON PUB MED.

Are you arguing that it is impossible to tell whether birth trauma occurred? You must be joking.

“C-sections are at an all-time high, and CP rates haven’t changed. Ergo, C-sections are ineffective. Yet you’ll crucify us for not performing them. “

You are chock full of assumptions, aren’t you? You have no idea what acts or omissions constituted malpractice in this case. None.

I hope you don’t practice medicine with as little information as you practice law. If ignorance is bliss, you’re the happiest person on the planet.

For those others who still (ha.) have an open mind, lets begin with the fact that rates of CP in the population have not changed in the past 40 years. To some open-minded people, this would suggest the possibility that further intervention has been futile. To explain it in little words, we can’t stop it happening, even with best practices and andvances in technique and technology. This is medicine, not miracle making. You want a cure for something we can’t cure. It isn’t there. It has never been there. You can sue us into non-existence, and CP will still be there.

You cannot demonstrate why CP happened, other than to say that it may be caused by birth trauma in 5-10% of the cases. Still, without knowing conclusively whether birth trauma occurred, you sue. For every CP case, it’s a 1 in 10 or 1 in 20 chance that birth trauma could, maybe, have had something to do with it. The lawyer is betting that the jury will see it his way. If he tries often enough, or is manipulative enough, or gets the right jury, he wins, and the doctor loses, regardless of malpractice.

So what’s the doctor to do? To avoid birth trauma, he/she’s going to make all his/her patients have c-sections? Let’s try to look objectively at this. C-sections are at an all-time high, and CP rates haven’t changed. Ergo, C-sections are ineffective. Yet you’ll crucify us for not performing them. What a sick, tragic waste. And even sicker, you don’t even understand what you do. Ignorance really is bliss.