Skip to main content

SBS research

Another piece of significant reporting today is that linked about SBS. Basically they looked at 55 babies who died in hospital from symptoms equivalent to SBS.

What this demonstrated (which was already known for Glutaric Aciduria) is that there are natural circumstances under which the SBS triad occur and that without other evidence (eg bruises) that the SBS triad of bleeding in the brain and retinas and a shortage of oxygen is not sufficient to "prove" that a baby has been shaken.

The case mentioned just above is one what I have helped write documents for the Court of Appeal. This key report (which I need to properly source) will be very important to that case. There are also a number of people wrongly imprisoned based upon the flawed evidence of SBS.

Post Script:
I have since been in touch with the researchers who indicate that they did not check for the triad, but instead for Sub Dural Haematomae (one aspect of the triad) which was found in 36 cases. However, this is still important even if not as significant as what was originally reported.

What they did was an observation of routine practice and not research (they did not research into the causes, they just pointed out at the coexistence and research NEEDS to be done now). Two thirds of the babies (both neonates and fetuses) had subdural haemorrhage and the majority of those also had brain hypoxia (lack of oxygen). They do not know about the retinas in these cases but they know that Retinal Haemorrhages have been seen after 31 and 58 days post partum (the latter in a ventouse extraction). The significance of the observation is that there are many more natural occurrences of at least 2 of the triad together in young babies which should make society cautious about the causes. In many of their cases they were not sure as to the cause and we think that in the others there is a variety of causes.

In essence there are a number of routes (including shaking) that lead to the SBS triad.

Publication on the net
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19007301
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126931.800-the-%20pathologist-challenging-shaken-baby-syndrome.html?full=true

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Standards Board and Ken Livingstone

The link is to the case where Ken Livingstone appealed the decision of the Adjudication Panel for England. The Standards Board and associated Adjudication Panel have done a lot of damage to democracy in the UK. The courts are, however, bringing them into more sanity. The point about Ken Livingstone's case is that it was high profile and he also could afford to appeal. The Standard Board has a problem in that those subject to its enquiries face substantial costs that they cannot claim back. This is an issue that needs further work. In essence the Judge found that what he said brought him into disrepute, but not the office of Mayor. We do need the machinery of the SBE and APE to concentrate on things that matter rather than people being rude to each other.

Problems with Outlook Express - emails lost dbx corruption

In the light of the enthusiasm shown for my post relating to the OCX control that must not be named (and probably Microsoft's most embarrassing error of recent years) I thought I would write someting about Outlook Express. Outlook Express is the email client that comes as part of windows. I use it myself, although I have my emails filtered through a spam filter of my own devising written in java. It takes email off a number of servers using POP3 (Post Office Protocol TCP Port 110) and sends it using SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol port 25). I have recently spent a few hours dealing with the problem that arises when .dbx files get corrupted during compacting. Outlook Express (OE) stores the emails (and other things) in files with the suffix .dbx. Each folder has its own .dbx file. They are stored in hidden directories. This makes it harder to deal with things when OE goes wrong. It is very important to back up your stored *.dbx files as otherwise if you have a disk cra

Statement re False Allegations Campaign

Many people will know that my family and I have been subject to a campaign of false allegations by Esther Baker for the past 4 1/2 years. Yesterday there was a court judgment Baker v Hemming [2019] EWHC 2950 (QB) which formally confirmed that the allegations were false. Esther Baker, who had brought a libel claim against me, dropped her defence of Truth to my counter-claim and was taken by the judge as no longer trying to prove her allegations. Due to Baker's various breaches of court rules and orders, she has been barred from further repeating her allegations even in the court proceedings. Further claim of mine in libel against Baker are ongoing. There is a good summary in the Daily Mail here . This demonstrates the challenge in fighting false allegations in today's Britain. A substantial campaign was built up to promote allegations which had no substance to them. Various Labour MPs and in