U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-07-2017, 09:13 AM
 
2,276 posts, read 842,702 times
Reputation: 3934

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by easthome View Post
There is NO HOPE that is why the courts came to the decision they came to, it doesn't matter what Art says, his sons case has nothing to do with this one! The courts came to a decision after evidence from EXPERTS IN THE FIELD OF MEDICINE they didn't just pick a number from a hat. The fact that there are people here prepared to let a baby boy actually suffer is slightly concerning.
It is the Terry Schiavo situation redux. GOP politicians are exploiting the child's medical condition and the misery of the parents to push their political agenda. They know that there is no chance that any treatment option is going to help this young boy, they are merely using him as a tool to further their plans to take health insurance away from millions of Americans.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-07-2017, 09:53 AM
 
Location: Camberville
11,988 posts, read 16,722,280 times
Reputation: 19630
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Who is saying that the experimental treatment could save this child's life???

Please read the court documents.
Donald Trump says there's hope, and apparently he knows better than every expert in both Europe and the US!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2017, 10:58 AM
exm
 
Location: Long Island, NY
2,121 posts, read 699,100 times
Reputation: 1364
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorman View Post
It is the Terry Schiavo situation redux. GOP politicians are exploiting the child's medical condition and the misery of the parents to push their political agenda. They know that there is no chance that any treatment option is going to help this young boy, they are merely using him as a tool to further their plans to take health insurance away from millions of Americans.

And meanwhile, the left is perfectly fine by letting the courts decide this kids should die and is no candidate for experimental treatment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2017, 11:00 AM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
20,327 posts, read 10,412,165 times
Reputation: 7964
Quote:
Originally Posted by exm View Post
And meanwhile, the left is perfectly fine by letting the courts decide this kids should die and is no candidate for experimental treatment.
The doctors told the court that Charlie is not a candidate for the experimental treatment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2017, 11:05 AM
 
Location: In The Thin Air
12,265 posts, read 8,053,070 times
Reputation: 8911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Two boys View Post
If he did not show any interest in helping this family, then he would be criticized for that.....just can't win.

We paid for our family health insurance for 18 years, $18,000 - $20,000 a month. Obamacare made it worse.....we paid more for less. We struggled to make this payment every month. It was our responsibility, not arguing about that. Middle class were not given any kind of break.....made it worse. Those under Obamacare who have a lower income are given government subsidies, they are being helped. Again, the burden falls on the middle. We never hear about this. All we keep hearing about is people will no longer have insurance. I don't mind people who are able bodied, working and contributing members of society getting assistance/subsidies. That is fine. My point is....perhaps those that can will have to take on more responsibility under the new plan. Those that can't, will in one way or the other be assisted. Sorry I am off topic and venting, but there is another side of this too.
Actually I wouldn't have known anything about this kid if it wasn't for what Trump did. It doesn't get much airplay here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2017, 11:37 AM
 
Location: Florida
3,274 posts, read 904,338 times
Reputation: 2609
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
The doctors told the court that Charlie is not a candidate for the experimental treatment.
I want you to put up a link of this doctor saying in an interview on TV that Charlie is not a candidate!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2017, 11:50 AM
exm
 
Location: Long Island, NY
2,121 posts, read 699,100 times
Reputation: 1364
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
The doctors told the court that Charlie is not a candidate for the experimental treatment.

The doctors in single payer England. How about the American doctors who are willing to provide the experimental medication?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2017, 12:15 PM
 
Location: Great Britain
11,453 posts, read 3,915,845 times
Reputation: 7093
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
The doctors told the court that Charlie is not a candidate for the experimental treatment.
Given the fact that the treatment would not cure the conditon, the child was teminally ill and given the childs long term quality of life that end of life paliative care would be most appriopriate.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH)

There is no cure for Charlie’s condition which is terminal. GOSH explored various treatment options, including nucleoside therapy, the experimental treatment that one hospital in the US has agreed to offer now that the parents have the funds to cover the cost of such treatment. GOSH concluded that the experimental treatment, which is not designed to be curative, would not improve Charlie’s quality of life.

Frequently asked questions about the Charlie Gard court case | Great Ormond Street Hospital




Quote:
Originally Posted by Great Ormond Street Hospital -v- Yates and Gard - High Court London

At one stage, Great Ormond Street Hospital got as far as deciding to apply forethical permission to attempt nucleosidetherapy here - a treatment that hasnever been used on patients with thisform of MDDS - but, by the time thatdecision had been made, Charlie’s condition had greatly worsened and theview of all here was that his epilepticencephalopathy was such that his braindamage was severe and irreversible that treatment was potentially painful butincapable of achieving anything positive for him.



Great Ormond Street Hospital -v- Yates and Gard


Last edited by Brave New World; 07-07-2017 at 12:26 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2017, 12:20 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
20,327 posts, read 10,412,165 times
Reputation: 7964
Quote:
Originally Posted by warhorse78 View Post
I want you to put up a link of this doctor saying in an interview on TV that Charlie is not a candidate!
I haven't seen any of the doctors giving interviews on this case, but I have read the court documents.

Quote:
The doctors who are treating Charlie, who had themselves contemplated the same alternative treatment when he was first in their care in the autumn of 2016, have, following a significant decline in the level of his brain functioning in January 2017 firmly concluded that there is, effectively, no chance of Charlie now benefiting from its effects.
Quote:
“87. It is important that I record what Dr. B said in court this week in relation to the issue of nucleoside treatment. He indicated that Charlie is not responsive to his direct surroundings in any purposeful way. He confirmed what had already been said by Professor A, namely that Charlie had deteriorated a great deal. He said that Charlie’s brain is now so damaged that there is no movement. He said that there is no evidence of a sleep/wake cycle, which, he said, is a really strong indicator of how bad Charlie’s brain function has become. He said that Charlie had had a brain deterioration with seizures and poor movement. He said that on Charlie’s brainwave tracing you can see seizure activity, but that now his muscles are so weak there is just an electrical signal present.

88. He said that there were no further treatments available to Charlie which could improve him from his current situation and that this was the opinion of the entire team - including those from whom a second opinion had been obtained -with the view of the entire team that Charlie is deteriorating, that he cannot get better, that he cannot understand anything or develop, that there is no prospect of this and that he should be allowed to slip away peacefully and with dignity.
Crucially, she said that, even if there was an ability to cross the blood/brain barrier, it is not possible to reverse the process for neurones already lost. She said that seizures in mitochondrial disease are a sign that death is, at most, six to nine months away. She said that she and Dr. I did not really differ on the science and both agree that, very sadly, it is extremely unlikely to help Charlie.
Quote:
In addition to the medical expertise to which I have referred thus far, it is right to record that the parents had permission to instruct their own expert, Dr L, a consultant paediatric neurologist at Southampton General Hospital. Dr L’s conclusions were effectively in identical terms to the other expert contributions, leading the judge to conclude (paragraph 93):

Accordingly, the entire highly experienced UK team, all those who provided second opinions and the consultant instructed by the parents in these proceedings share a common view that further treatment would be futile. For the avoidance of any doubt, the word “futile” in this context means pointless or of no effective benefit.”
Quote:
Dr I gave evidence over a telephone link from the USA on the first day of the hearing before Francis J. He confirmed that he had, that day, seen the most recent EEG for Charlie. The judge records his observation as follows:

“Seeing the documents this morning has been very helpful. I can understand the opinion that he is so severely affected by encephalopathy that any attempt at therapy would be futile. I agree that it is very unlikely that he will improve with that therapy. It is unlikely.”

“Crucially, Dr I said that, having seen the 30 March EEG, the damage to Charlie’s brain was more severe than he had thought. He said that he thought Charlie was in the terminal stage of his illness. He said that he thought that the treatment, if administered, was unlikely to be of any benefit to Charlie’s brain. He described the probability as low, but not zero. He agreed that there could be “no reversal of the structure of Charlie’s brain.”
Yates & Anor v Great Ormond Street Hospital For Children NHS Foundation Trust & Anor (Rev 1) [2017] EWCA Civ 410 (23 May 2017)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2017, 12:23 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
20,327 posts, read 10,412,165 times
Reputation: 7964
Quote:
Originally Posted by exm View Post
The doctors in single payer England. How about the American doctors who are willing to provide the experimental medication?
"Dr I" ( the Dr that heads the experimental therapy in the US) as quoted in my earlier post said that "“Seeing the documents this morning has been very helpful. I can understand the opinion that he is so severely affected by encephalopathy that any attempt at therapy would be futile. I agree that it is very unlikely that he will improve with that therapy. It is unlikely.” And that there there could be “no reversal of the structure of Charlie’s brain"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:09 AM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 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, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top