zlacker

[return to "A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy"]
1. TeeMas+A45[view] [source] 2023-09-27 03:58:21
>>rossan+(OP)
"What happened is that during my literature review, I disturbingly realized that what I had been told at the hospital, namely that subdural and retinal hemorrhage in infants are almost always caused by violent shaking even in the absence of external evidence of trauma, was an assertion based on very weak scientific foundations. And yet, this “shaking hypothesis” (sometimes referred to as the theory of the “triad”, since encephalopathy is frequently associated with the other two signs, subdural and retinal hemorrhage) has been taught as though it was a proven fact to generations of physicians all over the world. Every year, thousands of children are removed from their parents, and thousands are prosecuted, convicted, and even incarcerated, on the basis of this assertion. Law professor Deborah Tuerkheimer qualifies SBS/AHT as a “medical diagnosis of murder”. The very least we should expect for an assertion this powerful is that it should be based on reliable scientific foundations."

This is why using experts for advice is great but everyone should still be encouraged to do their own research.

◧◩
2. kergon+sN5[view] [source] 2023-09-27 10:21:35
>>TeeMas+A45
> This is why using experts for advice is great but everyone should still be encouraged to do their own research.

Not everyone is equipped to do this kind of literature review (that’s not research), or have access to all these papers. Everyone needs to be critical and skeptical to a reasonable extent, but this kind of “do your own research” attitude is damaging. People just end up trusting dodgy but authoritative-sounding YouTube videos and blog posts because they cannot read scientific articles.

◧◩◪
3. TeeMas+aH6[view] [source] 2023-09-27 15:31:32
>>kergon+sN5
YouTube videos are just letting other people do research ;)
[go to top]