http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/shakenbaby2.html

Shaken Baby Syndrome
or
Adverse Vaccine Reaction?
Many parents have been charged with murder for allegedly shaking their
babies to death, but medical evidence suggests that vaccinations are
to blame in a large number of these cases.

Extracted from Nexus Magazine, Volume 7, Number 6 (October-November
2000) or November-December 2000 in the USA only.
PO Box 30, Mapleton Qld 4560 Australia.(snip)
Telephone: +61 (0)7 5442 9280; Fax: +61 (0)7 5442 9381
From our web page at: www.nexusmagazine.com

© by Maureen Hickman © 2000
PO Box 274
Ettalong Beach, NSW 2257
Australia
(snip)

Throughout history, mankind has been plagued by infectious diseases.
With the advent of modern biochemical antibiotics, many of these To
loving, caring parents, the act of child abuse is abhorrent. However,
it must be recognised that child abuse has occurred in the past and
inevitably will occur in the future. Medical professionals have the
unenviable task of establishing, by applying sound medical practice
and scientific evidence, if child abuse has in fact occurred.

Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS) was described in medical literature in the
early 1970s1 but was recognised as a form of severe child abuse as far
back as 1860.2 It is a collective term for internal head injuries
which a baby or young child may sustain from:
(a) being violently shaken (child abuse);
(b) a combination of medical problems exacerbated by a serious vaccine
adverse event;
(c) a lone serious vaccine adverse event.

According to New Scientist,3 researchers may be on the way to
identifying a biochemical signature that can help distinguish between
brain injuries caused by accidents and those resulting from violent
abuse. Whilst this research may identify SBS, it may not identify
underlying medical problems which have been exacerbated by a serious
vaccine adverse event or a lone serious vaccine adverse event. Unless
sound scientific evidence is initiated swiftly to diagnose the
difference, parents could find themselves in the position of a father
in Sydney, Australia, who in 1995 was charged with the murder of his
child.
THE TRAGIC DEATH OF RIKKI LEE WALTERS
Scott Warren Walters was charged with the murder of his four-month-old
baby daughter, Rikki Lee Walters, by allegedly shaking the baby to
death on 22 April 1995. Rikki Lee was born on 23 January 1995 at 41
weeks' gestation. The apgar scores (the scale, from 1 to 10, upon
which a baby's physical health is judged) were 8 at one minute and
improved to 9 at five minutes. She was vaccinated on 19 April 1995, 72
hours prior to her death. Vaccines given were triple antigen
(diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis), Hibtiter (Haemophilus influenzae),
hepatitis B and polio syrup.

The transcript of an electronically recorded interview between the
police and Scott Warren Walters is significant:
Q: Did she have any medical problems which you were aware of any time
in between those two visits to the doctors?
A: Oh, we were worried about her chest, 'cause she was, um, breathing
a bit heavy and like, we took, the doctor said she's just got a cold.
Q: When did the doctor say that?
A: When we took her to, um, get her needles and that, she was...
Q: So, you were worried about her chest when you took her to the
doctors.
A: Yeah, we were; her chest was, since she was born, like she had
a...she caught a cold, and, you know, through the month...through,
like, the second month, she's caught a cold and it hasn't gone away;
it was just...her breathing was just heavy.

The transcript of the police interview with the mother is also
significant:
Q: Did Rikki Lee receive any vaccination?
A: Yeah; the other day it was her two-month-old needles, 'cause she
had a cold when they were due; ones for polio, hepatitis B, measles
and mumps, all that type of thing.
Q: Did Rikki Lee have diarrhoea?
A: No.
Q: Did she have vomiting?
A: She's always been a vomity baby after she is fed, but no more than
usual.
Q: Did she have cold symptoms?
A: She's had a snuffly chest and nose, she had a really bad reaction
to the needles. She only had them on Wednesday; she had a runny nose
since this. [Author's emphasis in italics.]

The fact that Rikki Lee had a bad reaction to vaccination was also
noted by the police in the "Report of Death to the Coroner", dated 23
April 1995:
"The deceased received two-monthly injections on Wednesday 19.4.95 on
her three-monthly period because she had been sick. The deceased then
suffered a bad reaction to the injections; however, the mother did not
return her to the doctor. [Signed by constable.]"

It is noted that the medical practitioner said the following in a
statement to police:
"I cannot recall this consultation; however, it [is] my usual practice
to observe the child and ask general questions as to the child's
health. If the child had been obviously unwell with fever, the
vaccination would not have been ordered. Further, the child did not
appear to have any physical injuries or [to be] suffering from
neglect; and if the child had been, I am aware of the guidelines in
relation to [my] contacting the Department of Community Services. The
child received the vaccinations from nursing staff, as this is usually
the normal practice at the centre." [Author's emphasis in italics.]

We know that the child was ill because both parents alluded to this
fact when giving police statements. Did the medical practitioner give
adequate information to the parents on the risks and benefits of
vaccination so an informed decision could be made? The father alleged
that the medical practitioner, in a consultation lasting three to four
minutes, did not take any notes of the consultation, did not examine
the child for contraindications to the administration of a vaccine,
did not question the parents on the health of the child, and did not
explain the risks and benefits of vaccination.

If the medical practitioner did not recall the consultation, how could
he remember whether there were any physical injuries or whether the
child was suffering from neglect? Remember, the doctor took no notes
according to the parents. The doctor made the statement: "If the child
had been obviously unwell with fever, the vaccination would not have
been ordered." We know, however, that the doctor admitted only to
observing the child, so how could he make a diagnosis of whether the
child had any contraindications for the administration of the six
vaccines?

The Australian Immunisation Procedures Handbook4 is distributed by the
National Health and Medical Research Council to give medical
practitioners guidance about vaccination and to encourage them to
maintain the highest standards in the provision of vaccination
services. The 5th edition of this handbook, distributed in October
1994, is very clear on the issue of consent and advises practitioners
that informed consent must be obtained from the person being
vaccinated or, in the case of a child, the child's parent or guardian.
The handbook advises that consent should be obtained prior to each
vaccination, after the recipient's fitness and suitability have been
established, and that the person being vaccinated or the
parent/guardian should be informed of all possible side effects.

It does appear that the medical practitioner in this instance was
clearly negligent because he did not follow government guidelines in
the provision of vaccination services. He did not establish Rikki
Lee's fitness for vaccination correctly, as she was subsequently found
to have been suffering from viral pneumonia. Seventy-two hours later,
disastrous results emerged from his carelessness.

Following this vaccination, Rikki Lee slept for 10-11 hours on Friday
night, 21 April 1995, the night before her death. Was this "excessive
somnolence"? This is defined by Peter O. Behan, Professor of Neurology
at Southern General Hospital, Glasgow, as "a state of drowsiness" and
is an adverse reaction to vaccination.6 He wrote: "Albeit, this may be
difficult to quantitate but, normally, mothers will be aware that the
child will be difficult to arouse, will not take its food, and most
mothers will note that the child is sleeping excessively."

According to the transcript from an additional police interview, Scott
Warren Walters was asked about feeding details on the day Rikki Lee
died:
A: ...she only, she didn't have it; she wouldn't have been two
minutes; she was on the bottle and she just...
Q: About two minutes on the bottle?
A: Yeah.
Q: And what, she wasn't interested in the food?
A: No, no.

The father admitted that Rikki Lee, following the administration of
the vaccines, had shown signs of excessive drowsiness, projectile
vomiting and diarrhoea, had not been taking the full amount of her
formula and was on continual doses of Panadol every six hours.
DOCTORS CALLED BY CROWN LEGAL TEAM
In the case of Regina v Scott Warren Walters,5 heard by Acting Judge
Black in the NSW Supreme Court in April 1998, the Crown called three
expert witnesses: a forensic pathologist, a paediatrician and a
neuropathology professor.
The forensic pathologist reported:
"There were no fractures of the skull; subdural haemorrhage was
present diffusely across the superior surface of the right cerebral
hemisphere. There was no evidence of bruising of the neck. There were
no fractures of the rib cage. No digested food was seen in the
intestine and there was minimal faecal material within the colon. An
X-ray skeletal survey was performed, and no evidence of old or recent
trauma or other bony disease was seen."

Acting Judge Black commented on the forensic pathologist's testimony
in his Judgment:
"Examination of the fixed eyes noted haemorrhages around both sides of
the optic nerve and diffuse retinal haemorrhages... There was
laryngopharyngitis and moderate microvesicular steatosis present in
the liver... Cytomegalovirus was isolated from a nasal swab. She said
that cytomegalovirus was a viral pneumonia which she would not expect
to cause death but would expect to cause something like a bad cold,
maybe bronchitis... She was not able to say how long Ricki Lee had
been suffering from viral pneumonia.
"The microscopic examination of the subdural haemorrhage told her that
the haemorrhage occurred within around 12 hours prior to Ricki Lee's
death."
The forensic pathologist determined that the direct cause of death was
subdural haemorrhage occurring up to approximately 12 hours prior to
death. No antecedent causes or other significant conditions that may
have contributed to the death were listed.
In cross-examination, the following questions and answers were put and
given:
Q: And first of all, it is the case, is it not, that there is some
controversy within the medical profession about this whole issue of
shaken baby syndrome?
A: Yes.
Q: There are those who would debunk the whole idea completely?
A: There are certain people that say that shaking alone is
insufficient to cause injuries, that there must be impact as well; and
there are others that say that the shaking is sufficient.
The paediatrician, Chairman of the Child at Risk Committee at Westmead
Hospital, Sydney, reported:
"The clinical and pathological findings are almost certainly the
result of a violent shaking injury to the child in the short time
prior to her death."
Slightly later in his report, he said this:
"The only other possible explanation for a spontaneous haemorrhage
into the brain would be some form of haemorrhagic disease such as
vitamin K deficiency in the neonatal period. I understand that she did
receive her vitamin K injection and this would virtually rule out this
possibility."

In his Judgment, Acting Judge Black commented on the paediatrician's
findings:
"In the course of his evidence, the paediatrician had said that he
felt strongly about his position and I asked him to clarify what he
meant by that. He said it was not because he was trying to make out
that he was zealous about the matter; it was just that because of the
range of injuries within the brain, he felt it was consistent with
violent shaking, way out ahead of any other possibility; in terms of
percentages, something like 99 per cent, something like that.
"He was not aware that the child had been vaccinated about three days
before her death.
"He says that the presence of cytomegalovirus would not be a
contraindication for immunising the child. He said the current advice
is that immunisation should be done unless there is a particularly
serious illness.
"In relation to the microvesicular steatosis found by the forensic
pathologist, he [paediatrician] did not refer to it in his report. He
said in relation to it:
'It is not something I think I could comment on, but I think I was
concentrating largely on the injuries that were documented but it is
obviously important in the context.'
'Q: When you say you cannot comment on it, are you saying you cannot
comment on microvesicular steatosis?'
'A: Yes, I would have to be told what that is. I don't know what that
is.'
"I am surprised [said Judge Black], in view of those answers, that the
paediatrician felt able to be as positive in his conclusions as he
was."
A neuropathology professor also gave evidence for the Crown.
Commenting on his testimony, Acting Judge Black wrote in his Judgment:
"Injuries are consistent with the child having been shaken. He was
asked, 'Would it be possible for a child to have received these
injuries and to appear normal to a number of adults over a period of
hours?' A: 'Yes.' When asked to put a time frame on this, he said,
'The injuries could have happened twenty-four to forty-eight hours
prior to the arrival of the ambulance on the Saturday night'. He was
unaware that the child had been vaccinated three days prior to the
death. He noted the presence of cytomegalovirus but that did not cause
him any concern, nor did he see any relationship between that and the
vaccination.
"He did not consider whether scurvy was a problem and said, 'Scurvy is
a diagnosis that...again I am no [more] expert on the clinical aspects
of vitamin deficiencies than I am on the vitamin aspects of brain
problems, but scurvy does not normally cause any brain pathology'."
It was clear from the medical evidence tendered that the subdural
haemorrhage was the cause of death and was probably less than 24 hours
old. The retinal haemorrhage would have occurred near the time of
death and could have been caused by resuscitation. In other words,
there were two instances of haemorrhage allegedly caused by the baby
being shaken.
DOCTORS CALLED BY DEFENCE LEGAL TEAM
Two medical practitioners were called on behalf of the defence in the
case of Regina v Scott Warren Walters.
Dr Mark Donohoe, MB, BS, gave the following testimony:7
"The contributing and unusual factors in this case do make it
difficult to attribute the intracranial bleeding to a single cause.
The range of contributing and potentially causative factors include:
hepatic mitochondrial abnormality (as evidenced by the microvesicular
steatosis of the liver); antibiotic use in the neonatal period;
cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection causing pneumonia; poor feeding and
fluid intake causing a depletion in glutathione; multiple antigen
vaccination administered while she was suffering a significant viral
infection; adverse reaction to the vaccination; the use of paracetamol
to manage her high temperature; nutritional deficiencies, including
vitamins K and C."

This is an extract from Acting Judge Black's Judgment concerning Dr
Donohoe's testimony:
"In summary, his [Dr Donohoe's] report focuses on the moderate
microvesicular steatosis present in the liver, found by the forensic
pathologist. He says this condition arises from an inherited or
acquired disorder of hepatic mitochondrial function. This was either
inherited by Rikki Lee from her mother or caused by a toxic drug
reaction. This type of hepatic damage would be expected to cause
coagulation and bleeding disorders. In his view, the administration of
an antibiotic when Rikki Lee was eleven days old, the presence of the
cytomegalovirus infection, the administration of the vaccines, the
administration of Panadol and possible vitamin deficiencies all
combined to the possible sudden onset of spontaneous bruising and
bleeding in a previously apparently healthy child.
"He disagreed with the forensic pathologist's evidence that the
steatosis of the liver was consistent with viral infection from the
cytomegalovirus. He said the literature and research in the last five
years had been fairly definitive that microvesicular steatosis is a
mitochondrial disorder.
"I [Judge Black] have considered the forensic pathologist's evidence
about this carefully, and on this issue I am not satisfied that Dr
Donohoe is wrong."
Dr Archie Kalokerinos, MB, BS, well-known (retired) general
practitioner and author of the book Every Second Child,8 also gave
evidence for the defence. This is an extract from his testimony:
"A possible cause of Rikki Lee's death was scurvy haemorrhage
precipitated by pertussis vaccine.
"The precipitating factor giving rise to scurvy is the endotoxin
contained in pertussis vaccine, and the amount of endotoxin varies
tremendously from one batch to another. In addition, endotoxin is more
likely to be stimulated in production because bottle-fed babies do not
have normal bowel flora. Also, the administration of antibiotics can
stimulate the production of excessive amounts of endotoxin. Vitamin C
neutralises the effects of endotoxin; however, infants exposed to
endotoxin can develop a sensitivity which can precipitate extremely
acute and even fatal symptoms occurring without warning.
"The presence of a viral infection means more utilisation of vitamin C
and probably causes the production of endotoxin in the gut. All the
factors necessary for the production of scurvy haemorrhages are
present in this case."

Regarding Dr Kalokerinos and his evidence, the Acting Judge noted:
"He said from his own experience and from the research he had done,
haemorrhages can occur in scurvy. The haemorrhages noted by the
forensic pathologist could all have been caused by scurvy. The vitamin
deficiencies and problems arising therefrom are far more common
amongst Aboriginal and part-Aboriginal children than amongst Caucasian
people. (It is noted here that the accused's evidence was that he was
Aboriginal.) He says, in the present case, the vitamin C deficiency
was a very likely possibility, 'much more likely than any other
possibility'. He disagreed with the professor's evidence that scurvy
did not normally cause any brain pathology.
"It will be remembered that the professor had disclaimed any expertise
in vitamin deficiency. Further, the professor had not said that scurvy
could not cause any brain pathology; the words he used were 'does not
normally cause'. Accordingly, I am not satisfied beyond reasonable
doubt that scurvy cannot cause brain pathology."

Acting Judge Black, in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Criminal
Division, in handing down Judgment on 24 April 1998, said:
"In relation to those two doctors [i.e., doctors for the defence], I
had the opportunity of seeing them both give their evidence and be
carefully and comprehensively cross-examined in the witness box. I
have also paid attention to the written submissions provided to me by
the respective counsel. I did not form the view that either of those
doctors was putting forward a fanciful, untenable proposition.
Perhaps, putting the burden the correct way, I am not satisfied that
their evidence should be rejected as unreliable, nor am I satisfied
that their propositions are unreasonable.
"...Suffice it then to say, in this case, having regard to all the
evidence before me including, in particular, that given by witnesses
whom I have seen, my verdict is that the accused is not guilty."
[Author's emphasis in italics.]
An innocent man would have been jailed in this matter if the Judge had
not found that the medical practitioners for the defence were
presenting reasonable propositions for alternative medical reasons,
including a vaccine adverse event, rather than SBS for the death of
the baby. Other accused parents have not been so fortunate.
COMPARISON WITH SBS/VACCINE CASES IN UK & USA
In the United States, a father has been jailed for life after a jury
found him guilty of causing SBS. Baby A.9 was born in September 1997
and vaccinated eight weeks later with diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis
(DTP), hepatitis B, polio syrup and Hib (Haemophilus
influenzae)--exactly the same vaccines that were administered to baby
Rikki Lee.
It is interesting to note that Baby A. had advanced bilateral
pneumonia, whilst Rikki Lee was diagnosed as having viral pneumonia.
Both mothers noted that their babies had chest congestion from birth
to death and had a falling-off of feeding patterns and increased
lethargy following the administration of vaccines.
Clearly, the medical condition of both babies following birth should
have precluded them from undergoing any vaccination, and especially
not six vaccines at the one time. It is obvious that the babies in the
two cases mentioned had underlying medical problems that were
exacerbated by the administration of multiple vaccines and that a
vaccine adverse event contributed to each death.
The post-mortem findings on Rikki Lee found subdural haemorrhage of
the right cerebral hemisphere and retinal haemorrhages were noted. In
the case of Baby A., the findings found subdural haemorrhages of the
right and left cerebral hemispheres as well as retinal bleeding. It is
also interesting to note that both mothers had urinary tract
infections during pregnancy and were treated with antibiotics.
The father of Baby A. is fighting for his life and is presently
seeking sufficient worldwide medical expertise to file an appeal. Many
medical professionals around the world have responded to his request
for support, including Dr Archie Kalokerinos who gave evidence in the
Walters trial.
Another tragic case in the United States is that of a mother who has
been jailed for life for allegedly shaking her quadruplets. The
naturally conceived quadruplets were born two months prematurely,
weighing around three pounds each. When the babies were three weeks
old, they were given hepatitis B vaccine--following which, all four
babies became ill and required hospitalisation. Two babies ultimately
required insertion of shunts in their brains to release blood and
fluid as a result of subdural haemorrhages.
Immediately the babies were hospitalised, the medical professionals
made a diagnosis of SBS. These four babies are now scheduled for
adoption and the maternal grandmother has been dismissed by state
authorities as a possible candidate.
In the United Kingdom, a 35-year-old lawyer was recently convicted of
the double murder of her baby sons. Christopher died in 1996 and Harry
in 1998. Sally Clark was accused of shaking Harry to death. Because of
that accusation, it was alleged that it was too much of a coincidence
to believe that Christopher did not die in 1996 in exactly the same
way, even though death at the time was attributed to "natural causes".
Harry was diagnosed with retinal haemorrhage; however, one medical
expert prior to the trial had doubts about this diagnosis, as he
claimed he had been looking at the wrong slides. This disclosure
weakened other medical experts' evidence of SBS, but it was not
sufficient to sway the jury from a verdict of guilty. Christopher was
vaccinated 23 days before his death, and Harry on the day he died; so
it is feasible that both of these babies could have died from a severe
vaccine adverse event.10
There was a divergence of medical opinion at the trial of Sally Clark
as well as at the trial of the father of Baby A. The question must be
asked whether juries are capable of understanding complex, conflicting
medical evidence empowering them to judge a person's guilt or
innocence in such cases. It is interesting to note that in the
Australian case of Walters, a Judge alone found the defendant not
guilty.
ACCURATE CASE ASSESSMENT
It should be noted that SBS may not always result in the death of a
baby. In New South Wales recently, parents of a child suffering a
serious vaccine adverse event were suspected of SBS. The baby has been
removed from the care of the parents and placed with a Department of
Community Services (DOCS) foster parent. The law in New South Wales11
gives representatives of DOCS the right to attend on the residential
address of any parent suspected of abusing children. A notice12 is
served on them to present their child forthwith to a nominated medical
practitioner at a hospital or some other place so specified so a
medical examination of the child can take place.
Under the law, the Director-General of the Department of Community
Services may keep the child for "such period of time as is reasonably
necessary for the child to be examined". A court of law will
ultimately decide the fate of the baby, i.e., whether the baby would
be returned to the care of the parents or whether it would be fostered
out to family or other carers. Following a hearing, it is possible
that the court could refer the matter to the police. The situation may
then arise where a person is charged with a criminal offence (SBS),
even though the injuries to the baby may well have been reported to
the appropriate authorities by that person as a serious vaccine
adverse event.
It is clear that the diagnosis of SBS requires meticulous medical
investigation. This investigation will be made much more difficult in
the future with the recent endorsement by governments around the world
of hepatitis B vaccination of all newborns. As more vaccines are
released onto the market, the number of serious vaccine adverse
events--including death--will increase in our children and at a
younger age.
The problem is the failure of medical professionals to recognise that
vaccine adverse events do occur and that they are guilty of labelling
them "coincidental" or "by chance".13 In Australia, six deaths14 have
been reported from vaccines in the 27-month period from 6 June 1997 to
2 September 1999. Because of the under-reporting and under-recognition
of such events, it is likely that death and other serious injuries
occur in much higher numbers than the public has been led to believe.
In other words, it is more politically correct to label the death or
injury of a baby as SBS than to investigate the safety and
effectiveness of vaccines which are considered by governments and the
majority of the medical profession as the only panacea for the
treatment of infectious diseases.

Clinical trials prior to licensure of vaccines are notoriously small,
and this inhibits researchers' ability to establish accurately the
cause and effect relationship between vaccines and serious adverse
events. Vaccine trials are usually funded by vaccine manufacturers
themselves and are unlikely to quantify accurately the true "risks vs
benefits" ratio, lest it reflect on sales and marketing strategies.
What is seriously lacking is independent scientific research with
large numbers of trial participants, where one half is given the
vaccine and the other half is given a placebo.
Dr Mark Donohoe, the Sydney medical practitioner who gave evidence for
the defence in the Walters trial, was very explicit in his SBS
research when he said:15
"There exist major data gaps in the medical literature regarding SBS.
These are summarised as:
Lack of clear definition of cases. There is an urgent need for
standard criteria, to identify certain cases for the purpose of
homogeneity in trials and identification of the unique features of SBS
as opposed to other abuse, other medical conditions and normals.
Lack of useful and specific laboratory or other markers proven to
identify SBS.
Poor definition and quantification of the social and family risk
factors to provide guidance on likelihood of abuse for a given set of
circumstances.
There is a strong need for a checklist or other diagnostic or
management tool to assess cases and to quantify index of suspicion of
shaking."

A paper in the British Medical Journal concluded:16
"Subdural haemorrhage is common in infancy and carries a poor
prognosis; three quarters of such infants die or have profound
disability. Most cases are due to child abuse, but in a few the cause
is unknown." [Author's emphasis added.]

The authors of the paper believe that the clinical investigation of
such children should include:
a full, multidisciplinary, social assessment;
an ophthalmic examination;
a skeletal survey supplemented with a bone scan or a skeletal survey,
repeated at around 10 days;
a coagulation screen;
a computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging.

However, according to Dr Mark Donohoe:
"There is an urgent need for properly controlled, prospective trials
into SBS, using a variety of controls. Until such studies are
complete, published and replicated, the current opinion on the link
between SDH/RH and SBS cannot be sustained."
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE LEGAL AND MEDICAL PROFESSIONS
The correct diagnosis of Shaken Baby Syndrome is a problem for those
being accused of this syndrome around the world. The cases mentioned
are only a small number that have occurred over the past few years.
It is hard to imagine the distress, confusion and despair suffered by
the accused and their families, especially those who have been jailed
for life for a crime they claim they did not commit.
Juries and lawyers rely heavily on what medical experts tell them. If
medical experts are guilty of grossly misleading a court of law by
providing skewed evidence from inadequate medical research on SBS,
then innocent individuals are suffering unnecessarily. Let us hope
that the SBS medical experts comprehend that they are not infallible
and realise the untold human tragedy that can occur if they are wrong.
Glossary
The key terms in the identification of SBS are alleged to be:17
Cerebral oedema: fluid collecting in the brain, causing tissue to
swell.
Haematoma: a localised accumulation of blood in tissues as a result of
haemorrhaging.
Haemorrhage: a condition of bleeding, usually severe.
Retinal haemorrhage (RH): bleeding of the retina, a key structure in
vision located at the back of the eye.
Subdural Haematoma (SDH): a localised accumulation of blood, sometimes
mixed with spinal fluid, in the space of the brain beneath the
membrane covering called the dura matter.
Endnotes:

1. Gale Encyclopedia of Medicine (Olendorf, Jeryan, Boyden, editors),
Gale Research, Detroit, MI, vol. 4, 1999, p. 2604.
2. "Abuse and Neglect of Children", Nelson Textbook of Pediatrics
(Behrman, Kliegman, Jenson, eds), W.B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia, PA,
2000, 16th edition, chapter 35, p. 113.
3. Baker, Mitzi, "That was no accident: Biochemical markers could one
day help identify battered children", New Scientist, 28 November 1998,
p. 21.
4. The Australian Immunisation Procedures Handbook, National Health
and Medical Research Council, 5th edition, October 1994 and revised
5th edition, 1995.
5. Regina v Scott Warren Walters, Supreme Court of New South Wales,
Criminal Division, No. 70031 of 1998.
6. Behan, Peter O., MD, FACP, FRCP (Professor of Neurology, Glasgow
University, Scotland), "Report on the Neurological Complications of
Pertussis Vaccination in Children", August 1995; and letter from
Professor Behan to Sydney solicitors, dated 13 October 1993, regarding
a vaccine damage claim.
7. Dr Mark Donohoe's research on Shaken Baby Syndrome, prepared for
the case of Regina v Scott Warren Walters, heard in Sydney, Australia,
in 1998.
8. Kalokerinos, Archie, MD, Every Second Child, Pivot/Health
Books/Keats Publishing, CT, USA, 1981 (first published by Thomas
Nelson Australia Ltd, 1974), ISBN 0-87983-250-9.
9. Information provided to the writer by the father of Baby A. in
written correspondence and history, taken by Harold E. Buttram, MD,
and F. Edward Yazbak, MD, of the Woodlands Healing Research Center,
Quakertown, PA, USA, dated 25 May 2000.
10. Driscoll, Margarette, "Shadow of Doubt", Sunday Times News Review,
UK, 28 November 1999. The article reports that Christopher was
vaccinated on the day before his death; but Dr Viera Scheibner has
learned that the boy was vaccinated 23 days before he died--one of the
critical days, according to her studies linking SIDS (sudden infant
death syndrome) with vaccinations.
11. New South Wales Children (Care and Protection) Act 1987, No. 54.
12. ibid., section 23, pp. 30-31.
13. The Australian Immunisation Procedures Handbook, 7th edition,
March 2000, pp. 22, 259; also, Drs Gordon Ada and David Isaacs,
Vaccination: The Facts, The Fears, The Future, Allen & Unwin, Sydney,
2000, pp. 91, 94, ISBN 1-86508-223-6.
14. Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care, Communicable
Diseases Intelligence Bulletins: 21(20):313, 2 October 1997;
21(23):364, 25 December 1997; 22(7):146, 9 July 1998; 22(10):234, 1
October 1998; 23(1):34, 21 January 1999; 23(9):255, 2 September 1999.
15. Dr Mark Donohoe's research on Shaken Baby Syndrome, prepared for
the case of Regina v Scott Warren Walters, ibid.
16. Jayawant, S., Rawlinson, A., Gibbon, F., Price, J., Schulte, J.,
Sharples, P., Sibert, J.R., Kemp, A.M., "Subdural haemorrhages in
infants: population-based study", British Medical Journal
317:1558-1561, 5 December 1998.
17. Gale Encyclopedia of Medicine, op. cit.
About the Author:

Maureen Hickman, JP, has been a para-legal in Sydney law firms for
over 25 years and currently works part-time at Carters Law Firm. She
is the author of Vaccination: The Right Choice? (reviewed in NEXUS
7/04, June-July 2000).
Editor's Note:

For additional background information, refer to "Shaken Baby Syndrome:
The Vaccination Link" by Viera Scheibner, PhD, published in NEXUS
5/05, August-September 1998.

Vera  Scheibner,

Didn't read your entire post, but do not need to.   My answer is quite
independent of  vaccination theory.   And pretty certain.  What with John
Stroger hospital in Chicago, and Canada Health report of babies born to mothers
on anti-depressants in the last months of pregnancy, having acute problems of
respiratory and seizure problems and are hospitalized.  John Stroger hospital
has problems  with newborns of mothers on drugs, (no doubt stimulant or
recreational drugs) having rumination problems (vomiting).  The babies are
taken from the mothers and given to a surrogate caretaker  not on drugs  to
thrive.
I have a layman's theory on website
http://ascc.healingwell.com/info/gailfaq.htm
that describes what stimulants can do to people of all ages.
There was a case here where a nurse was taking care of a 6mo. old, and the
parents (physicians) worked a few days a week.
The baby died in the nurse's care, and she was blamed for the death.  The
article describing the case, emphasized that the mother was taking an
anti-depressant, and was not ashamed to admit it.
They were devastated by the death, and the nurse got life.  It was reduced to
50 years, when I read the article, I went to the lawyers office to tell him of
my theory on stimulants, and he said he knew the nurse was not guilty as he
would know the truth.
Then who killed the baby.  Clear in my mind, the stimulant works in a very
harmful manner. and the harm continues by a mind/body connection literally, no
matter the distance involved between baby and parent.   The case was appealed
and the nurse is now free.  I do not know what the appeal was based on, but
clearly her time in prison was a mistake.  I can provide the nurse's name and
lawyer's name if necessary.
This will continue to happen and in more frequent fashion, if the damage of
stimulants is not recognized and curbed.
It is grievous to know this and not know what to do about it.
It needs a study, the easiest being of pediatric children who have IBD or
crohns, as it is usually their parent on an anti-depressant and the situation
ceases if the parent ceases the drug.
Also, Xanax, buspar, depakote, flexeril, natural herbs with natural stimulants,
kava kava, st johns wort, SAM-e etc. etc. etc. can  also cause the harmful
syndrome.
This is a cause for great concern, as it is a very strange and almost
unbelievable theory, but any observer astute enough to pursue this, will find
it to be true.
If anyone knows of a an organization or pediatrician willing to initiate such a
study, I can contribute some funds to the project.
There is no other cause to the dire harm being done to so many in this manner.
Have observed this for many years.
Gail Michael

...

Is it okay to shake a baby?

I'm asking because a baby is being buried today that was shaken to keep her
quiet.  Well, now she is quiet forever.

Je n'ai pas lu (trop long et en anglais).
Mais, au vu des nombreux groupes dans lesquels
vous avez post?, peut-on supposer qu'il est question
d'?sot?ristes complotant en utilisant des m?thodes
m?dicales ?  :-))
Ou alors des m?decins qui complotent en utilisant
des m?thodes ?sot?riques :-))
Ou encore...

PS : ce commentaire est valable pour les autres
messages que vous avez post?s avec la m?me
liste de diffusion.

JCC