In 1971 Norma Guthkelch, retired neurosurgeon, published the first description of the Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS). Within the next several years John Caffey, pediatric radiologist, wrote several articles supporting the SBS theory. Very soon after, when infants were brought into hospital emergency rooms in the U.S.A. with brain hemorrhages without known accidental explanations such as auto accidents or high distance falls, almost routinely the hemorrhages have been attributed to SBS or related diagnoses resulting in criminal conviction of parents or caretakers. These and other issues such as inflicted child abuse, non-accidental trauma, failure to protect, and other diagnoses are reviewed in this book ''Since the original introduction of the SBS theory, conclusive evidence has emerged proving that these prosecutions have been founded upon tainted medical opinions and fundamentally flawed scientific methodology (i.e. junk science). It requires little imagination to understand the significant mental pain which parents undergo while grieving over the death of a child, as frequently occurs in these cases. Accusing this parent of murdering their child (with no real evidence) and putting the entire strength of the state behind this accusation is monstrous, when the entire accusation pivots upon facts which are now known to be false. Loss of job, loss of family and community ties follow the accusation. Moreover, the general public, the grand and petite juries, the states and the parties, all have an overwhelmingly strong interest in knowing if these prosecutions are founded upon reasonable interpretation of the facts - or - if the accusations are built around falsehoods and scientific impossibilities.'' Quoted from the writings of Kent Holcomb.

Shaken Baby Syndrome or Vaccine Induced Encephalitis - Are Parents Being Falsely Accused?

By Harold Buttram Christina England

AuthorHouse

Copyright © 2011 Harold Buttram M.D. and Christina England
All right reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-4567-1976-0

Contents

Dedications.............................................................................................viiIntroduction............................................................................................ixChapter 1: The Alleged Shaken Baby Syndrome.............................................................1Chapter 2: Subdural (Brain) Hemorrhages.................................................................9Chapter 3: Antioxidants, the Stepchildren of Modern Medicine, as Applied to SBS/NAT.....................13Chapter 4: Increased Hazards of Vaccines in Preterm Infants.............................................19Chapter 5: Pro-inflammatory Vaccine Adjuvants: Aluminum & Peanut Oil....................................23Chapter 6: Vaccine Combinations and Immune Paralysis....................................................27Chapter 7: A Dangerous Combination......................................................................37Chapter 8: The Five In One Vaccines - The Pharmaceutical Industries Cauldron............................63Conclusion..............................................................................................75References..............................................................................................79

Chapter One

The Alleged Shaken Baby Syndrome

(A) Origin of the Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS)

Working with the U.S. Department of Transportation, an Oxford-trained neurosurgeon, AK Ommaya, devised an experiment to measure the amount of rotational acceleration required to reach the threshold of brain injury with adult Rhesus monkeys as subjects. As reviewed by R Uscinski:

"A contoured fiberglass chair was built, mounted on wheels, and placed on tracks with a piston behind it. The monkeys were strapped into the chair with their heads free to rotate in such a way that there would be no impact. The piston then impacted the chair, simulating a rear-end motor vehicle collision. The experiment was photographed with a high-speed camera, allowing calculations of generated rotational accelerations. Ommaya was able to demonstrate that a rotational acceleration of 40,000 radians/second (squared) was sufficient to produce intracranial injury in 19 of the animals, with 11 (57.9%) of them also demonstrating neck injuries. Then, using the scaling parameters, he estimated that less rotational acceleration would be required to produce concussion in the larger human brain, perhaps on the order of 6,000 to 7,000 radians/second (squared)"(5).

Calculations were based on the same laws as described in classical Newtonian physics, as applied to movements of planetary bodies, that force is the product of mass and acceleration.

Ommaya's experiments were published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1968 (6). In 1971 Guthkelch reported on the first diagnosed case of SBS in which he hypothesized that subdural hematomas could be caused by manually shaking an infant without the head impacting on any surface (7). One year later Caffey, a radiologist, alluded to the parent-infant stress syndrome with manual shaking causing intracranial injury in the form of subdural hematoma and/or retinal hemorrhages of infants. (8) Two additional papers published by Caffey over the next two years emphasized shaking as a means of inflicting intracranial bleeding in children (9,10). It is important to note that each of these four papers referred to Ommaya's publication of 1968 as justification for this concept. This was in spite of the fact that Caffey, in a phone consultation with Ommaya, had been assured by Ommaya that his monkey tests could not be used to support the SBS hypothesis.

After publication of these four papers, the term Shaken Baby Syndrome became widely accepted as a clinical diagnosis for inflicted (non-accidental) head injury in infants in which the findings of subdural (brain) hemorrhages and/or retinal hemorrhages became accepted as exclusively diagnostic of SBS in the absence of known major accidental trauma and remains so today in hospital emergency rooms..

(B) SBS Theory Irreconcilable with the Weakness of the Human Infant's Neck

From its origins, the SBS has been based on the assumption that a parent or caretaker, becoming irritated over a baby's prolonged fussiness and crying, loses self-control and, grasping the infant by the chest or heels, shakes the infant with such violence that any onlooker would recognize it as excessive and dangerous. It is true that shaking does sometimes take place when an infant collapses and stops breathing, which is a common presentation in many of these cases. In such situations a panicky parent, usually untrained in resuscitation, may pick up an infant and (not knowing what else to do) mildly shakes an infant that has just gone into respiratory arrest. However, these instances do not in any sense constitute SBS.

As pointed out in the Uscinski report (5), the brain of an infant is nearly seven times larger and heavier than that of a monkey. In addition, adult monkeys are known to be incredibly strong, approximately four times stronger than humans. There would be no comparison, therefore, between the neck muscle strength of an adult monkey and that of an infant, barely able to hold up his or her head by age six months. Consequently, if such violent shaking were actually taking place, It follows that the incidence of neck injuries in the SBS should be exponentially greater than the 59.7 percent in Ommaya's monkey experiment. With these facts in mind, consider the following:

'Most SBS cases in the USA take place during the first six months of life, when there are negligible infant neck muscles. As will be shown further on, the major impact of violent shaking would fall at the junction between the base of the skull and brainstem area and upper cervical spinal cord. In most if not all instances this would result in instant death or paraplegia (spinal paralysis) from brain stem and/or cervical spinal cord injuries.

'Biomechanical research literature consistently reports findings that infant subdural hemorrhages in a 2-yr.-old child can not take place below a range of 85-120 g's (gravities) of force, while a 2-yr.-old child's neck, spinal cord, or brain stem would lethally fail if subjected to a 9-10 g's of shaking force (11-19).

'In view of these considerations, one would expect a far greater incidence of severe cervical skeletal and spinal cord injuries in infants than took place in the monkeys, and yet this type of injury has rarely if ever been documented in any SBS case to date. In view of these facts, the Shaken Baby Syndrome theory defies both reason and common observation. As a simple statement, it is physiologically impossible.

'As a final observation concerning "Non-Accidental Trauma," in which it is assumed that there is a head impact in the process of shaking, or a direct impact to the head by the caretaker, there must be substantiating evidence in the forms of head/scalp bruising and/ or subgaleal (scalp) hematoma in order to justify the diagnosis of NAI. Without such evidence, the diagnosis of NAT would merely be undocumented speculation.

Reflecting these considerations, F.A. Bandak, Ph.D., a biomechanical research scientist and...