Charlie Gard has passed

[SassyIrishLass]

Hands you another five katyushas.

Says the moron who can't even use the quote function properly. I think this thread is above your pay grade.

I started this thread, moron.

Take your socialised medicine and health care and stick it up your socialist ass.

 

[flacaltenn]

[

No -- of course.. It's all about FAIRNESS and EQUALITY of treatment. If word got out that baby was saved, by Gawdly -- they MIGHT have other Brits demanding that Brit Heath cover the treatment.

THAT -- would be unacceptable to the Gate Keepers.. Or should I say "Death Panel"....

Saved from what? Are you a doctor?

Saved from the progress of a disease that a MONTH AGO -- MIGHT have been arrested by an American doctor on a trial program. You know that -- why are you dogging me? That doctor suggested a 15 to 50% chance of stopping and reversing the disease with cutting edge gene therapy..

 

[DarkFury]

[

No -- of course.. It's all about FAIRNESS and EQUALITY of treatment. If word got out that baby was saved, by Gawdly -- they MIGHT have other Brits demanding that Brit Heath cover the treatment.

THAT -- would be unacceptable to the Gate Keepers.. Or should I say "Death Panel"....

Saved from what? Are you a doctor?

Saved from the progress of a disease that a MONTH AGO -- MIGHT have been arrested by an American doctor on a trial program. You know that -- why are you dogging me? That doctor suggested a 15 to 50% chance of stopping and reversing the disease with cutting edge gene therapy..

It became an issue of a government death panel wanting to publicly show its power. That should worry people more then anything.

 

[Dr Grump]

[

I started this thread, moron.

Take your socialised medicine and health care and stick it up your socialist ass.

I'm not surprised you started this lame arse thread. You can take your capitalist medicine and shove it up you big fat Deplorable arse.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

A Socialized Medicine Death Panel killed that child.

It was illness that killed the kid...here he would simply not have been seen at all ...would have died anonymous one of many poor kids who die from lack of access to treatements

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

[

No -- of course.. It's all about FAIRNESS and EQUALITY of treatment. If word got out that baby was saved, by Gawdly -- they MIGHT have other Brits demanding that Brit Heath cover the treatment.

THAT -- would be unacceptable to the Gate Keepers.. Or should I say "Death Panel"....

Saved from what? Are you a doctor?

Saved from the progress of a disease that a MONTH AGO -- MIGHT have been arrested by an American doctor on a trial program. You know that -- why are you dogging me? That doctor suggested a 15 to 50% chance of stopping and reversing the disease with cutting edge gene therapy..

That is hoax medical science

 

[PredFan]

A Socialized Medicine Death Panel killed that child.

It was illness that killed the kid...here he would simply not have been seen at all ...would have died anonymous one of many poor kids who die from lack of access to treatements

Typical bull shit.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

[

No -- of course.. It's all about FAIRNESS and EQUALITY of treatment. If word got out that baby was saved, by Gawdly -- they MIGHT have other Brits demanding that Brit Heath cover the treatment.

THAT -- would be unacceptable to the Gate Keepers.. Or should I say "Death Panel"....

Saved from what? Are you a doctor?

Saved from the progress of a disease that a MONTH AGO -- MIGHT have been arrested by an American doctor on a trial program. You know that -- why are you dogging me? That doctor suggested a 15 to 50% chance of stopping and reversing the disease with cutting edge gene therapy..

You are misinformed.

A cruel and ignorant campaign | MelaniePhillips.com

The hospital statement contains two particularly devastating passages. The first leaves the reputation of Professor Hirano in shreds.

“Professor Hirano (“the Professor”), whose laboratory research has an international reputation, is very well known to the experts at GOSH and he communicated with them about NBT treatment for Charlie at the very end of December. In January, GOSH invited the Professor to come and see Charlie. That invitation remained open at all times but was not taken up until 18 July after being extended, once again, this time by the Court.

“When the hospital was informed that the Professor had new laboratory findings causing him to believe NBT would be more beneficial to Charlie than he had previously opined, GOSH’s hope for Charlie and his parents was that that optimism would be confirmed.”

That claim of new research evidence was why the parents returned to court and re-opened the case. The judge said he was eager to hear of this new evidence and hoped it would enable him to reverse his previous ruling. The GOSH statement, however, continues:

“It was, therefore, with increasing surprise and disappointment that the hospital listened to the Professor’s fresh evidence to the Court. On 13 July he stated that not only had he not visited the hospital to examine Charlie but in addition, he had not read Charlie’s contemporaneous medical records or viewed Charlie’s brain imaging or read all of the second opinions about Charlie’s condition (obtained from experts all of whom had taken the opportunity to examine him and consider his records) or even read the Judge’s decision made on 11 April.

“Further, GOSH was concerned to hear the Professor state, for the first time, whilst in the witness box, that he retains a financial interest in some of the NBT compounds he proposed prescribing for Charlie. Devastatingly, the information obtained since 13 July gives no cause for optimism. Rather, it confirms that whilst NBT may well assist others in the future, it cannot and could not have assisted Charlie.”

In other words, there never was any hope for Charlie – and the claim that
fresh research evidence provided some new hope was wholly without foundation and came from someone who had never even examined the child.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

A Socialized Medicine Death Panel killed that child.

It was illness that killed the kid...here he would simply not have been seen at all ...would have died anonymous one of many poor kids who die from lack of access to treatements

The child has been used as a political football by those who oppose a humane health care system.

 

[koshergrl]

A Socialized Medicine Death Panel killed that child.

It was illness that killed the kid...here he would simply not have been seen at all ...would have died anonymous one of many poor kids who die from lack of access to treatements

The child has been used as a political football by those who oppose a humane health care system.

Denying parents the ability to seek cutting edge treatment for their children isn't humane.

 

[koshergrl]

[

No -- of course.. It's all about FAIRNESS and EQUALITY of treatment. If word got out that baby was saved, by Gawdly -- they MIGHT have other Brits demanding that Brit Heath cover the treatment.

THAT -- would be unacceptable to the Gate Keepers.. Or should I say "Death Panel"....

Saved from what? Are you a doctor?

Saved from the progress of a disease that a MONTH AGO -- MIGHT have been arrested by an American doctor on a trial program. You know that -- why are you dogging me? That doctor suggested a 15 to 50% chance of stopping and reversing the disease with cutting edge gene therapy..

You are misinformed.

A cruel and ignorant campaign | MelaniePhillips.com

The hospital statement contains two particularly devastating passages. The first leaves the reputation of Professor Hirano in shreds.

“Professor Hirano (“the Professor”), whose laboratory research has an international reputation, is very well known to the experts at GOSH and he communicated with them about NBT treatment for Charlie at the very end of December. In January, GOSH invited the Professor to come and see Charlie. That invitation remained open at all times but was not taken up until 18 July after being extended, once again, this time by the Court.

“When the hospital was informed that the Professor had new laboratory findings causing him to believe NBT would be more beneficial to Charlie than he had previously opined, GOSH’s hope for Charlie and his parents was that that optimism would be confirmed.”

That claim of new research evidence was why the parents returned to court and re-opened the case. The judge said he was eager to hear of this new evidence and hoped it would enable him to reverse his previous ruling. The GOSH statement, however, continues:

“It was, therefore, with increasing surprise and disappointment that the hospital listened to the Professor’s fresh evidence to the Court. On 13 July he stated that not only had he not visited the hospital to examine Charlie but in addition, he had not read Charlie’s contemporaneous medical records or viewed Charlie’s brain imaging or read all of the second opinions about Charlie’s condition (obtained from experts all of whom had taken the opportunity to examine him and consider his records) or even read the Judge’s decision made on 11 April.

“Further, GOSH was concerned to hear the Professor state, for the first time, whilst in the witness box, that he retains a financial interest in some of the NBT compounds he proposed prescribing for Charlie. Devastatingly, the information obtained since 13 July gives no cause for optimism. Rather, it confirms that whilst NBT may well assist others in the future, it cannot and could not have assisted Charlie.”

In other words, there never was any hope for Charlie – and the claim that
fresh research evidence provided some new hope was wholly without foundation and came from someone who had never even examined the child.

Propaganda to justify denying treatment.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

[

No -- of course.. It's all about FAIRNESS and EQUALITY of treatment. If word got out that baby was saved, by Gawdly -- they MIGHT have other Brits demanding that Brit Heath cover the treatment.

THAT -- would be unacceptable to the Gate Keepers.. Or should I say "Death Panel"....

Saved from what? Are you a doctor?

Saved from the progress of a disease that a MONTH AGO -- MIGHT have been arrested by an American doctor on a trial program. You know that -- why are you dogging me? That doctor suggested a 15 to 50% chance of stopping and reversing the disease with cutting edge gene therapy..

You are misinformed.

A cruel and ignorant campaign | MelaniePhillips.com

The hospital statement contains two particularly devastating passages. The first leaves the reputation of Professor Hirano in shreds.

“Professor Hirano (“the Professor”), whose laboratory research has an international reputation, is very well known to the experts at GOSH and he communicated with them about NBT treatment for Charlie at the very end of December. In January, GOSH invited the Professor to come and see Charlie. That invitation remained open at all times but was not taken up until 18 July after being extended, once again, this time by the Court.

“When the hospital was informed that the Professor had new laboratory findings causing him to believe NBT would be more beneficial to Charlie than he had previously opined, GOSH’s hope for Charlie and his parents was that that optimism would be confirmed.”

That claim of new research evidence was why the parents returned to court and re-opened the case. The judge said he was eager to hear of this new evidence and hoped it would enable him to reverse his previous ruling. The GOSH statement, however, continues:

“It was, therefore, with increasing surprise and disappointment that the hospital listened to the Professor’s fresh evidence to the Court. On 13 July he stated that not only had he not visited the hospital to examine Charlie but in addition, he had not read Charlie’s contemporaneous medical records or viewed Charlie’s brain imaging or read all of the second opinions about Charlie’s condition (obtained from experts all of whom had taken the opportunity to examine him and consider his records) or even read the Judge’s decision made on 11 April.

“Further, GOSH was concerned to hear the Professor state, for the first time, whilst in the witness box, that he retains a financial interest in some of the NBT compounds he proposed prescribing for Charlie. Devastatingly, the information obtained since 13 July gives no cause for optimism. Rather, it confirms that whilst NBT may well assist others in the future, it cannot and could not have assisted Charlie.”

In other words, there never was any hope for Charlie – and the claim that
fresh research evidence provided some new hope was wholly without foundation and came from someone who had never even examined the child.

Propaganda to justify denying treatment.

What treatment ? There was no treatment. Dr Hirano had not seen the child or even read his notes. When he gave evidence he confirmed that he could not help.

 

[koshergrl]

[

No -- of course.. It's all about FAIRNESS and EQUALITY of treatment. If word got out that baby was saved, by Gawdly -- they MIGHT have other Brits demanding that Brit Heath cover the treatment.

THAT -- would be unacceptable to the Gate Keepers.. Or should I say "Death Panel"....

Saved from what? Are you a doctor?

Saved from the progress of a disease that a MONTH AGO -- MIGHT have been arrested by an American doctor on a trial program. You know that -- why are you dogging me? That doctor suggested a 15 to 50% chance of stopping and reversing the disease with cutting edge gene therapy..

You are misinformed.

A cruel and ignorant campaign | MelaniePhillips.com

The hospital statement contains two particularly devastating passages. The first leaves the reputation of Professor Hirano in shreds.

“Professor Hirano (“the Professor”), whose laboratory research has an international reputation, is very well known to the experts at GOSH and he communicated with them about NBT treatment for Charlie at the very end of December. In January, GOSH invited the Professor to come and see Charlie. That invitation remained open at all times but was not taken up until 18 July after being extended, once again, this time by the Court.

“When the hospital was informed that the Professor had new laboratory findings causing him to believe NBT would be more beneficial to Charlie than he had previously opined, GOSH’s hope for Charlie and his parents was that that optimism would be confirmed.”

That claim of new research evidence was why the parents returned to court and re-opened the case. The judge said he was eager to hear of this new evidence and hoped it would enable him to reverse his previous ruling. The GOSH statement, however, continues:

“It was, therefore, with increasing surprise and disappointment that the hospital listened to the Professor’s fresh evidence to the Court. On 13 July he stated that not only had he not visited the hospital to examine Charlie but in addition, he had not read Charlie’s contemporaneous medical records or viewed Charlie’s brain imaging or read all of the second opinions about Charlie’s condition (obtained from experts all of whom had taken the opportunity to examine him and consider his records) or even read the Judge’s decision made on 11 April.

“Further, GOSH was concerned to hear the Professor state, for the first time, whilst in the witness box, that he retains a financial interest in some of the NBT compounds he proposed prescribing for Charlie. Devastatingly, the information obtained since 13 July gives no cause for optimism. Rather, it confirms that whilst NBT may well assist others in the future, it cannot and could not have assisted Charlie.”

In other words, there never was any hope for Charlie – and the claim that
fresh research evidence provided some new hope was wholly without foundation and came from someone who had never even examined the child.

Propaganda to justify denying treatment.

What treatment ? There was no treatment. Dr Hirano had not seen the child or even read his notes. When he gave evidence he confirmed that he could not help.

[

No -- of course.. It's all about FAIRNESS and EQUALITY of treatment. If word got out that baby was saved, by Gawdly -- they MIGHT have other Brits demanding that Brit Heath cover the treatment.

THAT -- would be unacceptable to the Gate Keepers.. Or should I say "Death Panel"....

Saved from what? Are you a doctor?

Saved from the progress of a disease that a MONTH AGO -- MIGHT have been arrested by an American doctor on a trial program. You know that -- why are you dogging me? That doctor suggested a 15 to 50% chance of stopping and reversing the disease with cutting edge gene therapy..

You are misinformed.

A cruel and ignorant campaign | MelaniePhillips.com

The hospital statement contains two particularly devastating passages. The first leaves the reputation of Professor Hirano in shreds.

“Professor Hirano (“the Professor”), whose laboratory research has an international reputation, is very well known to the experts at GOSH and he communicated with them about NBT treatment for Charlie at the very end of December. In January, GOSH invited the Professor to come and see Charlie. That invitation remained open at all times but was not taken up until 18 July after being extended, once again, this time by the Court.

“When the hospital was informed that the Professor had new laboratory findings causing him to believe NBT would be more beneficial to Charlie than he had previously opined, GOSH’s hope for Charlie and his parents was that that optimism would be confirmed.”

That claim of new research evidence was why the parents returned to court and re-opened the case. The judge said he was eager to hear of this new evidence and hoped it would enable him to reverse his previous ruling. The GOSH statement, however, continues:

“It was, therefore, with increasing surprise and disappointment that the hospital listened to the Professor’s fresh evidence to the Court. On 13 July he stated that not only had he not visited the hospital to examine Charlie but in addition, he had not read Charlie’s contemporaneous medical records or viewed Charlie’s brain imaging or read all of the second opinions about Charlie’s condition (obtained from experts all of whom had taken the opportunity to examine him and consider his records) or even read the Judge’s decision made on 11 April.

“Further, GOSH was concerned to hear the Professor state, for the first time, whilst in the witness box, that he retains a financial interest in some of the NBT compounds he proposed prescribing for Charlie. Devastatingly, the information obtained since 13 July gives no cause for optimism. Rather, it confirms that whilst NBT may well assist others in the future, it cannot and could not have assisted Charlie.”

In other words, there never was any hope for Charlie – and the claim that
fresh research evidence provided some new hope was wholly without foundation and came from someone who had never even examined the child.

Propaganda to justify denying treatment.

What treatment ? There was no treatment. Dr Hirano had not seen the child or even read his notes. When he gave evidence he confirmed that he could not help.

Bullshit. The fact that he didn't come to the UK at the Hospital's bidding does not confirm he couldn't help. Nor did his testimony "confirm that he could not help". You're a liar.

 

[Moonglow]

Kids dies every hour of everyday, yet only one child get's a pseudo representation because of a healthcare system and what doctors said about the case..

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Kids dies every hour of everyday, yet only one child get's a pseudo representation because of a healthcare system and what doctors said about the case..

It's more to the point the parents had the funds to pay for the experimental treatment and were denied even trying it.

Since when does anyone have the authority to deny someone paying their own way to help their own child?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Saved from what? Are you a doctor?

Saved from the progress of a disease that a MONTH AGO -- MIGHT have been arrested by an American doctor on a trial program. You know that -- why are you dogging me? That doctor suggested a 15 to 50% chance of stopping and reversing the disease with cutting edge gene therapy..

You are misinformed.

A cruel and ignorant campaign | MelaniePhillips.com

The hospital statement contains two particularly devastating passages. The first leaves the reputation of Professor Hirano in shreds.

“Professor Hirano (“the Professor”), whose laboratory research has an international reputation, is very well known to the experts at GOSH and he communicated with them about NBT treatment for Charlie at the very end of December. In January, GOSH invited the Professor to come and see Charlie. That invitation remained open at all times but was not taken up until 18 July after being extended, once again, this time by the Court.

“When the hospital was informed that the Professor had new laboratory findings causing him to believe NBT would be more beneficial to Charlie than he had previously opined, GOSH’s hope for Charlie and his parents was that that optimism would be confirmed.”

That claim of new research evidence was why the parents returned to court and re-opened the case. The judge said he was eager to hear of this new evidence and hoped it would enable him to reverse his previous ruling. The GOSH statement, however, continues:

“It was, therefore, with increasing surprise and disappointment that the hospital listened to the Professor’s fresh evidence to the Court. On 13 July he stated that not only had he not visited the hospital to examine Charlie but in addition, he had not read Charlie’s contemporaneous medical records or viewed Charlie’s brain imaging or read all of the second opinions about Charlie’s condition (obtained from experts all of whom had taken the opportunity to examine him and consider his records) or even read the Judge’s decision made on 11 April.

“Further, GOSH was concerned to hear the Professor state, for the first time, whilst in the witness box, that he retains a financial interest in some of the NBT compounds he proposed prescribing for Charlie. Devastatingly, the information obtained since 13 July gives no cause for optimism. Rather, it confirms that whilst NBT may well assist others in the future, it cannot and could not have assisted Charlie.”

In other words, there never was any hope for Charlie – and the claim that
fresh research evidence provided some new hope was wholly without foundation and came from someone who had never even examined the child.

Propaganda to justify denying treatment.

What treatment ? There was no treatment. Dr Hirano had not seen the child or even read his notes. When he gave evidence he confirmed that he could not help.

Saved from what? Are you a doctor?

Saved from the progress of a disease that a MONTH AGO -- MIGHT have been arrested by an American doctor on a trial program. You know that -- why are you dogging me? That doctor suggested a 15 to 50% chance of stopping and reversing the disease with cutting edge gene therapy..

You are misinformed.

A cruel and ignorant campaign | MelaniePhillips.com

The hospital statement contains two particularly devastating passages. The first leaves the reputation of Professor Hirano in shreds.

“Professor Hirano (“the Professor”), whose laboratory research has an international reputation, is very well known to the experts at GOSH and he communicated with them about NBT treatment for Charlie at the very end of December. In January, GOSH invited the Professor to come and see Charlie. That invitation remained open at all times but was not taken up until 18 July after being extended, once again, this time by the Court.

“When the hospital was informed that the Professor had new laboratory findings causing him to believe NBT would be more beneficial to Charlie than he had previously opined, GOSH’s hope for Charlie and his parents was that that optimism would be confirmed.”

That claim of new research evidence was why the parents returned to court and re-opened the case. The judge said he was eager to hear of this new evidence and hoped it would enable him to reverse his previous ruling. The GOSH statement, however, continues:

“It was, therefore, with increasing surprise and disappointment that the hospital listened to the Professor’s fresh evidence to the Court. On 13 July he stated that not only had he not visited the hospital to examine Charlie but in addition, he had not read Charlie’s contemporaneous medical records or viewed Charlie’s brain imaging or read all of the second opinions about Charlie’s condition (obtained from experts all of whom had taken the opportunity to examine him and consider his records) or even read the Judge’s decision made on 11 April.

“Further, GOSH was concerned to hear the Professor state, for the first time, whilst in the witness box, that he retains a financial interest in some of the NBT compounds he proposed prescribing for Charlie. Devastatingly, the information obtained since 13 July gives no cause for optimism. Rather, it confirms that whilst NBT may well assist others in the future, it cannot and could not have assisted Charlie.”

In other words, there never was any hope for Charlie – and the claim that
fresh research evidence provided some new hope was wholly without foundation and came from someone who had never even examined the child.

Propaganda to justify denying treatment.

What treatment ? There was no treatment. Dr Hirano had not seen the child or even read his notes. When he gave evidence he confirmed that he could not help.

Bullshit. The fact that he didn't come to the UK at the Hospital's bidding does not confirm he couldn't help. Nor did his testimony "confirm that he could not help". You're a liar.

US doctor in Charlie Gard case speaks out

"Unfortunately, a MRI scan of Charlie's muscle tissue conducted in the past week has revealed that it is very unlikely that he would benefit from this treatment."

You should actually read up on stuff before you shoot your ignorant mouth off.

 

[PredFan]

A Socialized Medicine Death Panel killed that child.

It was illness that killed the kid...here he would simply not have been seen at all ...would have died anonymous one of many poor kids who die from lack of access to treatements

The child has been used as a political football by those who oppose a humane health care system.

Bull shit. He is an example of how inhumane the British system is.

 

[JoeB131]

Unbelievable. What a gross abuse of power. Welcome to Socialized medicine.

Okay, let's look what would have happened if Charlie had his issues with Corporatized Medicine.

If Charlie was one of the Americans without insurance, he'd probably have been done months ago. But let's assume that he was lucky enough to have insurance and let's assume that the insurance company didn't declare his procedure "Experimental" and decide not to fund it.

There would come a point where the big insurance companies would have declared, "Well, we've done our part. The Gards have exceeded their maximum coverage." The hospitals would have kept treating Charlie until his parents were bankrupted, and you wouldn't have a bunch of religious do-gooders raising money for them.

 

[JoeB131]

Saved from the progress of a disease that a MONTH AGO -- MIGHT have been arrested by an American doctor on a trial program. You know that -- why are you dogging me? That doctor suggested a 15 to 50% chance of stopping and reversing the disease with cutting edge gene therapy..

Might have a 15% chance of stopping a disease that already left him blind, deaf and paralyzed?

 

[flacaltenn]

[

No -- of course.. It's all about FAIRNESS and EQUALITY of treatment. If word got out that baby was saved, by Gawdly -- they MIGHT have other Brits demanding that Brit Heath cover the treatment.

THAT -- would be unacceptable to the Gate Keepers.. Or should I say "Death Panel"....

Saved from what? Are you a doctor?

Saved from the progress of a disease that a MONTH AGO -- MIGHT have been arrested by an American doctor on a trial program. You know that -- why are you dogging me? That doctor suggested a 15 to 50% chance of stopping and reversing the disease with cutting edge gene therapy..

You are misinformed.

A cruel and ignorant campaign | MelaniePhillips.com

The hospital statement contains two particularly devastating passages. The first leaves the reputation of Professor Hirano in shreds.

“Professor Hirano (“the Professor”), whose laboratory research has an international reputation, is very well known to the experts at GOSH and he communicated with them about NBT treatment for Charlie at the very end of December. In January, GOSH invited the Professor to come and see Charlie. That invitation remained open at all times but was not taken up until 18 July after being extended, once again, this time by the Court.

“When the hospital was informed that the Professor had new laboratory findings causing him to believe NBT would be more beneficial to Charlie than he had previously opined, GOSH’s hope for Charlie and his parents was that that optimism would be confirmed.”

That claim of new research evidence was why the parents returned to court and re-opened the case. The judge said he was eager to hear of this new evidence and hoped it would enable him to reverse his previous ruling. The GOSH statement, however, continues:

“It was, therefore, with increasing surprise and disappointment that the hospital listened to the Professor’s fresh evidence to the Court. On 13 July he stated that not only had he not visited the hospital to examine Charlie but in addition, he had not read Charlie’s contemporaneous medical records or viewed Charlie’s brain imaging or read all of the second opinions about Charlie’s condition (obtained from experts all of whom had taken the opportunity to examine him and consider his records) or even read the Judge’s decision made on 11 April.

“Further, GOSH was concerned to hear the Professor state, for the first time, whilst in the witness box, that he retains a financial interest in some of the NBT compounds he proposed prescribing for Charlie. Devastatingly, the information obtained since 13 July gives no cause for optimism. Rather, it confirms that whilst NBT may well assist others in the future, it cannot and could not have assisted Charlie.”

In other words, there never was any hope for Charlie – and the claim that
fresh research evidence provided some new hope was wholly without foundation and came from someone who had never even examined the child.

Absolutely NOTHING devasting there. The condition we're discussing has KNOWN progressions. And the researcher was more familiar with these facts than probably the attending physicians provided by Brit Health.

There would be NO REASON to come visit the child if the ENTIRE Brit Govt was saying no.. None whatsoever. He's not a care-taker or there to comfort parents -- he's a researcher.

If the Govt hadn't definitely RULED OUT allowing that family to travel for treatment, there WOULD have been a visit and an evaluation. Either by the Principal Investigator or one of his associates.

Furthermore -- EVEN IF -- the American Doctor wasn't gonna to get embroiled in this and COULD NOT help Charlie, YOU need to recognize that under those conditions, CHARLIE could have helped THOUSANDS of other kids with this condition. You don't really THINK. You react instinctively and politically..