Earlier today I mentioned one form of junk science. Here's another. There is no scientific basis for intracranial bleeding, retinal hemorrhages, or brain swelling being exclusively diagnostic of abuse.

Wieneke Law Office, LLC Are you a medical professional? And a scientist? I wasn’t aware you had so many degrees to debunk every thing.

So what you are saying in essence is that if I went into the ER with retinal hemorrhaging and intracranial bleeding a doctor would not be able to tell the reason

missesmysteries Wieneke Law Office, LLC I read the article, thoroughly. It states the pediatric neurologist at the time thought they should wait before jumping to abuse. And it turns out, that medical professional was correct.

:) Ange 🗨 Wieneke Law Office, LLC And current tests conclude it was not abuse. You all seem to be overlooking current medical tests and how reliable they are

missesmysteries :) Ange 🗨 Wieneke Law Office, LLC So you've literally just confirmed that you accept that what Wieneke Law Office, LLC posted initially, is correct......

Paul smith :) Ange 🗨 Wieneke Law Office, LLC She stated the tests, like ballistics, are junk science

missesmysteries Paul smith Wieneke Law Office, LLC No, that is not what her post says at all. She says there is no test to show it is exclusively abuse. Which was correct at the time of the child's trauma and is still correct today.

:) Ange 🗨 missesmysteries Wieneke Law Office, LLC Exactly! Which they even agree with themselves 😂😂