As you may or may not know, one of the physicians hired by the Schindler family claims that Terri can recover, and that he has treated patients worse off than Terri that have recovered. That physician is named Dr. William Hammesfahr. He also claims he has been nominated for the Nobel Prize.
Below the fold I show how, in my opinion, his claims regarding the Nobel Prize are completely false. I am not writing this as a personal attack on the Doctor who, I am sure, has done good things for many patients. However, his claim that he has been nominated for the Nobel Prize was used repeatedly by Sean Hannity last night, and by many others, as "proof" that Judge Greer and the doctors who say Terri is in PVS must have no idea what they are talking about.
It would have been nice to see the MSM and the pundits actually take two minutes to check his claim before perpetuating it. All of the info below can be found easily...
First, credit where credit is due: Media Matters has a great piece today concerning the controversies surrounding Dr. Hammesfahr.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200503220002
For me, it was yesterday, while looking through the actual court filings in the Schiavo case on the great abstractappeal.com website, that I noticed this in Judge Greer's 11/22/02 court order regarding Dr. Hammesfahr: "A lot of the time also was spent regarding his nominations for a Nobel Prize. While he certainly is a self-promoter and should have had for the court's review a copy of the letter from the Nobel committee in Stockholm, Sweden, the truth of the matter is that he is probably the only person involved in these proceedings who had a United States Congressman recommend him for such an award. Whether the committee `accepted' the nomination, `received' the nomination or whatever, it is not that significant. What is significant, however, and what undemises [sic] his creditability is that he did not present to this court any evidence other than his generalized statements as to the efficacy of his therapy on brain damaged individuals like Terry Schiavo." http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/trialctorder11-02.txt
I read this, and immediately thought this was a interesting rebuke of a Doctor's claimed credentials, but I decided to look further into it and came up with this:
Dr. Hammesfahr indeed does claim that he was nominated for the Nobel Prize in 1999 for his work in medicine and physiology. It states this right on the first page of his website (http://www.hnionline.com/) for the Hammesfahr Neurological Institute (which notes that the phrase "God Leaves No One Behind" is their mission statement (take from that what you will!)).
Dr. Hammesfahr also kindly has a copy of the letter by which he was "nominated" for the Nobel Prize included in his website here: http://www.hnionline.com/nobel_prize_nomination.htm. As you will see, he was nominated by Congressman Michael Bilirakis.
Now, here's the rub: According to the Nobel Prize website, only the following people have the right to nominate someone for a Nobel Prize in Medicine and Physiology: Members of the Nobel Assembly at Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm; Swedish and foreign members of the medical class of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences; Nobel Laureates in Physiology or Medicine; Members of the Nobel Committee not qualified under part 1 above; Holders of established posts as professors at the faculties of medicine in Sweden and holders of similar posts at the faculties of medicine or similar institutions in Denmark, Finland, Iceland and Norway; Holders of similar posts at no fewer than six other faculties of medicine selected by the Assembly, with a view to ensuring the appropriate distribution of the task among various countries and their seats of learning; and Practitioners of natural sciences whom the Assembly may otherwise see fit to approach. http://nobelprize.org/medicine/nomination/nominators.html
Clearly, Congressman Bilirikas cannot nominate anyone for the Nobel Prize in Medicine and Physiology. Furthermore, the site explains that "the prize-awarder in Stockholm (The Nobel Assembly at Karolinska Institutet) sends out invitations to about 3,000 people who are allowed to propose winners. These are mainly members of the Nobel Assembly, previous prize winners, and a selection of professors at universities around the world." http://nobelprize.org/medicine/nomination/index.html
Again, I do not believe that Congressman Bilirikas would have been receiving one of these letters. But, even if Congressman Bilirikas HAD a right to nominate Dr. Hammesfahr for the Prize, or, even if Dr. Hammesfahr WAS nominated by someone who had a right to, then Dr. Hammesfahr would STILL not be able to claim that he is a Nobel Prize nominated doctor. That is because all Prize nominations are kept secret for 50 years.
The Nobel site's FAQ section further explains (http://nobelprize.org/help/faq/#2): "According to the Statutes of the Nobel Foundation, information about the nominations is not to be disclosed, publicly or privately, for a period of fifty years. The restriction not only concerns the nominees and nominators, but also investigations and opinions in the awarding of a prize. Nomination information older than fifty years is public."
I am not going to go as a far as state that Dr. Hammesfahr is perpetuating a fraud on the public by making his claims regarding the Nobel Prize (although it can be argued). My only point is that this information is easily available and more members of the media should do their job: report the facts. That means taking the time to determine what the facts are and then present them to the public. There are serious grounds upon which to challenge Dr. Hammesfahr's claimed credentials, and it is irresponsible for anyone to perpetuate those claims without at least noting that they are flawed.
This is part of a larger failure of the MSM to get to the facts in the Schiavio matter and not allow falsehoods and mischaracterizations to go unchallenged.
Finally, the Nobel Prize is a very serious and important award, and no person should be allowed to claim they were even nominated for it without at least a cursory look into whether such claims can be properly backed up.