Originally Posted by
Clinton McKenzie
andrewr’s implied statement that I had undone surgery involving the blood supply to the brain, when that is simply not true.
I get the feeling that is the statement of a lawyer trying to find a loophole, rather than what doctors would view as involving the blood supply to the brain. You said it was the cranial blood supply, which in my understanding
is the blood supply to (parts of) the brain. Are the vessels on the inside or outside of your skull? I don't think there are many major vessels inside the skull that are not somehow involved in blood supply to the brain. And just because it wasn't IN the brain doesn't mean it wasn't blood supply TO the brain.
You said the potential outcome if it was untreated could have been severe. How is that the case if it did not involve the blood supply to the brain? The severity of possible future complications probably correlates with the severity of outcomes if it was untreated, or complications during the surgery. The main question would seem to be the probability.