Reply to Gwyneth Paltrow court case

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Gwyneth Paltrow court case"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I don't think Paltrow was drunk or skiing with her ski's 18" apart - someone came up behind her maybe trying to stop but couldn't - hence the noises she heard behind her. His skis then came onto and between hers causing her to widen her stance. She then loses her balance and falls - and he trips up and goes flying to land on his chest laying head down the slope causing a concussion and rib fractures. When your skis get tangled up, the more experienced and downhill skier who is not going very fast snd is in control can fall easier and the fast moving out of control one goes flying. I'm a skier and a physician. I can picture GP's story. I've skied at DV with my 3 kids. They each had their own instructor - but I did not ski with them. I'm not sure where everyone is seeing there were 6 instructors. There were just instructors for each kid - and the instructors were watching the kids. GP didn't have or need an instructor. She has stuck to her story. He seems to be unreliable, admitting that he "often misspeaks"! I hope no one is found at fault - accidents like this can happen and no one was terribly negligent. Waste of time and money - the whole case and counter suit.[/quote]

Great, since you are a physician, I’m sure you believe in ebm and believe peer reviewed literature over anecdotal evidence. Refer back to the poster who posted a link to an article that studied skier-skier collisions and concluded that the striking skier is less likely to be injured than the struck skier

https://www.injuryjournal.com/article/S0020-1383(22)00356-4/pdf

I’m also a physician and a skier, and in the case of a dispute between two skiers where one is injured and the other is not, the injured one is the one most likely struck from behind. I also have skied in deer valley with my kids and I actually live 3 miles away. The word around town is that initially the accident seemed minor. I’m sure as an experienced physician you know that sometimes people underestimate their injuries and claim they feel fine even though they are not. The ski instructor identified GP to the plaintiff as if to say, hey, lucky you, you were in a collision with a celebrity. This is why there is a clear protocol to stop, exchange information, wait for ski patrol to arrive before skiing away. The instructors should know this protocol but they are not responsible for enforcing it. Had this been followed, we would know more. There is a reason why the instructor’s scenario was animated, but GP’s was not. They probably tried, but couldn’t make it seem plausible.

You are right, it’s a waste of time now since there is no additional information beyond one witness. Had that witness been in GP’s favor, I’m sure people would have believed him, but apparently not when he is in the other guy’s favor. The only part that makes him more plausible is that he is on record telling people at the time of the accident that GP was the one who hit him. [/quote]

I find it strange and upsetting that as a physician you rely so strongly on peer reviewed literature that you cannot comprehend another cause/outcome. I am thankful to not be your patient. Surely you know that ailments may present differently in different people. Women are more often misdiagnosed, and you seem to have it out for Gwyneth. [/quote]

Recollections and opinions may vary... :mrgreen: [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics