Findings of metal in the body selections2 add+internet version


Published on

About detection of illegal implants at victim number two in research, and radiological obstruction in research after by committing fraud for concealment. The axial scans parts lightning up is caused by oversampling (wrong-setting MRI), but the frontal scans definitely point out one implant. The mentioned forgoing X-ray's were CT scans and a fraud being very poor quality avoiding proof. Presentation of will follow including proof of false psychiatric procedures against the victim in the Netherlands again.

1 Comment
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Findings of metal in the body selections2 add+internet version

  1. 1. Findings of metal evidently in the body of mr. Robert Burgerhout 31-03-1959 M:Scan A_a_Z19 Scan A_a_Z25resp. MRI Abdomen CD: AAAAZ19 resp. MRI Abdomen CD: AAAAZ25Scan A_b_Z02 resp. MRI Abdomen CD: AAABZ02 Magnetic MRI DisturbanceExplanation on scan-extractions…With several professional detectors of metal we were able to positively detect severalindications of findings of metal in the body of mr. Burgerhout made of special kind of alloy(that is evidently less sensitive for magnetism and by which is less present clearly at a MRIscan). With anatomic knowledge all body-foreign objects are by the way definitly to bepointed out. Unfornately the scan form the serie are showing them sprongsgewijs, meaning anextra obstancle to read scans, and the amount of coups (scan layers) around the implant israther limited, this could have been researched extensively further. Above it also appearded,that not all scans were of the same kind of quality (resolution) qua size of the images. A majorpart of the scans is containg material from the callibration/scout series. The file extention alsohad to be added manulally, in order to be able to have a look in the scans with for instanceIrfanvieuw. By this the research has been obstructed (on purpose?), nevertheless concerningone object I was able to find a few significant scans. 1
  2. 2. 1 3 5 .A_b_Z02 A_b_Z05 A_b_Z32Above the line are starting the lumbar vertebras (5 Vertebrae Lumbalis) situated above are thethoracic vertebras being smaller. By this the lumbar vertebras are clearly to distinct from theother vertebras. The artifact is located at front close to the fourth lumbar vertebral.A_r_Z07 A_r_Z08 A_r_Z11These axial (also limited) abdomen scan indicates (possibly) this corpora aliena metal too.The MRI’s selected show an evident finding of metal in the body of mr. Burgerhout. Inspecial Scan A_b_Z02 shows that typical burning out white with a small black little edge (asin a kind of solarising) with a haze spreading around. In spite of the limited amount of coupsstill there were three available providing the finding of metal. If there were more coups wealso would have found those typical zigzag-shaped disturbances of images. Myself I haveseen several scans with metal being present, and under those series were also similar imagesas are shown above. Scan H_a_Z18 resp. MRI Hoofd CD: AAAHZ18 (Also here there were very few scans available, 2 evident scans only, and it appeared impossible to enlarge them!) When questioning Mr. Burgerhout it came out that he has a metal pin there as part of a tooth prosthesis (to be found in the upper jaw), this was - although minimalist- proving indeed the existence of metal parts in the head already. Note: Prosthesis is alsoFor compare: an other metal object found an artifact. Remarkably considering the(tooth prosthesis in his head/upper jaw): assignment from the shoulder part no scans were being made. 2
  3. 3. Because single X-ray photo’s are easily to be manipulated, I advised mr. Burgerhout to have aMRI scan to be made. Even if the radiologist wants to be compliss in medical improperbehavior by comitting onstruction in the reserach, then still a MRI scan will show somethingor another, and in consequence it will become clear to us if a false intended research had beendone in that case. Which has showed out. Selections underneath from a further metaldetection research are shown, including the objectionable report by Dr. C.Y. Nio.THIS DETECTOR IS DEFINITLY PROVING THE EXISTENCE OF METAL.This type of detector Gold Bug Pro made by Fisher Labs the detection-head has to be movedreciprocate in one way and back into the reverse direction etc. in order to detect metal.Conclusion: Metal is located in the abdomen area of mr. Burgerhout here. 3
  4. 4. ALSO THIS DETECTOR IS DEFINITLY SHOWING THE PRSENCE OF METAL.This type of detector C.S 1220XD made by C.Scope is detecting with pulse-detection withhead motionless position in order to detect eventual present metal. (Note: It is not needed tomention that Mr. Burgerhout by the way is not wearing any metal parts on his body or in hiscloths...)Conclusion: there is metal to be found near the heart-region or the shoulder-blade. 4
  5. 5. THIS DETECTOR IS ALSO DEFINITIVELY SHOWING THE PRESENCE OF METAL.This type of detector has to be used by moving the detector head reciprocate in one way andback into the reverse direction etc. in order to detect the eventual presence of traces of metal.Conclusion: Also the detector C.S 1220XD of the brand C.Scope indicates even as thedetector Dëus indeed the existence of metal near the heart-region or either near the shoulder-blade.The detector C.S 1220XD of the brand C.Scope is deflecting with a pointer, while the othertwo are expressing their detection numerically. Fact is and remains all three detectors pointedout the presence of metal. In other words: this is evidence!For control of the serie of research concerning mr. Burgerhout the efficacy of two detectorsalso have been tested on two other person, of which we know, because of a medical treatment,that metal is present in the bodies of those persons, duly noted. 5
  6. 6. The Fisher Labs metal detector detected also the so called Stent that is present in the body ofcontrol-testing person 1. This Stent was placed during a cardiologic treatment in 2010. 6
  7. 7. The metal detector from the brand Dëus also detected the neck-Prosthesis, which is present at test-person 2 in the neck. The Prosthesis was used after a cervical fracture, for namely giving relieve C7 (being crushed after an accident). In control: also this device is only detecting metal that is right close underneath the detection-head. We could have used a third test-person for the remaining detector, but to us it was clear that with the functionality of the detectors it was sufficient demonstrated: that there is metal present inside the body of Mr. Burgerhout. In the abdomen area to be precise, as also MRI scan research after showed the presence too with the magnetic disturbance that arises as consequence of the presence of metal in the MRI scanner. The actual nature and function still will have to be investigated completely, but the evidential fact remains, that with this little research an object of metal has been found, indisputable present in the abdomen-area of Mr. Burgerhout.No detection, then the meter isn’t swinging. .Underneath is following the report by Dr Van Zandvoort with an analysis of the radiologicreport by Nio. Dr. Nio is deliberately neglecting the explicit assignment for metaldetectionand is pointing (unjustified) that nowhere, but realy nowhere in the body of mr Burgerhoutartifact are to be found. Mr. Burgerhout did not supllie information or conventional photo’swhere with the presence of metal would have been excluded already. 7
  8. 8. The assignment was to research irrefuteable the presence of metal. Two (aspirant?)radiologists still to be determined have operated the MRI scanner. Dr. C.Y. Nio only was thejudging radiologist, and has not madse the MRI scan himself. Nevertheless with the materialavailable the presence of metal (body foreign) was to be indicated. The a priori denying of thepresence of metal in the body by Dr. Nio is reproachable. 8
  9. 9. Translation of the letter by Dr. R.F.M. van Zandvoort april 3rd 2012Meant for the treating physician of mr Burgerhout coming with the report of RCD Echt.Dr. Keulen clinicLetter to the treating physician of mr. R.J.W. BurgerhoutTilburg, April 3rd 2012Dear Collegue,On 25-03-2012 we have done a MRI scan on mr. R.J.W. Burgerhout, born 31-03-1959, livingat , in , MRI scans of the Neckvertebrals, the brains and the adomen area,for the sake of proving of metal parts.Resuming: - see attachmentsWith Peer-esteem, R.F.M. van Zandvoort, physicianAttachments: results-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Translation of the letter (shown on the next page) by Dr. R.F.M. van Zandvoort april 3rd 2012Meant for mr. Burgerhout comingcoming with the report of RDC Echt.Dr. Keulen clinicMr. R.J.W. BurgerhoutTilburg, April 3rd 2012Dear mister Burgerhout,Recently there were performed three MRI scans on you.Dr. Nio, the radiologist, has judged these scans.The scan of the neck and the lower part of the face did not show any metal parts. Thevertebrals are normal and some intervertebrals disks are bulging without this is causingpressure on the nerves. Above the age of 50 this is a normal aging phenomenon.The MRI of the brains did not show metal fragments either and the brains appear as normal.The MRI of the abdomen also did not show any deviations to the organs and the veins. Alsohere no metal parts were found.In case you would like a further explanation, you may reach me by telephone on tuesdays,thursdays and frydays between 9.30 and 10.00 hrs. For urgent questions you may alwayscontact with the assistents and in case when needed you will be called back by me as soon aspossible. Ofcourse you can use our e-mail servoce also: info@keulenkliniek.nlWith kind regards and good luck!R.F.M. van Zandvoort, physicianAttachments: results 9
  10. 10. 10
  11. 11. 11
  12. 12. 12
  13. 13. Requested Research: Gevraagd Onderzoek:MRI scan of the cervical vertebrals date MRI scan of the neck vertebrals date 25.03.201225.03.2012 (by RDC Echt): (by RDC Echt): The assignment was STRICKTLY AND JUST the proving of metal parts and nothing else! Possibillity of metal which already had beenThe posbillity of metal has been excluded excluded on usual (!?!) photos!?! Mr. Burgerhoutalready on conventional photo’s already by the hasn’t supplied any information about this, for heway. came for metaldetection-research by MRI. Where dot they get that false information from? Please proof! Report:Report: MRI neck column vertebral with also a vieuw fromMRI cervical column vertebral with also sight underneath: sagittal T1 and T2, axial T1 and T2.from underneath: sagittal T1 and T2, axial T1 Scans in vertical layers from the side and inand T2. horizintal layers from the bottom in sensitivity- measurement reach T1 and T2. Strong forwardEnfored cervical lordosis with normal distance curve in the neck with normal mutual gravitation of the neck vertebrals without sagging (hernia). Nomutual position of the cervical vertebrals indications for a hernia. But indeed some bows ofwithout loss of height. No indications for a the verdetebral disks between C4-C5, C5-C6 andhernia. But indeed certain bows of the disci on C6-C7. Normal neck vertebral-canal with an ampleC4-C5, C5-C6 en C6-C7. Normal cervical flushing of feeding liquid in the neck vertebras andcolumn vertebral with ample liquor circulation without damages. And that all they did were ableof the cervical myleum without myelopathy. to see indeed . . . ? Normal transit from the neck toNormal cranio-cervical transit. the skull. Nowhere are artifacts recognized in consequence caused by metal. The question was ifNowehere are artifacts recognized caused by there was any metal to be found, but that questionmetal. has not been answered. They only urged to state to see no artifacts, while that wasn’t the question. MRI brains: from the side T1, T2 and T2 flair.MRI brains: Normal division of the gray and white matter ofTransversal T1, T2 en T2 flair. the brains with a normal aspect of the spaceNormal spreading of signal intensity of grey outside the little and large brains. Symmetric not-and white matter with a normal aspect of the widen liquid-chambers with a in the middlede extra-cerebellair and extra cerebral liquor- situated fourth brian-fluid-chamber. Nospaces. Symmetric not-widen ventricle-system indications for artifacts as a result of metal. Againin the median-line with a median situated the answer to the question if there is any metalfourth ventricel. No clues for arifacts as a inside the head is avoided. Note: indeed there isresult of metal. metal to be fopund in the head, toably being a toothprothesis. It is unthinkable that information has been kept away and that the scans have to be reexamined ,provided that the rather poor quality of these scans is making this possible... MRI abdomen: Parallel to the axis in the length T1, T2 and T2 fiesta, and from front T2 fiesta. NoMRI abdomen: metal artifacts. There is definitely the presence ofAxial T1, T2 and T2 fiesta, coronal T2 fiesta metal to be found! The nature of the metal present (artifact) has not been examined yet. Dr. Nio isNo metal artifacts. Next as far as the scan attempting at priori to obstruct the research.sequences allow this no severe pathology Further as far as the upfollowing scan-images arecould be recognized to parenchymal organs. allowing toelaten this no severe pathology could be recognized to degenerating organs.Normal kaliber of the aorta. Thedeficient scan reserach is onderkent hereNo free liquids. implicit? Normal section seize of the aorta. No free accumulation of liquor. 13
  14. 14. Conclusion:As well cerebral as cervical as also abdominal no artifacts in consequence of metal corporaaliena. With acknowledgement for fererral, Dr. C.Y. Nio, RadioloogN.B.: Conversion of the Report by Dr. C.Y. Nio to plain English has been done step by stepfollowing thye text, with in Italic written analytical critics in comment directly after about.The report in itself is and appeared inferior in quality even as the MRI scans themselves. Thescans occupy relatively not much coups in research, and the head scans were in a rather lowresolution, so it showed out they could not be enlarged so much. Salient detail is that Dr. C.Y.Nio notably recongnizes himself implicit in his writing the limitations of the amount of coupsin the research on the body of mr. Burgerhout in order to investigated research after severepathologic diseases! “As far as the sequences are allow this…” Normally one first makes ascout-scan, whereafter on slections of a scan in high resolution is to be made.Fact remains that at least one metal object definitely can be found in the MRI-scan as well asin the metal detection research. Seen the fact that Dr. C.Y. Nio starts the report with thestatement that in the forgoing research middels gebruikelijker (röntgen/Ct Onderzoek) alreadywas found that there would be no metal present, while that information precisely was notcoming from mr. Burgerhout, the fals intention to deny at priori is also clear. Above that if italready has become defined that there is no metal present in the body of mr. Burgerhout, whythey still would perform especially a deficient MRI scan? Next to the denial of at least metalin the abdomena, and the tooth-prothesis artifact, the report is also not answering to thequestion of mr. Burgerhout and the request of research from Dr. Van Zantvoort, al the timethere is written negatively all the time regarding the existence of artifacts in stead of metal.Dr. C.Y. Nio is speaking falsely in report! This is a serious reproachful matter, and I identifybeing in default and false acting / inaccuracy in writing, and also not following up theassignment to research for metal parts as was asked by the client and/or the clinic.In addition on the MRI rtesearch we again did a little metal-detection-research, the serieunderneath is showing the re-finding of metal in the abdomen area at mr. Burgerhout by metaldetection, but also we detected metal in the schoulder-area, what the scan-serie by inspite ofthe assignment MRI Echt even did not examined. We use the Garrett Ace 250 detector in pin-pointer position in order to detect metal. The area of measurement of the pin-pointer isdirectly under the steel and is detecting from that spot. The Garret Ace 250 is measuring here a 20 Ct coin which is put down on the lawn. (In pin-pointer-position one does not need to move the detector reciprocate in order to detect metal.) The Garret Ace 250 can also define to what depth (distance to the detector-head) the metal is located, but the depth is not easy to define inside human tissue, for like as detecting metal in wet mud is being more difficult than in dryThat little squares-line indicates metal- sand this in compare to mention. In thisdetection. When that deflectings metal is research we choose just to detect evidentlydetected. Pay attention to that line on the metal in the body of mr. Burgerhout.detector at the photos shown below. 14
  15. 15. Next to the already found corpora aliena (body-foreign) metal placed median in the abdomen,there is also metal in the shoulder-area to be found, namely in specially on the right-backside.`Concerning the detection of eventual other metal next to the present pivot tooth (prostheses) isdifficult to define because of the smaller volume of the head in comparison to the abdomen.The Garett Ace 250 is surfacing a too large area for this in detection. Actually we shouldwork with a smaller range in measurement-area, but the detection force of that again is morelimited. Anyhow after the abdomen research als metal was found in the shoulder area.CONCLUSION: THE SCANS SHOW OUT DEFINITELY THAT THERE IS METAL IN THE BODYPRESENT. EVEN AS METAL DETECORS ALREADY TOONDEN; THE SELECTED SCANS WERE THEMOST EVIDENT TO TONEN. IF THE RADIOLOGICAL CENTRE / THE RADIOLOGIST DID NOT SEETHESE EASY TO BE FOUND SCANS, THEN THIS IS BLAMEABLE IN ABILITY, EITHER PURPOSEBECAUSE OF / SEEN THE EXPLICIT ASSIGNMENT OF RESEARCH; REPROACHABLE.Siegfried van Hoek. 15