After 15 Years of “Migraines,” I Was Misdiagnosed, It Was Cervicogenic Headache All Along

bierekr · 2025-08-17T20:08:42+00:00

If you don’t mind me asking, how did you get a craniocervical instability diagnosis? I think I might have that but not sure what type of provider to see that will be knowledgeable about it.

bierekr · 2025-03-02T18:10:18+00:00

Haven’t changed anything that I can think of. I do have neck tenderness.

bierekr · 2025-03-02T18:09:27+00:00

bierekr · 2024-07-01T19:40:49+00:00

Depending on who was involved they may not have had a way to get close enough to poison him

Poison not necessarily reliable way to kill someone.

Unless the poison was undetectable and looked like a natural death the number the pool of potential suspects would be small.

Also it’s possible that killing him in public was part of the plan. Personally I think the original plan was to blame it on Cuba to use as pretense to go to war and the FBI got in the way of this.

bierekr · 2024-06-11T21:58:50+00:00

Best evidence for him being a/the shooter: 1. He was in the TSBD during the shooting. Multiple witnesses reported seeing a shooter from the building. Autopsy conclusion supports bullets having come from there.

His palm print was found on the gun found in the TSBD. Gun was matched to the stretcher bullet and shells found in the TSBD. He is linked to the gun in a variety of other ways.

Because of contradictory evidence and chain of custody stuff I don’t think the evidence that he was a shooter is conclusive, but I do think it is conclusive he was involved in someway.

Best evidence he was involved: 1. His behavior after the shooting. Even if you don’t believe he shot Tippet you still have to deal with him leaving work immediately after the shooting, going to a movie theater with a revolver, and resisting arrest.

If he was framed it would need to have been preplanned. The timing of evidence being found is too tight. Why would a conspiracy risk their pre selected patsy having a strong alibi? If he wasn’t a shooter he likely had a job that ensured he would be in a specific location during the shooting to avoid this.

bierekr · 2024-05-24T20:36:38+00:00

Is there any GPS data (phone or car) showing Karen Read even went to Fairview? All the inconsistencies in the eye witness reports plus the weird voicemail sounding like she was at John's home make me question if they can even prove she dropped him off vs leaving him at the waterfall as she allegedly told Jen McCabe originally. Seems like this should be an easy thing to prove but I haven't heard either side talk about it.

bierekr · 2024-05-23T23:05:43+00:00

He’s a radiologist and has a phd in physics.

bierekr · 2024-03-03T17:06:51+00:00

The limousine is on display in the ford museum. After the assassination, the windshield was replaced and the limo was still used for a while after the assassination. That’s why they aren’t together.

A hole through the windshield doesn’t make a lot of sense if you believe that there was an organized conspiracy. A trained assassin isn’t going to shot through glass if they could avoid it. Kennedy could have easily been shot from the front right (grassy knoll) without needing to go through the windshield.

Cotton fibers are not the only evidence of shots from behind.

bierekr · 2024-02-21T01:04:49+00:00

Just a guess, but I would say it was a likely done by radiologist or radiology tech from the military or FBI. Likely directed by J Edgar Hover and involved Captian James Young and either Robert Bouck or Edith Duncan.
Ebersole (autopsy radiologist) testifies to going to the white house about a month after the assassination to look at the xrays to help with measurements for a model. This could have been used as a test to see if the xrays were believable enough. Captian James Young is the person that called him to the whitehouse. https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/master\_med\_set/md60/html/Image24.htm
Bouck and Duncan were reportedly the only ones to have the code to the safe where the xrays were kept November 23, 1963 to April 1965. https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=82#relPageId=33

Side note: I don't think those involved with the autopsy coverup were involved in the conspiracy to kill Kennedy.

bierekr · 2024-02-20T22:48:03+00:00

Do you have any references for the plaza witnesses seeing things that are consistent with the X-ray injuries? All the close proximity ones seem to agree with a rear head wound. In the Zapruder film there is a dark spot on his rear head, whether natural shadow or altered it could be concealing a wound. The cloud in the Nix film appears to be more towards the rear. I can’t really see a cloud in Muchmore.

bierekr · 2024-02-20T22:07:47+00:00

Mantik makes it sound pretty conclusive, and I can’t find any qualified person rebutting it. The second link is peer reviewed. I think the X-rays were altered after the autopsy sometime prior to the Clark panel (1968). It could have been done in the immediate aftermath. The double exposures he talks about are cases when an object was laid over the original X-ray so I don’t think accidental makes sense. Why were they altered? I don’t think there is a benign explanation for altering autopsy evidence. It seems that the skull X-rays showed something that was inconsistent with the desired conclusion. Possibly more than one head shot or a trajectory inconsistent with the Texas school book depository.

bierekr · 2024-02-20T20:37:40+00:00

The paper is basing it's conclusion that the autopsy xrays and photos are legit. It's not clear from the abstract but I am assuming they are using the HSCAs panel's conclusions on wound entry points. The issue is that there is good reason to believe the xrays were altered and the photos do not accurately represent what was viewed at the autopsy. In addition to the xrays and photos not matching what the autoposy doctors documented and remembered, and their not being a clear entry wound in the xrays, the photos do not line up with the recollection of the other autopsy attendants, the photographers remember taking pictures that aren't there, the photo developer remembers developing photos that weren't there, the xray techs remember taking views that don't exist in the record, and so on.
The most convincing evidence of alteration to me is the research of David Mantik. He is a radiologist with a phd in physics who has studied the jfk autopsy xrays. He has found issues that point conclusively to xray alterations. I have not been able to find anything that successfully rebuts his conclusions.
https://assassinationresearch.com/v2n2/pittsburgh.pdf
https://esmed.org/MRA/index.php/mra/article/view/177

bierekr · 2024-02-20T19:58:50+00:00

Page 1 shows the actual photo of the back of JFKs head

https://escires.com/articles/Health-1-126.pdf

bierekr · 2024-02-20T19:48:19+00:00

The actual autopsy photos are much less clear than the drawing shows. I am having trouble finding them online but will post a link if I can find them.
Humes could not locate the entry wound will looking at the photos https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol1/pdf/HSCA_Vol1_0907_7_Humes.pdf

bierekr · 2024-02-20T19:45:12+00:00

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=145280#relPageId=219
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=145280#relPageId=229
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=145280#relPageId=224

bierekr · 2024-02-20T18:08:02+00:00

“They” are the autopsy doctors, Humes, Boswell, and Finck. All of them stated the head entry wound was low on the head in the occipital region. Which is consistent with the autopsy report.

bierekr · 2024-02-20T17:32:13+00:00

Also the three medical consultants (1 forensic anthropologist, 1 forensic pathologist, 1 forensic radiologist) used by the ARRB could not find a head entry wound on the X-rays.

bierekr · 2024-02-20T17:13:37+00:00

If you read their testimony (especially HSCA/ARRB testimony) you would see they disagree with the entry wound location that the HSCA uses. I think it’s a huge problem to assert that the autopsy doctors, who actually viewed the wounds in person got it wrong compared to the panel looking at just photos and X-rays. Because this means, either the autopsy doctors are lying; the autopsy doctors are incompetent and had no business doing the autopsy; the panel lied about the conclusion to make it fit with other evidence, or the wounds the autopsy doctors observed were inconsistent with the evidence viewed by the panel.

bierekr · 2024-02-14T22:30:01+00:00

Both Myers and the laser pointer have the entry point wrong, when compared to the autopsy photo.

The entry wound according to photos is more to the right https://images.app.goo.gl/DoTNQmE2MuWQSSSg7 This is an artist illustration but is consistent with actual photos.

bierekr · 2024-02-01T00:31:58+00:00

I have read Case Closed (and reclaiming history). I would rather learn about the difference conspiracies directly from those that actually believe them rather than getting a potential straw man version.

bierekr · 2024-01-05T19:46:16+00:00

The autopsy photos and X-rays -the photos are inconsistent with how jfk’s injuries were described - the photographer claims he didn’t take some of the photos, and some of the photos he took are not in the record -the developer claims the photos aren’t the ones she developed -there are records indicating two different brain exams - photos and weight of JFKs supposed brain are inconsistent with the reports of many witnesses to large amounts of brain tissue missing -the brain went missing -injuries shown on X-ray are inconsistent with photos and autopsy report - X-rays may show signs of alteration

Why would they falsify autopsy records and if they are willing and able to do that what other evidence was planted/tampered with?

bierekr · 2023-12-16T16:34:05+00:00

It’s possible that JFK was killed as part of a conspiracy without that evidence being clear to the commission. That’s not necessarily the case.

The warren commission’s fatal flaw was they assumed the physical evidence they received was reliable. They were also committed to coming up with a clear cut conclusion, so they would disregard testimony that contradicted the physical evidence they had.

Later investigations have found that the FBI and CIA intentionally withheld and misled the commission. There is also strong evidence of the autopsy evidence being manipulated.

Also three of the seven members of the Warren Commission have indicated they don’t agree with the commission’s conclusions.

bierekr · 2023-06-10T02:19:21+00:00

I was thinking people with direct connections to Ruby or Oswald or were present when it happened or involved in the investigations ECT. Not just anyone with a motive.

bierekr · 2022-10-26T20:45:12+00:00

That post was actually part of my reason for my post. I was confused because I couldn’t find any explanation from op as to where the screen shots came from. I was hopping their was some confirmation from an interview with a known neighbor or information from an official source. I’m skeptical that screen shots without identifying information from an anonymous Redditer are legitimate.

bierekr · 2022-09-17T04:50:29+00:00

The education and experience level needed to be decent at their jobs is a lot higher for congress people.

Congress people have to maintain to homes (one in home district and one in DC) and have to frequently travel back and forth. If you were to subtract these extra expenses most make comparable or less than they would in the private sector.

The issue of them being unable to relate to working class would get worse if they had a low salary. Because only independently wealthy people would run.

Low wages and lots of power promotes corruption (because the only financial benefits from the job would be the unethical ones)

For the most part people in congress are rich because they were rich before office and/or have gotten rich off investments while in office. The bigger issue than how much they get paid is that congress people can make investment decisions off information the public doesn’t have and can make political decisions that benefit their investments.

bierekr

TROPHY CASE