21 May 2011

Continuing questions about Trig Palin

In 2009-10 I accumulated about a dozen links about Sarah Palin's pregnancy with Trig, planning to leave it all in a folder and not waste time writing it up unless she declared formally as a presidential candidate.

But today I read an extensive commentary from a neonatologist who opined that the photo above is not consistent with Trig having been born 12 hours earlier.
This baby looks to be about 1-2 months old and doesn’t look premature. Premature babies don’t have a lot of subcutaneous fat. This baby is chubby. He has epicanthal folds, flat nasal bridge and a recessed chin, which are suggestive of Down syndrome. Down syndrome babies can be chubby, but if they’re premature, it’s not so prominent...

... the baby does not look plethoric (ruddy) and may look just slightly jaundiced. Most babies are born with extra red blood cells and look ruddy at birth. This is especially true of preemies because their skin is thinner. As that extra blood is broken down, it releases bilirubin, a pigment that turns the skin yellow. At 24 hours of age, most babies will still be ruddy. Visible jaundice usually develops between 24 and 72 hours of age.

Another clue to me is the absence of milia. Milia are tiny white bumps that are usually seen on the nose, cheeks and chin. They are caused by dead skin clogging up the pores and are a normal finding in newborns that can persist for a few weeks. Most newly born babies will have some of this...

One more thing that may be missing from this picture is lanugo. This is hair that we see mostly on the arms and back, but also often on the cheeks of premature babies. It disappears after about 35 weeks so it doesn’t precisely age this baby, but does suggest an age greater than 35 weeks...

These pictures of Trig appear to show a full term size baby who was probably born a month or so ago. I base these conclusions on skin color and the imperfect ICD measurements. None of these findings are absolute, as babies can vary in size and color, but if I had to bet money, I’d say that Trig wasn’t born yesterday, so to speak, in these pictures.
Enough. Those interested in such things can go to the link, via The Dish.


  1. And so the point of anal-yzing over this photo is why?

    I have nothing for or against Palin. I don't know her. And this portion of her personal life doesn't concern me.

    Was Palin pregnant? Did she have a baby? Did the baby die and she stole this one? Does the baby not have a birth certificate? Can she really be president in 35-ish years?

    As my boss asks me on a regular basis, "How is this relevant? Get to the point."

    ... I love details and research, but I don't see the purpose for this analysis unless it leads somewhere. Does it?

  2. The open secret of Palin's campaigning cover-up speaks to the greater problem of news media's complicity and even the American public's willingness to be deceived by its would-be leadership.

    To accept falsehood as fact is to beg for abuse - as evinced by today's penniless Rapture believers and the victims of power since time immemorial.

    I am persuaded that there is no limit in the absurdities that can, by government action, come to be generally believed.

    [...] to make the majority of the population believe that two and two are three, that water freezes when it gets hot and boils when it gets cold, or any other nonsense that might seem to serve the interest of the State.

    Of course, even when these beliefs have been generated, people would not put the kettle in the refrigerator when they wanted it to boil. That cold makes water boil would be a Sunday truth, sacred and mystical, to be professed in awed tones, but not to be acted on in daily life.

    What would happen would be that any verbal denial of the mystic doctrine would be made illegal, and obstinate heretics would be 'frozen' at the stake.

    No person who did not enthusiastically accept the official doctrine would be allowed to teach or to have any position of power.

    Only the very highest officials, in their cups, would whisper to each other what rubbish it all is; then they would laugh and drink again.

    - Bertrand Russell in Unpopular Essays

  3. I'll tell you what, you can fold your Trig Palin conspiracy theories folder up and shove them in the bit bucket. Never thought I'd read it here.

  4. "Many strange things surrounded the pregnancy and birth of Trig. They included:

    Bristol looks more pregnant in many pictures than Sarah at a time when Sarah would have been pregnant with Trig, if in fact Palin was ever pregnant with Trig.

    Bristol evidently missed five months of high school because of “mono”, during the exact time that she would have been in her last five months of pregnancy with Trig, if she was Trig’s mom.

    Bristol was living in Anchorage with Sarah’s sister.
    Sarah didn’t tell anyone in her office that she was pregnant until she was about seven months pregnant. The amazing thing is that no one in her office suspected that she was pregnant. She must have been one of the few fortunate women who don’t have morning sickness, back problems and swelling of her hands and feet.

    Pictures appeared on the internet suggesting that the size of Sarah’s abdomen were inconsistent with a normal pregnancy. Not only does Sarah not look pregnant in many pictures, but during the last two months of the pregnancy when Sarah should have been the most pregnant, we saw some pictures that were confusing. Some taken at a later time indicated that her abdomen was actually smaller than earlier pictures.

    The most amazing part of the story was the adventure to Texas. When she was in Texas for a Governor’s conference she reportedly had her water break at 4:00 am in her hotel, yet she proceeded to give a speech that afternoon. She left the speech purportedly having contractions and traveled to the airport in Texas to catch a flight back to Alaska. Palin sat in the airport lounge reading a book while waiting for a plane with a passenger who didn’t have any idea she was pregnant or in labor. She then boarded two different flights back to Alaska and didn’t tell anyone with the airlines that she was pregnant or in labor. She knew the flights were scheduled to take at least 10 hours to return to Anchorage, and after arriving in Anchorage she got in the car and drove almost one hour to the hospital near Wasilla to give birth."

  5. Again I must ask, "Why does it matter?"

    Was Sarah trying to protect her daughter from the embarrassment? Maybe, who wouldn't? Does Bristol having 2 kids any different than having 1? Who cares?

    Do you want to see a birth certificate?

    Maybe you're a birther at heart?

  6. Looks like we add your bigotry to the long list of those who hate children and go after them because of their helplessness. This is so cowardly. I totally don't get the hatred for Sarah Palin which drives otherwise good people to do sordid things like pick on her children. People threw rocks at her when she misunderstood Katie Couric's questions. Guess what? Palin was instrumental in routing out the democratic control of congress; Ms. Couric is fired. Now who has the clout? Please no more attacks on kids, otherwise this is an excellent blog I enjoy very much.

  7. Again I must ask, "Why does it matter?"

    Because the subject is a polarizing, demagogue and media whore probably.....

  8. Hey, Jerry, you know who really is a bigot? Sarah Palin. You know what she does for a living? Goes on Fox to talk about how stupid and evil those who disagree with her are. Ever read he tweets? They're about as critical of others as any other 12-year-olds. And she has the voice to do lasting harm, like any school bully.

  9. What's all this about hating children and going after them. Nobody is picking on the baby. This is all about Palin who some people wanted to have a heartbeat away from being the president.

  10. What the hell is with all the vitriol-spewing replies to this post? Are you guys serious?

  11. Erwin, this is not about the baby? What part of the headline, "Continuing questions about Trig Palin", did you not get? I stand firmly behind my comment, the child is helpless. The intention of the article was clearly to smear Sarah Palin using the child. The 8:1 ruling by the Supreme Court in the Westboro Baptist Church case defines the first amendment to include hurtful speech. However, it is still ugly. I sense others also do not like using children as scapegoats for a political agenda. However, you are entitled to your opinions.

  12. I didn't follow the whole Bristol thing, so I know nothing about how likely any conspiracy theories are, but there's one explanation that hasn't been stated here- they just substituted an older baby for the purpose of the photo. Newborns don't look very appealing and they probably wanted people to go "aww". That's what TV shows do when one of the characters gives birth.

  13. Palin never released her complete medical records in 2008...something everyone Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidate does. Why not? She's hiding something.

  14. But you're talking nonsense... Bigotry? Come on. Back to reality, please.

  15. I would like to add my voice to those who express their deep disappointment at seeing this repugnant conspiracy theory on this very fine blog.

    I dislike Sarah Palin's politics as much as the next guy, but I thought we were supposed to be better than them instead of stooping to their conspiracy mongering level.

    Here are two debunkings by such noted right wing publications as Salon.com and The Village Voice.

  16. This is not your every day "Obama is a foreigner" or "Bush blew up the twin towers" nutjob theory with no basis in anything but paranoid delusion... It's potentially an exposition of deception from someone who was an election result and an untimely death away from being the leader of the most powerful country in the world.

    And why? Why would anyone hide such a thing? There's no shame in it, in my opinion. The only shame lies in deception.

  17. And i am sick of people like Jerry who will use the innocent image of children as human shields by proxy. In the words of bill hicks...

    That's what I hate
    about this child-worship syndrome going on. "Save the children!
    They're killing children! How many children were at Waco? They're
    killing children!" What does that mean? They reach a certain age and
    they're off your f*cking love-list? F*ck your children, if that's the
    way you think then f*ck you too. You either love all people of all
    ages or you shut the f*ck up.

    Stop attempting to browbeat using a false moral high ground. You are allowing your political persuasion to rule your better judgment. No-one is even attacking this child, not even remotely. The implication is of dishonesty on the part of his (grand)mother. To imply that such an implication is somehow disrespectful to the child is abject sophistry. Grow up and join the reasoned adults, please.

  18. Looks like we add your bigotry to the long list of those who hate children and go after them because of their helplessness.

    Seriously... A mixture of sickening and laughable.

  19. Ah ha! Now we are at the root of Sarah Palin angst. Either real or perceived morality in the defense of her or her family makes her foes livid. How dare anyone use morality and Palin simultaneously? It goes to the root of the bias against her, she is a hypocrite and will never be forgiven for it. Those who don't get it are dumb little waifs who should be slapped with words and told to grow up. In their mindset one must simply live in a quagmire of moral incertitude never knowing what is right and what is wrong. Oh, yes, they carry a big pail of rocks to throw at the sinners, chief among them are Palin and her family. Sorry, Jim, those were two little pebbles written with your sin free hands. Again, you do have the right to express your opinions.

  20. I am not talking about ms. palin, i am talking about you and your transparent and juvenile mindless contraryness.

    You are attempting to defend a straw-man argument with a straw-man argument. Come back when you have grown up.

  21. I realize when the discussion resorts to name calling, nobody hears anything. It is time to bow out.

  22. You mean like when someone nonsensically accuses another of being a bigot?

  23. I don't think you've heard anything from moment one. And i tend to agree, there is not much point continuing this discussion, i have no desire to engage in pointless discourse with a rabid zealot with a willful disregard for reason.

  24. You come in here, and with your very first sentence pollute this thread with ad hominem diatribe which isn't accompanied with even a semblence of logical justification for it, then when someone calls you on out your own rubbish and picks an appropriate epithet to describe it (with logical backing), you retreat under the guise of not wanting to be in a discussion involving name-calling. Here's some more name-calling for you... What a ridiculous hypocrite you've shown yourself to be.

    Go ahead, take your ball and go home. You've already shown you can do a fantastic job of arguing against straw-men you can conjure up all by yourself.

  25. As a third party and no interest in the personality conflict, I think Jim shoots from the hip ,too fast to make his points.

  26. Do folks not know being abusive gets them banned?

  27. You're probably right re; shooting from the hip. That jerk really got under my skin, and i'm too young not to turn into a jerk when faced with a jerk.

  28. Don't you have anything else to do?


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...