Severed Foot Is Bears NOT Childs... How Was There Any Confusion?

Maybe it was a small bear? I don't understand either. You'd think an orthopedic surgeon of all people would have known right away! I would understand if it was just the family and the police officers who thought it was a child's foot...but how can a "professional" make that mistake. It kind of makes you wonder just how smart doctors really are.

I find it a bit far fetched to mistake a bear's foot with that of a child. It's a gross mistake.

Well, you'd think they'd be able to tell the difference but they don't give much detail either. I suppose it could have been a newborn or even a premature birth that didn't survive. That would explain the small size. I'm sure it was probably pretty chewed up by other animals as well so it may not have had much skin on it. Ewwww, don't mean to be gross but that's the only explanation I can think of.

I think it must have come from a baby bear, poor thing. I wonder what happened to the rest of it. The news report says that an orthopedic surgeon examined the foot, and thought it could be from a human child, but maybe it was in really poor condition after being in the mouth of a dog, and because of whatever injury had caused it to be separated from the bear. I'm not familiar with the structure of a bear's foot. From memory, I think they are flat like ours, but I think it would have claws, rather than nails.

I'd have to assume that it must have been the skeletal remains of a foot. Otherwise I would think it would be hairy or something. If the surgeon thought it resembled a human foot. I guess from a skeletal standpoint it must be similiar.

welllllllllllll i have seen a bears "paw" up close and personal. I have seen a childs foot up close and personal. I have to say, i would have never mistaken one for the other. I think the Nails, the long toes, maybe some hair... Hmmmm... I think someone should have taken a closer look before opening up a search party. But hey thats just me smilesssssss...