「千万“电子妈妈”掀舆论海啸助宁波“小洛熙”讨公道（2025.12.19-21）」2025年12月19日，在经历了长达35天的绝望奔走与网络呼号之后，宁波“小洛熙”的父母终于等来了那份决定性的法医报告。不过，这份由知名法医刘良出具的鉴定意见，不仅没有平息争议，反而如同一颗深水炸弹，在中国的互联网上引发了罕见的舆论风暴。数以千万计的“电子妈妈”与代表宁波大学附属妇幼医院利益的“水军”在网络上展开了激烈博弈，为那个逝去的生命争夺最后的真相。
尸检真相：“制造”出来的致命手术
根据尸检报告，5个月大的小洛熙死因触目惊心：术中肺静脉梗阻、严重肺水肿、心脏传导系统损伤以及失血性休克。然而，最令舆论哗然的，是关于心脏缺损的真相。
术前，宁波妇儿医院的病历和手术记录反复强调，小洛熙患有“7mm静脉窦型房缺及无顶冠状窦综合症”。这是一种复杂且罕见的先天性心脏病，也是主刀医生陈君贤力劝家属进行手术的核心理由——他声称这是“必须要做的手术”，且是“入门级的高成功率手术”。
但尸检结果狠狠打碎了这一谎言。法医在解剖中根本没有发现所谓的“无顶冠状窦综合症”或“冠状窦型房缺”，仅检见一个3毫米的继发孔型房间隔缺损。按照现行医学共识，这种单纯、微小的缺损在婴幼儿中极为常见，且具有极高的自然闭合概率。主流诊疗方案通常建议随访观察至学龄前，而非在5个月大的婴幼儿期进行高风险的开胸手术。
此外，尸检显示小洛熙体内的出血量高达70毫升。对于一个5个月大的婴儿来说，这已超过全身血容量的一半。这意味着，孩子几乎是在手术台上流干了血。
“这不是手术失败，这就是谋杀。”看到报告的那一刻，小洛熙的母亲邓女士崩溃痛哭，“陈君贤，你自己也有后代，你怎么舍得拿5个月的小孩折磨9个小时，让她血流干净？”
业内揭秘：为了利益拿幼儿当“小白鼠”？
为什么陈君贤要对一个几乎健康的孩子动刀？随着尸检报告的曝光，多位心外科专业人士及资深医生在网络上给出了令人不寒而栗的推测。
有业内人士指出，随着中国出生率下降及产前筛查的普及，先心外科正处于“病源枯竭”的边缘。加之北上广顶尖医院的虹吸效应，像宁波这类二线城市的医院很难留住病人。在这种背景下，陈君贤可能面临着极大的手术量KPI压力。业内推测，为了留住病人，陈君贤在明知彩超诊断存疑并建议CTA复查的情况下，并未进行进一步确诊检查，而是急于将小洛熙推上手术台。
更可怕的推测是：他在手术中犯下的致命错误，是小洛熙死亡的主因。一位网名为“咖喱鸡”的心外科医生分析指出，陈君贤术中可能因解剖结构不清，将右下肺静脉误认为是那个根本不存在的“冠状窦房缺”并进行了缝合，导致肺静脉梗阻，引发严重肺水肿和心力衰竭。为了掩盖错误或试图补救，手术时长从承诺的3小时拖延至7个多小时，期间经历了二次开胸，最终导致孩子惨死。
在网络上，网友的爆料也印证了作为陈君贤同行的医生们的推测，一名母亲表示，她也有和小洛熙妈妈类似的遭遇。2024年，她带孩子到宁波大学附属妇幼儿童医院检查时，也挂到了陈君贤的号，当时，陈也是用一样的话术劝她给孩子做手术。不过，幸运的是，这个妈妈后来带孩子去了上海交大医学院，那里医生告诉她，孩子不需要做手术。
“开胸后发现没有那个7mm的洞，发现自己做不了，给孩子缝上也不至于丢了命吧？”无数网友发出这样的质问。但现实是，手术台上的错误操作，最终夺走了小洛熙的生命。据网友深挖，涉事医生陈君贤手下疑似已有其他类似死亡案例，但此前均未得到妥善处理。
尸检报告公布以后，有法律界人士指出，若证据链能证明医生存在主观故意，卫健委应立即将案件移送公安机关，以“故意伤害或故意杀人罪”立案侦查，绝不能仅停留在行政层面的事故鉴定。
舆论战：院方水军洗地与人格侮辱
面对确凿的尸检报告和汹涌的民意，宁波大学附属妇女儿童医院及涉事医生并未选择道歉，而是发起了一场针对受害者家属的抹黑行动。尸检报告出炉后，院方曾短暂发布声明，试图重新界定房缺大小及手术合理性，为自己洗白，但随即在20分钟后删除了该声明。与此同时，网络上包括“白衣山猫”、“豆妈刘芳”、“虫子医僧”等十数个大V账号，步调一致地发布了大量混淆视听的内容为医院“洗地”。甚至有账号恶意泄露邓女士过往的流产史等私密就医记录，试图通过人格攻击来转移公众视线。这种突破底线的操作激怒了公众。包括大量医务人员、多位明星以及天量网友纷纷发文驳斥，与水军展开论战。
“以为结果出来了就是上岸了，没想到水更深了！”一名网友愤怒地评论道。
“电子妈妈”让“宁波的风”吹向世界
如果不是小洛熙父母的坚韧，如果不是网络上勇敢的“电子妈妈”群体，这起悲剧或许早已经被一句轻描淡写的“手术并发症”掩埋。
从11月14日家属网络求助，到17日广场哭诉，再到如今的全网声援，数以千万计的“电子妈妈”成为了这起事件的中坚力量。因为更能感同身受，她们的态度相较普通网友也更为决绝。
在事件初期，由于相关部门的大规模屏蔽和删帖，热度一度降温。是这群“电子妈妈”发起了“宁波的风”接力活动，将小洛熙一家的遭遇传遍中国，直至全球。在这一个多月里，“电子妈妈”群体不断壮大，她们始终关注着小洛熙母亲的一举一动，在各大平台发表声援文章、视频，在评论区呼吁、呐喊，甚至自费购买推广，只为对抗无处不在的审查。
她们的行动不仅仅在线上。在线下，她们发起了在汽车和手袋上贴标语的活动，要让小洛熙的遭遇传遍城市的每一个角落。她们拨打宁波各级政府的电话进行控诉，希望当局能给小洛熙一个公道。当相关商品在电商平台被下架，她们甚至开始自行印制标语进行传播。
正如“电子妈妈”们所言，她们“不希望再看到下一个因为手术失误含泪去世的宝宝，我们能做的就是不断顶帖，不让热度消失。”、“虽有无良之人造谣抹黑，但你们背后还有千千万万个电子爸妈支持，一定要坚持到底，让坏人绳之以法。”
正是她们的坚持，使得小洛熙事件没有像其他类似悲剧一样随着时间流逝而沉寂，而是在一个月后演变成一场现象级的公共事件，凝聚了天量的关注与愤怒。
在腐烂的系统中寻找公道
尽管法医鉴定结果已经为事件定性，尽管有上亿网友关注、千万“电子妈妈”支持，但小洛熙父母的维权之路依然漫长。因为她们面对的，是盘根错节的利益共同体和已经腐烂的医疗系统。
一位“电子妈妈”的留言道出了许多人的心声：“小洛熙事件对我的影响，高于我前半生读的所有圣贤书。敲醒了生活在看似繁华盛世的我，我想我再也不会因为媒体大肆歌颂的国泰民安而感动到热泪盈眶。”
Tens of Millions of “E-Mothers” Ignite a Tsunami of Public Opinion to Seek Justice for Ningbo’s “Little Luoxi” (2025.12.19–21)
On December 19, 2025, after 35 days of desperate appeals and online pleas, the parents of “Little Luoxi” in Ningbo finally received the decisive forensic report they had been waiting for. Yet the appraisal—issued by renowned forensic pathologist Liu Liang—not only failed to calm the controversy; it detonated like a deep-sea bomb, unleashing a rare storm of public opinion across China’s internet. Tens of millions of so-called “e-mothers” clashed fiercely online with organized “water army” accounts representing the interests of Ningbo University Affiliated Women and Children’s Hospital, battling over the final truth behind a lost young life.
Autopsy Truth: A Lethal Surgery That Was “Manufactured”
According to the autopsy report, the cause of death of the five-month-old infant was chilling: intraoperative pulmonary vein obstruction, severe pulmonary edema, damage to the cardiac conduction system, and hemorrhagic shock. What shocked public opinion most, however, was the truth about the alleged heart defect.
Before surgery, medical records and operative notes from the Ningbo women and children’s hospital repeatedly emphasized that Luoxi had a “7-mm sinus venosus atrial septal defect with unroofed coronary sinus syndrome.” This is a complex and rare congenital heart disease—and it was the core reason the lead surgeon, Chen Junxian, strongly urged the family to consent to surgery. He claimed it was “absolutely necessary” and a “basic procedure with a very high success rate.”
The autopsy results brutally shattered that narrative. During dissection, forensic experts found no trace of an “unroofed coronary sinus syndrome” or a “coronary sinus–type atrial septal defect.” Instead, they identified only a 3-mm secundum atrial septal defect. Under current medical consensus, such a small, simple defect is extremely common in infants and carries a very high likelihood of spontaneous closure. Mainstream clinical guidance typically recommends follow-up observation until preschool age, rather than high-risk open-heart surgery in a five-month-old infant.
Moreover, the autopsy revealed internal bleeding of approximately 70 milliliters. For a five-month-old baby, this exceeds half of the total blood volume—meaning the child essentially bled out on the operating table.
“This wasn’t a failed operation—this was murder,” Luoxi’s mother, Ms. Deng, sobbed upon seeing the report. “Chen Junxian, you have children of your own. How could you bear to torment a five-month-old baby for nine hours and let her bleed dry?”
Inside the Profession: Infants as “Guinea Pigs” for Profit?
Why would Chen Junxian operate on a child who was nearly healthy? As the autopsy report surfaced, multiple cardiac surgery specialists and senior physicians offered chilling speculation online.
Some insiders noted that, with China’s declining birth rate and the widespread adoption of prenatal screening, pediatric congenital heart surgery is approaching “patient source exhaustion.” Combined with the siphoning effect of top hospitals in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou, hospitals in second-tier cities like Ningbo struggle to retain patients. Against this backdrop, Chen Junxian may have been under intense pressure to meet surgical-volume KPIs. Insiders speculate that, despite ambiguous ultrasound findings and recommendations for further CTA confirmation, he skipped additional diagnostic confirmation and rushed Luoxi onto the operating table to keep the case.
An even more disturbing hypothesis is that a fatal intraoperative error was the primary cause of death. A cardiac surgeon using the handle “Curry Chicken” analyzed that Chen may have misidentified the right lower pulmonary vein as the nonexistent “coronary sinus atrial defect” and sutured it, causing pulmonary vein obstruction and triggering severe pulmonary edema and heart failure. In an attempt to conceal the mistake or attempt a salvage, the operation—promised to last three hours—dragged on for more than seven hours, including a second thoracotomy, ultimately resulting in the child’s death.
Online disclosures appeared to corroborate these professional suspicions. One mother said she had a similar experience: in 2024, she took her child to Ningbo University Affiliated Women and Children’s Hospital and also saw Chen Junxian, who used the same rhetoric to persuade her to proceed with surgery. Fortunately, she later took her child to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, where doctors told her surgery was unnecessary.
“After opening the chest and finding there was no 7-mm hole—if you realized you couldn’t do it, wouldn’t stitching the child up still have spared her life?” countless netizens asked. But reality was unforgiving: errors on the operating table ultimately took Luoxi’s life. Further digging by online users suggested that Chen Junxian may have been linked to other similar fatal cases that were never properly addressed.
After the autopsy report was released, legal experts noted that if the evidence chain can establish subjective intent on the part of the physician, health authorities should immediately transfer the case to public security organs for criminal investigation under charges such as intentional injury or intentional homicide, rather than confining it to administrative medical accident review.
The Public Opinion War: Whitewashing and Character Assassination
Faced with conclusive autopsy findings and surging public outrage, Ningbo University Affiliated Women and Children’s Hospital and the surgeon involved did not choose to apologize. Instead, they launched a smear campaign against the victim’s family. After the autopsy report was published, the hospital briefly issued a statement attempting to redefine the defect size and justify the surgery, only to delete it within 20 minutes. Meanwhile, numerous influential accounts—including “White-Coated Lynx,” “Bean Mom Liu Fang,” and “Monk Bug Doctor”—posted coordinated, misleading content to “whitewash” the hospital’s actions. Some accounts even maliciously leaked Ms. Deng’s past miscarriage history and other private medical records, attempting to divert public attention through personal attacks.
This crossing of ethical red lines enraged the public. Large numbers of medical professionals, several celebrities, and massive numbers of netizens spoke out in rebuttal, engaging the paid commentators in fierce debate.
“We thought once the results came out, we’d made it ashore—turns out the water is even deeper,” one netizen wrote angrily.
“E-Mothers” Let the “Wind from Ningbo” Blow Across the World
If not for the parents’ resilience—and if not for the courageous community of “e-mothers”—this tragedy might long ago have been buried under the vague label of “surgical complications.”
From the family’s online plea on November 14, to public crying in the town square on the 17th, to today’s nationwide outpouring of support, tens of millions of “e-mothers” have become the backbone of this movement. Because they empathize more deeply, their stance has been more resolute than that of ordinary netizens.
In the early stages, heavy censorship and mass deletions caused public attention to cool. It was the “e-mothers” who launched the relay campaign known as “The Wind from Ningbo,” spreading Luoxi’s story across China and eventually around the world. Over the past month, the group has steadily grown. They have closely followed every move of Luoxi’s mother, publishing articles and videos across platforms, calling out in comment sections, and even paying out of pocket for promotions—all to counter omnipresent censorship.
Their actions extended offline as well. They launched campaigns to place slogans on cars and handbags, determined to carry Luoxi’s story to every corner of the city. They called government offices at all levels in Ningbo to lodge complaints, demanding justice. When related merchandise was taken down from e-commerce platforms, they even began printing and distributing slogans themselves.
As the “e-mothers” put it: “We don’t want to see another baby die in tears because of surgical errors. All we can do is keep bumping the posts and not let the heat fade.” And: “Even if unscrupulous people spread rumors and smears, you have tens of millions of e-parents behind you. You must hold on and see this through, until the wrongdoers are brought to justice.”
Their persistence ensured that the Luoxi case did not fade into silence like so many similar tragedies. Instead, one month later, it has evolved into a phenomenon-level public event, concentrating immense attention and anger.
Seeking Justice in a Rotten System
Despite the forensic conclusion, despite hundreds of millions of eyes watching and tens of millions of “e-mothers” standing in support, Luoxi’s parents still face a long road ahead—because they are confronting entrenched interest networks and a deeply decayed medical system.
One “e-mother” left a message that captured the shared sentiment of many:
“The impact of the Luoxi case on me outweighs everything I learned from the sages in the first half of my life. It woke me up. Living in what looks like a prosperous age, I don’t think I’ll ever again be moved to tears by media paeans to ‘peace and prosperity.’”