| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/15/2005 01:43:36 PM · #576 |
Originally posted by hbunch7187:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by hbunch7187:
Just to add too, that she was also found to be blind. |
Is that true? Because wasn't she said to have been following a balloon around as they moved it around the room?
Wowzers. |
Yeah, the vision center of her brain was totally dead. Which means she wasn't 'looking' at her parents either.
Edit to add that she was SO brain damaged that her brain was only about 1/2 the size of a normal brain and that NO ammount of theropy could 'fix' it. |
As people said about the autopsy from the beginning. What was wanted for the request of autopsy was for the bone analysis and evidence of breakage/damage/abuse - not a brain analysis because that would show the damage. The fact that the autopsy reveals her to be blind proves a failure in this case.
Either
a) that should have been determined and know medically...
or
b) the fact that the area is damaged, we assume no function was retained. however, we know very little about the brain and it's ability to re-route and re-process. Doctors are repeatedly amazed by such cases in damaged/penetration, stroke victims, etc.
As such, a doctor examining and determining which areas have been severely damaged is not going to cut the cake. Why? Because it's a visual test - we do not have the means (yet) of testing the circuitry.
An example of this is a circuit board. If I shot a circuit board and you looked at it you'd assume it was not functioning. However, certain circuit boards for high level applications have a large amount of redundancy. These boards can ofter re-route when shorted and use alternate circuits and conduits. Often losing features and performance but being able to perform rudimentary. As such an autopsy of the brain can show that the region for sight was severely damaged but not necessary that sight was impossible.
- Jason
|
|
|
|
06/15/2005 02:34:43 PM · #577 |
| I think the medical term for the condition you're trying to convey is called Graspingat strawsytosis. |
|
|
|
06/16/2005 08:12:03 PM · #578 |
So, Saj,
I guess you join the elite company of Dr Bill Frist, who reviewed the videotape and claimed that Terri was in fact following visual stimuli and was NOT in a persistant vegetative state.
Both of you evidently know better than the seven neurologists who actually examined her for more than fifteen years, and the coroner who did the autopsy.
How inconvenient for your argument that Terri Shiavo was not kept "on sustenance" for another decade or two in order to prove your theory of neuronal regeneration.
THAT would have put all those left-wing right-to-die-with-dignity anti-life protesters in a position where they would need to apologize to Michael Schiavo all right. :( |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/07/2025 09:18:50 PM EDT.
