musterion
Well-known member
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/02/myth_of_brain_death_exposed_in_michigan.html
Acolytes of the death cult won't like this one bit.
Acolytes of the death cult won't like this one bit.
"The Myth of 'Brain Death'"
- Thread starter musterion
- Start date
PureX
Well-known member
I would say there is a doctor in Kalamazoo that made a bad call, that nearly killed a patient.
It happens.
But just because one doctor, somewhere, wrongly declares a patient brain-dead doesn't negate the fact that such a condition does occur, and that there is no recovery from it.
This does call attention, however, to the dangers involved in organ donation. And in the need to take them out, quickly, after a terminal diagnosis. Since we humans are bound to err, we need to proceed with extreme caution in these instances.
It happens.
But just because one doctor, somewhere, wrongly declares a patient brain-dead doesn't negate the fact that such a condition does occur, and that there is no recovery from it.
This does call attention, however, to the dangers involved in organ donation. And in the need to take them out, quickly, after a terminal diagnosis. Since we humans are bound to err, we need to proceed with extreme caution in these instances.
Tyrathca
New member
For one I really have to doubt that they were actually preparing to take the patients organs, more likely the doctors spoke poorly and thought that brain death was imminent. Determination of brain death should always be a formal procedure based on widely published medical literature on the subject, this is a process which inevitably takes time. There has never been a case of someone who has been through the formal process of determining brain death (involving whole brain function including brain stem) who has subsequently regained neurological function.
Simply put if she could follow commands then she could not have been through the testing which is what sounds like is the case. The doctors (probably correctly) surmised that brain death was a possible outcome and contacted an organ donation team (appropriate practice) however they unwisely discussed this with the family in a manner which obviously made them think A) She WAS brain dead already and B) They WERE going to donate her organs. Really they should have said nothing as the call to the organ donation team was probably just a courteous "hey heads up this may go sideways in which case we'll need your input" in which case mentioning it prematurely just leads to confusion (like we see here)
Simply put if she could follow commands then she could not have been through the testing which is what sounds like is the case. The doctors (probably correctly) surmised that brain death was a possible outcome and contacted an organ donation team (appropriate practice) however they unwisely discussed this with the family in a manner which obviously made them think A) She WAS brain dead already and B) They WERE going to donate her organs. Really they should have said nothing as the call to the organ donation team was probably just a courteous "hey heads up this may go sideways in which case we'll need your input" in which case mentioning it prematurely just leads to confusion (like we see here)
brewmama
New member
According to the article, "Bronson Methodist Hospital was preparing to remove the girl’s organs for donation when she squeezed her distraught mom’s hand." I don't think it was just a matter of alerting the transplant team.
It's pretty naive to think that there are "formal procedures" that are followed. In fact, most hospitals now regard electroencephalograms (which determine the presence of brain waves) and cranial blood-flow studies as ‘ancillary’ procedures. Neither is necessary for a formal finding of death. Of the many criticisms lodged against brain-death standards, absence of these confirming diagnostic steps is the most serious.
Read more:http://touchstonemag.com/archives/print.php?id=16-01-020-v#ixzz417G50wlV
gcthomas
New member
How would you prefer death to be determined then? A stopped heart can be lethal, but not in a hospital. What else apart from brain death can be used when someone is being artificially ventilated?
musterion
Well-known member
I see.
So the family lied, or at least exaggerated. The hospital did not correct their account. So ABC is wrong. All because that's how you'd prefer the story went.
Got it.
musterion
Well-known member
Why don't you tell me?
The girl was pronounced brain dead at the hospital, by the hospital, the day she was shot. They were ready to open her up for donations.
She was not brain dead. Evidently never was.
Consider the implications...
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
this is about zoo and artie, right?
we're not sposed to make call-out threads anymore
Tyrathca
New member
Yes I know what the article said, specifically it quoted the mother saying that. However it is very unclear what this even meant as the preparation process is mainly testing for transferable conditions (cancer, infections, etc) which and then waiting for the surgeons to arrive.
According to the hospital they never got further than notifying a transplant organisation, the first next step of brain death testing was never performed. I assume you missed my link so HERE IT IS again.
http://www.livescience.com/53821-what-is-brain-death-kalamazoo-shooting.html
I know what brain death testing involves, have you ever bothered to look it up? FYI part of it involves trying to elicit a reaction to stimuli, which the girl obviously could do. And yes measures of cranial blood flow studies are not routinely done (they are generally reserved when there is a reason that the formal examination can't be fully performed).
That article was not very educational or informative.
No the family was mistaken, very likely the fault of the doctors (or perhaps less likely another health care worker). And the hospital DID correct their account, see the link provided above (again)
Yes the ABC is wrong because it is clear they did not seek comment from the hospital. I don't say this because it is convenient I say this because the ABC say nothing about the hospitals version of events and don't even say the usual "comment was sought from X but no response was received prior to publication" or variations of that. Furthermore another source DID get the hospitals correction and their version of events fits much better with the timeline.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Yes, it's scary. It isn't like doctors never make mistakes, like cutting off the wrong leg etc. The fact that organs can be harvested might very well lead to declaring a person "brain dead" when they are simply in extremely bad shape. I'm sure until the girl squeezed her mother's hand, it was looking quite hopeless.
gcthomas
New member
What evidence is there that the girl was 'pronounced brain dead' in the formal way you are suggesting?