No offense, Nono, still rational. You'll know you've pissed me off the moment I let out a "Look here you Jesus-looking Copy-Shop Freak!". Ask your brother.
The only problem I have with the doctors testimony is my fundamental distrust of doctors. I NEVER take doctors at their word. They are usually dabbling in a science not fully explored, yet. We could fit what we know about the brain's function and topography in a thimble. But I keep running into this assumption that these doctors speak the WORD, and you're a fool for questioning them. I question a doctors word almost as fast as I question a politician, lawyer or school administrator.
I would be more likely to accept that 80% of her brain is swiss cheese and their's no hope, except for the fact we only use 5-8% of our brains capacity for rational thought, and the cases (in particular hyper hydroencephalitis, which newborns have a HUGE fluid sack where their brain should be, and their documented chances of "normal" brain function is in the 30-45% range)
I get this "The hospital doesn't want to keep paying and using up resources we could be using on more profitible patients" feeling every time I hear some expert doc talk about Terri.
But, as always this is just my opinion, so take that for what it's worth.
The 10% brain myth: http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/tenper.html
Additionally, the CT scan shows that there is little to no functioning cortical tissue. The connective material (which holds the brain together) has unraveled.
To use an analogy, imagine rubberbanding together 100 pieces of popcorn. Now leave it outside where ants can get to it. After they eat all the popcorn, all you've got is a bunch of loosely jumbled rubber bands.
The gigantic ventricles, expanded white matter, and undifferentiated blue space in that scan all point to the same thing: massive loss of grey matter in the cerebral cortex.
The reason an MRI hasn't been done is simple: While it could provide more detail, a sizable number of cranial implants would have to be removed first. Additionally, the MRI wouldn't add anything of signifigance to what the CT or x-rays have shown. Her brain is gone.
As for the PET scan, that works by injecting radioactive substances into the body, then mapping their locations. For brain scans, this is normally done through glucose injections. The way it works is tumors, because they grow faster than surrounding tissue, absorb more of the glucose, and thus, are 'greater' radioactive hot spots.
In the Schiavo case, all this will show is an extremely low absorbtion rate, because there is very little grey matter left to need glucose.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Not quite...
The only problem I have with the doctors testimony is my fundamental distrust of doctors. I NEVER take doctors at their word. They are usually dabbling in a science not fully explored, yet. We could fit what we know about the brain's function and topography in a thimble. But I keep running into this assumption that these doctors speak the WORD, and you're a fool for questioning them. I question a doctors word almost as fast as I question a politician, lawyer or school administrator.
I would be more likely to accept that 80% of her brain is swiss cheese and their's no hope, except for the fact we only use 5-8% of our brains capacity for rational thought, and the cases (in particular hyper hydroencephalitis, which newborns have a HUGE fluid sack where their brain should be, and their documented chances of "normal" brain function is in the 30-45% range)
I get this "The hospital doesn't want to keep paying and using up resources we could be using on more profitible patients" feeling every time I hear some expert doc talk about Terri.
But, as always this is just my opinion, so take that for what it's worth.
Re: Not quite...
http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/tenper.html
Additionally, the CT scan shows that there is little to no functioning cortical tissue. The connective material (which holds the brain together) has unraveled.
To use an analogy, imagine rubberbanding together 100 pieces of popcorn. Now leave it outside where ants can get to it. After they eat all the popcorn, all you've got is a bunch of loosely jumbled rubber bands.
The gigantic ventricles, expanded white matter, and undifferentiated blue space in that scan all point to the same thing: massive loss of grey matter in the cerebral cortex.
The reason an MRI hasn't been done is simple: While it could provide more detail, a sizable number of cranial implants would have to be removed first. Additionally, the MRI wouldn't add anything of signifigance to what the CT or x-rays have shown. Her brain is gone.
As for the PET scan, that works by injecting radioactive substances into the body, then mapping their locations. For brain scans, this is normally done through glucose injections. The way it works is tumors, because they grow faster than surrounding tissue, absorb more of the glucose, and thus, are 'greater' radioactive hot spots.
In the Schiavo case, all this will show is an extremely low absorbtion rate, because there is very little grey matter left to need glucose.