Wednesday, 8 October 2014


 DZ is used to reading crap reports on medical matters in the newspapers. Sometimes the problem is that a perfectly reasonable piece of research is taken by the newspaper editor and mangled to the point where the conclusions are completely misrepresented, in the interests of making a more newsworthy article. Sometimes however the original research itself is clearly just bollocks.

Like this one

The fundamental and primary error here seems to be at what stage people are declared clinically dead. The investigators seem to be of the view that you declare someone dead, and then commence resuscitation. No you fucking don't! Cardiac arrest does not equate to death. Death is what's declared when resus has failed and you've all given up. The entire paper is based on the accounts of people who were successfully resuscitated, ie NOT DEAD. At all, even a little bit. Strewth, these guys apparently spent four years gathering data about after death experiences from live people. By definition live people are not dead, and never have been.

The only thing they have proved is that people who are brain dead can become university professors in spite of it.

No comments:

Post a Comment