• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Seems like a complicated subject, have you tried yelling at it?

When your entire life is steeped in white supremacy, equality feels like discrimination.

The worst democrat is better than the best republican.

“I was told there would be no fact checking.”

75% of people clapping liked the show!

There is no right way to do the wrong thing.

I am pretty sure these ‘journalists’ were not always such a bootlicking sycophants.

In my day, never was longer.

Dear elected officials: Trump is temporary, dishonor is forever.

Shallow, uninformed, and lacking identity

This country desperately needs a functioning fourth estate.

if you can’t see it, then you are useless in the fight to stop it.

I’ve spoken to my cat about this, but it doesn’t seem to do any good.

GOP baffled that ‘we don’t care if you die’ is not a winning slogan.

Republicans got rid of McCarthy. Democrats chose not to save him.

Lick the third rail, it tastes like chocolate!

After dobbs, women are no longer free.

Today’s gop: why go just far enough when too far is right there?

Conservatism: there are people the law protects but does not bind and others who the law binds but does not protect.

When they say they are pro-life, they do not mean yours.

When I decide to be condescending, you won’t have to dream up a fantasy about it.

Of course you can have champagne before noon. That’s why orange juice was invented.

Live so that if you miss a day of work people aren’t hoping you’re dead.

Republican also-rans: four mules fighting over a turnip.

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Frist Felt the Schiavo Burn

Frist Felt the Schiavo Burn

by John Cole|  January 29, 20066:58 pm| 201 Comments

This post is in: Politics, Science & Technology

FacebookTweetEmail

Looks like Sen. Frist felt the pain after the Senate meddled in a personal tragedy:

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who took a leading role in the Terry Schiavo case, said Sunday it taught him that Americans do not want the government involved in such end-of-life decisions.

Frist, considered a presidential hopeful for 2008, defended his call for further examinations of the brain-damaged Florida woman during the last days of a bitter family feud over her treatment. Schiavo was in a persistent vegetative state.

The case became a rallying point for right-to-life advocates, an important segment of the Republican Party. It also drew interest from those supporting the right to refuse life-sustaining medical treatment and led to charges that the GOP was using a family tragedy for political gain.

Asked on NBC’s “Meet the Press” if he had any regrets regarding the Schiavo case, Frist said: “Well, I’ll tell you what I learned from it, which is obvious. The American people don’t want you involved in these decisions.”

Of course, the reactionary “culture of life” crowd doesn’t give a shit what the American people want, and they will be furious with Frist for this statement. Just more evidence that Frist is not running for President after his term.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Congrats
Next Post: Richard Paey on 60 Minutes »

Reader Interactions

201Comments

  1. 1.

    stickler

    January 29, 2006 at 7:12 pm

    Of course, the reactionary “culture of life” crowd doesn’t give a shit what the American people want, and they will be furious with Frist for this statement.

    Yeah, and guess which political party they think they run now. They delivered the election for Bush in 2004. They expect to be paid back.

    In full.

  2. 2.

    ppGaz

    January 29, 2006 at 7:25 pm

    View the streamed video of MTP or study the transcript. Frist only allowed that he had learned something after it was clear that Russert was not going to let him off the hook. Frist employed every mealy-mouthed tactic in the book to avoid the truth of the situation … as he did throughout his MTP appearance with every tough issue.

    It was a jaw-dropping half hour of mendacity and dishonesty which deserves some kind of award for hubris and cheek.

  3. 3.

    Angry Engineer

    January 29, 2006 at 7:57 pm

    Russert actually got tough with someone? I’ll definitely have to check that one out.

    “Well, I’ll tell you what I learned from it, which is obvious. The American people don’t want you involved in these decisions.”

    Yea, like, no shit – that’s kinda the idea behind being a conservative. Or at least it used to be.

  4. 4.

    The Sanity Inspector

    January 29, 2006 at 8:02 pm

    Typo alert: Check your header on the post.

    As to the Schiavo affair, I still think it was right for us to have had this big hullabaloo over it. She was actively put to death, not merely allowed to die. Now, this may well have been the correct thing to do. But right or wrong, we as a society did cross a line into hitherto unknown territory (for us, at least). I think it was necessary to have a big, jarring bump as we crossed over.

  5. 5.

    John Cole

    January 29, 2006 at 8:08 pm

    She was actively put to death,

    Thanks for including that so early in your comment so I know I can simply ignore the rest. I didn’t, but I appreciate the crazy talk up front as an aid to those out there who want to ignore silliness.

    As to whether any lines were crossed- nonsense. The only lines that were crossed were the ones crossed by the emboldened wingnut lobby who elevated what was an everyday personal occurrence into a national case in which the Republican Congress radically overstepped their bounds and proved once and for all that they are beholden to the busybodies in the radical religious right.

  6. 6.

    SeesThroughIt

    January 29, 2006 at 8:21 pm

    Of course, the reactionary “culture of life” crowd doesn’t give a shit what the American people want, and they will be furious with Frist for this statement.

    True, and “culture of life” knuckle-draggers are welcome to keep exposing the entire lot of themselves as fucking morons who are wasting oxygen that the rest of us could use for something productive. The only problem is there’s a whole bunch of them, and numbers, not intelligence, dignity, or veracity, are the only thing that matter in democracy.

  7. 7.

    Eural

    January 29, 2006 at 8:23 pm

    She was actively put to death, not merely allowed to die

    Care to explain?

  8. 8.

    stickler

    January 29, 2006 at 8:25 pm

    … the Republican Congress radically overstepped their bounds and proved once and for all that they are beholden to the busybodies in the radical religious right.

    So what are you going to do about it?

    Speaking as a registered Republican who could see this coming a few years ago, I can say I decided to vote for the guy with (D) after his name back in late 2004. And I’m going to keep on doing that until the GOP is no longer a wholly-owned subsidiary of Pentecostal Winguts, LLC.

    But if our gentle host here is going to keep on fulminating about the wingnuts — while still voting GOP, then his fulminations aren’t worth a bucket of warm spit.

  9. 9.

    Laura

    January 29, 2006 at 8:31 pm

    As to the Schiavo affair, I still think it was right for us to have had this big hullabaloo over it. She was actively put to death, not merely allowed to die. Now, this may well have been the correct thing to do. But right or wrong, we as a society did cross a line into hitherto unknown territory (for us, at least). I think it was necessary to have a big, jarring bump as we crossed over.

    Removing a surgically implanted feeding tube removed was hardly unknown territory. Families have to make such decisions all the time. This past December, a colleague of mine did just that with her mother who was at the end stages of alzheimer’s. Fortunately for her, George Bush and Bill Frist didn’t interfere with this prayerful, personal decision.

  10. 10.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 9:43 pm

    Please. I am getting a little tired of this incessant drumbeat of criticism of Bill Frist for the comment he made about Terri Schiavo, turning him into the anti Christ practically. If you know anything about PVS, you know that PVS patients by definition cannot follow objects with their eyes. There was a video that we all saw in which Terri followed a ballon with her eyes. By definition, that means she is not PVS, perhaps instead minimally conscious. If a person is minimally conscious and otherwise in decent health, it is illegal to withdraw care.

    Now was the video doctored? Was it a fluke? We didn’t know for sure. Was an investigation made into this to see if it was doctored? No. Since we know that patients thought of as PVS can develop new abilities years later, did we know whether Terri could have developed an ability to follow objects with her eyes in the almost ten years after her trial and before we put her to death? No. We guessed. Maybe Bill Frist thought a guess wasn’t good enough. Kudos for him for speaking out on what his eyes saw. And shame on the rest of you for trying to silence a man who speaks his conscience.

  11. 11.

    ppGaz

    January 29, 2006 at 9:51 pm

    turning him into the anti Christ practically

    He’s a goddaned fool, a liar, and a sleazy politician pandering to an obnoxious base.

    That doesn’t qualify him to be the Anti Christ. That kind of thing is just a thuggish rhetorical trick … the kind of thing you’re the first to criticize others for doing.

    Cut the crap. Frist is an asshole and a faker. He knew what was going on with Terri Schiavo, or else he’s an incompetant doctor. He as much as admitted as much today on MTP … he just wanted “one more review” even though there had nothing but years of reviews already. Why?

    Politics, that’s why.

  12. 12.

    ppGaz

    January 29, 2006 at 9:52 pm

    I am getting a little tired of this incessant drumbeat

    Then GO AWAY.

  13. 13.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 9:55 pm

    ppGaz, I’m curious, weren’t you warned by the authorities here? If you can’t play nice, don’t play at all, that kind of thing..

  14. 14.

    Otto Man

    January 29, 2006 at 9:57 pm

    I saw the clip of Frist on MTP and, wow, did he look bad. Out of it, like he was sick or medicated, or both.

    Or maybe his conscience is getting back at him for all the sleazy shit he’s pulled on this.

  15. 15.

    John Cole

    January 29, 2006 at 9:57 pm

    There was a video that we all saw in which Terri followed a ballon with her eyes. By definition, that means she is not PVS, perhaps instead minimally conscious. If a person is minimally conscious and otherwise in decent health, it is illegal to withdraw care.

    A.) Terri Schiavo never followed the balloon with her eyes.

    B.) Terri Schiavo COULDN’T follow the balloon with her eyes. Why? BECAUSE SHE WAS BLIND:

    The most hysterical charges involving Terri’s husband were proven false, including the notion that he had injected Terri with insulin at some point to kill her. Some of the most well-publicized assertions about her activities also were shown to be wishful thinking, such as an ability to eat and drink without the feeding tube and Terri’s following visual cues, which she seemingly did in the video released by her family. With her vision center destroyed, she had cortical blindness. In the opinion of the coroner after examining the brain, Terri’s condition would never have improved.

    And that is Captain Ed, not some left wing euthanasia nut. Read the autopsy, page 36 (.pdf warning)

  16. 16.

    John Cole

    January 29, 2006 at 9:59 pm

    Then GO AWAY.

    Knock it off, PPGAZ. I know you two just irk each other, but don’t be rude.

  17. 17.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 9:59 pm

    he just wanted “one more review” even though there had nothing but years of reviews already. Why?

    As I have told you multiple times, there have been new medical understandings of PVS starting in the early 2000’s. Terri’s legal case was based on mid 1990’s science. That’s why he and many other doctors were right to ask for a new review. And that’s why it’s not good to mix courts and medicine. The law wanted a finality in 1997. It wasn’t flexible enough to take into account that medicine changes.

  18. 18.

    John Cole

    January 29, 2006 at 9:59 pm

    ppGaz, I’m curious, weren’t you warned by the authorities here? If you can’t play nice, don’t play at all, that kind of thing..

    SCS- No taunting.

  19. 19.

    ppGaz

    January 29, 2006 at 10:06 pm

    I am getting a little tired of this incessant drumbeat

    Bullshit, John. Her posts are childish, idiotic, and deliberately provocative. “I’m getting tired.”

    Of what? The damned truth? So what? If the truth makes you tired, go and do something else. Are you telling me that this childish twit can post this kind of crap and we’re supposed to sit here and say “yes dearie?”

    She’s full of crap.

  20. 20.

    ppGaz

    January 29, 2006 at 10:08 pm

    As I have told you multiple times, there have been new medical understandings of PVS starting in the early 2000’s. Terri’s legal case was based on mid 1990’s science

    Idiotic. What are you suggesting? That she be cruelly kept alive forever in favor of evolving “science?”

    What “science” gives hope to a patient with a destroyed brain?

  21. 21.

    Sojourner

    January 29, 2006 at 10:12 pm

    Thanks, scs, for the laugh!!!

    Yeh, I’m sure Mrs. Schiavo was tracking the balloon with her blind eyes.

    And the autopsy which showed she had lost almost her entire cerebral cortex shouldn’t deter you from claiming that she still possessed cognitive abilities and consciousness.

    Did you take your advanced placement science classes in Kansas, by chance?

    What a moron.

  22. 22.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 10:13 pm

    Okay John, we have better knowledge now of her condition, thanks to her autospy. But did we have any definite knowledge of any of this before we killed her? No. And you know why we didn’t know? Because Michael refused to give her an MRI before her death. Is that the kind of diagnosis you want? Diagnosis by autopsy? Sorry, I much prefer diagnosis by video.

    Now I saw the video and she looked like she was following the ballon with her eyes. How did this happen? A random fluke? A fake video? If the video was not doctored, then I’m sorry, even if it was for one second, I don’t believe it was random. That is too much of a coincidence. Now how did it happen? I don’t know. Could she use her hearing to follow voices? It’s a mystery. Either way, your link you provided said that one doctor witnessed this, another didn’t. You know who didn’t witness it? Right-to-die activist Ronald Cranford, the same guy who spead misinformation to the public about Terri’s EEGs being “flat”. Sorry but the more I think about it again, this whole case stinks, and I’m just sorry you are all to blind to see it.

  23. 23.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 10:14 pm

    Sojourner I don’t converse with liars such as yourself.

  24. 24.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 10:17 pm

    PPGAz, did you not READ the article I linked up to, just per your request last week? Gawd. Did you read how MANY MANY people who are classified as PVS actually have some cognitive abilities, able to be picked up on MRIs? I think you are the idiot because you desperately want to believe a judge over medical science.

  25. 25.

    ppGaz

    January 29, 2006 at 10:18 pm

    this whole case stinks

    But not for the reason you are pimping. It stinks because every best practice of law and medicine was observed in the case, including voluminous reporting of a guardian ad litem, representing the patient’s interests to the court, and opportunistic politicians tried to interfere.

    The court is the rightful instrument in such a case, as it is in many such cases, all the time. The court is entrusted with that responsibility because it should be so trusted, and because it is equipped and empowered to do the right thing. That’s what we establish courts to do, and what we expect of them.

    Who are you, or Bill Frist, to step in and try to derail that process in a situation that is none of your business?

    Here’s a hint for the children in our midst: It isn’t your business because you saw it on tv.

  26. 26.

    Sojourner

    January 29, 2006 at 10:19 pm

    Sojourner I don’t converse with liars such as yourself.

    LMAO. Let’s see. You’re claiming that Schiavo tracked a balloon with her eyes and John Gibson warned Christians to be nice to non-Christians – with Janet Parshall’s concurrence. Oh, and let’s not forget your accusation that ppGaz was sexually harassing you. That’s my personal favorite.

    You are absolutely and totally delusional, little girl.

    But a tremendous source of humor.

    Thanks again for the laughs.

  27. 27.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 10:26 pm

    Sojourner did I ever say Gibson warned Christians to be “nice” to non Christians? No. I block quoted his words from an interview , multiple multiple times for you, that stated he directly said that ‘we “tolerate” other religions’. His EXACT words and I repeated them for you. Can you read dear? I think you can read, which leads me to another conclusion, that you love to twist the truth, otherwise known as lying.

    You are a liar and I pity you.

  28. 28.

    John Cole

    January 29, 2006 at 10:26 pm

    Okay John, we have better knowledge now of her condition, thanks to her autospy. But did we have any definite knowledge of any of this before we killed her? No. And you know why we didn’t know? Because Michael refused to give her an MRI before her death.

    More nonsense.

    We knew her medical condition- she had received the best medicine in the world, and more legal proceedings than anyone else ever has before being removed from life support. Additionally, she had been in this condition for FIFTEEN YEARS, with no change or improvement.

    I am sorry you have a hard time accepting these facts, but they were known well ahead of Terri’s death, and confirmed by the autopsy- not, as you would like to pretend, diagnosed by the autopsy. Terri Schiavo died 15-16 years ago. Period.

  29. 29.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 10:31 pm

    It stinks because every best practice of law and medicine was observed in the case, including voluminous reporting of a guardian ad litem, representing the patient’s interests to the court, and opportunistic politicians tried to interfere.

    Yes but nothing was done to her with the only instrument that could have detected any cognitive ability, an MRI. The courts decided this case on 1997 medicine and then REVIEWED it based on 1997 medicine. That’s why I approved of the politicians stepping in to look out for Terri’s interests and make sure she got all the best tests she could, before we killed her, since the courts didn’t seem very interested in it.

  30. 30.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 10:32 pm

    she had received the best medicine in the world,

    Did she EVER get an MRI?

  31. 31.

    DougJ

    January 29, 2006 at 10:33 pm

    This column on the Sciavo fiasco says it all.

    Like many of you, I have been compelled by recent events to prepare a more detailed advance directive dealing with end-of-life issues. Here’s what mine says:

    * I want total strangers – oily politicians, maudlin news anchors, ersatz friars and all other hangers-on ( added by the editor: unhinged blog commenters ) – to start calling me “Bobby,” as if they had known me since childhood.

  32. 32.

    DougJ

    January 29, 2006 at 10:34 pm

    Did she EVER get an MRI?

    Because God knows that would have cured.

    They couldn’t do an MRI because she had metal in her head from some experimental treatment they tried earlier, you half-witted piece of shit.

  33. 33.

    ppGaz

    January 29, 2006 at 10:38 pm

    That’s why I approved of the politicians stepping in

    Doesn’t matter. It was none of their business, and it’s none of your business.

    It wasn’t Bill Frist’s business either, and if you take note of his pathetic performance today on tv, you’ll find out that that’s basically what he thinks he learned … that most people think it was none of his business.

    And they’re right, it wasn’t, and still isn’t his business, or your business.

    Just because you saw her on tv doesn’t make it your business. You’re a voyeur into someone else’s life.

  34. 34.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 10:41 pm

    John, I just read over your link. First of all I don’t know who this commenter is, I didn’t follow all the info to his background yet. However, a CAT scan shows horizontal slices of a brain, minutely thin. Only a few pictures of Terri’s brain were released to the public, courtesy of Michael. We all know that Terri received extensive damage to the top of her cortex and much of that was gone. However, about 30% of her cortex did remain. Some of that may, I repeat, may, have had some function.

    Of course Michael released only a few horizontal slices that may have been the most damaged slice of her brain. Without more cross sections released, there is no way for ‘bloggers’ to know how far this severe damage extends down her brain. So everyone on this one picture assumes that “oooh, it’s all damaged. No need for an MRI” when in fact an MRI might still uncover something the CAT scan didn’t. It was another false PR trick engineered by Michael and Cranford and apparently very successful.

  35. 35.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 10:44 pm

    They couldn’t do an MRI because she had metal in her head from some experimental treatment they tried earlier, you half-witted piece of shit.

    Look dumb ass, I am aware of that. Are you aware that Michael was ordered by Terri’s doctor to have those removed years before her death because they might be an infection risk, and he disobeyed doctor’s orders? I’m sorry, you love to insult before you know. That’s called being an idiot.

  36. 36.

    John Cole

    January 29, 2006 at 10:45 pm

    It was another false PR trick engineered by Michael and Cranford and apparently very successful.

    Have you been drinking? Because you are about to make me break my diet and have a glass of wine.

  37. 37.

    Sojourner

    January 29, 2006 at 10:45 pm

    You are a liar and I pity you.

    Look out, scs is off her meds again.

    If that’s what Gibson said, why has he not subsequently explained what he meant? Or is it because he knew he could not defend what he originally said?

    I’m sorry, little one, but it really is a shame that you try so hard to defend the indefensible.

    Now run off and take those little pills your mommy has for you. You’ll feel much better.

  38. 38.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 10:47 pm

    Sojourner, I am quoting the MAN for god’s sake and his EXACT words! Do I have to google that quote AGAIN for you for the 20th time now? Jesus. Stop lying.

  39. 39.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 10:48 pm

    Sojourner, are you in menopause? Cause you sure sound like it.

  40. 40.

    Sojourner

    January 29, 2006 at 10:50 pm

    Sojourner, I am quoting the MAN for god’s sake and his EXACT words! Do I have to google that quote AGAIN for you for the 20th time now? Jesus. Stop lying.

    Well, apparently Gibson doesn’t agree with your interpretation. But I forget. You have omniscient knowledge of what Gibson REALLY meant (even though he doesn’t know it) and of Schiavo’s TRUE condition.

    What a little fool you are.

  41. 41.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 10:50 pm

    Have you been drinking? Because you are about to make me break my diet and have a glass of wine.

    Tell me John, where is my science wrong? What percent of a brain has to be spared to have no cognitive function left and so we know we don’t need to give MRIs to brain damaged patients? If you know the answer to that, you deserve a Nobel prize. And a glass of wine.

  42. 42.

    Sojourner

    January 29, 2006 at 10:51 pm

    Sojourner, are you in menopause? Cause you sure sound like it.

    Have you hit puberty yet? Cause you sure don’t sound like it.

    Certainly the fantasy of sexual harassment was that of a child.

  43. 43.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 10:52 pm

    Sojourner – do you know what a QUOTE is? Do you know what repeating a quote word for word is? It’s a QUOTE. QUOTE. Again. Quote. Get it? There is no interpretation to repeating a quote.

  44. 44.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 10:52 pm

    Sojourner, you might need to up your estrogen.

  45. 45.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 10:54 pm

    Actually Sojourner, I’m sorry to go there. But- if you insist on bringing up my age, which you have no idea of, I guess I have no choice but to do likewise.

  46. 46.

    Sojourner

    January 29, 2006 at 10:54 pm

    There is no interpretation to repeating a quote.

    A quote taken out of context. But then you don’t understand how a dialogue takes place. Because if you did, you would have two choices: Either you’re wrong or Janet Parshall has developed a new concern with the feelings of non-Christians. Of course the latter doesn’t pass the straight face test so don’t bother going there.

    But the reality is you have no interest in facts and I have no interest in spending any more time on you. You have school tomorrow and I have to go to work.

  47. 47.

    ppGaz

    January 29, 2006 at 10:54 pm

    John, I am going to need a raise. I don’t get paid enough for this.

  48. 48.

    nyrev

    January 29, 2006 at 10:59 pm

    ppGaz, as far as free entertainment goes, this is pretty good. Compared to scs, BIRDZILLA’s the genius love-child of Albert Einstein and Marilyn Vos Savant.

  49. 49.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 11:01 pm

    By the way DougJ, I applaud you for using your real ID to insult me tonight instead of your usual cowardly ruse of hiding behind your fake ones to insult. You’re making progress. Soon you might need a only few fake IDS on here to hide behind as compared to the dozens you have now.

  50. 50.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 11:02 pm

    Have any one of you disputed my science? No. Because you don’t know any of it. Please inform yourselves first.

  51. 51.

    ppGaz

    January 29, 2006 at 11:05 pm

    ppGaz, as far as free entertainment goes, this is pretty good

    I’m just sorry that I ever gave up serious drinking.

  52. 52.

    DougJ

    January 29, 2006 at 11:05 pm

    Scs — what makes you think DougJ is my real ID?

    John — what’s going on here? I thought scs was your sister or girlfriend or something. Just to get it out of the way, let’s not say that since this is West Virgina, she could be both.

  53. 53.

    ppGaz

    January 29, 2006 at 11:09 pm

    BIRDZILLA’s the genius love-child of Albert Einstein and Marilyn Vos Savant.

    Ah. And here I thought his tortured syntax was just …. gibberish. It’s actually a highly advanced form of communication!

  54. 54.

    SeesThroughIt

    January 29, 2006 at 11:10 pm

    Are you actually serious, scs, or are you just trying to get a rise out of people?

  55. 55.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 11:10 pm

    John—what’s going on here?

    You all dish it out, but you don’t seem to like to take it. And no, I have no relationship to John of any kind.

  56. 56.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 11:12 pm

    Sometimes I try to get a rise out of people, such as when I insult them or their party, other times I am serious. In terms of the medicine I talked about here, I am serious, and I will google and back up anything I wrote if you make me.

  57. 57.

    ppGaz

    January 29, 2006 at 11:15 pm

    Sometimes I try to get a rise out of people, such as when I insult them or their party, other times I am serious. In terms of the medicine I talked about here, I am serious, and I will google and back up anything I wrote if you make me.

    Oh, Jesus.

  58. 58.

    ZTN

    January 29, 2006 at 11:20 pm

    Frist looked really, really bad today. He looked (and was) totally speechless. Russert had him on the ropes on just about everything but let him off the hook by letting Frist have the last word and moving onto the next question.

    Russert should take notice of how he can easily stump and corner these pols when he doesn’t accept there disingenuous, sidestepping spin-filled, BS answers. I was disappointed when he let Frist go. Seeing Frist speechless, looking for a way to BS his way out tough, good questions was nice to see.

    I wish Russert would just have the guts to say “Listen, Senator (or anyone else), I think I made my point, the facts are what they are and you know it. Accept it. I don’t want to hear anymore. Don’t push it. Now, next question…”

    Journalists should know their stuff. They should know a Pol’s BS answer BEFORE he/she gives it and nail them when they equivocate. HOLD THEIR FEET TO FIRE!

  59. 59.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 11:23 pm

    Oh Jesus what? None of you all seem to have knowledge on your own about this, or the ability to look up your own facts, so I have to link up every little thing on here, or you don’t believe it. It’s like teaching school on here.

  60. 60.

    ppGaz

    January 29, 2006 at 11:24 pm

    HOLD THEIR FEET TO FIRE!

    Well, but then they’d have to give up their luxury box seats at the Redskins games.

    Have you ever watched Chris Matthews suck up to a powerful politician? It is without doubt the most sickening thing you’ll see on tv that week.

  61. 61.

    ppGaz

    January 29, 2006 at 11:27 pm

    It’s like teaching school on here.

    Oh, this just keeps getting better.

  62. 62.

    DougJ

    January 29, 2006 at 11:29 pm

    These guys — Matthews, Russert — are just awful. And the sad thing is Russert is the Grand Inquisitor next to the people on CNN. The whole state of television journalism is a disgrace.

    I believe that the entire Gang of 500 should be tried for treason. I am not kidding.

  63. 63.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 11:33 pm

    So ppGaz, is that the back of your head in the baseball stadium? Where’s the frontal shots?

  64. 64.

    The Other Steve

    January 29, 2006 at 11:36 pm

    You people are just so mean! Calling scs names, when all she wants to do is just get along. Even if that means capitulating on everything we believe in as Americans.

  65. 65.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 11:43 pm

    Yes, me wanting Terri to get an MRI before we killed her means you all have to capitulate on everything you believe in as Americans. Great country you want to live in.

  66. 66.

    ppGaz

    January 29, 2006 at 11:50 pm

    So ppGaz, is that the back of your head

    No, I just comb the hair over my face.

  67. 67.

    ZTN

    January 29, 2006 at 11:55 pm

    ppGaz and DougJ,

    I agree 110%. In fact I emailed MTP after watching and shared a few comments.

    I made a comment along the lines of box seats at Redskins games why I ask if he was afraid of getting shunned at the next cocktail party (by not pressing the issue when he had them stammering and running for cover).

    I agree, types like Russert and Matthews (and MANY others definitely have a conflict of interests when “getting tough” with politicians. I see too many virtual “wink winks” when discussing serious matters. You’d think their kids probably hang out together or something like that.

    Find a “take no prisoners” journalist with integrity who doesn’t care about being nice nice with these pols and you’ll have the number 1 political talk show…until Kaplan, Klein or Ailes drop them because of outside pressures.

  68. 68.

    scs

    January 29, 2006 at 11:57 pm

    No, I just comb the hair over my face.

    Well we know what the problem is with you then. You can’t see the keyboard well enough to write. you know, funny, I never pictured you as a blond.

  69. 69.

    ppGaz

    January 29, 2006 at 11:59 pm

    I never pictured you as a blond.

    Let me guess: Red, with a pitchfork tail?

  70. 70.

    ZTN

    January 30, 2006 at 12:00 am

    BTW, ppGaz, I just answered your post about “media narratives” and Group Think a few threads back on page 2 about John Kerry and the Filibuster. I used “John” on that thread for some reason.

  71. 71.

    CaseyL

    January 30, 2006 at 12:03 am

    Why is anyone arguing with scs about Schiavo? scs pulled the same stunts the first six dozen times we talked about it: professed to ‘not know much about the issue’ (other than winger talking points), asked people to ‘give [me] information,’ and then didn’t bother to read any of it but instead kept repeating the winger talking points.

    Hell, scs does that with every topic she posts about. Discussing anything with her is like talking to a broken record.

    And if the topic of undead people is itself never going to die, I remember asking the Terri!Lives! ghouls why they weren’t just as outraged by the Texas Futile Care Law.

    You know, the one Bush supported and signed into law? The one that allows hospitals to discontinue care of cases they consider “hopeless,” with the definition of “hopeless” including “People who can’t pay for continuing care”?

    Oddly enough, I don’t remember reading anything about the Terri!Lives! ghouls thundering down to Texas to save any lives there. And, y’know, it’s been quite a while since Terri!Died! – I know of at least two other cases where hospitals in Texas killed patients whose families didn’t want them to die – and, in one of those cases, the patient herself was conscious enough to communicate a wish to go on living.

    Not a peep from the Terr!Lives! ghouls, though.

    Not a friggin’ word.

  72. 72.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 12:07 am

    The one that allows hospitals to discontinue care of cases they consider “hopeless,” with the definition of “hopeless” including “People who can’t pay for continuing care”?

    I bet even those people had MRIs.

  73. 73.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 12:23 am

    scs pulled the same stunts the first six dozen times we talked about it: professed to ‘not know much about the issue’ (other than winger talking points), asked people to ‘give [me] information,’ and then didn’t bother to read any of it but instead kept repeating the winger talking points.

    That is a lie. I found this blog because of the Terri issue. And in fact, I came to this blog rather late in the case, and already probably knew more about the case and the medical science of it than 95% of you when I got here.

    I think you may confusing this issue with our debates on ID. In the beginning of my debates about ID, I had only read one (long) article about it in the NYT and so didn’t consider myself an expert on the issue. Unlike many of you, I was honest enough to admit that. However, after that time, I did inform myself more about ID by actually reading articles by Behe and not just taking my thoughts about it off the Daily Kos or Panda’s Thumb. Anyway I suggest before you accuse someone, try something new and know what the hell you are talking about first.

  74. 74.

    ppGaz

    January 30, 2006 at 12:34 am

    the patient herself was conscious enough to communicate a wish to go on living.

    Yes, but she was in a Persistent Uninsured State. No hope.

  75. 75.

    Rex

    January 30, 2006 at 1:38 am

    The Terri Schiavo case has to be the only situation where you wingnuts give a flying shit about science.

  76. 76.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 1:41 am

    Ok John, you got your medical info from the comments section of some blog from some guy who is not even a medical doctor. I just did another quick search and found this about Terri’s CAT scans. I don’t know exactly who this writer is, but I can see that this doctor’s blog is a blog that SPECIALIZES in medical issues. And not only that, as you can see in the top right corner, it won the 2004 Medical Blog Award, so I’m assuming he knows what he is talking about. This writer has a very different view on Terri’s CAT scans. As you can see, there are differing opinions on this everywhere because it is still an evolving science. I still say when in doubt the more tests the better.

    Code Blue Link

    First, I contest the theory that Terri’s brain actively continues to degenerate as implied by the above statement. How could they gage serial brain degeneration without serial follow-up? And by what mechanism would her brain CONTINUE to atrophy? Second, Terri’s cerebral cortex has not been replaced by fluid. That is inaccurate. The cortex is thinned and the sulci are enlarged. There is a difference. Third, and most importantly, given the amount of atrophy on this image I disagree with the court’s inadequately considered conclusion….

    The most alarming thing about this image, however, is that there certainly is cortex left. Granted, it is severely thinned, especially for Terri’s age, but I would be nonplussed if you told me that this was a 75 year old female who was somewhat senile but fully functional, and I defy a radiologist anywhere to contest that.

    The worrisome, no alarming thing, for me, was that I heard a bioethicist and several important figures on the major media describe Terri’s brain as MUCH WORSE. One “expert” said that she had a “bag of water” in her head. Several experts described her as a “brain stem preparation”… These statements are wholly inaccurate. This is an atrophied brain, yes, but there is cortex remaining, and where there’s cortex (?life) there’s hope…. If you starve this woman to death it would be, in my professional and experienced medical opinion, the equivalent of starving to death a 75-85 year old person. I would take that to the witness stand.

  77. 77.

    MAX HATS

    January 30, 2006 at 4:26 am

    Some form their opinions by consideration of evidence. There are also republicans.

    Scs, I’m dying to hear your brilliant ideas on global warming too. Don’t hold back.

  78. 78.

    Pooh

    January 30, 2006 at 5:25 am

    Global warming was a plot spawned by Hillary during the ’94 midterms. Since she made a deal with the devil, she knew how the next 10 years would turn out, so she knew she needed some story to start breaking in 2006 so that she could derail her 2008 opponent, Harriet Miers, during the election. She should be ashamed for ecologizing politics.

  79. 79.

    The Other Steve

    January 30, 2006 at 8:07 am

    Yes, me wanting Terri to get an MRI before we killed her

    It’s amazing how far we’ve progressed… from the days when God caused people to die and medical technology was involved to postpone the situation…

    To today when it’s the doctors who kill people by turning off the extraordinary measures we use to keep people alive well past when God called them up to heaven.

    Apparently some people today view Religion as just saying a big “FUCK YOU!” to God.

  80. 80.

    John Cole

    January 30, 2006 at 8:28 am

    SCS- Code Blue is not an expert, and is the wingnut who speculated for days about nefarious behavior with Schiavo about to spots on her CAT scan he could not figure out. Those spots- metal stints placed there for experimental therapy.

    Just stop it- you are humiliating youtself, whether you realize it or not.

  81. 81.

    Steve

    January 30, 2006 at 8:29 am

    Scs shrugs off the multiple cases of people who were taken off the machines “because they had MRIs,” even though those people were CONSCIOUS and WANTED TO LIVE. How nice it must be when your “culture of life” extends to exactly one person.

  82. 82.

    Steve

    January 30, 2006 at 8:38 am

    Here is another sample of Code Blue’s wisdom to assist in evaluating his credibility:

    DOES BILL CLINTON HAVE AIDS OR CANCER?

    Remember how crazy everyone got because of the abrupt change in Viktor Yushchenko’s appearance over the course of six months? Well this is PRETTY CLOSE, wouldn’t you say?

    Scs is like a less articulate Darrell, armed with nothing but preconceived notions and Google.

  83. 83.

    charliedontsurf10

    January 30, 2006 at 9:00 am

    Yea, like, no shit – that’s kinda the idea behind being a conservative. Or at least it used to be.

    Ideas, conservative, same sentence, that’s a good one, shmendrik.

  84. 84.

    Sirkowski

    January 30, 2006 at 9:29 am

    I was braindead once.
    Then I had an MRI.
    Now I’m writting here.

    IT’S NOT TOO LATE TO SAVE TERRY!

  85. 85.

    Mr. Grouchypants

    January 30, 2006 at 9:30 am

    What does everyone think of the positions that disability rights groups such as Not Dead Yet took on the Schiavo situation. They aren’t generally right-wing or “pro-life” as the term is generally used, but they opposed Schiavo’s death. I didn’t hear much about them in the news during the incident, but they were involved with protests.

  86. 86.

    Ancient Purple

    January 30, 2006 at 9:31 am

    The really sad part is that even if people were to have Living Wills, health care directives and video of themselves saying, “If I am ever incapacitated like Terri Schiavo, I want you to pull the plug,” people like scs would be there in a flash to get the courts involved to keep me alive.

    Of course, when the question were to arise as to who would pay for my continue care, people like scs would scatter like cockroaches.

    Culture of life… unless you have to pay for it.

  87. 87.

    rachel

    January 30, 2006 at 10:08 am

    I can’t wait until the Democrats keep bringing the Terri Schiavo debacle up OVER and OVER again during the election seasons!! It was pathetic, disgusting and makes them look like idiots (what else is new). I live in Florida and we’re NEVER going to let people forget! Can’t wait!

  88. 88.

    The Sanity Inspector

    January 30, 2006 at 10:39 am

    Okay, having waded through the flammage here, I guess I have no choice but to concur that I am the crazy, unbalanced one. But indulge me a moment more, please.

    The Schiavo autopsy put a lot of wild rumors to rest. She was just plain gone, and had been gone for a long time. Her husband never abused her. There was no possibility of rehabilitation, as her brains had degenerated into almost complete non-functionality.

    But she was alive, and her life was ended by the witholding, not of extraordinary medical interventions, but of food and water. Due reckoning must be made of this fact, if we are to avoid sliding down into the same pit as the Dutch, with their doctor-discretion euthanasia.

    But if you think the Dutch way is a good thing, then please say so.

  89. 89.

    ppGaz

    January 30, 2006 at 10:53 am

    But if you think the Dutch way is a good thing

    Yes, I think the woman should at least offer to pay for the meal.

  90. 90.

    ppGaz

    January 30, 2006 at 10:55 am

    I was braindead once.
    Then I had an MRI.
    Now I’m writting here.

    Well, if you’re a righty, you needn’t have sought treatment. Nobody would have noticed, and you’d have saved a lot of money.

  91. 91.

    ppGaz

    January 30, 2006 at 11:02 am

    BTW, ppGaz, I just answered your post about “media narratives” and Group Think a few threads back on page 2

    Answered.

  92. 92.

    farmgirl

    January 30, 2006 at 11:45 am

    Sanity Inspector: “But she was alive, and her life was ended by the witholding, not of extraordinary medical interventions, but of food and water.”

    COnsidering that food and water was being delivered by a surgically implanted tube, I’d say that qualifies as an extraordinary medical intervention.

  93. 93.

    Cyrus

    January 30, 2006 at 11:51 am

    But she was alive, and her life was ended by the witholding, not of extraordinary medical interventions, but of food and water. Due reckoning must be made of this fact, if we are to avoid sliding down into the same pit as the Dutch, with their doctor-discretion euthanasia.

    This is not an expert opinion, but when food and water is given intravenously (or was it just a tube stuck down her mouth?), I’d call it extraordinary.

    But even if not, so what? The person she had given power of attorney to did not want her to be in this state and, as collaboration even if it’s not important itself, claimed that she told him as much. No credible reasons were given to argue that Michael Schiavo shouldn’t have had that right or to dispute what state she was in. Well, unless you count, “An MRI might have shown that she wasn’t really in the state every other measure demonstrated she was in, if an MRI could even be invented that would work despite metal plates.” (Thanks DougJ, I didn’t know about that.)

    In my opinion ethically and beyond all shadow of a doubt legally, her husband alone should have had the final say. But for some reason, it became the only event up to that point to cut one of Bush’s vacations short. Funny how that worked.

  94. 94.

    Cyrus

    January 30, 2006 at 11:55 am

    The Schiavo autopsy put a lot of wild rumors to rest. She was just plain gone, and had been gone for a long time. …
    But she was alive, and her life was ended by the witholding, not of extraordinary medical interventions, but of food and water.

    Also, I don’t think we’re using common definitions of these words. To me, “She was just plain gone” and “But she was alive,” are incompatible and contradictory. Either she was gone or she wasn’t.

    Due reckoning must be made of this fact, if we are to avoid sliding down into the same pit as the Dutch, with their doctor-discretion euthanasia.

    But if you think the Dutch way is a good thing, then please say so.

    I appreciated ppGaz’s sarcasm, but I have my own radical, wild-and-crazy proposal: let’s have the person with power of attorney make the decisions. Totally nuts, I know.

  95. 95.

    Phillip J. Birmingham

    January 30, 2006 at 12:02 pm

    But if you think the Dutch way is a good thing, then please say so.

    I think that the way the Dutch actually do things is good.

    If they acted according to the lies spread about them, yeah, that would be bad.

  96. 96.

    DougJ

    January 30, 2006 at 12:04 pm

    It boils down to this: who do you think you have the final say in these matters, the woman’s husband or Tom DeLay?

    There’s nothing else to ask really.

  97. 97.

    ppGaz

    January 30, 2006 at 1:06 pm

    It boils down to this: who do you think you have the final say in these matters, the woman’s husband or Tom DeLay?

    Mrs. DeLay’s living will: Don’t let that motherfucking husband of mine touch my respirator!

  98. 98.

    demimondian

    January 30, 2006 at 1:08 pm

    It boils down to this: who do you think you have the final say in these matters, the woman’s husband or Tom DeLay?

    And when Tom DeLay had to make a similar decision, you’ll notice that he didn’t ask Randall Terry’s opinion.

  99. 99.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 2:12 pm

    Just stop it- you are humiliating youtself, whether you realize it or not.

    I am humiliating myself because I wanted the woman to get an MRI before her death? Give me a break. I don’t know who that writer is, he was one fo the first that showed up on a search, but I saw he is a doctor of a seemingly respected blog. I gave his opinion as an example of how different medical people can see the same things in different ways. Why? Because there is no definitive way to read a CAT scan and see if someone has PVS. You are all humiliating yourselves because you cling to outdated science of a bright line between minimally conscious and PVS. I have provided articles for you, or you can look it up yourselves – why aren’t you educating yourselves?

    As to these other people being put to death in Texas, like I have said previously, I get my news from the mainstream media, primarily the NYT. I do not recall any stories that I have read on this subject run there. If they did run a small story, I must have missed it. I ask you why the supposedly liberal NYT saw fit not to make a huge issue out of these Texas patients? Sorry I can’t scour all the newpapers for all injustices done in this country everyday. I am not an activist. But I can have an opinion on a huge media story that is in my face for months. And my opinion on this story has nothing to do with what is going on in Texas. If those patients are treated injustly, I wish that they receive justice. And I wish Terri received justice as well.

    The best way to know if someone has any coginitive funtion is not from “observations”, it’s from an MRI. Terri would have had to have a minor operation that her doctor recommended years ago to remove her implants in her head and then she could have received one. However, Michael felt it better to just keep them in and check up on her in the autopsy. And the rest of you let him get away with that. Your blinding ignorance is sickening and sad.

  100. 100.

    Darrell

    January 30, 2006 at 2:34 pm

    It boils down to this: who do you think you have the final say in these matters, the woman’s husband or Tom DeLay?

    A more honest reading of the situation would be: who do you think should have the final say in these matters, the woman’s husband who had moved on, or her parents who obviously cared greatly for her

    I saw her husband and Terri’s parents interviewed on tv a year before the blowup.. Michael comes across as a real insincere sleazeball, something which admittedly swayed my opinion against him. The tombstone he made for his wife confirms he really is a hateful callous prick

    The law giving the spouse final say is a good law for most cases.. as the spouse usually knows best what the other wants. But in the Shiavo case, Michael ‘moved on’ shortly after winning a big insurance settlement, putting into question whether he had his wife’s best interest at heart. That was in stark contrast to her parents, who clearly (at least to me) loved and cared for their daughter. It was not the ‘open and shut’ situation which many are characterizing it to be, and as scs points out, why not get an MRI to be sure in a life or death situation like this? Why the hell not get an MRI to be sure?

  101. 101.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 2:35 pm

    FYI, I am trying to link up posts for you all on the difficulties of reading CAT scans and for Terri’s scans. However, mostly what is coming up is opinions on blogs. I see a lot of Balloon Juice comments popping up actually. I was trying to link to CNN and Time Magazine stories by neurologist Dr. Sanjay Gupta, whom I had seen often stating that Terri’s CAT scans were inconclusive, as are most CAT scans when diagnosing PVS. But all the major media stories coming up on this are pay-per-view by now. It’s very hard to find a neutral source to link to at this point, but I will continue to look.

  102. 102.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 2:44 pm

    Exactly Darrell. I think unfortunately most of these commentors on here are getting their science from other blogs. Blogs are dangerous because people have a tendency to seek out the ones they agree with and just use that to confirm their world view of the facts. When I actually linked to some actual science articles in the past here, I doubt they even read them because of the facts they are still getting wrong. It’s the lazy man’s way to educate yourself.

    All I say we should have reomoved Terri’s implants in a simple operation and then gave her an MRI. You don’t have to be a brain surgeon to understand that. But many here are so blinded by ideology that they can’t see it.

  103. 103.

    Mike S

    January 30, 2006 at 2:55 pm

    rachel Says:

    I can’t wait until the Democrats keep bringing the Terri Schiavo debacle up OVER and OVER again during the election seasons!! It was pathetic, disgusting and makes them look like idiots (what else is new). I live in Florida and we’re NEVER going to let people forget! Can’t wait!

    I can’t figure out who you are calling idiots. But as scs demonstrates, the capacity for wingnuts to continue lying and looking rediculous on this issue has no bounds.

  104. 104.

    SeesThroughIt

    January 30, 2006 at 3:01 pm

    When I see these “culture of life” dingbats, all I can think of is Mayor Quimby’s quip:

    “Are these morons getting dumber or just louder?”

  105. 105.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 3:08 pm

    Okay you morons- god you are all idiots and getting me mad. I will post this article that I posted a few weeks ago. PLEASE READ THE ARTICLE! I”M BEGGING YOU! This same info can also be found in other medical sources.
    .

    The Scientist link

    Schiavo, whose persistent vegetative state (PVS) lasted 15 years, never regained consciousness, and her autopsy suggested why: After anoxia, her brain had atrophied to about half its normal weight. The reason why Herbert awoke, on the other hand, remains a mystery. “You just can’t tell” whether someone in a vegetative state will recover, says Steven Laureys, an assistant professor of neurology and neurosciences at the University of Liège in Belgium.

    Consciousness disorders, however, are starting to yield some of their secrets to brain-imaging technology. Scans have already linked these disorders to disrupted neural connections and decreased cerebral metabolism. Brain imaging eventually might be able to track, and perhaps predict, an event like Herbert’s awakening – a transition from one state of consciousness to another.

    In a newly published study,[1] Adrian M. Owen, a senior scientist at the MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit in Cambridge, UK, and his colleagues scanned a vegetative patient with positron emission tomography (PET). They discovered that certain brain regions reacted to spoken English sentences much as they reacted in fully conscious subjects. Nine months later, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) revealed that the patient’s cortex responded partially to semantically ambiguous sentences; this response is thought to tap higher levels of speech comprehension. The patient later entered a minimally conscious state (MCS). “What we may have been picking up in the second visit was his emergence” from PVS to MCS, speculates Owen …

    SHOCKING RESULTS:One minute of electrical stimulation was delivered to the wrists of 15 healthy controls and 15 patients in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). Positron emission tomography indicated the activation of various brain regions (red), including the primary somatosensory cortex and thalamus. Blue areas, which were activated less in patients than in controls, included higher-order cortices. (From S.L. Laureys et al., NeuroImage, 17:732–41, 2002.)

  106. 106.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 3:24 pm

    I will summarize my thoughts again in this case for you because I don’t even think most of you know what you are even arguing about at this point with me.

    Terri’s trial was in the late 90’s, I believe 1997. At that time, medical professionals had a now outdated idea, like you and your favorite blogs seem to also have, that there was a bright line between PVS and minimally conscious. In fact the term minimally conscious was not even adopted as a medical term until the early 2000’s. They had the belief that if a person was non-responsive for one year, that there was no hope of recovery after that and that the person’s brain was basically like the term states- like a vegatable. No activity in the cortex at all.

    However, in the early 2000’s doctors started to realize that there was more to a supposed “PVS” patients than was previously realized. One way they started to notice this was through MRI’s and PET scans, and noticing that the activity in the brain of some PVS patients of recognizing voices were similar to that of normal patients. They started to understand at that point how to use MRIs and PET scans to better check for consciousness patterns. In addition, there were begginning to be stories of “recovery” from a supposed PVS state years later. Example, Bob Herbert a firefighter who recovered speech and consciousness from PVS 10 YEARS after his injury.

    This line of thinking did not exist in the medical establishment during Terri’s trial. The medical establishment thought by giving a CAT scan and just sitting by a bed and looking at the patient was the best and only way to diagnose PVS. They thought because Terri didn’t show consciousness after one year, there was NO NEED to give her an MRI or PET scan and ruled on that. We now know, and we knew before Terri’s death, that this is insufficient. To truly know, as best we can, of a patients mental status, a PET scan or MRI scan must be given.

    Why was Terri not given this? Removing her implants was a minor operation so that wasn’t the reason. The reason is because the courts ruled in 1997 and didn’t care what new concepts in medicine in 2001 said. Any review after that was also based in 1997 medicine that was recorded at her trial. Her case fell through the legal cracks. And it’s sad. It’s sad that Terri wasn’t even given the most basic tests before we allowed her to die.

    Now if you want to debate me or call me names, stick to what I’m arguing and stick to some facts please.

  107. 107.

    Faux News

    January 30, 2006 at 3:26 pm

    “Yes, I think the woman should at least offer to pay for the meal”.

    I just spit up my “Freedom Bubble Tea” all over my keyboard. Thanks!

  108. 108.

    Faux News

    January 30, 2006 at 3:29 pm

    I am serious, and I will google and back up anything I wrote if you make me.

    Uh oh, as if BJ doesn’t have enough of these (sigh):

    http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ferouscranus.htm

  109. 109.

    csc

    January 30, 2006 at 3:32 pm

    Also, you didn’t even need to use medical tests to see that Terri wasn’t braindead. She was capable of tracking objects with her eyes, as demonstrated on a widely available videotape. She would smile when her parents entered her room. At least one Harvard MD diagnosed her as NOT being in a PVS, and it was so obvious that he didn’t even need to see her in person to do so. Coupled with the fact that Michael Schiavo probably beat her into her state and was worried about her waking up and testifying against him (not to speak of the untold millions he won but refused to spend on her), and it’s pretty obvious that the murder of our dear Terri was the crime of the century, and one that Democrats will pay a dear price for.

  110. 110.

    RobR

    January 30, 2006 at 3:37 pm

    And it’s sad. It’s sad that Terri wasn’t even given the most basic tests before we allowed her to die.

    Which, in hindsight, would have shown that she was brain-dead and blind. So why are you still arguing?

    This is America. Find a lawyer and get yourself a living will that says that you want all heroic measures taken before they pull the plug on you, and rest assured that you will be tested and poked and prodded and kept on machines until you crap your kidneys, and you need never fear that you might be pulled off of life support before you’re Goddamned good and ready.

    You know, provided you’re not uninsured in Texas.

  111. 111.

    Steve

    January 30, 2006 at 3:37 pm

    The law giving the spouse final say is a good law for most cases.. as the spouse usually knows best what the other wants.

    Just to clarify the record, Florida law does not give the spouse final say. There is a specific, statutory procedure that applies to these cases, and where there is doubt a court proceeding is convened to determine, not what the spouse wants, but what the actual intent of the patient would be. Michael Schiavo was entitled to present evidence at that court hearing, and so was everyone else, and at the end of the day the judge made his best determination of what Terri Schiavo wanted. His lengthy, detailed ruling left no doubt that Michael Schiavo’s position was not entitled to any extra weight just because he was the husband.

    I won’t relitigate the facts of the case, considering there was a full and fair trial followed by a decade of appeals, but this is the procedure that was employed. It was not simply “her husband wants her to die so that’s the way it’s gonna be.”

  112. 112.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 3:42 pm

    Which, in hindsight, would have shown that she was brain-dead and blind. So why are you still arguing?
    This is America. Find a lawyer and get yourself a living will that says that you want all heroic measures taken before they pull the plug on you

    Yes its sad we had to wait for the autopsy. An MRI or a PET scan is not a heroic measure today, it’s standard care for brain damaged people. And we didn’t give it to Terri because her husband and the courts didn’t want to give her basic care. They thought an autopsy should suffice.

  113. 113.

    Darrell

    January 30, 2006 at 3:48 pm

    Ask yourself, would a loving, caring husband truly concerned about his wife’s well being REFUSE consent to even allow an MRI of his wife to aid in her diagnosis? An honest answer to that question says a lot in my opinion

    I really don’t believe this is a case of the religious right trying to ram their belief system down the throats of individuals making private decisions. It was a difficult case in which the husband left lots of legit doubts as to whether he had his wife’s best interest at heart.. and his opinion on the fate of his wife clashed with close family members who seemed genuinely concerned with her well being. For me, it was a question of who do you believe was sincerely looking out for Terri Schiavo’s best interest, the husband or her parents

    I can imagine a number of other scenarios where such a conflict would cause legitimate concern. Imagine the case of a lonely widower re-marrying then shortly thereafter succombing to serious illness or injury putting him in a coma. The judgement call of the new bride over the fate of her new husband, someone who may not have known him for long, would take precedence over that of the sons, daughters, and brothers of the comatose victim who were close to him for a lifetime. But the law says the spouse has final say. Is that fair?

    Would objections to her decision, including legal challenges, really constitute a basis to claim that the “radical right” is interfering in “everyday occurrences”? Please.. what bullshit to frame the debate that way

  114. 114.

    Darrell

    January 30, 2006 at 3:53 pm

    His lengthy, detailed ruling left no doubt that Michael Schiavo’s position was not entitled to any extra weight just because he was the husband.

    Terri Schiavo left no living will. Only her husband’s word, suddenly recalled many years after the fact. Steve, I may be misinformed here, so let me put it another way – do the courts usually give heavy deference to the spouses wishes in these matter? more so than to parents or siblings?

    What about in cases where the person in a coma left left no clues as to what they wanted for themselves, one way or another?

  115. 115.

    Mr. Grouchypants

    January 30, 2006 at 3:59 pm

    Darrell,

    The problem is that many right-wing groups did use the Schiavo situation to further their own goals. So they brought the backlash on themselves.

    However, I agree with your point about how the issue was framed. While lots of protesters were right-wing pro-lifers, not all of them were. Many disability rights activists, such as Not Dead Yet, also protested the courts actions. And those groups are usually much more left leaning. So focusing solely on the pro-life groups is rather shortsided.

  116. 116.

    SeesThroughIt

    January 30, 2006 at 4:05 pm

    Which, in hindsight, would have shown that she was brain-dead and blind. So why are you still arguing?

    Now you’re getting closer to the point. It’s not about medical or legal procedures with these human pustules. They just want their way–their lunatic, wingnut, insulting-to-intelligence way. If the MRI fell in line with every single other shred of medical evidence and showed Schiavo wouldn’t have recovered–and the MRI would’ve shown that–then they would’ve demanded another medical test. And then another round of legal wrangling. And then some more tests. And then some more wrangling. They just want to keep running this bullshit until they got the result they wanted. Plain and simple. Most people would’ve told them to shut up and go fuck themselves long before Michael Schiavo did.

    It’s rather pathetic that people are still trying to run this crap, though. If you’re one of those people, let’s just liquify a significant portion of your brain; after all, you people don’t seem to think it’s so bad.

  117. 117.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 4:06 pm

    Good lord. If that was the case then why was Mrs. Schiavo given a CAT scan, you moonbats?

    How do you guys remember how to breathe?

  118. 118.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 4:06 pm

    By the way, Michael could have opted for a PET scan (some info, near bottom of page) for Terri, which we see from the article I linked to above, also has great value in diagnosing brain damaged patients and wouldn’t have required him to have ANY operation to remove her metal implants. Just a short simple scan paid for by insurance. Yet Michael refused to have that given as well. Best interests at heart?

  119. 119.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 4:08 pm

    Mrs. Schiavo given a CAT scan, you moonbats?

    A CAT scan is not sufficient to diagnose PVS. Read the article I linked to, PLEASE. And ask Bob Herbert about that.

  120. 120.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 4:08 pm

    They thought because Terri didn’t show consciousness after one year, there was NO NEED to give her an MRI or PET scan and ruled on that. We now know, and we knew before Terri’s death, that this is insufficient. To truly know, as best we can, of a patients mental status, a PET scan or MRI scan must be given.

    I was replying to this idiocy.

  121. 121.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 4:13 pm

    scs, please explain what ambiguities about Schiavo’s brain functionality remained after the CAT scan. Also, explain to me how Don Herbert proves your point about PET and fMRI scans. And how do you reconcile your assertion that “not even the most basic tests” were given with the CAT scan?

  122. 122.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 4:14 pm

    then they would’ve demanded another medical test

    You are the moonbats who are so afraid of standard tests that we use EVERYDAY to diagnose people. You were so very afraid that they might show some consciousness you were too damn chicken to let Terri have one. You thought it “safer” to wait for the autopsy. That’s stinks and you people ought to be ashamed of yourselves.

  123. 123.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 4:17 pm

    A basic test today to diagnose brain damage contains CAT scans and MRIs and PET scans. You obviously didn’t read the article above. CAT scans only pick up structure. However the brain is a complicated organ and MRIs and PET scans can pick up function in a damaged cortex where a CAT scan doesn’t. Simple as that.

  124. 124.

    John

    January 30, 2006 at 4:18 pm

    Yes its sad we had to wait for the autopsy. An MRI or a PET scan is not a heroic measure today, it’s standard care for brain damaged people. And we didn’t give it to Terri because her husband and the courts didn’t want to give her basic care. They thought an autopsy should suffice.

    Since you seem to have problems with this simple fact, I’ll spell it out for you.

    1) A magnetic resonance image (MRI) does not, in and of itself, show anything about activity. MRI, just like CT, takes a series of images as slices, usually less than a millimeter in thickness, of the affected area. There is a related technology, functional MRI (fMRI), that can show activity via blood oxygenation in the affected area. Still just a slice, though.

    2) MRI and fMRI utilize a static magnetic field ranging from 0.15 Tesla to 5+ Tesla to force non zero-spin atomic nuclei in the subject to align on a known axis. An orthogonal gradient is then applied to knock these atoms into a different alignment. Through the magic of precession, these atoms return to their previous alignment, emitting a very weak RF signal in the process. This signal is captured via a sensitive network of detectors, amplified, and recorded.

    3) The gradient mentioned above is a strong RF signal. Metal will absorb this RF pulse, heating in the process. And by heating, I mean hot enough to cook meat.

    4) Humans are made of meat.

    5) Therefore, any sort of a MRI on a person with embedded metal falls somewhere between “Really bad idea” and “Malpractice lawsuit”.

    6) Unless you like cooked human. In which case, seek help beyond what I can give you.

    7) Terri Schiavo had metal stents in her head. Several people are killed or injured every year from MRI + metal in body. (Several more are killed or injured when well-meaning people bring non-stainless steel devices into the scanning suite. Even 0.5 Tesla is enough to rip screwdrivers, pens and oxygen cylinders out of the hands of the Rad technicians.)

    8) See #5 for why a MRI on Terri would have been a bad idea.

    Is that clear enough for you, or do you prefer to maintain a conspiracy where there is none?

  125. 125.

    SeesThroughIt

    January 30, 2006 at 4:20 pm

    you people ought to be ashamed of yourselves.

    Yes, “culture of life” chickenshits should be ashamed of themselves. But that’s part of the problem–they are completely shameless. Hiding behind the body/corpse of e vegetable? Shameless. Not to mention pathetic.

  126. 126.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 4:23 pm

    ) Therefore, any sort of a MRI on a person with embedded metal falls somewhere between “Really bad idea” and “Malpractice lawsuit”.

    Did you ever hear of a minor operation to remove her metal implants, the one Michael’s doctors ordered him to do years before her death? Did you ever hear of a PET scan that also has much diagnostical value and that isn’t effected by the metal implants? Who are you and where did you get your info. You obviously need to look up more.

  127. 127.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 4:24 pm

    Hiding behind the body/corpse of e vegetable?

    Did you read the article I linked to on PVS? I doubt it. You like to spew off rather than inform.

  128. 128.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 4:28 pm

    Nothing in the article scs keeps pointing to says that fMRIs and PET scans are necessary to identify if a patient is in a PVS. The article is not about diagnosing PVS or MCS; rather, the described research is about trying to see what cognitive abilities are possessed by MCS patients, and it’s all pretty challenging stuff about mapping consciousness to brain activity.

    Schiavo’s CAT scan was not ambiguous.

  129. 129.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 4:36 pm

    rather, the described research is about trying to see what cognitive abilities are possessed by MCS patients

    Well thank God someone actually read what I linked to for once. Like I said, this is all new research. However we can take from that article that if consciousness can be mapped in a supposedly PVS patient, then it should logically follow that PETs and MRIs should be used to ascertain consciousness. If a CAT scan was always sufficient in all these cases, there would be no need for this new research obviously. And in fact these new tests are being done now in hospitals all the time to aid in diagnosis.

  130. 130.

    John

    January 30, 2006 at 4:41 pm

    Did you ever hear of a minor operation to remove her metal implants, the one Michael’s doctors ordered him to do years before her death? Did you ever hear of a PET scan that also has much diagnostical value and that isn’t effected by the metal implants? Who are you and where did you get your info. You obviously need to look up more.

    There is no such thing as a “minor operation” on a comatose patient. The risks associated with any surgery are greatly magnified, especially with the length of time she was in a PVS.

    And yes, I’ve heard of PET, though I doubt you’ve heard anything beyond the soundbite you’ve been parroting. Positron Emission Tomography is the 2nd most used neurological imaging technology, behind fMRI. The issue there is that it measures glucose uptake, through a radioisotope of oxygen, of areas of the brain.

    In Terri’s case, the CT showed that those areas of interest had been replaced with cerebrospinal fluid. There was no blood flowing to those areas, no brain cells to use glucose in those areas, and hence no benefit to PET. I know you want to think of Michael Schiavo as some unfeeling monster, but the fact of the matter is that the CT scan pretty much told the whole story, as far as any reputable doctor was concerned.

    As far as who I am — the name is John. I got my info from a lifetime dealing with the convergence of the medical industry and these technologies. I was involved with these things when they were still called NMRIs, before the Great Nuclear Heebie-Jeebies forced an entire industry to drop the word “Nuclear” from them. Why do my credentials matter, anyway? Everything I said in this post or the earlier one is available to a moment’s research. None of it is secret, and none of it is opinion, other than my growing opinion that you can’t possibly be as stupid as you are acting.

  131. 131.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 4:41 pm

    Where does the article say that consciousness can be mapped in a supposedly PVS patient? Have YOU read that article?

    Jesus Christ.

  132. 132.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 4:43 pm

    And by the way, I love the right-wing moonbat projection displayed in this thread — scs and darrell ccusing people of getting their science from blogs and being blinded by ideology is really cute.

  133. 133.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 4:44 pm

    Schiavo’s CAT scan was not ambiguous.

    According to the CAT scans, Schaivo did have about 30% of her lower cortex remaining. Before her autopsy, it was not known what shape this remaining cortex was in or exactly what functional areas of her brain existed. It was possible, not impossible, that this remaining cortex had some function. Not probable, but possible. The human brain does not need 100% of the cortex to function and we do not have a rule to determine at what percent of cortex left in a brain does there cease to be functioning. That is why a CAT scan was not enough. Even PETs and MRIs are not definitive but at least they would have given a much fuller picture of the state of her brain activity before we allowed her to die.

  134. 134.

    SeesThroughIt

    January 30, 2006 at 4:44 pm

    You like to spew off rather than inform.

    You’ve proven yourself to be uninformable, so why bother? The mountain of evidence is right there in front of you, and you still want to cling to, “I think she was following the balloon with her eyes!” So you’ve demonstrated that there’s no reasoning with you.

    It is funny how you like to call everybody else–you know, the ones with medical science on their side–“uninformed,” though.

  135. 135.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 4:49 pm

    scs and darrell ccusing people of getting their science from blogs

    This shows your ignorant prejudice. I have never read a right wing blog in my life (if you don’t include this one, which is not right wing anymore). I repeat, I get most of my news from the New York Times. And I get most of my science news from the science sections of mainstream papers, eager to read any of them that I can. In fact my interest in this case is that is it science based (and also womens’ rights based) not because I give a fuck about right wing causes (I’m not a joiner)and because I find so much of politics masquerading as science today, and I feel that I should set the record straight.

  136. 136.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 4:50 pm

    The mountain of evidence is right there in front of you, and you still want to cling to

    What evidence pray tell? A CAT scan? Please, read above.

  137. 137.

    SeesThroughIt

    January 30, 2006 at 4:54 pm

    What evidence pray tell? A CAT scan? Please, read above.

    Thanks for proving my point. Carry on….

  138. 138.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 4:55 pm

    Thanks for proving my point. Carry on….

    Thanks for proving MY point.

  139. 139.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 4:58 pm

    Anyway, you all got me so worked up, I blew off errands today. You all take care.

  140. 140.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 4:59 pm

    However we can take from that article that if consciousness can be mapped in a supposedly PVS patient, then it should logically follow that PETs and MRIs should be used to ascertain consciousness. If a CAT scan was always sufficient in all these cases, there would be no need for this new research obviously.

    There are so many things wrong with this that you should be ashamed of yourself.

    #1 finding consciousness in PVS patients — read your own damn article again

    #2 fMRI and PET scans can determine consciousness — do you really think it was an open question whether Schiavo was conscious

    #3 the need for this research — this research isn’t being done to figure out if Schiavo was still alive. read your own damn article again.

    #4 CAT scan being sufficient in all cases — if I can tell that someone is dead just by casually looking at him, does that mean I can always tell if someone is dead just by casually looking at the person? Durr.

  141. 141.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 5:02 pm

    consciousness – meaining being conscious of your surroundings. PVS patients are not supposed to be “conscious” that is why they are called PVS. This is grade school here.

  142. 142.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 5:03 pm

    Read the article again. But with that I have to go.

  143. 143.

    SeesThroughIt

    January 30, 2006 at 5:04 pm

    This is grade school here.

    And you’re flunking.

  144. 144.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 5:04 pm

    PVS is also a clinically defined state, by the way. I’m just trying to inform you, which should be real easy since you’re not ideologically blinded and you have a well-balanced science education from a variety of sources.

    Also, the firefighter Don Herbert did not have the same diagnosis as Terri Schiavo, and that distinction was not due to fMRI or PET scans. Again, more information, since you didn’t seem to understand that. It was a little odd that your misunderstanding consistently reinforced your prior beliefs, but what can I say.

  145. 145.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 5:07 pm

    scs, READ YOUR ARTICLE YOURSELF. Scientists found certain kinds of brain activity in MCS patients. Not PVS patients. And note that these patients were described to be in a MINIMALLY CONSCIOUS STATE BEFORE THE FMRI AND PET SCANS WERE DONE — gee, I wonder how they were able to diagnose them then.

    Really, you should be ashamed of yourself.

  146. 146.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 5:09 pm

    Also, the firefighter Don Herbert did not have the same diagnosis as Terri Schiavo,

    He was diagnosed as PVS for years. Same diagnosis. REad the article.

  147. 147.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 5:12 pm

    . Not PVS patients.

    They had been previously classified as PVS. Again…

    SHOCKING RESULTS:One minute of electrical stimulation was delivered to the wrists of 15 healthy controls and 15 patients in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). Positron emission tomography indicated the activation of various brain regions (red), including the primary somatosensory cortex and thalamus. Blue areas, which were activated less in patients than in controls, included higher-order cortices. (From S.L. Laureys et al., NeuroImage, 17:732–41, 2002.)

  148. 148.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 5:22 pm

    Herbert was not diagnosed with PVS. But then you don’t even know what PVS means, so how would you know?

    You quote the caption from the illustration article — do you even know what it means? They did a study comparing brain activity in PVS patients with brain activity in normal people. They are doing this to figure out what the differences in brain activity are. So what? What does that have to do with anything? Did any patients lose their PVS diagnosis as a result of the study?

    Hmm, I’m starting to suspect why you’re taking such a strong interest in this case… well, I wouldn’t want to be put to death either.

  149. 149.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 5:31 pm

    Okay to summarize again, it seems that our scientific conflict here is that you all think her CAT scan was enough, due to the severe damage. I don’t, based on my understanding that function can exist even with severe damage, and that a PET scan would be useful to eliminate as much doubt as we can. We’ll have to leave it at that I guess.

  150. 150.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 5:36 pm

    So what? What does that have to do with anything? Did any patients lose their PVS diagnosis as a result of the study?

    Blue areas, which were activated less in patients than in controls, included higher-order cortices

    If you look at the picture and read the article, you’ll see that the result of this study was that PVS patients did appear to have some cognitive function apparent on the scans. Less than the controls but still there. Due to the fact that PVS are supposed to have no function at all, yes they would or should lose their PVS status.

  151. 151.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 5:37 pm

    Herbert was not diagnosed with PVS.

    Yes he was. Google him.

  152. 152.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 5:44 pm

    Due to the fact that PVS are supposed to have no function at all, yes they would or should lose their PVS status.

    Wrong.

    This is ridiculous. If PVS patients are not supposed to have any function, then why are researchers bothering to compare them to normal people????

    Unbelievable.

  153. 153.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 5:47 pm

    I find references to Don Herbert being a “near persistent vegetative state.” Of course you’ve already admitted you don’t know the difference.

  154. 154.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 5:49 pm

    This is ridiculous. If PVS patients are not supposed to have any function, then why are researchers bothering to compare them to normal people????

    God now I know why you all don’t bother to brush up on science, you don’t understand when you do read it it seems. Its because they are realizing that the PVS patients they THOUGHT had no function actually DO have function and that they were mistaken in their previous evaluation of the patients. That’s why a PET scan is key.

  155. 155.

    Darrell

    January 30, 2006 at 5:53 pm

    and that a PET scan would be useful to eliminate as much doubt as we can

    Isn’t that the bottom line? To do whatever reasonably possible to eliminate as much doubt as possible? MRI’s and PET scans are no-big-deal tests.

    Why didn’t Michael Schiavo give his consent for those tests to obtain a more definitive diagnosis for his wife if he truly cared about her?

  156. 156.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 5:54 pm

    I find references to Don Herbert being a “near persistent vegetative state.”

    His doctors officially classified him as PVS. There is no medical condition of “near PVS”. “Near” PVS is just descriptive.

  157. 157.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 5:55 pm

    Stop it – you’re terrifying me. Are you serious?

    The article is not about DIAGNOSING PVS. Repeat – it is not about diagnosing PVS. It is about identifying differences in brain activity between PVS patients and normals.

    Its because they are realizing that the PVS patients they THOUGHT had no function actually DO have function and that they were mistaken in their previous evaluation of the patients

    No. You are literally making this up. Here’s a challenge: give me a cite to support this ludicrous interpretation. Show me a PVS patient with no brain function at all, or show me where the study says that PVS-diagnosed patients had their diagnosis changed because of the discovery of brain activity.

    This is beyond stupid.

  158. 158.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 5:56 pm

    Thanks Darrell. I need a back up here. Even though I’m wasting my day away here, when I should be doing errands.

  159. 159.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 5:57 pm

    “Near” PVS is just descriptive.

    There is something called a “minimally conscious state.” That was his official diagnosis, I believe.

  160. 160.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 5:58 pm

    It is about identifying differences in brain activity between PVS patients and normals.

    Hello??? “Identifying differences” is how you diagnose someone.

  161. 161.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 5:59 pm

    No his offical diagnosis was PVS- they did not even use the term minimally conscious 10 years ago when he fell in his state.

  162. 162.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 6:02 pm

    Show me a PVS patient with no brain function at all, or show me where the study says that PVS-diagnosed patients had their diagnosis changed because of the discovery of brain activity.

    The article you just read for God’s sake! Bob Herbert for another.

  163. 163.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 6:04 pm

    Show me a PVS patient with no brain function at all,

    PVS patients are supposed to have no cortex functions at all.

  164. 164.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 6:06 pm

    Anyway, now I REALLY have to go. Later.

  165. 165.

    DougJ

    January 30, 2006 at 6:58 pm

    Also, you didn’t even need to use medical tests to see that Terri wasn’t braindead. She was capable of tracking objects with her eyes, as demonstrated on a widely available videotape. She would smile when her parents entered her room. At least one Harvard MD diagnosed her as NOT being in a PVS, and it was so obvious that he didn’t even need to see her in person to do so. Coupled with the fact that Michael Schiavo probably beat her into her state and was worried about her waking up and testifying against him (not to speak of the untold millions he won but refused to spend on her), and it’s pretty obvious that the murder of our dear Terri was the crime of the century, and one that Democrats will pay a dear price for.

    Somebody’s got to give this snark it’s props. Good work. I only realized the third time thru that it wasn’t scs.

  166. 166.

    ppGaz

    January 30, 2006 at 7:52 pm

    Thanks Darrell. I need a back up here.

    We report, you deride.

  167. 167.

    ppGaz

    January 30, 2006 at 7:54 pm

    In fact my interest in this case is that is it science based (and also womens’ rights based) not because I give a fuck

    When did you start swearing like a sailor?

    { time passes }

    ARE you a sailor?

  168. 168.

    Sojourner

    January 30, 2006 at 8:01 pm

    Well, I’m certainly glad I didn’t stick around last night to read scs claiming that Schiavo was tracking a balloon in spite of the fact that she was blind. Let’s ignore all of the testimony from people with no vested interest in the case (other than their roles as officers of the court) who spent hours with her and witnessed NONE of the things Schiavo’s parents and siblings claimed.

    And let’s not bring up the acknowledged fact that the videotape we all saw was based on hundreds of hours of film, with only the “good parts” being left in in the final version. It certainly couldn’t be the case that random head movements made during those hundreds of hours might, in the carefully edited version, suggest some type of tracking when, in fact, there was none.

    So are you now going to claim that Schiavo was shy and only came out of her shell when she was alone with her family? Or are you going to claim this was a huge conspiracy on the part of otherwise honorable people?

    Perhaps scs should have an MRI done to see if there’s any conscious thought going on in that skull.

  169. 169.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 8:23 pm

    “Identifying differences” is how you diagnose someone.

    Oh. My. God.

    You are so amazingly dumb.

    And this is the best part: you’re so dumb you don’t even realize how dumb you are.

    Good lord. What can I say? I’m speechless. Momentarily at least.

    OK. Go to this article you keep citing. Tell me where in the article a PVS diagnosis is changed due to the discovery of brain activity. Don’t say “the article.” Show me where.

    Or show me where the researchers discussed make any diagnoses at all. And once again, don’t say “the article.” Show me where.

    I mean, this is truly flabbergasting. You keep trotting out this article and it’s becoming more and more obvious you don’t have the slightest clue what it’s about.

  170. 170.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 8:31 pm

    No his offical diagnosis was PVS

    Bullshit. Show me evidence of that.

  171. 171.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 8:34 pm

    PVS patients are supposed to have no cortex functions at all.

    More bullshit.

  172. 172.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 9:13 pm

    PVS patients are supposed to have no cortex functions at all. …More bullshit.

    Ok, school is back in session. Since you all won’t inform yourselves on the issues, I guess I have to.

    http://www.gerryroche.com/thesis/Chapter4.htm

    Section 1: The original definition of PVS
    An article by Jennett and Plum, published in 1972, was the first to name the syndrome ‘Persistent Vegetative State’ as such. This syndrome, after its acute stage had passed, was characterised by:

    the absence of function in the cerebral cortex as judged behaviourally
    The Jennett and Plum article was seminal and has had a considerable influence on the subsequent debate on PVS. The authors displayed a precision in their use of language which is seldom found in the subsequent discussion. They were aware of the danger of drawing unjustified inferences and were scrupulous in their choice of terminology, being fully conscious of the subtle implication of inappropriate terminology. Subsequent discussions on PVS have often concentrated on the supposed ‘lack of consciousness’ of the PVS patient

    That is the original definition of PVS and still holds legally today. Now however, medically they are expanding that definition as they realize there can be different degrees to cortical functioning.

  173. 173.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 9:30 pm

    scs, just do me a favor: show me how the brain scans in the Scientist article you linked were used to make diagnoses. Just show me that, or confess that you linked to that article without having any understanding what it was about.

  174. 174.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 9:38 pm

    This might help when you go back to the read the Scientist article: the article is NOT about making diagnoses, but about studying the brain differences between patients diagnosed with PVS and normals. No diagnoses are being made or changed by the researchers.

    And as for this:

    Now however, medically they are expanding that definition as they realize there can be different degrees to cortical functioning.

    I just love how you make shit up.

  175. 175.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 9:50 pm

    http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1397436/posts

    For the first time, Dr. Ahmed described Mr. Herbert’s condition over the last couple of years as having been close to a “persistent vegetative state,” a term that neurologists used to describe Terri Schiavo before she died last month in Florida. Someone in a persistent vegetative state appears to be awake but is unaware of what is going on around him.
    Dr. Ahmed said he had paid close attention to Mr. Herbert’s responsiveness, or lack of it, from the time he first examined him in 2002. “I was trying to understand and clarify, “Is he understanding? Is he aware of the environment?’ ” Dr. Ahmed said yesterday. “But there was no way to confirm that. I came to the conclusion that he was, you could say, close to the persistent vegetative state.”

    There is no medical condition called “close” to PVS. He was officially diagnosed as PVS by his doctor, as that was the closest condition he thought matched his state.

  176. 176.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 9:57 pm

    I like how the doctor calls him close to PVS, you say close to PVS doesn’t exist, and therefore the doctor meant to call him PVS. Bullshit. If someone has cancer, I don’t say he nearly has cancer when I mean he has cancer.

    And get back to me on that Scientist article, will you? Or at least admit you don’t have the ability to understand it.

  177. 177.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 9:59 pm

    I just love how you make shit up.

    Jesus, read the link! For god’s sake.

    No diagnoses are being made or changed by the researchers.

    Look. Let me spell it out for you cause you are not getting it. This article is about research. The researchers are not about to change the diagnosis of their study subjects, that is not the focus of the article and it up to their personal doctors to do that, not reseachers. But let’s use our brains a little. The old and still valid definition of PVS means “the absence of function in the cerebral cortex” . This would definitely include no cognitive function at all. If there is evidence of cognitive function in the cerebral cortex, then these patients do not meet the standard definition of PVS. If they do not meet the definition of PVS, then these patients who are classified as PVS, are actually not PVS, are they? Okay, get it now? I can’t explain it any clearer than that.

  178. 178.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 10:01 pm

    Sorry Barbar, no one has “close to cancer” They either have cancer or they don’t. Same with the classification of PVS 10 years ago. Since 1991 or so, a new category was adopted of minimally conscious. His injury was before 1991 and so he was classified as PVS.

  179. 179.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 10:02 pm

    Sorry, I meant 2001 above, not 1991.

  180. 180.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 10:03 pm

    Unbelievable. Does the article even suggest that anyone will change the PVS diagnosis of the patients? Does the article express surprise that the PET scans don’t turn out totally blank for the PVS patients? Does the article stop referring to the PVS patients as being in a PVS after they get their brain scan?

    Seriously, this is beyond stupid.

  181. 181.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 10:05 pm

    Listen you freaking moron, if someone says “he is near cancer” that means he DOESN’T HAVE CANCER. Now you say cancer is like PVS. So what does it mean when someone says “he is near PVS”?

    More amazing than your stupidity is your inability to realize how stupid you are.

  182. 182.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 10:10 pm

    Does the article even suggest that anyone will change the PVS diagnosis of the patients? This is a research article. Medical decisions will be set by the medical community.
    Does the article express surprise that the PET scans don’t turn out totally blank for the PVS patients? Yes I believe the caption is “Shocking Results” It’s not that they are not totally blank, its that the brain exhibits recognition patterns similar to cognitive people, pointing to cognition. That is surprising from supposedly “uncognitive” people. Does the article stop referring to the PVS patients as being in a PVS after they get their brain scan? Huh?

    Barbar, are you really DougJ? This is getting too ridiculous. If you are not, you obviously don’t understand the concept of research. You need research first, which is this article. Once a research precedent is set and accepted, the medical community changes their medical techniques to reflect this new understanding. The medical community is still in the process of reseach with PVS.

  183. 183.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 10:12 pm

    So what does it mean when someone says “he is near PVS”?

    Okay what was the offical diagnosis?

  184. 184.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 10:15 pm

    Okay what was the offical diagnosis?

    You tell me. If someone says he was nearly in a PVS, I will take that as evidence that he was not diagnosed to be in a PVS — in fact, I’ll assume he wasn’t.

    But then again, I’m not a total moron.

  185. 185.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 10:16 pm

    Yes I believe the caption is “Shocking Results”

    You stupid idiot, this is a pun due to the fact that “one minute of electrical stimulation was provided…”

    You might be the stupidest person I’ve ever encountered online.

  186. 186.

    Sojourner

    January 30, 2006 at 10:29 pm

    Barbar: You’re wasting your time. scs sees what she wants in what she reads – whether it’s there or not. It’s very weird and a bit spooky but so it goes.

  187. 187.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 10:30 pm

    Yes but it was also a play on words that the results are surprising. Please. Did you ever hear of double irony? I think you have an IQ around 80 from the way you’ve understood the science in this article. There is no use discussing it with you anymore. Take some science classes first and then we’ll talk.

  188. 188.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 10:31 pm

    Sojourner, you’re just pissed I caught you in your lies again. Get over it. Let it go.

  189. 189.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 10:34 pm

    If you are not, you obviously don’t understand the concept of research. You need research first, which is this article. Once a research precedent is set and accepted, the medical community changes their medical techniques to reflect this new understanding.

    You’re not seriously lecturing me about scientific research, are you? The Scientist describes research findings but is not a research journal per se; the actual studies are published elsewhere (follow the links in the references). The article makes connections to the Schiavo and Herbert cases, but if you read it over you’ll realize that nowhere does it suggest that the diagnostic procedures for PVS are going to change. It simply describes research into what PVS brains look like and how they work. It was you who decided that the article revealed a new paradigm in PVS diagnosis with fMRI studies. But as you can surely see now, you just made that up.

    If you wish to place the research in a broader context, these paragraphs is the key:

    Nevertheless, doubts remain about imaging’s potential to elucidate consciousness. Christof Koch, a professor of cognitive and behavioral biology at the California Institute of Technology, cautions that brain scans detect hemodynamic, not neuronal, activity (though a new paper correlates fMRI with neuronal firing[2] ). Imaging, moreover, does not show what people perceive, notes Jordan Grafman, chief of the cognitive neuroscience section at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. “In the end, that’s consciousness,” Grafman states. “That’s what you want to know.”

    Stanislas Dehaene, director of the cognitive neuroimaging unit of the Service Hospitalier Frédéric Joliot in Orsay, France, has a different perspective. He studies how conscious subjects subliminally process camouflaged, or “masked,” stimuli. Asserting that an “enormous amount” can be learned from patients with consciousness disorders, he explains: “The crossing of the threshold of consciousness in a masking situation… is a large event. So is the recovery of consciousness in vegetative-state patients.” These different paradigms, he continues, “converge to the same style of brain activation,” involving the cortex’s parietal, prefrontal, and cingulate network.

    In other words, the research is part of paradigm of trying to use brain scans to investigate consciousness. Note nowhere is there a suggestion that PVS isn’t really PVS and that brain scans will reveal that. You made that shit up.

  190. 190.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 10:35 pm

    The official diagnosis was PVS. I read that in an article that came out at the time. I can’t find it now because anything about this story that I can find on it, not on a blog, is pay per view. But according to you, his official diagnosis was “near PVS”. Thanks for educating me on a new condition called “Near PVS”. I will look it up in Emedicine.

  191. 191.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 10:40 pm

    Yes but it was also a play on words that the results are surprising.

    A liar and an idiot. Explain how the results are surprising, using language from the article or other sources, and please stop making shit up. Surely you can find a quote from the article contrasting what scientists expected to find in PVS patients with what they actually found, if there was really a matter of surprise?

    And forget the fact that the WHOLE REASON WE’RE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION about this article is because you were arguing that a PET scan might have revealed that Terri Schiavo wasn’t really in a PVS. And once again, it turns out that you were full of shit.

    Do you really have no shame? No respect for the truth?

  192. 192.

    Sojourner

    January 30, 2006 at 10:42 pm

    Sojourner, you’re just pissed I caught you in your lies again. Get over it. Let it go.

    Given your bizarre performance on this topic, it’s pretty obvious there’s a pattern. Nobody on this blog would seriously argue that John Gibson (hint: he’s the author of “The War on Christmas”) and Janet Parshall (noted critic of non-Christian religions) are concerned that Christians are being mean to non-Christians. Only a dumb ass like you would get it totally ass backwards.

    But keep embarrassing yourself. The good news is it’s all anonymous.

  193. 193.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 10:42 pm

    But according to you, his official diagnosis was “near PVS”.

    Idiot, why would his doctor call him “near PVS” if he was diagnosed with PVS? Really, even you can’t be stupid.

  194. 194.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 10:49 pm

    cautions that brain scans detect hemodynamic, not neuronal, activity (though a new paper correlates fMRI with neuronal firing[2] ).

    Yes that excerpt is a quote that means that not all is definitive yet in these studies. It detects blood movement in the brain, and blood movement cannot be 100% correlated with neuron activity, yet – although you’ll see in the parenthesis that there is strong reason to suspect that they do correlate.

    These different paradigms, he continues, “converge to the same style of brain activation,” involving the cortex’s parietal, prefrontal, and cingulate network.

    This means that consciousness is an activity that involves mutliple parts of the brain working together, not any one thing.

    It simply describes research into what PVS brains look like and how they work. It was you who decided that the article revealed a new paradigm in PVS diagnosis with fMRI studies

    Yes and with new research that can discover cognitive patterns, it doesn’t take a genius to realize that this can be used to diagnose cognition in patients thought of as PVS. I brought up this article in the first place to illustrate the changing understanding of PVS as not always being a “vegetable” state, with no cognition. We see from this research that some patients classified as PVS have more action going on their brains than we have previously thought. Now whether they use this technique commonly to diagnose people today I don’t think so yet. However, they do use PET scans regulary today on brain damaged patients to look for general activity in the brain, if not cognitive patterns. And Terri was denied that test.

  195. 195.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 10:53 pm

    Idiot, why would his doctor call him “near PVS

    Because they didn’t have a classification of “minimally conscious” till 2001. People “near PVS” were officially considered PVS at that time. There was no other term for them since “near PVS” was not an official medical term.

  196. 196.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 10:57 pm

    We see from this research that some patients classified as PVS have more action going on their brains than we have previously thought

    I thought I told you to stop making shit up. Show me a quote from the article that shows that scientists are finding that PVS patients are more mentally active than previously thought. Go ahead, show me a quote.

    And don’t give me the “oh it’s obvious” bullshit. What’s obvious is that some scientists are investigating the mental activity of PVS and other vegetative patients to figure out the neuronal difference between consciousness and lack of consciousness — and you are pretending that this obviously means that vegetative patients have more cognitive function than previously thought, and that PET scans might lead people to overturn PVS diagnoses. Which is bullshit.

  197. 197.

    Barbar

    January 30, 2006 at 11:03 pm

    Because they didn’t have a classification of “minimally conscious” till 2001. People “near PVS” were officially considered PVS at that time. There was no other term for them since “near PVS” was not an official medical term.

    HAHAHAHA. OK, let me get this straight.

    1) When this guy gets hurt, there’s only 1 possible diagnosis, PVS.

    2) In 2001, people invent a second possible diagnosis, CMS.

    3) After 2002, his doctor calls him “near a PVS” for the first time (your FreeRepublic link above).

    Your conclusion? He was diagnosed as PVS.

    Fuck this, I’m going to sleep.

  198. 198.

    scs

    January 30, 2006 at 11:42 pm

    Your conclusion? He was diagnosed as PVS.

    You didn’t hear the doctor call him “near minimally conscious” did you? Nope. He went with “near PVS”, which meant he thought he was closer to PVS than minimally conscious. It’s like a multiple choice test with no D.) All of the above. If the doctor thought he was minimally conscious after 2002, he would have said that, but instead he said he was “near PVS”. On a medical form he would check A.) PVS, not B.) minimally conscious. So for medical purposes of classification, he was PVS.

  199. 199.

    Sojourner

    January 31, 2006 at 7:47 am

    You didn’t hear the doctor call him “near minimally conscious” did you? Nope. He went with “near PVS”, which meant he thought he was closer to PVS than minimally conscious. It’s like a multiple choice test with no D.) All of the above. If the doctor thought he was minimally conscious after 2002, he would have said that, but instead he said he was “near PVS”. On a medical form he would check A.) PVS, not B.) minimally conscious. So for medical purposes of classification, he was PVS.

    So if someone is “near death”, then for purposes of classification, he’s dead?

    Yikes!

  200. 200.

    Barbar

    January 31, 2006 at 10:12 am

    Once again, it’s really hard to argue with someone who’s too stupid to realize how stupid they are. The false dilemma here is that someone is either conscious or in PVS, until 2001, in which case they are either conscious, PVS, or MCS. Bzz, wrong.

    When are you going to admit you were clueless about the Scientist link you posted? It’s not good to be shameless.

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. In Search Of Utopia says:
    January 29, 2006 at 10:37 pm

    The Shabooty Interview … Reloaded

    I am bored, and was having so much fun reading Shab’s interview from a year ago, I decided to redo it on my own, just to see how much has changed. THE LONG AWAITED DAVID ANDERSON INTERVIEW An Interview with…

Primary Sidebar

If This Doesn't Make You Feel Better, Then Nothing Will
Image by WG’s niece (6/16/25)

Recent Comments

  • Baud on Score One for E. Jean Carroll (Jun 16, 2025 @ 12:31pm)
  • Kosh III on Score One for E. Jean Carroll (Jun 16, 2025 @ 12:30pm)
  • Suzanne on The Coming Assault On Our Cities (Jun 16, 2025 @ 12:30pm)
  • Baud on Score One for E. Jean Carroll (Jun 16, 2025 @ 12:29pm)
  • scav on The Coming Assault On Our Cities (Jun 16, 2025 @ 12:28pm)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
No Kings Protests June 14 2025

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!