It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Firefighter Who Was Brain Damaged For 10 Years Makes Astounding Recovery

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 4 2005 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by FLYIN HIGH
This just goes to show that there is a God.



How rude that must be to people who has family members that have died early in thier life.

God pick this guy to save and not others? Why? Because he isa firefighter
? There have been many fireman that could have been "saved".

I guess YOUR God does pick sides, and doesnt love all.




posted on May, 4 2005 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jemison
Very interesting and I'm glad you posted this. To me this is the type of proof that shows that Terri was neglected. She didn't receive constant therapy and wasn't given a chance. 10 years is a long time to wait for someone to all of a sudden perk up but it's proof that they CAN recover if they get therapy and aren't just left in a room with no stimulation and then starved to death!



Jemison


You are comparing apples to oranges the man was only in a coma for few months unlike terri who was in a coma for 15 years.

edit to add wish I had read ahead before replying I see
GMTA since redhat has the same impression I have




[edit on 5/4/2005 by shots]

[edit on 5/4/2005 by shots]



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Its quite possible he faked it for the last 9 years 9 months and fifteen days.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 02:27 PM
link   
His wife refused to give up. His doctor had an idea.

Certain medications had shown promise in Dr. Jamil Ahmed's more recently brain-damaged patients, drugs normally used to treat Parkinson's disease, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and depression. He gave them to Herbert.

Miraculous?

"I think so," said Dr. Ellen Reilly, Herbert's attending physician at Father Baker Manor nursing home, where he has lived the past seven years.

Ahmed had told Linda Herbert to give the drugs six months. Even he was startled at their apparent effect. When Ahmed examined Herbert on Saturday, he could follow commands such as shaking his head, moving his hands and counting to 200.

www.cnn.com... covery.ap/index.html

The drug combination, he said, was meant to stimulate neurotransmitters, which brain cells use to communicate with one another.

Dr. Ross Zafonte, chairman of the department of physical medicine and rehabilitation at the University of Pittsburgh, said such classes of drugs may help with a rerouting of brain circuitry.

While seeming to offer promise in this case, the approach is not a cure-all for brain-injured patients, he said.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpittinCobra

Originally posted by FLYIN HIGH
This just goes to show that there is a God.



How rude that must be to people who has family members that have died early in thier life.

God pick this guy to save and not others? Why? Because he isa firefighter
? There have been many fireman that could have been "saved".

I guess YOUR God does pick sides, and doesnt love all.


You better beleive there is a God and MY God is a forgiving God and will enter the lives of us who will accept him and welcome him



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBandit795
This doesn't have anything to do with God. This is physiological.


Even the greatest miracles could not make the greatest atheists even consider the existance of a God as your comment shows.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakko

Originally posted by TheBandit795
This doesn't have anything to do with God. This is physiological.


Even the greatest miracles could not make the greatest atheists even consider the existance of a God as your comment shows.


See this is the problem, you assume ALL miracles are acts of god.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 02:39 PM
link   


Make you wonder what might / could have happened if feeding tubes were left in place and the courts stayed out of personal matters.


While this is great news for the man and his family, it wouldn't have changed for Terri. I'm not sure the extent of the man's brain damage, but you have to understand that Terri's cerebral cortex was pretty much GONE.

BTW, the courts DID stay out of personal matters. It was only when people wanted to FORCE the court's involvement, that anything went to trial. And in ruling after ruling, they agreed with you, in that it's a personal matter they had no say in.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Terri schiavo had part of her brain turn to liquid, this guy still had his brain intact, damaged, but intact, there is the apples to oranges analogy people where trying bring up. and if you people are so sure of your god skip hospitals all together would make Free health coverage for the rest of us much more feasible for the government. As soon as I saw this on the news I knew the whole Schiavo thing was going to come back up regardless of the fact that the woman brain had partly LIQUIDFIED. The Schiavo case was a complete disaster get a living will people and avoid any more complications like this, leave fate in your own hands. We should really think starving somebody is more humane than a “hot” shot (morphine…)? Criminals have an easier death than this poor woman had. If you leave clear wishes stating that you would to be kept alive in X state then I don’t know think anybody would lift a finger either way (at least legally)



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpittinCobra

See this is the problem, you assume ALL miracles are acts of god.


Not at all.
We do not know wether this is a miracle of God or not.

What we do know that this is something that doesn't happen everyday, which is why it's in the news in the first place, and then when some people want to explain it with "a miracle of God" then replying with "God has nothing to do with it" is just ignorant.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok


BTW, the courts DID stay out of personal matters. It was only when people wanted to FORCE the court's involvement, that anything went to trial. And in ruling after ruling, they agreed with you, in that it's a personal matter they had no say in.



forgot to bring this up, lol



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 03:09 PM
link   
"What we do know that this is something that doesn't happen everyday, which is why it's in the news in the first place, and then when some people want to explain it with "a miracle of God" then replying with "God has nothing to do with it" is just ignorant."

and it's not just as ignorant to automatically attribute it to god and not the experimental drug treatment used by his doctors?

"You better beleive there is a God and MY God is a forgiving God and will enter the lives of us who will accept him and welcome him "

then why should we (or more say religous people) even bother going to hospitals in this case?

I'm not trying to single any side specifically, I not going to make a final decision on religion till I take my dirt nap and I'm proven right or wrong whatever the consequences either way, atheism lately has turn into a "faith" with it's Fundamentalist and fanatic/extremist. But when you call him ignorant for justifying some unusual with his faith same as your doing it's a little much....

Faith: my def........... a strong and life altering (affecting) beliefs that cannot be proven %100 either way. THAT"S WHY YOO HAVE TO "FAITH" and it's not just a given.

I believe in science and medicine and they are the first to tell you that they are nowhere near understanding the human body, they do know some thing, you can not function with a liquidfied cortex, you can though to varying degrees, go on with a damage but otherwise functional brain.

simplerer anology....you can run a car with a really bad engine, you can't run it with half completely gone.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 03:11 PM
link   
Well saying you are 100% sure it was God, is as foolish as saying you are sure it wasn't.
We don't know.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Elevatedone,

I knew with this title where you were going. Blah blah blahadittydah, Terri Schiavo could have lived, bladittydah.

FACT: Had the courts stayed out of this situation, like you had wished, she would have died 8 years ago. Therefore, Bush and Delay and the Republicans would have no platform to attack everyone from. You see, had the courts not touched the matter, the rights would have defaulted to the husband. And he would have had her killed a long time ago. SO, in other words, shut up.



posted on May, 6 2005 @ 05:35 AM
link   
How To Earn My Disrespect On ATS

It's quite simple, really, and these are just a few of the many fine options available:

1) Lie.

2) Knowingly promote false analogies, which is a form of lying.

3) Unknowingly promote false analogies, which is a form of willful ignorance.

4) Claim to speak on behalf of God, which is, at best, fraud, and typically much worse. You're not God.

5) Attack other ATS members personally for expressing their opinions, however screwed up those opinions may happen to be.

I would like to remind my fellow ATS members that while thinking is optional, it is encouraged.

Meanwhile, using profanity or personal attacks against other members is discouraged.

On the other hand, opinions themselves may be mercilessly attacked and exposed to to the harshest criticism.

I encourage doing so where it is merited, provided it is clear that it is the opinion and not the person holding it who is being criticized. Ideally this is done with tact, but sometimes a sledgehammer is the right tool for the job.

Ultimately, those who post and promote lies do an adequate job of publicly insulting themselves, and need no further assistance.



posted on May, 7 2005 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by OXmanK
You see, had the courts not touched the matter, the rights would have defaulted to the husband. And he would have had her killed a long time ago. SO, in other words, shut up.


Of course anyone who actually went out of their way to learn up on the case would know that it was actually the courts who originally ordered the feeding tube out... and that Terri's physicians wouldn't do any such thing without a legal judgement.

So... if you think about it... you're wrong.
-S



posted on May, 8 2005 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Or, he would have bounced her around from hospital to hospital, hospice to hospice, until he found someone who would. I make no mistake that this man may very well be really evil, but the courts upheld the LAW. And this would have happened with or without the courts. If this guy was that concerned with "carrying out her last wishes" or just outright killing her, he would have found a way.

And besides, the courts had NO choice in it. It is a scary path to walk down to just disregard the LAW. Sure, let's bend it for one, but it would just become a quoted case. It would be used over and over again for any case of the parents wanting to usurp the power from the spouse.



posted on May, 8 2005 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by OXmanK
Or, he would have bounced her around from hospital to hospital, hospice to hospice, until he found someone who would. I make no mistake that this man may very well be really evil, but the courts upheld the LAW. And this would have happened with or without the courts. If this guy was that concerned with "carrying out her last wishes" or just outright killing her, he would have found a way.

And besides, the courts had NO choice in it. It is a scary path to walk down to just disregard the LAW. Sure, let's bend it for one, but it would just become a quoted case. It would be used over and over again for any case of the parents wanting to usurp the power from the spouse.


I disagree entirely. I think that static law is MUCH scarier than dynamic law. I think that upholding the law simply for the law's sake destroys the spirit of the law. Further, any law that allows for the death of an innocent, warranted or not, deserves at least a eight or nine year review (or however long it took them to decide that Terri Schiavo's was not a life worth saving).

It was a good process. Unfortunately I disagree with the outcome but I disagree with many laws. Can't have my own country, you know. Anyway, people throw words around like "LAW" as if any "law" could be infallible or perfect. Everyone also makes it sound like this is an isolated case and that evaluation of a law, particularly when a life is at stake, is some heinous heretical blasphemy.

Putting all of the possible political agendas and strategies aside, I think it was more than fair for this process to have been dragged on as long as it did. If, God forbid, you were in the same legal situation as Terri was and you "woke up" half way through the court proceedings to find that your wife had another family now and was spending thousands (millions?) to try to get your feeding tube removed, I think you'd be less than happy. I'm sure it was this "what if" that kept Terri's parents from wanting her to die.

So as far as the law goes, from one angle one could say that the law was served. However, being that Terri was never true PVS one could also say that there was never a decision to be made and the question of whether Terri should have been allowed to die should never have been raised. On the third hand, I don't care what you call what happened to Terri, it was euthanasia. Euthanasia is most certainly against the law, however it is also infinately better than being starved to death. If they had just called it euthanasia, Terri would have died quickly, painlessly, and the whole situation would have been less tragic, less of a media circus, and a LOT less traumatic for everyone involved. But it couldn't be so. The oh, so powerful "LAW" would not allow Terri's death to be a pleasant one.

Being that this fireman had a much better chance at recovery I find it sad that his family had all agreed to let him die in a life threatening medical emergency. But I don't need to argue any points here. I'm sure his family feels rightly guilty about having made that decision now that he's made such a recovery.

Never underestimate the brain. It has an amazing ability that no other organ has. It can rewire itself entirely. It can delegate new tasks to parts of itself that those parts would never have been able to do naturally. It was almost like some one literally hit the restart button for this man's brain. This man took in no new long term memories for about nine and a half years, then all of the sudden BOOM... right as rain. Truely remarkable.

Now, Terri's case is by no mean analogous. However, I've worked with vegetables before (catatonics) and they had almost nothing in common with Terri. Terri couldn't have been said to have been in a vegetative state. Her state was persistant, yes, but too much of her brain still worked for her to have been diagnosed as vegetative. Though a full recovery was never an option for Terri, SOME recovery was possible. At her best Terri might have recovered with a severe mental handicap, but would have been at least somewhat recovered all the same. Whether or not we should kill everyone with a severe mental handicap is a question for another thread... or Hitler.
-S



posted on May, 8 2005 @ 10:10 PM
link   
Great story and one lucky guy -if one neglects the fact that he woke up to another Bush-government of course


Personal sidenote: This has nothing to do with "God" - or "the imaginary source of self confidence" as I like to call this figure. This is a physiological happening that will hopefully lead to more constructive research and results.

[edit on 8/5/05 by phlake]



posted on May, 9 2005 @ 09:51 AM
link   
Never said it wasn't euthanasia. And I am not "scared" of the word either. But, I will go one step further with it. It was passive euthanasia. And passive is completely horrible. However passive is the only legal one. Active euthanasia is outright illegal, but passive is still allowed. (Which is a crock.) And besides, it is the right that prevents active from happening...look at Jack who is still in jail, I believe.

And there you go and bring up Hitler. Everybloodybody wants to bring up Hitler, especially when they have nothing more to offer. What Hitler did was not euthanasia. They made a word for him, genocide. He was a mass murderer. He did eugenics. It was not this euthanasia you so proudly infer. The only thing that was euthanasia is what he called it. But if I call my truck a butthole, does it make it that? What about the RINO's here, are they Republicans?

The reason I have a problem with them trying to subvert the law is that this law is WELL DEFINED. Are you married? Then your second in command is your spouse. If you aren't, your parents are. That is of course unless you have it otherwise stated in another legal contract such as a living will. I personally do not care if this guy worships the devil and reads Mein Kampf nightly, it was this guy choice on what to do with his wife. He could have even come out and said "she would have wanted to live but I want to see her ashes and in the ground" and the only thing that would have changed is the public support. Nah, maybe the parents would have had a better case, but I don't think anything would have changed.

And yes, I would rather have seen the law upheld. Which, yes it was, but it took an umpteen year long legal battle with certain politician's overstepping their bounds. And it's not just uphold it for the sake of the law. It is too keep situations like this from happening. If this happened one hundred years ago, they would have laughed the parents right out of court. Heck, the judge probably would have offered up his gun to do the deed. (I miss those days back when we used to make sense.)



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join