Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Scientists Reverse Brain Damage in Drowned Toddler?

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 310 posts

Re: Scientists Reverse Brain Damage in Drowned Toddler?

#11

Post by noelwelsh »

ilitirit wrote: post #4

Does drowning not imply death? Is there different definition for drowning (or death) in medicine? EDIT: I'm referring to the fact that the title says the girl drowned, not that she was at some point "drowning".

Not an expert here, but I think there are two recognised types of death: heart stops working (what is usually meant by death) and brain stops working (aka brain death). In this case it seems her heart stopped working so she did in fact die, by one definition. It seems she was well on her way to brain death as well.

Re: Scientists Reverse Brain Damage in Drowned Toddler?

#13

Post by ilitirit »

83457 wrote: post #9
ilitirit wrote: post #4

Does drowning not imply death? Is there different definition for drowning (or death) in medicine? EDIT: I'm referring to the fact that the title says the girl drowned, not that she was at some point "drowning".

No. Look it up

I did.

http://imgur.com/a/rh6sf

http://imgur.com/a/4VeDA

Re: Scientists Reverse Brain Damage in Drowned Toddler?

#14

Post by kyrra »

nerdponx wrote: post #2

This is approaching Star Trek levels of medicine. Congratulations to the team who discovered and pull this off, and of course my heart goes out to the family and their child. Drowning is very serious and very scary. Edit: somewhat unrelated since this girl fell into an unattended pool, but it's important to know the signs of drowning, which are not what you see in movies: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-to-spot-signs…

Useful site to see what drowning looks like.

http://spotthedrowningchild.com

Re: Scientists Reverse Brain Damage in Drowned Toddler?

#15

Post by ilitirit »

whorleater wrote: post #7
ilitirit wrote: post #4

Does drowning not imply death? Is there different definition for drowning (or death) in medicine? EDIT: I'm referring to the fact that the title says the girl drowned, not that she was at some point "drowning".

> The World Health Organization in 2005 defined drowning as "the process of experiencing respiratory impairment from submersion/immersion in liquid". from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drowning

That is the act of drowning though, or isn't it? eg. You can be drowning, but still be rescued.

It's no big deal, but I've also thought that if someone drowned it implies they died.

Re: Scientists Reverse Brain Damage in Drowned Toddler?

#17

Post by toxican »

melling wrote: post #3

No, not really. You're making a hyperbolic statement. I've been watching Star Trek for 40 years. We're definitely still in the Dark Ages: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMaGnpVaSGQ

Just to be pedantic, isn't referring to where we're at now as "the dark ages" equally hyperoblic?

Re: Scientists Reverse Brain Damage in Drowned Toddler?

#19

Post by School-Cotton »

noelwelsh wrote: post #11
ilitirit wrote: post #4

Does drowning not imply death? Is there different definition for drowning (or death) in medicine? EDIT: I'm referring to the fact that the title says the girl drowned, not that she was at some point "drowning".

Not an expert here, but I think there are two recognised types of death: heart stops working (what is usually meant by death) and brain stops working (aka brain death). In this case it seems her heart stopped working so she did in fact die, by one definition. It seems she was well on her way to brain death as well.

No, what’s usually meant by death is definitely “brain stops working forever”.

Re: Scientists Reverse Brain Damage in Drowned Toddler?

#20

Post by dna_polymerase »

nerdponx wrote: post #2

This is approaching Star Trek levels of medicine. Congratulations to the team who discovered and pull this off, and of course my heart goes out to the family and their child. Drowning is very serious and very scary. Edit: somewhat unrelated since this girl fell into an unattended pool, but it's important to know the signs of drowning, which are not what you see in movies: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-to-spot-signs…

> “The startling regrowth of tissue in this case occurred because we were able to intervene early in a growing child, before long-term tissue degeneration. Although it’s impossible to conclude from this single case if the sequential application of normobaric oxygen then HBOT would be more effective than HBOT alone, in the absence of HBOT therapy, short duration, repetitive normobaric oxygen therapy may be an option until HBOT is available."

It was done for the first time, we have no idea what really did the magic here, we can just assume. In any future medicine scenario I'd expect us to exactly know what we are doing and how it works. Yes medicine is improving but we really are in the dark ages still.

Post reply on HN