Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Tellemurius]

I didn't say it wasn't. It definitely is. But the point still stands. The most likely beneficiary isn't the person receiving CPR, it's the people who get their organs.

Err....no. CPR means something has gone wrong with your heart, which means you're facing cardiac death. They don't harvest people who suffer cardiac death, only brain death.

I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Are you saying that organs are only harvested after people are declared brain dead? I should hope so, but that doesn't conflict with what I've said.

If you mean that organs aren't harvested from people whose primary cause of death was cardiac failure, then perhaps that's the case in Raleigh, North Carolina, United States of America. Not the case here, as far as I understand.

Well with cardiac failure that usually means theres tissue damage

[Durin Stronginthearm]

Blame the thought train its all over the place not my fault in that other than being alive

No worries. It appears I've just spouted some crap myself

[Max White]

I remember CPR training... The guy said that there is a chance of a broken rib, but he didn't say it was certain.
He also said not to worry if it feels a bit like crunching corn flakes... 

[MetalSlimeHunt]

And I trust an anesthesiologist with decades of experience than what you overheard from your random paramedic buddy. :p

Why would an anesthesiologist know more about CPR than a paramedic? Anesthesiology is quite the occupation, but that doesn't change the fact that it is focused on administering anesthetic, not CPR.

I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Are you saying that organs are only harvested after people are declared brain dead? I should hope so, but that doesn't conflict with what I've said.

If you mean that organs aren't harvested from people whose primary cause of death was cardiac failure, then perhaps that's the case in Raleigh, North Carolina, United States of America. Not the case here, as far as I understand.

I don't think you quite get it. If you die from cardiac failure your organs are going to be mostly unsalvageable by the time that becomes an option. It isn't just allowed for brain death, it can only be done in cases of brain death because the body is still keeping your organs alive even though you are dead.

And copy/pasting my location directly from my profile just looks plain sloppy.

[Durin Stronginthearm]

I didn't say it wasn't. It definitely is. But the point still stands. The most likely beneficiary isn't the person receiving CPR, it's the people who get their organs.

Err....no. CPR means something has gone wrong with your heart, which means you're facing cardiac death. They don't harvest people who suffer cardiac death, only brain death.

I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Are you saying that organs are only harvested after people are declared brain dead? I should hope so, but that doesn't conflict with what I've said.

If you mean that organs aren't harvested from people whose primary cause of death was cardiac failure, then perhaps that's the case in Raleigh, North Carolina, United States of America. Not the case here, as far as I understand.

Well with cardiac failure that usually means theres tissue damage ie. parts of the body that has suffered lack of oxygen.

And this is precisely why CPR is valuable in this case - the purpose of CPR is to oxygenate and circulate the blood, preventing the tissue damage your talking about.

[GlyphGryph]

Children survive without their parents all the time, what the heck are you talking about?

Probably talking specifically newborns, who can't without some sort of support. Surrogate parents or an equivalent if nothing else.

Then he should have said "can't survive without outside assistance" (which, really, is true of most of us), rather than something that something that is clearly incorrect.

[Tellemurius]

I didn't say it wasn't. It definitely is. But the point still stands. The most likely beneficiary isn't the person receiving CPR, it's the people who get their organs.

Err....no. CPR means something has gone wrong with your heart, which means you're facing cardiac death. They don't harvest people who suffer cardiac death, only brain death.

I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Are you saying that organs are only harvested after people are declared brain dead? I should hope so, but that doesn't conflict with what I've said.

If you mean that organs aren't harvested from people whose primary cause of death was cardiac failure, then perhaps that's the case in Raleigh, North Carolina, United States of America. Not the case here, as far as I understand.

Well with cardiac failure that usually means theres tissue damage ie. parts of the body that has suffered lack of oxygen.

And this is precisely why CPR is valuable in this case - the purpose of CPR is to oxygenate and circulate the blood, preventing the tissue damage your talking about.

Actually, with cardiac failure you wouldn't be able to revive a person with CPR. CPR was meant to revive people that suffered some type of oxygen deprivation ie. suffocation, shock.

[ChairmanPoo]

it's also meant for that, though. Hence the chest compressions. Often it won't be enough by itself but it will help to keep the victim alive until it can receive more specialized help..

[Max White]

Is the debate here the effects and use f CPR, or did it just sort of derail into it?
Doesn't seem like the kind of thing this thread is normally used for.

[Durin Stronginthearm]

I don't think you quite get it. If you die from cardiac failure your organs are going to be mostly unsalvageable by the time that becomes an option. It isn't just allowed for brain death, it can only be done in cases of brain death because the body is still keeping your organs alive even though you are dead.

See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-heart-beating_donation - sorry for not going into it here, but really it's easier if you read it yourself, rather than me chopping out loads of little bits. Basically, you're right for a lot of organs, but not all of them.

Also, to clarify - when you say "cardiac failure", what exactly do you mean? Because if you're think of cardiac arrest or heart attacks, those are not cardiac failures (though they can cause it).

[Durin Stronginthearm]

Is the debate here the effects and use f CPR, or did it just sort of derail into it?
Doesn't seem like the kind of thing this thread is normally used for.

I think this is my bad, sorry!

[Tellemurius]

I don't think you quite get it. If you die from cardiac failure your organs are going to be mostly unsalvageable by the time that becomes an option. It isn't just allowed for brain death, it can only be done in cases of brain death because the body is still keeping your organs alive even though you are dead.

See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-heart-beating_donation - sorry for not going into it here, but really it's easier if you read it yourself, rather than me chopping out loads of little bits. Basically, you're right for a lot of organs, but not all of them.

Also, to clarify - when you say "cardiac failure", what exactly do you mean? Because if you're think of cardiac arrest or heart attacks, those are not cardiac failures (though they can cause it).

Cardiac Arrest your heart stalls and your oxygen needs skyrocket, you are still alive at that point but the heart is now bruised. Failure is the heart just plain dies, theres no blood pressure at all.

[Bauglir]

The Following Post Deals With The Abortion Thing, Just So You Can Skip It If You Don't Care To Keep Reading About That

Except I never claimed to state the truth about what a human is. And yes. A blastocyst needs it's environment, but it is already there and will work on a automated system. None of my cells will. The key difference can be in obnoxiously difficult condition. You're not talking about cells in my body. You're talking about cells taken from my body and painstakingly work upon and nurtured and put in a environment where they will thrive.

How can you not seem the innumerable differences here? Each and every one can be used as the justification.

No, you didn't, but your post was in defense of one particular point of a person who did. You might not hold that particular viewpoint, but it was a convenient quote for me to use to discuss that particular point, and since you did specifically refer to it, it seemed fair to challenge.

That key difference isn't that much of a difference. Will the blastocyst be fine if the woman stops eating?* Does external fertilization create non-humans? At what point does effort become so "painstaking" that the potential creation no longer counts as a human?

Spoiler: bit of a trigger warning for rape, I suppose (click to show/hide)

If painstaking work is the key difference, does that make the offspring of a rapist who methodically stalks and attacks a woman more of a person than that of some guy who just hooks up with her at a bar?

If we have an answer to the question of "When does life begin?", those should all be answered. My entire point is that it is either undefinable or so difficult to define that it hasn't happened yet, which I actually get the impression you agree with.

*Let's go further. If we only know that the blastocyst was a person because an automatic process would carry it to a state we obviously refer to as human, do miscarried ones retroactively become non-persons? That's some pretty interesting violation of causality, there.

[Durin Stronginthearm]

Again - the chest compressions in CPR are a subsitute for the heart. A poor one, but better than nothing. Your organs don't shrivel up and die as soon as the oxygen supply stops - brain damage occurs very quickly, but other organs cope better. And this is why CPR is useful for facilitating donations (of course, only in cases where the individual has consented beforehand).

To clarify: I imagine that CPR won't do much on it's own, it's part of a process which includes attempted resuscitation on the way to the hospital and life-support to maintain oxygen supply there. But nevertheless, even as part of a process, it has a certain utility. Or so I have been led to believe.

[Max White]

Well if the person is in cardiac arrest I don't see CPR making the matter worse. I could be horribly wrong, but it seems better than nothing.