Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
heretohelp, I’m sorry if I wasnt clear.
My comment was meant in response to FFG “I have never heard of a single case of anyone going to medical school with only a BTL plus the prerequisite classes for applying.”
To which I replied that it wa sin fact possible to go to Medical/dental school with just A BTL (obviously you have to take any specific perquisites that they require, as well as MCAT/DAT etc)
Ner Yisroel has (had?) such a program in place and has had BTl’s accepted in University of Maryland Medical and Dental schools, NYU dental school, SUNY at Buffalo school of medicine, Arizona School of dentistry, Technion, Ben Gurion University, amonng a few others.
That said I still dont recommend this path.
It is possible to go to medical/dental school with just a BTL. I know a handful of people who have done it over the past few years. Though it is getting harder, and I definitely would not recommend that route.
There are actually 10 differences (in spelling others invlove large letters. The example you cite is a different letter while the other nine are malei/chaser differences.
Furthermore there are several cases where our sifrei Torah differ from the Gemara’s. The gemara makes derashas lehalacha based on chaseiros we dont have (see sanhedrin daf daled keronos and Totafos)
Within the Hlachic process as long as rules are followed multiple approaches may eb correct. For teimanim following their mesorah, their sifrei Torah are correct for ashkenazim following theirs theirs is correct. And for The Ribono shel olam both are correct.
Ben Levi
the rishonim ALL understood chazal as meaning what they said (eg regarding mouse being genertaed from dirt, the earth being covered by a dome)
No you have not answered my question you dodged it by saying you dont know what you would have thought
I am asking if you (who you are today) had lived then and I marveled to you how up to date chazal are on modern science, would you have replied something along thelines of “”not quite chazal dont beleive in mud-mice even though they talk about them they are reffering to some secret sod that nobody can decipher.”
(Note NONE of the rishonim understood chazal this way, in an attempt to “defend” chazal you are saying the rishonim, were wrong Rch”l, but this is a side issue)
Ben levi, you are avoiding my question (purposely?)
In chazal’s time the general public beleived that lice were generated fom sweat, that there was a solid dome covering the earth etc etc.
I would have said (based on my view today no childish but we dont know hwere i wouldeve been yada yad)Something along the lines of “wow chazal are really up to date on science, they discuss the most modern issues including mud-mice.”
If you are being consistent with your approach you should reply “not quite chazal dont beleive in mud-mice even though they talk about them they are reffering to some secret sod that nobody can decipher.”
what would you say (based on your view TODAY)
Ben levi Im asking based whatever you are today
Ben Levi,
I have a question for you (and those who take a similar approach)
Lets rewind time Suppose we lived as the Gemara was written down, and I were to say to you wow the chachamim are realy up to date on modern science they even discuss halachos relating to the well known phenomena of spontaneus generation such as mud turning to dirt, killing lice on shabbos etc…
Would you have replied: well not quite, chazal dont actually accept modern science “when Chazal wrote what appears to be simple scientific facts in most instances they did really care if what they were writing was in actuallity the case, rather the intent was the information that was “encoded within”
A few quick points:
1) providing “food and drink” Is not as simple as some of you believe. Artificial feedings have been shown not to prolong life and are uncomfortbale requiring a PEG tube or at the very least a NG/OG tube. Hydration att he end of life isnt simple either as many of these patients have heart and/or renal failure in which case IV fluid can literaly cause the patient to drown in their own body.
2) Nothing the OP described is murder. Lo samed al dam reiacha maybe As SAm pointed out(which is bad)but lets tone down the rhetoric as it only serves to cloud rational discussion
3) We dont believe in prolonging life at all costs. Obviously thses are serious questions to be addressed to a rav. If we did then by definition the patient shouldnt be in hospice
Gamanit
No sharon has crnaial nerve reflexes according to (virtually) ANY definition Sharon is very much alive.
It isnt jut pupilary dilation as Ive mentioned in earlier post
Cranial nerves are tested at all levels of the brain stem, then an apnea test was done. These were never attempted on sharon as far as I know.
Gamnait
first of all that is irrelevant
Secondly you have not demonstrated that by citing Sharon since as mentioned several times he is NOT brain dead
SYag
Where those in brain death cases? or persistant/permanent vegatative states?
Sam2
im not so sure about that. The biggest issue (in this case) is the emotianly taxing issue. It isnt easy taking care of a vented pateint with no hope of recovery. all the more so when the patient is legally/medically dead. Plus there is (beleive it or not) a desire on the art of the doctors/nurses not to prolong agony and pounding a helpless case or corpse is viewed as causing harm.
However once this position is staked they cant then back down.
I havent seen any mention of this child’s organs being donated.
SYAG
It can take months though and aside from the financial issue there are other constraints, hospitals have bed shortages staff shortages etc…
I’m curious though and excuse the crassness of this question but strictly for argument’s sake you say “This obviously should be the choice of the family” who should foot the bill? The insurance company? hospital? the family?
Keep in mind this is a tad of topic. since as the law stands there is no requirnment in California to keep a brain dead person on “life support” So I’m not sure what you are sugesting the law should be changed? OR that the hospital should go “lifnim mishuras hadin”?
Gamnamit (I just saw your earlier reply)
What on earth are you talking about?
Sharon is not brain dead we have covered this. Now while in a permanent vegatative state sure theyve done scans to determine what if any brain function he has. He isnt brain dead I should hope they are monitoring his brain function of to detemine any progress (or loss) made he is a fully living person by (almost) every country’s definition!
I did just look up the law in Israel which was changed in 2008 and now does require some ancialry testing to confirm brain death. however these tests can be as rudimentary as transcranial doppler flow and do not require sophisticated scans per se. At any rate:
1) That is not what they were doing in Sharon’s case
2) In the US this is not the law
Syag
I dont think anyone remained for years either.
A case series Done by a DA Shewmon “Chronic “brain death”: meta-analysis and conceptual consequences” did yield a few cases “surviving” up to 6 months. It is rare though.
The brain as you know doesnt JUST control respiration. In other words it isnt like merely replacing a non-functioning brain with a vent solves everything. Circulatory collapse is a common problem as the brain controls vasodilation/constriction for example. And even with pressors there is so long they can help.
There have ben a few cases of pregnant brain dead women giving birth. OBviously though those cases dont involve years either.
Syag in theory it can
However generally there will be other issues that arise, most commonly infection leading to sepsis and septic shock.
In actuality I dont know of the longest case of hand. There is generally little desire to keep patient that way OTherwise the issue becomes who should pay? The hospital and insurance comapnies wont pay for the ventilation of what is legally a cadaver. The family never wants to. unless there is a compelling reason to do so, for example pregnant women have been kept on “life support” for months while brain dead for the benfit of the fetus. (this is what prompted the sheep experiment in Israel where a pregnant headless sheep gave birth while on “life support”)
Syag (and gamanit)
the heart as an internal pacemaker as long as it has a steady supply of oxygen, glucose and the correct balance of electrolytes it can pump indefinitely (in theory) without a brain. Thus evn if the brain is not connected (as in the sheep experiment) or not functioning (like in the poor case of this girl) as long as oxygen is supplied via a ventilator the heart can continue pumping.
In contrast however breathing requires a steady signal from the brainstem for each breath.
Gammit
I’m sorry but you read wrong you absolutly can feel/look for brain function that is EXACTLY how the determination of brain death is made. Cranial nerves are assessed by checking for pupil constriction to light (2 & 3), doll’s eye reflex and/or calorics (8,3,4 &6) corneal reflex (5&7) and fiannly apnea test.
Absolutely no other scans are required (nor routinely done)under US law and I’m fairly certain Israeli law as well.
The heart can last without a brain as Sam2 pointed out. That experiment was interrupted since it successfully proved the very point you are now denying. (the sheep gave birth to a live sheep 2 days after its head had been severed)
However please note this isnt a discussion about brain death. That has been debated ad nauseum though I am more than happy to discuss it further on another thread.
My only point is this girl, tragic as it may be, is by both legal standards and medical standards dead and not simply “in a coma”
(I suppose she can be described as “appearing to be unconscious” just as Lenin can.)
Gamanit,
Brain death isnt determined by scans. It is (theoretically) possible there is some brain function that is irrelevant. I have news for you btw “regular” death isnt determined by scans either it is done by listening and feeling for breaths/heartbeat. No scans whatsoever are required nor routinely done
You do not remember correctly. A heart can pump on its own modified for younger audiences even with a spinal cord injury if on a ventilator (provided blood loss is prevented)
147
I’m pretty sure it is the law in Israel too. (As I recall it was passed with in 2008 with Degel abstaining though per Rav Elyashiv’s instructions not bringing down the government) However Sharon is not brain dead. There is no such thing as “effectively brain dead” Sharon is in a coma he is not brain dead. the girl about whom this topic is reffering is brain dead she is not in a coma (though of course you can view both as alive that is not my point)
DY
I agree with your point however the girl and hospital about who popa are reffering both don’t agree.
At any rate even if you consider a brain dead individual to be “alive” They are still brain dead, they arent in a coma just becuase you dont recognise brain death as death. Rabbi Bleich who strongly disagrees with the notion of brain death being “dead” still discusses brain death. That is my sole point. This girl is not in a coma she is brain dead
GM1, moderator 127
I would love one too please!
DY
You do know that is roughly the equivalent of the New york post? do you believe everything you read in tabloid type magazines especially when it doesnt seem to be ANYWHERE else, the story as (sort of) reported by the dailymail is astounding why wouldn’t it be posted elsewhere?
reread the article with a critical eye worthy of the asstounding claim it makes. It doesnt actually quote doctors, and aside from the headline makes no mention of brain death or any Doctor actually saying such a determination was made. The article is full of hearsay reported by the family memebrs repeating what nameless doctors had told them. The only medical opinions mentioned say quite THE OPPOSITE of what the headline says:
Long story short I dont know what I would have called him since their simply isnt enough information available on the case
DY,
I only found it in dailymail and repeated in huffington post in both cases the story is extremly vague and self contradictory in terms of what exactly was said to the family. Did you see it elsewhere?
Nishtgedeygiy
This shouldnt be complicated He should call it what it is “coma” means one thing “brain dead” means another (regardless of whether you personally view it as “death.”
PBA was NOT making a halachic pronouncment, (please see his second comment on this thread) nor to the best of my knowledge is the family of the child. so discussion regarding the halachic definition of death is completly irrelevant as PBA pointed out. He is discussing the hospitals choices, and the choices they face are regarding a “brain dead” (whether you view her as alive/undead/dead/resurrected or whatever)
Your last paragraph proves you have absolutely no clue what “brain dead” means
Whats worse is you dont seem to know the aleoh bais of the subject at hand. You asked for a law, it was cited. Instead of a thank you you misconstrued (out of ignorance or malice) the discussion at hand. It isnt regarding whether the hospital “must remove someone from life support” (where on earth did you even get that bizzare notion) it is whether they may.
And according to the laws as currently written in every single state including California, this child is dead, there is no medical/legal reason to provide “life support” to a corpse.
(Again as to whether there is halachic reason to provide life support to what is legally/medically defined as a cadaver, is a great discussion but one for another day (or another thread)as it isn’t relevant to the discussion at hand which is limited to the options facing the child’s family and the hospital outlined in the OP neither of whom are invoking halacha)
DY great question!
I haven’t read up on that case in about a year now. As I recall the circumstance regarding what testing was done were never clear in the press( I don’t recall even seeing mention of it in mainstream press, let alone medical journals.) Ditto for case with boy in houston.
I will do search later and give you a more concrete answer.
If the doctors tested brain stem reflexes and did apnic test then he was brain dead, if not then he was “merely” in a coma despite any reporter confusing the terms as Popa did in his OP and which I am trying to correct
Whoa DY! I never said that
Just that the “age gap” is not THE cause(I’m not convinced it is even A cause but am willing to concede that point
PS Your comment was funny
nishtgedayget
This discussion isnt about the halachic status of “brain death” (As PBA made clear) it is in the context of this child vis a vis the hospital. (Please see th OP) In that context the child is dead, not in a coma as Popas’s state mistakinlgy and misleadingly states.
“This law says that you must remove the child from life support?”
No, what on earth are you talking about?
“And besides, have you examined the child yourself to make the determination?”
Again what are you talking about? I rarely determine for myself if person is dead or alive why would this case be an exception? Did you examine the child yourself? People are declared dead (whether via brain death or cardiac), countless times daily across the world, how on earth is my examining the child relevant?
PBA
I’m sorry I don’t follow, The girl is NOT in a coma she is brain dead which legally/medically equals dead.
Your headline says the girl is in “a coma” this is simply factually incorrect.
PBA
No it means we should all follow the same language to have a meaningful discussion.
Coma does not equal brain dead (nor vice versa) they express to different physiologic states, By any definition legal/ English or otherwise.
Nishtdaynagesheft,
while this site may be Jewish the child in question and the state of California are not so that is the basis of my statement (in this context).
The law I refer to is California H&S Code 7180-81 which adopted Uniform Determination of Death Act of 1982
Is it because they realized the age gap is nonsense?
There is no need to discuss brain death.
It is the law of the land, if you dont like it you can work to overturn it.
As the law of the land stands the kid is dead.
My point is the headline of the post is wrong, and misleading.
I’m not debating the actual point you made I think it is obvious and not even wrong.
He isn’t in a coma, he is dead.
Interestingly next year’s Thursday is even rarer day for Asarah beteves rarer still is wednesday. In fact Asarah beteves on Wed is the rarest calendar occurance only occurs only about once in 25 years on average. Whereas ASarah beteves on Friday occurs about once in five years
disagreeing with other’s call for Asifas should only be done by the Gedolim. Its not our place to just disagree without daas Torah.
DY
“The reason the minhag does follow her is probably precisely because she is the one who physically performs the mitzvah” So we agree.
(The metzitzah example is terrible as you know)
DY, it seems absurd to me that a person can have a minhag about something he doesnt do
can you think of another example?
DY, That seems absurd
Can you think of any similar example?
Torah613, I most definitely do not agree with you!
In fact for a while it bothered me that Dor yeshorim doent disclose information, They have a virtual monopoly on genetic testing in the heimishe community and then insure their survival by withholding information that I believe I have a right to know. I could not understand the harm in revealing carrier status to the carrier. Do they think we are that stupid that we cant understand High-school level biology?
But from you response I see how wrong I was, so thank you
DY
Youve misunderstood, im saying the minhag CAN’T follow the man because he doesn’t have a minhag in this regard.
DY, dor yesharim increases the carrier rate since it minimizes the chance of 2 carriers marrying each other and ending their line. Lets take Tay sachs as an example. Once upon a time in a population where by some estimates 1/25-30 is a carrier for tay sachs some would marry each other and have several of their children die Rch”l taking the “defective” gene with them. Now however virtually all carriers go on to reproduce succesfully, this however (over time)leads to an increase in the gene frequency rate.
statistically half of a carrier’s children will be carriers as well, all will survive. If the carriers dont marry other carriers the carrier rate frequency will increase over time.
DY of course it is his mitzvah. He however genrerally doesnt have any minhagim how to light ie on the rare occasion that he may have lit he didnt wave his hands he didnt say any tefilah he didnt light based on the number of kids he may have had etc etc etc ditto for any other minhagim regarding candle lighting.
Its pashut that when she adopts practices for which her husband has no minhag she would do as her mother does.
Note that R’ Yaakov Emden doesnt bring a raayah that she followed her mother, it is pashut he just states it as fact.
Dy that doesnt make any sense. I get the idea of adopting husband’s minhagim since its not practical for a family to practice different sets of minhagim. But the husband doesnt have a minhag regarding lighting candles, his mother does and she would follow her mother’s etc.
The husband generally doesnt have a minhag how to light candles. Why would the new wife adopt her husband’s mother’s minhag?
OOmis its simple. You dont like fleishigs in the morning because it would make you felishigs for most of the waking day. You wouldnt be able to have a regular coffee etc… (and as a result after years of avoiding mean in the morning the idea of eating meat doesnt sit well)
Goyim obviously dont have this concern thus grow up eating “fleishigs” for breakfast.
I would go for the more traditional milchigs meal instead of the modern fleishigs.
WIY, Unless you are fasting Shabbos day, you do in fact eat lunch.(As you should be so don’t feel bad)
nem621
Aderaba! In Al hanisim all we mention is the military victory there is no mention of the nes pach shemen. (At best there is an indirect mention of “vehidliku neiros bechatzros kodshecha” but the thust is clearly on military)
DY, agreed!
So technically as Live right heard on the news that “we celebrate Hannukah to commemorate the strength and bravery of the Maccabim” Is in fact correct, as Ive pointed out to him/her. Although granted that it reeks of “kochi v’otzem yodi”
DY Not quite, (though we may be arguing semantics)
Thanking Hashem for the military victory is inherently celebrating military strength.
Lets use the nes pach shemen as an example since it is less politically charged.
would you say
“Thanking Hashem for the oil lasting 8 days is completely different than celebrating the oil lasting 8 days.” (I’m using your words
I absolutely did ask him, and this is what he said and I quote verbatim:
?. ???? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ?? ????? ????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ????? ????? ??????. ????? ??? ?????? ????????? ?????? ????? ????? ?? ????? ????? ??????. ??? ??? ?????? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ?? ????? ????? ???? ??????? ??????? ???? ?????? ????? ??? ??????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ??????? ????? ???? ??????? ??? ?? ?????? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ????:
?. ??????? ????? ?? ??????? ?????? ??”? ???? ????? ??? ?????? ????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ????? ??? ?? ??? ??? ??? ?? ?????? ??? ??? ??? ???? ??????? ???? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??????? ??? ????:
?. ????? ?? ?????? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ????? ???? ???? ?????? ?”? ?????? ??? ???? ????
…
Becasue of the above (ie the military victory and the nes pach shemen) we celebrate days of SIMCHA and halel.
Live right, I did ask a rabbi. His name is Rabbi Moshe Ben Maiman. You dont need to be a yeshiva bachur to hear what he has to say. His works are available in English, even online.
Sorry it was meant for Liveright (Thogh you agreed so feel free to answer too)
s/he said “did you guys all know that we celebrate Hannukah to commemorate the strength and bravery of the Maccabim???? that’s what they’ve been saying on the news. so if you agree, go talk to a rabbi. whos Orthodox”
To which I replied:
I did know that; it is a beferish Rambam. See the very first 3 halachos on chanuka. Why, did you have another more “correct” celebration in mind that isnt mentioned in the Gemara or Rishonim?
LAB
I did know that its a beferish Rambam, the very first 3 halachos on chanuka. Why did you have another more “correct” celebration in mind that isnt mentioned in the Gemara or Rishonim
um cherrybim chazal made the connection, Im not sure why your rav didnt pick up on it.
The theme of chanuka is, as we say in al hanissim, “lehodos ulehalel” Which roughly translated mens to GIVE THANKS and praise