If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
As nice and happy as this may make some of you, I have to agree with some of the people above. This is not natural. We are not God, and we shouldn't pretend to be. If something dies, it is supposed to be dead, no matter how it died. Dead is dead and alive is alive. Leave it at that.
I was wondering how long it would take for you to jump in with your narrow minded archaic opinion. Understand that this is not bringing the dead back to life. It is simply reviving people. Are you also against the use of CPR? If not, how can you draw a distinction between CPR and this method of resuscitation?
And that talk about zombie dogs...
What a load of crap.
There have already been cases of children being revived after several hours of 'drowning' in icy waters. Are there also people out there that suggest we do not try to revive a child who has been underwater an hour or more?
I was wondering how long it would take for you to jump in with your narrow minded archaic opinion. Understand that this is not bringing the dead back to life. It is simply reviving people. Are you also against the use of CPR? If not, how can you draw a distinction between CPR and this method of resuscitation?
I guess you are right. Thank you for not being an ass about expressing yourself like some (look up) did.
THE VOICE OF REASON HAS SPOKEN!
Pop quiz: Which US president said, "Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade, and much of his nation's wealth, not on providing for the Iraqi people, but on developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."
George W. Bush is not correct. It was Bill Clinton in his 1998 State of the Union speech. HMMMMMMMMM.
Are there also people out there that suggest we do not try to revive a child who has been underwater an hour or more?
That is because of brain damage due to the lack of oxygen. Apparently, with this "technique", the brain damage won't happen. I mean, when you're dead, you're not breathing. When you're not breathing, you don't get oxygen. Meaning those dogs were without oxygen for 3 hours, yet they came back with no brain damage. I think that's the new part
And well... if you don't want humans to "play god" and ressucitate (sp?) you, you can always sign at DNR form. Meaning "do not ressucitate". That way, people won't try to bring you back to life with this way or the other methods in existance.
Also, I believe that picture was placed in the article as a joke- that's a wolf, not a dog And why would they place it in snow when it's a scientific test?
man. thats nothing, 3 hours? puh lease. id liek to see people who have been dead for months or years.
so its not bringing the dead back to life, liek 10 years of being dead.
That'd be a bit tough with rotting body parts along with the release of bodily fluids and whatnot.
Originally posted by wannabepilot777
As nice and happy as this may make some of you, I have to agree with some of the people above. This is not natural. We are not God, and we shouldn't pretend to be. If something dies, it is supposed to be dead, no matter how it died. Dead is dead and alive is alive. Leave it at that.
You never cease to amaze me. So if I did things your way, the next time I see a chap in the street who's just had a heart attack I just won't do anything. And when their family or another bystander turns to me asking why I didn't help, I'll just come up with the crock of an excuse that "he is supposed to be dead".
If a loved one is sick or has been injured I want to see to it that they get the best medical care to help them recover fully, not to sit and watch them die since trying to help is 'playing God'. It's someone's time when they cannot be saved, not when we reach a bump in the road. Sorry mate, I'm going with YBBN here in that you're just one extremely backward-minded prat.
WRONG. That isn't what I said at all. Ethical cancer reasearch saves and prolongs a life, which is fine.
Yeah but if God wanted them to have a prolonged life, he wouldn't have given them cancer. He wants them to die. They are supposed to be dead. Dead is dead.
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Comment