Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: longnshort who wrote (237732)	6/18/2005 2:00:50 AM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577100

"The frontal temporal and temporal poles and insular-cortex demonstrated relative preservation." What does this mean? These are the most complicated parts of the brain, only a little damage is enough to severely degrade their capabilities. Realize that when you are conscious and aware of your surroundings your brain engages in 4 times the metabolic activity than when you are daydreaming. So relative preservation says exactly squat. But ok, let us take that a face value. Lets assume that there was enough frontal cortex for awareness. Most of the perception is done towards the sides and back of the brain. There was no visual cortex at all. Hearing, smell, taste and touch weren't mentioned, but given the obvious damage in the speech center, if she had these senses they were, at best, sporadic. So if she had any consciousness, she had was effectively isolated from the outside world. She wasn't cognizant of her surroundings because there wasn't anything to sense those surroundings. Her brain was around half the size expected. The largest parts of the brain are the cerebral cortex and the visual system. You cannot lose that much brain and have anything that can respond as a human.