a) Absolutely people can be resuscitated from that long of not breathing and be OK, especially when they've been that cold, so stop being a typical internet 'That wouldn't work in real life' dick. It can and has in the past.
b) Brilliant movie. Love it.
c) The scene with the rat breathing fluid.... real. Amazing stuff. They've used the same technique for premature babies and children with lung problems. Of course, they've also done it on an adult scientist and almost killed him.

The film, and how it was made is truly amazing, and demonstrates the visionary that Cameron is. He doesn't do things by half that man.

It was kindly pointed out to me that I have just established a precedent at odds with the nascent opinion in this conversation.

As I wrote on the previous post, "I consider this action infinitely more efficient than waiting for all 105 (as of this time) voters to enter their votes a second time."

The only major downside to such an action is the scenario of people entering downvotes which they would've have upvoted had the video been sifted up differently.

To that, however, I say people should vote carefully. If the re-sift is to correct a wrong (in this case, poor video classification to the point of malice), then anyone who decided to upvote based on the proper video classification is vindicated.

The primary downside is anyone who decided to downvote for the reason of malicious classification (and who has not yet upvoted the new sift) will have a downvote transferred over.

The example linked above resulted in 4 downvotes getting transferred - my rudimentary cost/benefit thought-moment argued that 105 up's more than makes up for 4 down's in such a scenario.

>> ^xxovercastxx:
dupeof is too restricted to be very useful at the moment. At least let anyone call dupeof on their own posts (transferring votes they received to the rightful post, that is) the same way anyone can discard their own post. The probability of someone who can call dupeof actually seeing the video before it's discarded just isn't high enough. If the original poster can do it then that at least guarantees that the opportunity to call dupeof will present itself in every case.
I was also going to suggest what arvana said... have dupeof check queue date before it does its thing. You can do one better, actually. If someone calls dupeof backwards, attempting to transfer from old to new, since you've checked the dates you can kill the new and transfer to the old, even resurrecting the old with a new embed if necessary.


Now you see, the logic I have described above argues against xxovercastxx's idea - there may be some kind of reason the original sift was discarded and a resuscitation is not called for, such as in this case.


maatc: "What happens if the video the votes are being transferred to is a discarded, dead or killed clip? "

Sifters have the power to obliterate their submission to the Sift. An electronic "right to die", if you will. You don't want the code bringing discarded/killed vids back to life in this manner.

Restoration of dead clips, however, completely kosher because the sifts themselves are "alive", it's just the video code which needed fixing.

Polygamy and polyandry would be terribly complicated, legally speaking. Imagining a complication is trivial: what happens when one partner is critically injured and the other partners cannot agree whether a do not resuscitate order should be signed?

The line of argument presented by imstellar is patently ridiculous. As are all arguments against same sex marriage. They're all based on bigotry, intolerance, hatred and religious dogma.

The Mormon church needs its tax exempt status revoked.

*dead, needs resuscitation asap for sheer awesomeness

mmm... it seems this thread has been resuscitated so i fear no repercussion of posting my hello!

my name is chris and i've been registered to the sift since december of 2006. i'm obviously a lurker more than anything, but it's really because i don't spend a lot of time digging up videos. the only reason i felt compelled to find something worth posting was to get rid of my probie status! (i trust you all understand.)

i've got a bachelor's in german from UC berkeley, but i spent about 3.5 years learning electrical engineering and computer programming. after getting my heart broken, i changed my major to change my friends and surroundings. i have not looked back since; being out of the basement is invaluable, and so are great books and interesting people.

i love burlesque. you can probably find me at the uptown club in oakland or somewhere in the city at a show. (that's san francisco.)

thanks to a woman whom i've adored for years, but never done anything with, i'm addicted to cycling. i ride fixed gear for fun, not fashion. the bike has a phrase i painted on it, "my other bike has gears." i'm also a mechanic, and i used to autocross my old 1989 honda accord because, well, why not.

videosift has been one of my regular stops on the internet... along with big picture, nytimes, wsj, and (until recently) my warcraft guild's website. i have been "clean" for about three months now. i have no intention to return to addictive gaming.

i'm studying to become a recognized beer judge by the BJCP. i will know my score after the november 14th 2008 test. my background is in wine, but beer is amazingly complex and terribly tasty.

currently, i work for an enormous independent auto shop in berkeley. we are solar powered, do anything hybrid, and have a great reputation. i am the sys-ad, but i also interface between the mechanics and customers since i don't mind talking with people.

i'm 26, and single... but it's my 'fault.' i don't like to fuck around, probably because i respect women; but i'm a good looking guy and could easily capitalize on that. i have eyes for two women who, for reasons beyond my feeble masculine conception, seem to have little interest in me.

the sift rages on! i would like to thank cat power for being the musical backdrop for reading this sift-talk.

much love and respect for everyone, including the impressive (intelligent) trolls as well. i do not condone choggie's downvote/discard actions, but his comments consistently brought a smirk to my face.

eff (like the letter, not the keebler )

"To Treat the Dead: The new science of resuscitation is changing the way doctors think about heart attacks—and death itself."

Newsweek, May 7, 2007.

"Consider someone who has just died of a heart attack. His organs are intact, he hasn't lost blood. All that's happened is his heart has stopped beating—the definition of "clinical death"—and his brain has shut down to conserve oxygen. But what has actually died?"



It turns out the death process is a little more complicated than once thought.

>> ^White:
well the hosts don't realize the huge hole in their argument:
you can't really compare the two situations. his mother was not "on the brink of death, and then got better." she DIED. they took her off life support and she stopped breathing. then suddenly, BUT NOT IMMEDIATELY, she came back to life and no one knows why. i defy anyone to find a "perfectly healthy person" who dropped dead. people don't just die, they die because something was wrong with them or something happened to them. there is always a reason. the point of this man's story is that there is no medical reason that his mother came back. the doctors said she was going to die, and she did. then, out of the blue, she came back.


People do occasionally resuscitate on their own, although it is extremely rare. The most recent famous one was the brain dead woman who woke up after being taken off life support: http://www.startribune.com/local/15545747.html?location_refer=Error

There is, currently, no medical explanation for such events. Regardless, it's not a hole in the hosts' argument since not having an explanation for something does not automatically mean God exists. For most of humankind's history, people couldn't explain the apparent motion of the stars in the night sky, so they attributed it to God's work. We all know how that turned out, and I'm sure some day we'll have an explanation for people who self-resuscitate.

Cliche, but, with friends like those who needs enemies. If he'd tipped over he'd have caught a lung full of water before any of them could have gotten out there, not to mention the time it would have taken to drag his body back to land. For some reason I doubt those geniuses have the knowledge to resuscitate a drowning victim.

As far as it being a fake, I've know some pretty heavy sleepers, even when booze isn't involved, I'd say unlikely but, plausible.

To these day secession is no more then a fight over state power between different faction of the bourgeoisie. Since the quiet revolution, part of the french population had grown wealthy giving rise to a wider and strengten bourgeois class impeding on the project of a social-democratic Quebec nation. As a consequence sovereignty is loosing more and more popular support. So is their opponents, where's Trudeau just look like he wanted to resuscitate nationalist from the dead to regain center of the political attention. What 'll remain to Justin ? maybe just to follow Ben path...

That god they preserved the robot's dignity. I hope the resuscitation was a success.

Choggie, I believe he dispenses used knickers out of that thing. In fact that's why they built it.

this is great. It totally reminds me of Katamari Damacy. All the crazy little scenes that are going on around the main action- the man looking up the girl's skirt, the person being resuscitated on the side of the road, the building on fire, the alligators- it's all the details that really seal the deal for me on these videos. Great sift!

It seems like it's probably true, though this footage may be a re-enactment. :
"However, while the film could have been re-staged for the camera, it almost certainly depicts a series of real experiments. Bryukhonenko's work with canine circulation seems obscure today, but at the time was well publicized; his decapitation experiment even remarked upon by George Bernard Shaw.[1] Bryukhonenko's procedures are attested to in numerous books and medical papers, with some sources providing detailed technical information on the operations shown in the film. These texts also shed light on failures not mentioned in the film. For example, the severed heads survived only minutes in artificial circulation, while the resuscitated dogs often died after a few days.
Perhaps most importantly, Bryukhonenko's research was vital to the development of open-heart procedures in Russia. He was one of the leaders of the Research Institute of Experimental Surgery, where Professor A.A. Vishnevsky performed the first Soviet open-heart operation in 1957. Bryukhonenko developed a new version of the autojektor (for use on humans) in the same year; it can be seen today on display at the Museum of Cardiovascular Surgery at the Scientific Center of Cardiovascular Surgery in Russia. Bryukhonenko was awarded the prestigious Lenin Prize posthumously."
(wikipedia - though, especially in cases such as this, wikipedia warrants fact-confirmation; everthing else I've seen online points to this being true - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experiments_in_the_Revival_of_Organisms)
Full video (20 min) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap1co5ZZHYE
http://time-proxy.yaga.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,851883,00.html
http://analytics.ex.ru/cgi-bin/txtnscr.pl?node=578&txt=460&lang=2&sh=1