Re: "The Possibility Exists"
SirRoxalot said:
You've shown that this possibility exists. But none of your citations apply in this instance and wouldn't preclude anyone from engaging in this particular contest.
Perhaps you missed the part from the Kidney Diseases website:
Every now and then there is a report in the news about someone dying of water intoxication. It usually gets a lot of attention because the headlines are so shocking. How is it that drinking water killed someone, especially when they are so young and healthy! What is worse, it seems to fly in the face of conventional wisdom that you need to be drinking more water not less.
What Is Water Intoxication?
Water intoxication is a condition where the body’s level of sodium has been rapidly diluted with too much water. It is also known as hyponatremia or hyperhydration. Sodium is an important electrolyte that helps regulates the body’s fluids. When the body’s sodium level is changed rapidly by drinking a lot of water, the extra water then causes the cells in the body to swell and malfunction.
If that isn't a red flag, I don't know what is.
Again. There no documented case of it happening to a
normal healthy adult. And you're on a
kidney disease website. It wouldn't be a red flag in this case.
SirRoxalot said:
YOU'VE conducted a contest where people drank a gallon of water, and it made 2 of 3 contestants puke - an indication to any rational person that it's something that is bad for the body. PUKING is an indication that the conduct is NOT benign. Well, your buds at "The End" more than doubled the amount of water, and weren't as lucky as you. Someone DID die. And, the ONE contest that you cite hardly adds up to "thousands".
Again. The contest is well known. Drink 'til you puke/pee contest are old hat. They have been done forever with no major health issue resulting from participation. Yes, vomiting is a red flag, and yes it's involuntary, and yes it happened in my contest. It was also a contest where people
voluntarily and willfully participated. In fact, they were proud to have puked. Just as
the woman in this instance bragged that she could go on, and challenged the hosts to let her do so.
SirRoxalot said:
I have already cited several sources in previous posts that indicated that the amount of water, the time taken to consume it, and the relative body mass of the individual are critical to determining the effect on a person. Strenuous exercise is not required, but can be a contributing factor in that there are documented cases of people overhydrating during exercise. There are also cases of people overhydrating due to extremely hot weather.
The cases cited of people consuming large amounts of water in order to beat a drug test, and dieing as a result, should also raise a red flag among people taking reasonable care to protect contestants.
But you have yet to show me any case of an otherwise normal, healthy adult who has died from this prior to this contest. You seem unwilling to accept that this was an accident. You've shown multiple definitions of water intoxication. But not one reference case that would warn anyone of good physical health not to participate in this contest. It appears that you cannot accept that there's no information out there that applies to this event that would have precluded the hosts from executing it. You also seem to ignore the incorrect information provided by the much-cited "nurse" who called, that encouraged the hosts to continue the game. And the participant's willingness to continue.
SirRoxalot said:
You've shown that this possibility exists.
That should be enough to either stop your from running this contest, or at least seek competent medical advice before running a contest requiring people to consume gallons of water in a short period of time. Several cases cited - including the people trying to beat drug tests - refute your contention that there is
"no documented case of an otherwise normal healthy adult, who did not engage in either forced ingestion, or physically strenuous behavior, dying from this."
Is voluntarily overdrinking water to dilute your bloodstream in order to beat a drug test
not "forced ingestion?"
SirRoxalot said:
The bottom line is that station personnel apparently did no research, even though they were aware of a condition called "water intoxication" that could be fatal. In fact, they reassured contestants of that the contest might make them uncomfortable, but wouldn't really hurt them. They provided no competent medical staff to evaluate contestants before, during, or after the contest. They did not disclose to contestants the possibility that they could die from participating.
To which I retort..There was no information out there for them to have drawn this conclusion even were they have done the research you demand.
SirRoxalot said:
I'm sorry if the people that did this are your buds, but this is not an accident. This is negligence. They screwed up, and they're liable.
I respectfully, but wholeheartedly disagree. They provided an evironment conducive to personal injury. Yes. That happened. But the participants made their own decision to engage in the potentially dangerous behavior. At some point, adults must be held accountable for their own decisions. It will never happen. Especially in the state of California. Using your logic, we should sue the auto makers for every accident that happens during rush hour. Or, sue the gun manufacturers for every shooting that takes place.
Radio stations are not responsible for the actions of their listeners. Sorry. We're not babysitters. There's no evidence that this contest
would have resulted in its outcome. There was documented danger in overconsumption of water. But none of those circumstances existed in this controlled setting. You have repeatedly failed to show otherwise. The hosts are guilty of stupidity, but nobody made the woman participate. And she was more than willing to ignore warnings and bragged about being able to continue. Those are hardly the actions of a woman in distress.
And...we don't know what behavior she engaged in from the time she left the station until when her body was found. In a court of law...that would be "reasonable doubt." And some lawyer would raise it immediately. She could've engaged in any one the multiple behaviors you cited in your many references that could cause this to happen. Maybe she went to the gym to work out? Or, pehaps she went tanning? Does the woman do drugs? We don't know. I'm not trying to smear her at all. I'm pointing out that there's enough "reasonable doubt" to exonerate the hosts of any criminal behavior. There are reasons why she would have died, but, none of those behaviors were present when she willingly participated, and left the station in otherwise good health. The one behavior that would have contributed to it, was her voluntary denial of the body's natural filtering process of unrination. She was asked if she was OK, she said she was OK, and had an EMT asked the same thing, she'd have responded the same way and she'd have been allowed to leave, and the ambulance company would be a co-defendant in this case.
You cite the "bottom line"...Here's my interpretation:
A tragic accidental death during a radio contest.
That's my opinion. I've done enough research on the subject to stand by it as the available evidence supports my theory. Until I hear definitive data that would refute it, it will be unchanged.
My continued sympathy to all, involved in this tragedy.
