I would urge the Prof (from the audience) speaking at around 47:00 to study the data before coming to his current conclusions. An example mentioned by the lecturer was TK who was brain dead. And this is not mere brain stem death - TK's brain had undergone liquefactive necrosis and he had NO BRAIN. Despite having no brain, TK survived for 20 years. He used nutrients from tube feedings, fought infection, maintained body temperature and underwent proportionate physical growth. In other words, TK's body continued to work as an integrated, unified whole. Is this the mark of a dead "organism?"
I would urge the Prof (from the audience) speaking at around 47:00 to study the data before coming to his current conclusions. An example mentioned by the lecturer was TK who was brain dead. And this is not mere brain stem death - TK's brain had undergone liquefactive necrosis and he had NO BRAIN. Despite having no brain, TK survived for 20 years. He used nutrients from tube feedings, fought infection, maintained body temperature and underwent proportionate physical growth. In other words, TK's body continued to work as an integrated, unified whole. Is this the mark of a dead "organism?"