<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Diagnostic Benefit of the Doubt</title>
	<atom:link href="http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2437/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2437</link>
	<description>A Rare Bird, A Strange Duck, One Funky Blog</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:02:42 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2437#comment-19810</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Sep 2006 00:13:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2437#comment-19810</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;The woman in the study could not communicate with the researchers, and there was no way to know whether her subjective experience was anything like what healthy people call consciousness.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Seems like that sorta keeps this from becoming a real issue for the PVS debate. At the very least, it implicates the problem identifying consciousness from an objective perspective by observing brain activity and reminds us that it may be possible to have two brains that appear objectively to be doing the same things, but which present different subjective responses and provide different "subjective experience" (if you believe there is some part within the brain that does the experiencing).

Also, if the mere observation of brain activity where the brain itself is unable to communicate should count as the existence of a conscious individual, then it would seem reasonable to drop arguments against artificial intelligence like the infamous "Chinese Room" argument. Isn't the observation of brain activity without subjective experience pretty much what that argument is about? If you grant personhood to people in this state, then why not grant personhood to computers on the grounds that their electronic activity can be observed without knowing whether they have a subjective experience of it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote>The woman in the study could not communicate with the researchers, and there was no way to know whether her subjective experience was anything like what healthy people call consciousness.</blockquote><br />
<br />
Seems like that sorta keeps this from becoming a real issue for the PVS debate. At the very least, it implicates the problem identifying consciousness from an objective perspective by observing brain activity and reminds us that it may be possible to have two brains that appear objectively to be doing the same things, but which present different subjective responses and provide different &#034;subjective experience&#034; (if you believe there is some part within the brain that does the experiencing).<br />
<br />
Also, if the mere observation of brain activity where the brain itself is unable to communicate should count as the existence of a conscious individual, then it would seem reasonable to drop arguments against artificial intelligence like the infamous &#034;Chinese Room&#034; argument. Isn&#039;t the observation of brain activity without subjective experience pretty much what that argument is about? If you grant personhood to people in this state, then why not grant personhood to computers on the grounds that their electronic activity can be observed without knowing whether they have a subjective experience of it?]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: UnSpace - Show; Not Tell &#187; Diagnosing &#8220;Persistent Vegetative State&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2437#comment-19724</link>
		<dc:creator>UnSpace - Show; Not Tell &#187; Diagnosing &#8220;Persistent Vegetative State&#8221;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2006 13:08:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2437#comment-19724</guid>
		<description>[...] Diagnosing &#8220;Persistent Vegetative State&#8221;   By Rob Ales Rarus discusses an important discovery: a woman, diagnosed as being in a "persistent vegetative state" responded to verbal instructions to imagine herself playing tennis, as viewed on a functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging scan. Please stop over at Ales Rarus to read this article. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[[...] Diagnosing &#034;Persistent Vegetative State&#034;   By Rob Ales Rarus discusses an important discovery: a woman, diagnosed as being in a &#034;persistent vegetative state&#034; responded to verbal instructions to imagine herself playing tennis, as viewed on a functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging scan. Please stop over at Ales Rarus to read this article. [...]]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob</title>
		<link>http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2437#comment-19672</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2006 05:06:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2437#comment-19672</guid>
		<description>In the past, I've noted the one problem in this area is the definition of "vegetative state." In one notable case, a patient recovered from a supposed vegetative state, while a review of his chart showed a mishmash of diagnoses; vegetative state tended to be given by doctors without experience with such patients or who spent little time with the patient, while other doctors with better experience and/or time with the patient gave him a much better diagnosis.

Inter-rater reliability is obviously a problem. Better diagnostic criteria (functional MRI might become more common as a result), longer time before a hopeless Dx would be given and I'd suspect documentation in some form of devastating brain injury would be included. In this case, it's worth noting the amount of brain injury was unusually small for a Dx of "vegetative state."

Mrs. Schiavo would not have responded to these tests, as we now know those sections of her brain no longer existed. MRI would have been contraindicated for her because of the presence of a metalic implant -- a shunt, if I remember right. Use of non-metalic implants in such patients might introduce a new cost/benefit ratio to some therapies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[In the past, I&#039;ve noted the one problem in this area is the definition of &#034;vegetative state.&#034; In one notable case, a patient recovered from a supposed vegetative state, while a review of his chart showed a mishmash of diagnoses; vegetative state tended to be given by doctors without experience with such patients or who spent little time with the patient, while other doctors with better experience and/or time with the patient gave him a much better diagnosis.<br />
<br />
Inter-rater reliability is obviously a problem. Better diagnostic criteria (functional MRI might become more common as a result), longer time before a hopeless Dx would be given and I&#039;d suspect documentation in some form of devastating brain injury would be included. In this case, it&#039;s worth noting the amount of brain injury was unusually small for a Dx of &#034;vegetative state.&#034;<br />
<br />
Mrs. Schiavo would not have responded to these tests, as we now know those sections of her brain no longer existed. MRI would have been contraindicated for her because of the presence of a metalic implant &#8212; a shunt, if I remember right. Use of non-metalic implants in such patients might introduce a new cost/benefit ratio to some therapies.]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: All Blog Headlines &#124; pittsburgh bloggers</title>
		<link>http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2437#comment-39137</link>
		<dc:creator>All Blog Headlines &#124; pittsburgh bloggers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2437#comment-39137</guid>
		<description>&lt;!--%kramer-pre%--&gt;   Ales Rarus discusses an important discovery: a woman, diagnosed as being in a "persistent vegetative state" responded to verbal instructions to imagine herself playing tennis, as viewed on a functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging scan. Please stop over at Ales Rarus to read this article. Read more at UnSpace!  &lt;!--%kramer-post%--&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!--%kramer-pre%-->   Ales Rarus discusses an important discovery: a woman, diagnosed as being in a &#034;persistent vegetative state&#034; responded to verbal instructions to imagine herself playing tennis, as viewed on a functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging scan. Please stop over at Ales Rarus to read this article. Read more at UnSpace!  <!--%kramer-post%-->]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
