• somename [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    yeonmi-park

    But seriously, why remove all the organs? What are you going to do with a brain? Is it time for more head transplants?

    • Radicalized@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      6 months ago

      “In North Amerika the prisoners are filled with sand after execution, and their organs are sent to schools to feed the starving school children who are taught it’s okay to do crime so that they too will go to prison and have their organs harvested.”

    • Dalek@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      6 months ago

      If its true… I know that the brain can be used for medical science.

      It could also be disposed of if the subject has been exposed or subjected to something that alters the brain leading to death, illness or medical injury. Eg the testing of medicine. Not saying thats what happened, just putting out a couple of explanations that would still need proof.

    • GreenTeaRedFlag [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      6 months ago

      Least awful: there were dangerous conditions they wanted to keep hidden. Could be lead, drugs, concussion, something the prison they wanted to not get out.

      Most likely: medical research on brains

      Most evil: someone ate it.

      Could be any of the above, or more.

      • HexBroke [any, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s rare a pathologist would take a whole brain, but not out of the realm of possibility.

        Within BrainNet Europe (BNE, www.brainnet-europe.org), a consortium of 19 European brain banks established by the European Commission, an Ethical Code of Conduct was installed . This Code covers the basic legal rules and bioethical principles involved in brain banking and is based on legislation and guidelines issued by international governmental and non-governmental key organizations, such as the Council of Europe (CoE), the European Commission, the United Nations, the World Medical Association and the World Health Organization and is mostly based on the Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the CoE to member states on research on biological materials of human origin (Council of Europe Committee of Ministers, Explanatory Report, 2005, http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/Reports/Html/195.htm; Recommendation, 2006, https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=977859). In June 2008, all BNE II partners signed this Code of Conduct. This type of self-regulation is hoped in the long run to contribute to uniform and unambiguous European legislation guiding transparent brain banking and to guide new and professionalize existing brain banks.

        I love me some voluntary self regulation of checks notes brain collection

  • LGOrcStreetSamurai [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    6 months ago

    This sort of thing should only be heard of in some sort of survival horror game lore item describing some fictional super experiment. It’s sickening that real life actual people have their humanity removed when they enter the thresher of the us criminal (in)justice system

  • DragonBallZinn [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    6 months ago

    Normies: “Thank God no commies are in power, could you imagine a world where DANGEROUS LUNATICS like people who thought racism was bad were in power instead of our based and redpilled leaders!?”

    • GreenTeaRedFlag [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      6 months ago

      No it fucking isn’t. So far they have the body. “Some guy finds prisoner’s corpse” communicates rhe same information with the focus on the finder, not the corpse. This is actually a great time to use passive voice because what was found mattered more. Yes I agree it was most likely the prison that stole his organs, but we don’t know that yet and “prison may have stolen organs” is an awful headline.

        • GreenTeaRedFlag [any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          6 months ago

          You’re just wrong. Although the obvious assumption is that someone did it, and you’re almost certainly correct in that assumption, until you can point out who or why you don’t know that for sure. The best way to communicate the case efficiently is to put up the facts. Then you ask the questions who and why in the article. People complain about passive voice too much here. Cops get the same treatment as others by passive voice because “13 dead, 6 injured in school shooting” is just as common as “man killed by cop.” The phrasing on cops usually separated then more or makes the victim seem less sympathetic, which is the issue, but the passive voice alone is not the problem. In this case, they are not removing a single bit of blame, just presenting what is known as clearly and precisely as possible.

          • HexBroke [any, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            You’re just wrong. Although the obvious assumption is that someone did it, and you’re almost certainly correct in that assumption, until you can point out who or why you don’t know that for sure. The best way to communicate the case efficiently is to put up the facts. Then you ask the questions who and why in the article. People complain about passive voice too much here. Cops get the same treatment as others by passive voice because “13 dead, 6 injured in school shooting” is just as common as “man killed by cop.” The phrasing on cops usually separated then more or makes the victim seem less sympathetic, which is the issue, but the passive voice alone is not the problem. In this case, they are not removing a single bit of blame, just presenting what is known as clearly and precisely as possible

            Lot of words for someone who didn’t read the article lol

            You can see the impacts of a bad headline in this thread

            Who found the body? No one “found” it, it was transferred to a funeral director from the Alabama pathology service and the funeral director told the family the body was all fucked up.

            Who removed the organs? The Alabama pathologist, because that’s what they do in an autopsy.

            What forgot to put back the organs? Probably the Alabama pathologist.

            Where did the person die? Not in prison, at an ‘outside hospital’.

            Is it normal for a body to be decomposing, transferring it from a hospital morgue to a mortuary and then to a funeral director? Absolutely not and doing so would raise more questions.

            If you wanted to steal organs you wouldn’t take the whole lot, and you wouldn’t take the people from a hospital.

            What you would do with American prisoners is lots of medical experimentation, continues to occur.

            • GreenTeaRedFlag [any]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Read the article, talking in the abstract. For the specifics, they can’t prove they forgot/stole the brain yet, and saying it with qualifiers sounds weak as hell.

              Precision and efficiency seem not to be your strong suit. You could have just responded to my comment, much faster than copy paste the whole thing. Your argument is not strengthened by putting the whole thing.