Brian Sandle bsandle at southern.co.nz
Tue Sep 5 22:57:17 EST 1995

Brian Sandle (bsandle at southern.co.nz) wrote:
: Another thing which bears on the matter is that people can live quite 
: well and even be very intelligent with only a brain stem.
I've had a couple of questions regarding brainstem-only life, and
perhaps have exaggerated slightly. Here is something on it which could
be followed up.
Brian Sandle. Shell to snail? bsandle at southern.co.nz
From: flixman at news.dorsai.org (Robt_Martin)
Subject: Re: No brain/brain waves & Death? (Was: Re: Brain usage Was:Re:
Function of sleep in brain (Neural-Nets)?)
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 1995 23:23:39 GMT
Brian Sandle (Brian_Sandle at equinox.gen.nz) wrote:
: : Mary Lacroix (mlacroix at interlog.com) wrote:
: : 
: : : "So far some 70 individuals between 5 and 18 years of age were
: : : found to have gross or extreme hydrocephalus with virtually no 
: : : neopallium who are, nevertheless, intellectually and physically
: : : normal, several of whom may be considered brilliant. The most
: : : striking example is a young man of 21 with congenital
: : : hydrocephalus for which he had no treatment, who gained a
: : : university degreee in economics and computer studies with
: : : first class honours, with an apparent absence of neopallium.
: : : There are individuals with IQs of over 130 who in infancy had
: : : virtually no brain and some who even in early adult life have
: : : very little neopallium" (J. Lorber, "Is your brain really
: : : necessary?" Archives of Disease in Childhood 53 (10): 834FF,
: : 
: I've added talk.euthanasia to the groups. Does no brain waves really
mean no
: useful life? Do the virtually no-brain people have brain waves? Should
: euthanase people with no brain waves?
Lorber doesn't say these people had "no brain" -- he says "in infancy
virtually no brain" and "in early adult life had very little
The implication is that this subsequently changed somehow.
I think it's a little too soon for your questions. Can someone with 
access to Lorber's work please let us know how he backs up his rather 
surprising assertions? 

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list