"So far, according to her doctors, Giffords is likely to be in the small minority of patients who will beat the odds. So, what placed those odds in her favor?
First off, she received very quick care, and was in the operating room within 38 minutes after arriving at the hospital. Her overall health and youth also provide some benefit. The injury was a “through and through” injury, meaning there was both an entry and exit wound. That’s significant because some of the energy of the bullet was dissipated into space, as opposed to all within her cranial cavity."
I don’t think that the bullet stopping in her brain would have cause any more injury due to the bullet spending it’s energy in the cranium. Maybe the removal of the bullet still in the cranium would have added to the injury. From what I’ve read the two wounding mechanisms are the crush cavity and the TC so the bullet traversing through the brain caused the TC to traverse the brain causing more trauma to the brain than if it hadn’t traversed the brain.
Maybe Doc or some of the others with more knowledge can give their opinion.
If the bullet stops in the body, whether cranium or anywhere else, that tells us that all of its energy has been expended in creating the wound components (TC and CC). If it exits the body, that means that it expended at least some energy outside the body after it exited. We don’t know how much and can’t unless they found the bullet and identify what it hit and how hard. Knowing that, however, has no implications that would guide treatment.
You realize that gun forums are going to be under intense scrutiny by the anti-gun crowd because of this incident. It might not be the best idea to be discussing the ballistics of her injuries on here. CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC and all the other alphabet communist news agencies are already decrying AZ’s gun laws. Just something to consider before this gets too morose, or we give them more fuel for their fires. IMO.
“As clearly illustrated in the relevant scientific literature over the past 20 years, kinetic energy or momentum transfer from a projectile to tissue is not a wounding mechanism.”
Unless I’ve misunderstood Duncan McPherson’s book and the other terminal ballistics literature I’ve read, I believe you are incorrect on this one.
Like I said the TC and crush cavity are the only wounding mechanisms and the TC should be identical if the bullet exits or not. I mention TC here because I do believe that brain tissue would be consider inelastic tissue.
Had to add all this is assuming that the projectile shape is the same for the one exiting the cranium and the one not exiting. That’s to say both are non deformed FMJs or both are expanded HPs.
I heard this morning from a doctor on the radio that the bullet traversed the left lobe of her brain, and then exited. This appeared to have allowed her to preserve as much function as she has. He stated that if the bullet had traversed rboth lobes of the brain she would be in much more trouble. Luckily the human waste that shot her was not able to hit the Medula Oblongata which would have killed her instantly.
I recall watching a television program that showed a young boy hit in the head with shotgun. Despite the complete loss of half his brain he had full language, and cognitive ability. The human body is remarkably fragile, and remarkably resilient at the same time.
May all those wounded make a speedy recovery, and RIP to all those killed.
I don’t believe that applies to brain tissue (different elasticity) in a closed cavity like the cranium, but I’d be interested to see any info you have that states otherwise.
I agree that velocity is more important than energy in most parts of the body, but brain tissue is far less elastic than other soft tissue and the consequences of otherwise trivial disruption far more devastating to the victim. Likewise, the cranium is a small cavity with rigid constraints. The consequences of any energy dissipation in the head are going to be different than, say, in the chest or abdomen…again, because of the nature of the tissue, its function, and the space where it lives.
But, you could be right…I may be wrong. My opinion is based on a lecture I attended a few years ago as assistant coroner for this county and I can’t lay my hands on it right now.
There are two factors that lead me to suspect the ammo used in the shooting was FMJ:
[ol]
[li]The description of Giffords’ wound*
[/li][li]The kind of ammo used doesn’t appear to be “newsworthy”.
[/li][/ol]
Note that the killed/wounded percentage (30%) is the same as the Ft. Hood shootings, in which 5.7x28mm was used.
*It’s also possible that a JHP bullet may have produced the relatively mild wound (given the location of the wound) if it was damaged during the collision with dense cranium bone at the beginning of the wound track and did not expand.
Well CNN is a news agency, and its not appropriate for them to be discussing it either. However, CNN is not concerned with protecting gun rights in America either. In fact morose discussions about the specifics of her injuries play to their agenda of fear mongering. In my previous post I was raising a legitimate concern about wether or not this is an appropriate discussion. I am not a conspiracy theory nut job but thanks so much for jumping to that conclusion. Discussing theories on what kind of ammo this whack job used makes us look like a bunch of wierdos as a community. It is unfortunate enough that the media will strive to portray all gun owners as being just like the shooter in this case. Furthermore, does it really matter what type of ammo he used? We are talking about the unwarranted shooting of a human being not some fucking physics experiment. Try to show a little compassion for Christ’s sakes
Ass-backwards. If you’re going to contradict Dr. G.K. Roberts, one of the foremost experts on terminal ballistics in this country, it is incumbent upon you, to post factual data or credible scientific references to support your position. It doesn’t matter what you do or don’t “believe”. This is a technical forum and only facts matter here.
When you have “moderator” or “staff” under your user name you can decide what is or is not appropriate for the community here to discuss. In the meantime, you can report it as inappropriate if you so choose.
This is a discussion forum about terminal ballistics. Facts: someone was shot at close range; the 9mm projectile passed through the brain; the victim survived. I think every aspect of this is extremely valuable and interesting to anyone who studies or has an interest in the field. Medical researchers across the country are discussing the very same things right now.
