Saudi Arabia, as many other countries, continues to struggle with the question of when a person dies. According to a fatwa issued in 1988—and still operative—brain death signals the end of a life. A person whose brain no longer demonstrates brain activity beyond the most primitive, is assumed to be dead and can be taken off of life support.
Now, according to Arab News, a panel of experts is seeking to revise that, instead making heart activity the determinative. If a person’s heart still beats, without assistance, then the person is still alive. They call for a new fatwa to embrace this ‘new understanding’. Now, I’m aware of religious controversy over ‘brain’ v. ‘heart’ death; here’s a discussion of it from the point of Jewish law. The US case of Terri Schiavo, which ended in 2005, shows that there is dispute within Christian circles as well.
Now, I’m all for debate on this topic. There is serious scientific, medical discussion over just when a person dies. (See this piece from the New England Journal of Medicine.) The arguments raised in the Journal article, though, seem very different from those being made here.
Abdulgader said these electromagnetic waves are similar to airwaves. “What do you do when you turn on your television or radio. You basically try to catch a certain frequency and when that is matched there is communication — the radio and the television come alive. The same is the case with our heart waves. When it matches a certain frequency it is able to communicate with the higher force in life,” he said.
This sound a little woo-woo to me. ‘Heart waves’? Really? ‘A halo of light around the heart while it is beating.’ Really? I’m not sure that taking 7th C. understanding of physiology is a sound step, either.
I’d like to see more discussion of the issue, but I think it gravely premature to change the current ruling on the issue.
Expert calls for new fatwa on brain dead
SIRAJ WAHAB | ARAB NEWSAL-HASA: A leading Saudi medical expert, known in the global scientific community for his pioneering research in cardiology, has called on the Kingdom’s Islamic scholars to revise their ruling on terminating the life of a person who is “clinically dead” or “brain dead.”
“As long as a patient’s heart is beating there is no reason for us to take him or her off the ventilator,” said Dr. Abdullah A. Abdulgader, director of the Prince Sultan Cardiac Center in Al-Hasa.
Abdulgader said his view is based on research carried out by top cardiologists who are attending a three-day international conference on advanced cardiac sciences in this historic Saudi city.
“Everyone who is attending this conference, including professor Franz Halberg of the University of Minnesota and Dr. Rollin McCraty of California’s Institute of Heartmath, believes that the heart is where life is. As long as the heart is functioning a person should be considered as being alive. All these experts are of the unanimous view that the heart, not the brain, is the king of organs,” he said. “And all of them are basing their judgment on impeccable research.”
…
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
September:29:2010 - 16:10
Errant nonsense.
The brain is the king of our organism, and not the heart.
This provides another reason why our clerical establishment should have no power governmental.
The appeal to mystical waves is ridiculous. Forsooth why should this even be seriously considered?
September:29:2010 - 17:35
There’s a disturbing trend amongst Muslim scientists and science students in embracing mystical pseudo-science as real science, or bending religious texts to fit scientific facts.
September:29:2010 - 17:35
Andrew, you are so ignorant. Actually, Abdulgader is on to something.The heart waves are a significant component of the terahertz region of electromagnetic spectrum (EM), occupying the region bordered by infrared and microwaves, from 300 gigahertz (3×1011 HZ) to 3 terahertz (3×1012 Hz). Since wavelength is inversely proportional to the wave frequency, the non-ionizing terahertz radiation is quite short and nonpenetrating – suitable for the human body. Heartwaves do produce a signal but this radiation is typically absorbed by rotational modes in gas-phase molecules, by molecular motions in liquids, or by phonons in solids (tissue). While perfect for humanoid subnuclear particle disfussion, the heart wave is decoupled by de-excitation of hydrogen atoms when exposed to hypermolecular radiation in pion pairs at atomic level. This explains why heartwaves cannot be decrypted by rasterization processes like TV and radio signals. Therefore, for semistatic wave particle communication to occur, a structured a trigonal polymer protein vector neutrino chain must be produced at subtissue frequency level that matches the subuniverse protolifeform frequency at biparticle induction levels. Then and only then, are we able to communicate with the “higher force” defined in kinematic naturam environments. Until then we will just have to yell at each other. It is not Abdulgader’s fault if you don’t understand simple electro-particle hyperwave conductive interphysics.
September:29:2010 - 18:08
Before I read the NEJM article, I was going to say that the issue is an important one for donor transplantation, and that cardiac death is more difficult to define, and to time to successful donation, but is sought by some as away to increase the number of available organs.
After reading it, I am concerned about the following statement, because, as far as I know, that is routinely done ie seeking consent, and you still have to decide on a definition of death:
A better approach to procuring vital organs while protecting vulnerable patients against abuse would be to emphasize the importance of obtaining valid informed consent for organ donation from patients or surrogates before the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in situations of devastating and irreversible neurologic injury.5
As for Dr Abdulgader, I have less problems with his physics, and his metaphors for it (read in context his halo imagery isn’t problematic) than with his metaphysics which is derived from the Quran, with perhaps some “cardiological” overenthusiasm. In the Quran the heart is described in the context of a whole person, whereas Abdulgader goes on to ascribe to the cardiac organ minus the brain’s input the capacities of a “mind and soul unto itself” (my metaphor to summarize what he says).
Most cardiologists would disagree with that, despite their enthusiasm for their field. They recognize and teach the rest of us about higher neurological functions and the heart, including mind-body relationships, and that the heart beating, pumping, and generating energy in a halo of whatever radius is a brain stem function, ie no mind, no sentience, no reasoning, no intentionality, no judgment, nothing much more than reflex for that part of the brain, and even less than that for the heart in that circumstance.
I’m thinking the esteemed medical doctor’s recommendation on revising the definition of death in this particular way is one for the fatwa bin.
At the very least, it is extraordinarily cruel to family to keep a loved one’s body artificially “alive” for years on end (which can happen with brain stem function and a ventilator) when their personhood has been long gone. Which reminds me, Dr Abdulgader needs to review abortion in Islam, too.
The above is assuming that the journalist for Arab News did a reasonably accurate transcription of Dr Abdulgader’s words, aspirations, and explanations.
Jay–cute pseudo-science, and nice riff on rasterization! Very blogospheric!
September:29:2010 - 23:44
It’s far too easy to make fun of this. I am just glad that I made a living will to be an organ donor. My heart will just have to deal because once my brain stops functioning, I want out.
September:30:2010 - 06:25
Same with me.
September:30:2010 - 07:10
Making a living will to include organ donorship, or filling out that part of a driver’s license to donate organs is admirable.
There is a chronic shortage, and people on wait lists live a special kind of hell. They are also prey to/of unscrupulous practices, as they are desperate to have an organ.
I have a friend, a biological psychiatrist, who had renal failure due to inherited disease. While on the wait list she explored many opions of buying a kidney (illegal in Canada), going to another country for a transplant, etc. She was an anxious wreak and went to see a psychic on her friend’s recommendation. After the 10 minute visit (for which she paid 5X the going rate for a psychiatrist), she was so terrified she almost didn’t accept the donate kidney when she did get it. Fortunately she comes from a patriarchal culture, and her older brother cajoled, organized, drove, argued, pushed for her to take it, and rallied family to do the same.
Her life was transformed from existence thanks to dialysis, to full life, work, activities, resuming travel, and being free from constant worry about being near death.
Yeah, brain dead, unplug me!
October:03:2010 - 09:28
Kactuz:
I would politely offer the observation that your description is absurd pseudo-science.
This is not a criticism or a point of disputation, merely a statement. As such, I will not debate it.