Submitted via IRC for cmn32480
Carrie Fisher, the actress best known as Star Wars' Princess Leia Organa, has died after suffering a heart attack. She was 60.
Family spokesman Simon Halls released a statement to PEOPLE on behalf of Fisher's daughter, Billie Lourd:
"It is with a very deep sadness that Billie Lourd confirms that her beloved mother Carrie Fisher passed away at 8:55 this morning," reads the statement.
"She was loved by the world and she will be missed profoundly," says Lourd. "Our entire family thanks you for your thoughts and prayers."
Source: http://people.com/movies/carrie-fisher-dies/
[UPDATE:]
Submitted via IRC for martyb
NPR reports: Actress Debbie Reynolds Dies A Day After Daughter Carrie Fisher's Death.
That means that Billie Lourd, who had a minor role in Star Wars: The Force Awakens and was slated for a part in the sequel, Star Wars: Episode VIII, lost both her mother and her grandmother in the same week.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday December 28 2016, @01:29PM
There seems to be this underlying assumption in the two sided argument that she died because of a cardiac rhythm problem almost certainly caused by not hooking her up to the AED when it was discovered. Meanwhile the opfor is pointing out that an AED is utterly useless does nothing at all if a large enough artery is blocked by a clot or whatever and the AED people are having nothing of that argument.
My guess is the people talking about the miracle of the AED have access to a (possibly false) news report that she died of a verified cardiac rhythm problem or they're way more into her medical history than I am and she has a history of cardiac rhythm problems due to massive coke use or whatever and they're falsely assuming that if she has one heart problem its impossible to die of another separate heart problem (like blood vessel blockage)
If the AED folk would provide a link to some report that its already determined to be a cardiac rhythm problem then that would kinda end the specific argument about her death.
An AED is not a magic wand of "cure light cardiac wound" that you wave and any heart problem is magically cured. They don't actually do a hell of a lot except for nearly magically hands off automatically solving one very specific heart rhythm problem. Like if a patient's implanted pacemaker failed and there's a AED on board the survival rate goes from about 0% to about 100% if properly attached to the person quickly enough. But AEDs don't do jack for most vessel blockages (what you think there's a tiny toothbrush robot implanted that cleans the vessels?) or gunshots thru the heart or strokes or wtf else.
There is one vessel blockage scenario where an AED will save the patient which is when the blockage kills the cells that are your natural pacemaker and the AED will keep them booted up until a pacemaker can be implanted. But it has to be a pretty peculiar blockage to kill those cells but not kill enough heart cells to otherwise kill the patient anyway.
They're at the position of the hype cycle graph where they can do no wrong and can fix anything. Soon we'll reach the trough of the hype cycle graph where everyone knows they're nearly totally useless. The long term reality is they're useful occasionally, may as well have one around and hook it up.
In the long run the idea of an external pacemaker only will probably get expanded into a med-kit like from a FPS that magically does a ton of shit to anyone who's really sick, so they're a cool "gateway drug" into the future, so the future is a good reason to support AEDs today even if they're mostly useless today. Someday AED version 2352.4 is gonna have on board blood chemistry testing and ingrown toenail robotic surgery arm and be able to remove your tonsils and/or perform vasectomies. Something like a super-AED is going to be the future of health care, maybe in 50 years. In that way, encouraging shitty does almost nothing version 1.0 is a good idea if for no reason beyond I can't wait for version 2.0 to be released on our way to that version 2352.4 mentioned above.