Tom Neal Posted August 8, 2016 Share Posted August 8, 2016 (edited) Also, IMO, the damage at the apex of the lung is associated ONLY with the throat wound, NOT the back wound. What is your position on this?Bob, given your belief that the back entry is at T3, and I agree, do you agree with my above statement from a previous post? I think you do, but I want to be certain before I move on... The main point is that Humes never reported seeing a collection of blood in the pleural cavity between the parietal (outer) pleura and the visceral (inner) pleura that envelops the lung.Perry and Baxter reported blood and air in the mediastinum which Perry interpreted as indicative of blood in the pleural cavity. Although they didn't see blood between the inner and outer pleura, working only through the trachea incision they could NOT see the entire lung. As you may recall, I believe the bullet that inflicted the back injury at T3 fragmented, and spread dust-like particles into the right lung. Depending how deeply the bullet penetrated prior to fragmenting, a bullet-sized hole in the lung is certainly a possibility. At some point it obviously fragmented, or it certainly would have exited through his chest. This damage, independent of the injury at the apex of the lung certainly could cause all the symptoms you describe. Do you believe that the missile that bruised the lung (as described by Humes) produced ALL of the blood/air as described by Perry and Baxter (as seen through the trach incision)? IMO, it would NOT have produced enough blood to create what was seen by Perry and Baxter. If true, then lung damage MUST exist elsewhere. The only candidate for that is the entry wound at T3. I *think* you agree. Can you confirm or deny? Edited August 8, 2016 by Tom Neal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now