Haha sissy!A member of Blaine's medical team, paramedic Paul Kenny, told CNN: "Mentally he's very very, very very positive. Physically not very good. He's very very tired. He's got a few problems breathing-wise. A few problems with his chest, due to the cold."
The magician is experiencing an irregular heartbeat, caused by a lack of potassium and by thinning of the heart's walls, according to a statement on his Web site.
His Web site says that by day 38, Blaine was "occasionally incoherent and has been exhibiting signs of delusion," smelled strongly of sulfur and was longing to take a bath.
David Blaine suffering with only two days left in stunt.
Moderator: TheMachine
-
Krimson Klaw
- Way too much time!
- Posts: 1976
- Joined: July 22, 2002, 1:00 pm
David Blaine suffering with only two days left in stunt.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/10 ... index.html
-
Xouqoa
- Way too much time!
- Posts: 4105
- Joined: July 2, 2002, 5:49 pm
- Gender: Mangina
- XBL Gamertag: Xouqoa
- Location: Dallas, TX
- Contact:
What's unimpresisve about it?
Do you have reasons or are you just jumping on the anti-Blaine bandwagon?
If he's really been stuck in the box with no food for 44 days, I'd say that's a pretty impressive feat of stamina and will power.
Do you have reasons or are you just jumping on the anti-Blaine bandwagon?
If he's really been stuck in the box with no food for 44 days, I'd say that's a pretty impressive feat of stamina and will power.
"Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings." - John F Kennedy
-
Bubba Grizz
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 6121
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 12:52 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Green Bay, Wisconsin
-
Tegellan
- Way too much time!
- Posts: 1278
- Joined: July 5, 2002, 8:41 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: DK
- Contact:
going without food for 40 days has been done plenty by monks and other religious people. The fact that he is sitting in a box suspended above the ground and has to let everyone know about it doesn't impress me.
So to me, the fact that it has been done before and the fact that he is obviously whoring for attention, combines and makes me say it isn't impressive.
So to me, the fact that it has been done before and the fact that he is obviously whoring for attention, combines and makes me say it isn't impressive.
Fortune favors the brave!
I don't understand how he's making money off of sitting in a box. Why would anyone pay him for this? WHO is paying him for this?Sunserae wrote:the guy is making money and scoring a ton of poon off stunts like this. i don't find them particularly entertaining, but more power to him.
I'm not saying he's not getting paid, I mean obviously he is, but WHY and WHO?
THE LARGE PRINT GIVETH
The fine print taketh away.
The fine print taketh away.
A magician exposed
New Scientist vol 179 issue 2412 - 13 September 2003, page 27
It is either a foolhardy stunt or a cheap trick. But one thing is
sure to bring David Blaine down to earth with a bump, argues Graham
Lawton
FOR David Blaine, it has all begun beautifully. Even before the
magician stepped into his glass prison and was hoisted high above the
river Thames, controversy was simmering nicely. True, the start of
his stunt last week could have been more sensational, but it still
earned him front-page headlines in Britain.
For anyone who missed it, here are the basics. Blaine, an American
illusionist with a penchant for feats of endurance, is suspended in a
plexiglas box measuring 2 metres high, 2 metres long and a metre
wide. With him he has clothes, blankets, a mat, journal, pens, lip
balm, nappies (diapers) and wet wipes. He intends to stay in the box
for 44 days with no food. His only nourishment will be plain water.
The stunt has prompted howls of outrage and accusations of
tastelessness. Should Blaine be doing this when nearly a billion
people have no choice but to go hungry? Doesn't it also trivialise
hunger strikes in pursuit of political or moral principles - a tactic
used by Irish republicans in the 1980s and today by hundreds of
protesting prisoners in Turkey, Chile and the Philippines?
The answer to both these questions is undoubtedly yes. The fact that
Blaine's career has been littered with accusations of fakery doesn't
help. It is in the nature of his trade that people question whether
his stunts are really about endurance or just trickery. But if it is
offensive to seek celebrity through starvation, how much worse is it
to court fame from the illusion of doing so? Blaine, of course, knows
this perfectly well. With every outraged statement from London's
mayor, Ken Livingstone, fascination in Blaine's stunt grows.
And let's be honest. It is fascinating. Bad taste or not, it is
impossible not to wonder at Blaine's bravery and/or stupidity. Can he
really go the distance? What will happen to his mind and body during
the fast?
On this point Blaine claims to know what he is in for, but in truth
he cannot. Nobody is certain of all the changes that affect a human
body when it is deprived of food for 44 days. "The evidence is
limited," says Susan Jebb, head of nutrition and health at the UK
Medical Research Council's Human Nutrition Research Centre in
Cambridge. "Not very many people truly starve for that long." Much of
what we do know comes from experiments carried out in the early 20th
century, when ethics committees were a distant prospect, or from
sources such as hunger strikes and famines that are difficult to
research systematically.
But there is plenty we do know. The most obvious consequence for
Blaine, even if he pulls a fast one, is that he will lose a lot of
weight. A man who starved himself to death in 1917 lost 41 per cent
of his body weight in 63 days. And in 1981, the Irish republican
hunger striker Bobby Sands lost 30 per cent of his body weight in 66
days. Blaine says he expects to lose about 23 kilograms, which seems
about right, and the chances are he will be able to sustain this sort
of weight loss. Before his stunt began he had put on plenty of
weight, and the main determinant of how long starving people can last
is how much body fat they have.
After about two days of fasting, the body starts to shift
into "starvation mode". Fat breaks down, releasing fatty acids and
glycerol, which is converted into glucose. Skeletal muscle burns the
fatty acids, preserving the precious glucose for the organ that needs
it - the brain. Meanwhile, burning fatty acids produces "ketone
bodies", which can also be used as fuel by the brain. By the end of
week 3, the body has switched completely to starvation mode, and the
brain is finding 80 per cent of its energy from ketones.
From then on there is a gradual decline. The muscles and most of the
internal organs waste away, though the brain, skeleton and gonads
seem to be exempt. When all the fat has been metabolised, death
follows quickly. But Blaine will not get anywhere near that point.
If he escapes permanent physical damage, he should also remain
unscathed mentally, if starvation experiments on conscientious
objectors in the second world war are anything to go by. What's more,
psychological studies on people who starve themselves for a reason -
anorexics, for example - suggest that hunger is easy to ignore and
can even be interpreted positively. According to Peter Rogers of the
University of Bristol in the UK, who studies the psychological
effects of diet, Blaine's stunts - if they are real - have shown him
to be a very robust individual.
But there is one factor that could be Blaine's undoing. If he really
is taking water and nothing else, he will start to get seriously
short of salt. After three weeks, this will force down his blood
pressure, he will get dizzy and eventually pass out. The Irish
republican hunger strikers took salt supplements to avoid this.
So it looks as though Blaine cannot win. If he does take just plain
water, he will be unconscious by the end of September and the stunt
will end early. If he lasts the distance, on the other hand, it will
be highly likely he has been lying to us. Now there's a reason to put
aside your qualms and start watching.
New Scientist vol 179 issue 2412 - 13 September 2003, page 27
It is either a foolhardy stunt or a cheap trick. But one thing is
sure to bring David Blaine down to earth with a bump, argues Graham
Lawton
FOR David Blaine, it has all begun beautifully. Even before the
magician stepped into his glass prison and was hoisted high above the
river Thames, controversy was simmering nicely. True, the start of
his stunt last week could have been more sensational, but it still
earned him front-page headlines in Britain.
For anyone who missed it, here are the basics. Blaine, an American
illusionist with a penchant for feats of endurance, is suspended in a
plexiglas box measuring 2 metres high, 2 metres long and a metre
wide. With him he has clothes, blankets, a mat, journal, pens, lip
balm, nappies (diapers) and wet wipes. He intends to stay in the box
for 44 days with no food. His only nourishment will be plain water.
The stunt has prompted howls of outrage and accusations of
tastelessness. Should Blaine be doing this when nearly a billion
people have no choice but to go hungry? Doesn't it also trivialise
hunger strikes in pursuit of political or moral principles - a tactic
used by Irish republicans in the 1980s and today by hundreds of
protesting prisoners in Turkey, Chile and the Philippines?
The answer to both these questions is undoubtedly yes. The fact that
Blaine's career has been littered with accusations of fakery doesn't
help. It is in the nature of his trade that people question whether
his stunts are really about endurance or just trickery. But if it is
offensive to seek celebrity through starvation, how much worse is it
to court fame from the illusion of doing so? Blaine, of course, knows
this perfectly well. With every outraged statement from London's
mayor, Ken Livingstone, fascination in Blaine's stunt grows.
And let's be honest. It is fascinating. Bad taste or not, it is
impossible not to wonder at Blaine's bravery and/or stupidity. Can he
really go the distance? What will happen to his mind and body during
the fast?
On this point Blaine claims to know what he is in for, but in truth
he cannot. Nobody is certain of all the changes that affect a human
body when it is deprived of food for 44 days. "The evidence is
limited," says Susan Jebb, head of nutrition and health at the UK
Medical Research Council's Human Nutrition Research Centre in
Cambridge. "Not very many people truly starve for that long." Much of
what we do know comes from experiments carried out in the early 20th
century, when ethics committees were a distant prospect, or from
sources such as hunger strikes and famines that are difficult to
research systematically.
But there is plenty we do know. The most obvious consequence for
Blaine, even if he pulls a fast one, is that he will lose a lot of
weight. A man who starved himself to death in 1917 lost 41 per cent
of his body weight in 63 days. And in 1981, the Irish republican
hunger striker Bobby Sands lost 30 per cent of his body weight in 66
days. Blaine says he expects to lose about 23 kilograms, which seems
about right, and the chances are he will be able to sustain this sort
of weight loss. Before his stunt began he had put on plenty of
weight, and the main determinant of how long starving people can last
is how much body fat they have.
After about two days of fasting, the body starts to shift
into "starvation mode". Fat breaks down, releasing fatty acids and
glycerol, which is converted into glucose. Skeletal muscle burns the
fatty acids, preserving the precious glucose for the organ that needs
it - the brain. Meanwhile, burning fatty acids produces "ketone
bodies", which can also be used as fuel by the brain. By the end of
week 3, the body has switched completely to starvation mode, and the
brain is finding 80 per cent of its energy from ketones.
From then on there is a gradual decline. The muscles and most of the
internal organs waste away, though the brain, skeleton and gonads
seem to be exempt. When all the fat has been metabolised, death
follows quickly. But Blaine will not get anywhere near that point.
If he escapes permanent physical damage, he should also remain
unscathed mentally, if starvation experiments on conscientious
objectors in the second world war are anything to go by. What's more,
psychological studies on people who starve themselves for a reason -
anorexics, for example - suggest that hunger is easy to ignore and
can even be interpreted positively. According to Peter Rogers of the
University of Bristol in the UK, who studies the psychological
effects of diet, Blaine's stunts - if they are real - have shown him
to be a very robust individual.
But there is one factor that could be Blaine's undoing. If he really
is taking water and nothing else, he will start to get seriously
short of salt. After three weeks, this will force down his blood
pressure, he will get dizzy and eventually pass out. The Irish
republican hunger strikers took salt supplements to avoid this.
So it looks as though Blaine cannot win. If he does take just plain
water, he will be unconscious by the end of September and the stunt
will end early. If he lasts the distance, on the other hand, it will
be highly likely he has been lying to us. Now there's a reason to put
aside your qualms and start watching.