mergatroid
Well-Known Member
It's possible if you bleed out from a wound.
-
The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More -
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Guest dies, found unresponsive after riding Stardust Racers
- Thread starter mkt
- Start date
donaldtoo
Well-Known Member
How did we even get to death due to leg trauma in this thread…?!
About the only way to bleed out during a short rollercoaster ride from a leg injury would be from a punctured, torn or severed femoral artery. There’d be blood everywhere.
Yes, you can get a DVT from blunt force trauma to the leg (very rare), and have the clot break loose to your demise, but none of this was even remotely close to being speculated from what I saw at the beginning of the thread.
About the only way to bleed out during a short rollercoaster ride from a leg injury would be from a punctured, torn or severed femoral artery. There’d be blood everywhere.
Yes, you can get a DVT from blunt force trauma to the leg (very rare), and have the clot break loose to your demise, but none of this was even remotely close to being speculated from what I saw at the beginning of the thread.
Last edited:
mergatroid
Well-Known Member
It seems extremely unlikely although it's the lack of details that is leading to different theories being thrown about I guess? Any scenario seems unlikely as all the reported information seems to rule out any obvious and feasible scenario.How did we even get to death due to leg trauma in this thread…?!
About the only way to bleed out during a short rollercoaster ride from a leg injury would be from a punctured, torn or severed femoral artery. There’d be blood everywhere.
Yes, you can get a DVT from blunt force trauma to the leg (very rare), and have the clot break loose to your demise, but none of this was even remotely close to being speculated from what I saw at the beginning of the thread.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
I find it hard to believe that no one knows what caused the blunt force trauma. There aren't many options and I would think there would be enough evidence to figure it out.
Nope. It's just standard practice.
hopemax
Well-Known Member
(just brainstorming)
What about his head repeatedly hitting the bar people grab onto that's attached to the lap restraint?
VicariousCorpse
Well-Known Member
In Florida, it is standard practice for autopsy reports to be made public.
Dizknee_Phreek
Well-Known Member
I just saw this interview clip. They specifically said in this that he hit his head, which seems to rule out injuries to other areas leading to death.
The dad says he heard from other people that he was repeatedly hitting his head by slamming forward and back. Now...that still begs the question how that even happens with the restraints and design of the cars. Can it happen to anyone, or just people with certain disabilities/mobility issues? And what exactly was he hitting his head on? Was the impact to the front of the head, the back of the head, or both? If someone with a spinal condition hits the back of their head hard enough repeatedly, would that cause this type of trauma (asking seriously...I have no idea)? Too many questions unanswered at this point...which I'm sure will be addressed in the investigation.
This also clarified he was in the front seat on the last section of cars. So not the front of the train.
The dad says he heard from other people that he was repeatedly hitting his head by slamming forward and back. Now...that still begs the question how that even happens with the restraints and design of the cars. Can it happen to anyone, or just people with certain disabilities/mobility issues? And what exactly was he hitting his head on? Was the impact to the front of the head, the back of the head, or both? If someone with a spinal condition hits the back of their head hard enough repeatedly, would that cause this type of trauma (asking seriously...I have no idea)? Too many questions unanswered at this point...which I'm sure will be addressed in the investigation.
This also clarified he was in the front seat on the last section of cars. So not the front of the train.
Vegas Disney Fan
Well-Known Member
Because one of the eyewitnesses did a news interview and said his leg looked broken.How did we even get to death due to leg trauma in this thread…?!
About the only way to bleed out during a short rollercoaster ride from a leg injury would be from a punctured, torn or severed femoral artery. There’d be blood everywhere.
Yes, you can get a DVT from blunt force trauma to the leg (very rare), and have the clot break loose to your demise, but none of this was even remotely close to being speculated from what I saw at the beginning of the thread.
If you’re going to be condescending maybe read the whole thread first.
VicariousCorpse
Well-Known Member
The more information that comes out the more it makes me believe that there is "nothing" wrong with the ride and its restraints and was operating as intended. To me it sounds like a design flaw with the restraints that don't work for people with his condition. It sounds to me like whatever condition he had allowed his upper body a bigger degree of movement which caused him to have his injuries when he became unconscious. If it's true he did nothing wrong and Universal did nothing wrong, then we will see sweeping changes about the accessibility of these types of rides across the world.
Last edited:
donaldtoo
Well-Known Member
I wasn’t being condescending, but thanks for the outburst.
I was simply asking a question as to how we got to that point, and stating some facts regarding leg injuries. I have neither the time nor the inclination to go back and read almost 700 posts, especially when the information in post #1 clearly stated the coroner had already indicated there were “multiple blunt impact injuries”. Were those all leg impact injuries…? One person out of how many saying his leg “looked” broken…? Even if his leg was broken, the odds of a young man dying from a broken leg are extremely small. Plus, I’ve never heard of a broken leg from a rollercoaster ride, unless something went terribly wrong with the actual coaster (injuring others as well), and all info points to a clean ride.
In the future, If you can’t answer my simple posted questions without talking down (being condescending) to me, please don’t answer.
They are public record. From what I’ve heard via contacts in the media, the medical examiner usually has them ready about 90 days out, so figure around Christmastime for this case.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Well, this is the kind of stuff that needs to be flushed out in the investigation. I don't think it's as much 'no one knows' as much as people aren't saying plus what is actually confirmed by the evidence. AKA 'more is known, just not being said, yet'
Possible... It's certainly close enough, but hard for the body to bend that much, but like the guard/rail in front.. it doesn't seem 'normal', but maybe with the right combination of factors.
I still think all of this starts with the victim somehow losing control of their body.. be it simple lack of support/strength or blacking out first and then uncontrolled movement happens. The range of movement needed to reach these hard surfaces is just extreme.
To be precise, the REPORTER said that.. not a direct quote from the family/attorney in that clip. Maybe they said something different from their press conference, but without a direct cite, I would favor what the attorney said in a planned presentation (with visual aides) over what a reporter said in a voice over.
flynnibus
Premium Member
'did nothing wrong' is kind of a broad statement though. It would be more accurate to say "they did everything they were expecting to do" in terms of operating the ride. They didn't deviate from their SOP.
The "wrong" or not is loaded because there is an expectation that the ride is safe, in all circumstances. If the design of the ride allows for serious injury within situations that are practically possible and reasonable likely.. then the ride design is flawed, and both Uni and Mack did in fact "do something wrong" with the ride. The problem is with the design, not the operation.
If they find the injury is possible because the guy can't support himself (for whatever reason), I think you will find the ride getting a serious redesign of the trains and others being assessed for similar kinds of risks.
If the problem is 'range of movement and smacking a hard bar' - they can't rely on a guest being the one to avoid the injury.. they gotta deal with the reality that a guest may actually not be in control. Simply limiting who can ride won't fix that. They'd have to eliminate the risky elements on the train.
Dizknee_Phreek
Well-Known Member
I mean...true. It's not necessarily fact. Really not much of this situation is until concrete evidence comes out. This is just more information that could possibly bridge the gap of what has been floated around about "he was sitting in the back" vs "he was sitting in the front".
VicariousCorpse
Well-Known Member
If the hundreds of millions of rides of this type of restraint hasn't had this happen before, it leads me to believe his very unique set of circumstances and type of restraint led to this unfortunate outcome. He isn't the first person to pass out on a roller coaster by far. Limiting who can ride will absolutely fix that. I don't see them redesigning and replacing this type of restraint worldwide because of something that is a 1-in-a-billion chance of happening. Any type of attraction with movement at all has the potential to hurt or kill someone. You are taking the risk, no matter how small, every time you get on a ride. This is all just speculation on my part.
flynnibus
Premium Member
It quite literally will not fix that. While this type of restraint is common, this passenger space as a whole is not. It's the sum of the parts that matter, not the restraint alone.
Past avoidance doesn't mean much - especially to lawyers. Once it's been demonstrated that it's possible, if you ignore it and it happens to you.. that's when the negligence claims start flowing.
VicariousCorpse
Well-Known Member
How is limiting who can ride ignoring the issue? In my speculation the issue is his body type, type of restraint, and conditions that lead to him being unconscious. If this is the case prohibiting people with the same body type completely eliminates something like this from happening again. If you solve the problem, is that ignoring it?
flynnibus
Premium Member
Wrong - you path is to assume that combination of factors you have identified is the only way it can happen. Instead of recognizing you don't address WHY but the intention of a safe ride is to make it impossible for the injury to happen regardless of WHY the rider may be out of control. That's the difference between a safe ride and a responsible rider.
So let's say you ban people with neurological or limb issues, so the issue doesn't repeat.
Now, a year later, someone else gets injured in the same way because of a DIFFERENT reason for the body to be moving that way.. you're F'd because you knew someone could be injured in this way, yet you didn't change the design. It doesn't matter that the REASON for the person flopping around is different, the risk is you know a person can be hurt, and it would be argued that it is reasonable to know that given the past occurrences.