This version of the story is a little different: http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=70942
"West Virginia: 59-year-old Charleston resident Val Thomas is alive after being dead so long she began to succumb to rigor mortis. Her son Jim said: "Her skin had already started to harden and her fingers curled. Death had set in."
For over 17 minutes, she showed no sign of a pulse or brain activity whatsoever, this after suffering two heart attacks. The issue of organ donation was already underway when she came back to life after life support was disconnected for 10 minutes."
This story was published the same day, but it says 17 minutes, not 17 hours; and its clearly the son concluding that 'death had set in', not a doctor concluding rigor mortis had set in (which takes hours). The FOX version is likely a sensationalization of an already sensational story. Whatever was causing her fingers to stiffen up wasn't rigor mortis, her survival is remarkable, not miraculoous.
"West Virginia: 59-year-old Charleston resident Val Thomas is alive after being dead so long she began to succumb to rigor mortis. Her son Jim said: "Her skin had already started to harden and her fingers curled. Death had set in."
For over 17 minutes, she showed no sign of a pulse or brain activity whatsoever, this after suffering two heart attacks. The issue of organ donation was already underway when she came back to life after life support was disconnected for 10 minutes."
This story was published the same day, but it says 17 minutes, not 17 hours; and its clearly the son concluding that 'death had set in', not a doctor concluding rigor mortis had set in (which takes hours). The FOX version is likely a sensationalization of an already sensational story. Whatever was causing her fingers to stiffen up wasn't rigor mortis, her survival is remarkable, not miraculoous.
