It did not happen.
So, you have verifiable evidence that the heart is still beating? Please don't be modest--post it here for everyone to see!
In brain death cases, the heart does not stop beating because the brain is dead, it stops because the general deterioration of the body releases toxins (degradation products, cell debris, etc.) into the circulatory system, and those poison the heart. In the medical literature, in one case, a heart continued to beat for 52 days after death occurred. Since Jahi was a child at the time of her death, it could take longer for the heart to stop (for a number of reasons), but it will still happen. As I have already mentioned several times, I have no evidence that it has not happened.
When people make extraordinary claims, for instance that dead people miraculously come back to life--or even that a dead body is kept hooked up to machines in a semblance of life for 2 years, longer than has ever been documented in the medical literature--they MUST provide verifiable evidence of those claims.
Videos taken soon after Jahi's death demonstrating that she had some reflex activity in the peripheral nervous system are not proof of life and cannot prove that her body is in a condition to maintain the heart in functional status.
Undated pictures, which show clear signs of tissue death (necrotic patches on the fingers and near the eye, bloating of tissues), are also not proof of life.
Publicity about a lawsuit to overturn the medical finding of death (as if death can be reversed by a legal ruling) proves only that the family is angling to get a large sum of money, but does not prove that Jahi somehow returned to life.
Why do you want so much to believe that a brain-dead person is alive? Why does no evidence on the matter make a dent in your belief? What do you, personally, stand to gain by this? Are you, in fact, the person who often posts using a variant of the name "John Benton", who seems obsessed with denying that death is really death? Or are you a lawyer involved with the case, trying to get a feel for the kinds of medical/scientific arguments that support the determination of death, so that you can try to find a rebuttal for them that will hold up in court?
Hint: if you want to get me to "admit" I am wrong, just provide evidence that Jahi is alive. I can't even find objective evidence that she is still being maintained on an IV and respirator, much less that she has actually returned to life.
1). You accepted the brain scan. What date was that done?
2). As far as, “Why do you want so much to believe that a brain-dead person is alive?”
I have made no claims she is not brain dead and even two years ago I stated I had no problem with her being called brain dead.
But brain does not mean a person is a corpse or a cadaver etc...
In response, people, such ad you and others, made very specific claims as to what will happen due to her brain death.
I took a wait and see attitude.
Clearly your, and other predictions, did not occur.
This means she was either not brain dead but severely brain damaged. Or it means the determination of and brain death definition are not as straightforward or understood as thought.
Perhaps there is no difference between those two possibilities.
2a). As far as these things you think:
“What do you, personally, stand to gain by this? Are you, in fact, the person who often posts using a variant of the name “John Benton”, who seems obsessed with denying that death is really death? Or are you a lawyer involved with the case, trying to get a feel for the kinds of medical/scientific arguments that support the determination of death, so that you can try to find a rebuttal for them that will hold up in court?”
I am obviously not anything of the sort and your thinking so us an indication of paranoia on your part.
You are losing rationality.
As far as this: “Why does no evidence on the matter make a dent in your belief?”
What “believe” would you be referring to and cite a post by me to support your attribution of a “belief” to me.