Sorry but I don’t think you really understood what you were talking about. It was not true that you were “not eating”. You were on IV – fed intravenously. A patient having a stomach or intestinal operation (for example) is not allowed to eat for quite some time, but is being “fed” through the veins, with the equipment the OP said he was “hooked up” to. Since the patient has no solid food, he doesn’t have to poop. He doesn’t even have to pee if he is attached to a tube to drain the bladder. The patient does not “eat” and the functions of the stomach and bowels are bypassed, but is still receiving all the necessary nutrients directly through the blood (instead of the normal processes of food instake, digestion, absorption and assimilation which lead to the same result). He could remain in bed for days, months and (on rare occasions) even years (e.g. someone in coma). But you cannot get up or you would drag everything with you, and send tubes, bottles and other equipment crashing to the floor. That was clearly not the situation shown in the film.
reply
share
jmhow
11 years ago
So this character could have been fed thru a tube or even intravenously, and had her bladder drained thru a tube, all while she was "out" because of the drug he was giving her, and had it all disconnected before she woke up.
www.freerice.com
reply
share
HenryCW
11 years ago
I think the funeral director was unlikely to have the required medical knowledge, and even if he had, I don't think all those tubes and bottles associated with IV are standard equipment for a funeral home.
I guess you could mention such possibilities to defend the movie if you want, but that was not what we saw in the film – and more importantly, was not even intended by the scriptwriter and director.
reply
share