A woman dies from water intoxication from drinking too much water for a contest to win a Wii. The contest was to see who could drink the most water without having to urinate. Jennifer Strange was trying to win a Wii for her 3 kids. Read more here.
What contests have you tried and risks were associated?
"John Geary, vice president and marketing manager for Entercom Sacramento, the station's owner, said station personnel were stunned when they heard of Strange's death.
"We are awaiting information that will help explain how this tragic event occurred," he said."
Here's some information: your radio station held the @#$&ing contest. I'm so sick of radio station stunts like these, that put people through danger and humiliation, usually put on by morning radio a#$hole DJs too juvenile for any other people-related job. "What could go wrong" is a question they never seem to ask themselves.
How about a little sympathy for the woman rather than asking about more dangerous contests?
Andy Voss Wrote:
Why is it the radio station's fault? Why can't people have a little personal responsibility and hold themselves accountable for their actions? No one made her go to the radio station and do these acts?
"I love America. No one is responsible for what they do." Emil Slovak, 15 minutes.
There are volunteers for all kinds of things that involve irresponsibility, unethical, and even illegal practices. Citing that someone's free will to engage in an activity doesn't really justify an entity providing for the environment for such an activity to take place.
Could I run a whorehouse because everyone that visits does so on their own free will? Maybe hire illegal aliens to work for $1.00/hour and live in my basement, even if the workers in question not only agreed to do so, but wanted to?
If someone dies on your property, while engaged in an event that you sponsor, you are responsible. You think that the station should only be responsible if they force someone against their will to do something? Come on.
I was just about to post this one too. Why isn't the title "Stupid Radio Station has Contest to Kill Contestents"? Why is this even about the Wii? Geeze.
I mean, come on. Everyone should know that drinking too much water can kill you. I've know this since I was a little child. What kind of adult at the station thought this idiotic idea up?
That was my reaction. I could understand if the woman didn't know this, btu I would think it would the radio station's responsibility to see if the contest is dangerous.
Brian Hirt Wrote:
On the CNN post that Corn Popper linked to, the headline of the story was "Woman drinks so much water she dies". Or at least that's what it reads right at this moment.
Brian Hirt Wrote:
I never knew that :)
I hope the station is sued over it. Maybe they'll think twice before doing such stupid contests ever again. And maybe (unlikely), it will make other stations also be more careful.
but then again I don't think they were holding a gun to her head forcing her to drink... people should be accountable for their own actions as well
They were the ones with the responsibility to find out whether this was dangerous as it was their idea. It's not like she was juggling chainsaws or something obviously dangerous. If they'd used Gatorade instead of water, no one would have died.
(Edited by Indra was here (15038), Jan 16, 2007)Re: Woman dies after competing for a Wii
Indra was here (15038), Jan 16, 2007
Stupidity should not be rewarded. Either by the people conducting it nor by the people participating in the stupidity. I agree with Rob, people should be accountable for their own actions. Reality demands it.
Even though it is a real shame, it seems the contest organisers were total fools - drinking water? Surely this would hummilate any contestants who got involved. That radio station should be more considerate and grow up. They deserve to be sued by her family.
see everyone's reaction is that it's the radio station's responsibility... this makes me wonder what everyone thinks of who's fault the so called "games are making kids violent" fault is... the game makers or the parents... I take the same stance as the contest... more of the responsibility belongs on the person and on the parents for this case and not the game makers
This makes me think of a notorious drug tragedy in this country, in which a girl died on her 18th birthday after taking ecstacy. Most reports overlooked the fact that it was the large amount of water she drank with it that actually killed her. The blame for the incident was largely palmed onto the (ironically named in this situation) band Oasis, who she was a fan of, and whose singer was public about his past drug use.
Completely agree about the irresponsible attitude of the radio station in question. A lot of perfectly intelligent people are not aware of the dangers of drinking too much water - it tends to get lost among the large amount of 'make sure to drink 8 glasses of water a day' health warnings (which are especially valid for people with some medical conditions, including my own, incidentally).
Can Nintendo also be blamed for not choosing a better name for the Wii?
Maybe if the Amiga (Spanish for 'girlfriend') were launched today, a group sex contest would be launched to win it?
I think a football (American variety) player died after he drank too much water. In this case, I think his trainer or whatever should feel responsible. Just as the trainer should be responsible, the radio station should be held responsible. Also the incident with the radio station is not the same as video game makers being held responsible for violence rather than parents in my opinion.
I think its the woman's fault. The station didn't force her to drink that much water, she agreed to it, and while it is extremely tragic I don't think the show should be held responsible.
Corn Popper is right. We can't blame the games industry for putting out violent games and then get sued because someone died over it. Just as well, we can't blame the station for something the woman chose to do.
Matt Neuteboom Wrote:
No one has ever died because of a violent game. I thought most of us here agree that videogames have little if anything to do with people running amok.
The woman's death on the other hand was a direct result of the contest. I don't support the idea of suing other people for one's own stupidity, but it's hardly too much to ask of the radio station to do some minimal research before holding such a contest. Looking at the replies to this thread, it is apparently not common knowledge that drinking too much water can be deadly, and this incident could have easily been avoided had the organizers taken five minutes to ask a doctor about possible risks.
Supernintendo Chalmers Wrote:
Well, except for the man who died at the arcade machine version of Frenzy for playing too long. I'd argue that Frenzy is a violent videogame (die robots die!)
Violent video games aren't medically proven to cause adverse health effects and death. If they were, they'd be off the shelf. Drinking excessive amounts of water without urinating is medically proven to cause adverse health effects and death. The burden here lies on the radio station for holding such a contest.
Think of it this way.. one guy died because he played Everquest or whatever for several days and didn't properly eat or rest. His fault there, but if a radio station held a contest to see who could play the longest without eating properly or resting, it would be their fault for setting those rules for their contest.
In some ways yes, in other ways no. Not quite sure if this is a good example, but here goes. Enter hot dog eating contest, seeing how much doggies you can eat, until your body tells you enough is enough. For a few seconds you over-ride the protests of your body and continue eating regardless.
In addition to that, its not just a matter of whether or not the radio station is guilty. Yes, we all agree on that. But I do not agree that the radio station alone is at fault here. The participants themselves also share some responsibility. The fact that the contest could take place itself, without (I assume) much objection from the local populace at that time only proves that death due to over-drinking is not public knowlegde.
A contest involving fire-crackers however might by default cause some alarm by the locals prior the contest.
And yet, in Rhode Island a couple years ago (I'm guessing at the time frame), there was an incident where a band shot off fireworks (not the same ones that go up really high and explode) in a show inside a club. It caught the club on fire and burned it down and kill a lot of people. If I remember correctly (correct me if I'm off on this part), the club was held responsible for allowing it. So there you have your fireworks.
Holy crap! I'm never drinking water again!
(Edited by Indra was here (15038), Jan 17, 2007)Re: Woman dies after competing for a Wii
Indra was here (15038), Jan 17, 2007
That's why I drink Coca Cola. At least if I die from over drinking Coca Cola, my family can get more money from suing Coca Cola than a lousy radio station.
But people tend to forget I was the idiot in the first place for overdrinking...
Coca Cola Rules!
Maybe if the Amiga (Spanish for 'girlfriend') were launched today, a group sex contest would be launched to win it?
Even if you lose, you win! (Also: a new definition to the terrm "multiplayer")
Ace of Sevens Wrote:
OK, what is it now, spam? =D
According to what I have read about water intoxication, you cannot die from too much Gatorade. Gatorade (and most [all?] sports drinks) have electrolytes. Having the electrolytes in what you're drinking is enough to prevent death. That's why they say that athletes shouldn't drink water to rehydrate except in small amounts, but that they can drink as much sports drink as they want.
As a note, for anyone with infants... if you give your baby water in a bottle to drink, you have to be careful. This same thing can happen to babies that are given a lot of water during the day... and for babies, a "lot" is not near as much as for adults.
Even without electrolytes the big differences are sugars. When you consume a beverage that contains sugars your body handles it a completely different way than water. The body treats drinks of this nature like food, whereas water is stored in the tissues and organs even if over-hydrated.
When the girl was saying that her head hurts, that's the brain swelling. While the brain doesn't feel pain directly, the pressure on her skull was causing the nerves around her brain to react. At that point, it's usually too late, at least says some random doctor on TV while I'm flipping the channels.
Yep, I knew that too, but I thought it had to be much more water than she actually drank.
I think it was just a little more than 2 gallons total. Of course I'm sure it depends on many things such as weight, current hydration level, yadda yadda, and it doesn't help that they weren't allow to relieve themselves.
As for the "bladder busting from holding it in idea", I guess we can say, "myth busted" since you'll die before that happens.
Horrible...... you can listen to it here: http://www.sacbee.com/static/newsroom/kdndslides/
So the morning show the contest was held on has been pulled from the radio station and many people have been fired over the incident... read on.
That's downright criminal negligence there. I don't see how this could be her fault as it seems the station specifically told them this wasn't life-threatening. If you tell someone that something is safe and it turns out not to be, you can't say it's their fault for believing you. Also, waivers do not protect you from negligence.
Hmmm, now thats different. If they specifically told her that it wasn't life threatening then it certainly is the station's fault.
well they didn't really say it was life threatening but that if your body can't handle it then your brain would make you throw up the water... so the facts weren't really correct which they should have checked before hand
I don't really think it's anyone's fault. The radio station messed up, but it was simply a case of not checking their facts rather than criminal negligence.
(Edited by Ace of Sevens (4228), Jan 21, 2007)Re: Woman dies after competing for a Wii
Ace of Sevens (4228), Jan 21, 2007
What do you think criminal negligence is? Anyway, they knew it was dangerous as the DJs were joking about Matthew Carrington, who died in a similar fashion in a hazing stunt at a California State frat hazing two years ago. In that case, seven people went to prison. They also blew off a call from a nurse who told them they could kill someone that way.
If those two pieces of information (joking & nurse) are true, then they are definitely at fault and should be sued.
Oh they didn't just blow it off, they retorted with, "oh well we've had everyone sign waivers".
They didn't ignore the issue, they addressed it and responded with claims to how they are legally protected (which they aren't even with a waiver), and if you ask me that's even worse.
How sad, and what a stupid contest. Why don't people just go and buy a Wii in a normal shop?
They no doubt thought that the risk was small enough to be discountable. Any contest that involves overloading your body with a certain substance could possibly kill you. Besides, if they survive this fiasco I'm certain it's a mistake they won't make again.
Apparently, the radio station is actually being sued - what did I tell ya? *smile*
Read about it here - http://ngc.boomtown.net/en_uk/articles/art.view.php?id=13272
I can't stand people who try to get new game systems as soon as they come out, something just pisses me off about seeing a bunch of idiots waiting 30-something hours in front of a store for something they know will be sold out by the time they get there.