Odd Controversy Regarding Great White Shark Polaris Attacks On Humans

  • Thread starter Thread starter BigDon
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the controversial topic of Great White Shark attacks on humans, specifically focusing on three decapitation incidents involving snorkelers north of San Francisco. Participants debate whether the cause of decapitation is due to biting or extreme torso acceleration, with medical professionals generally supporting the biting theory based on autopsy findings. The discussion emphasizes the importance of citing credible sources and the necessity of autopsies to determine the cause of death accurately. Speculation is discouraged, highlighting the forum's commitment to factual information.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of marine biology and shark behavior
  • Familiarity with forensic science and autopsy procedures
  • Knowledge of trauma-related medical terminology
  • Awareness of legal implications surrounding death investigations
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the anatomy and feeding behavior of Great White Sharks
  • Study forensic pathology related to traumatic deaths
  • Examine case studies of shark attacks and their investigations
  • Learn about the legal processes involved in death investigations
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for marine biologists, forensic scientists, legal professionals, and anyone interested in understanding the complexities surrounding shark attacks and their implications.

BigDon
Messages
74
Reaction score
97
TL;DR
Shark Attack Injury
Over the decades at least three snorkelers in the waters north of San Francisco suffered that gruesome fate, with two witnessed directly, and the third moments later.

And in all three attacks the victims suffered decapitation.

Now amongst the fishermen, divers and boat dwellers of various sorts the argument is, is this the result of biting/cutting action or was the decapitation from extreme torso acceleration? I know the later is possible having unfortunately observed it first hand but doctors usually side with the cutting/biting crowd.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
Points:
1. You really should cite a news article at the very least, so please do that.

2. The reason physicians would state that 'biting' is the reason is the cause of traumatic death: the corpse goes to the Coroner's office, and there an autopsy is performed. Wound examination showed that result. Period, the end.
Legally, any other interpretation would require a second, sound, medical opinion. This gobbledy-gook is what you get from uninformed speculation - confusion and garbage answers. And BTW, autopsies would be required for each victim.

3. Now you know why PF does not support speculation. And the reason I mention this so we are all clear on the forum's position.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BillTre
Apologies. Still fitting in.

My motivations for not including the specific accounts was I was thinking of the privacy of the widows, oddly enough. Also the articles don't mention the attack method. But I spoke with eye witnesses and know some of the recovery divers.

I'll endeavor not to be a pain in the future.