MD/PhD Research Experience Essay Example

Application for MD/PhD programs requires three essays:

1. Personal Statement
2. MD/PhD Essay (a statement of interest specifically for both MD and PhD degrees)
3. Research Experience Essay (a detailed description of your research experiences)

I published my MD/PhD Essay as an example for students back in 2014 (link above). Hopefully my research essay will also be a helpful example.

My MD/PhD Research Essay

Prompt: Describe your significant research experiences. In your statement, specify your research supervisor's name and affiliation, the duration of the experience, the nature of the problem studied, and your contributions to the project.

1) Toxicology, Ichthyology, and Marine Ecology Lab

Dr. Sandra Diamond (Ph.D., Zoology, North Carolina State University), Assistant Professor, Texas Tech University

January 2011-Present

1a) Antibiotic Toxicology Project (January 2011-May 2012)
My research with Dr. Diamond began with the examination of an antibiotic, Triclosan, that is included in many personal care products. After use, Triclosan is carried through drains to wastewater treatment plants. While some of the Triclosan is purged from waterways, a significant amount escapes and reaches the oceans. There, it is incorporated into the fatty tissue of benthic organisms, where it interferes with calcium signaling. The widespread distribution of Triclosan is beginning to cause humans to acquire significant levels of Triclosan, especially in breast milk. This could generate antibiotic-resistant bacteria, and may even impede calcium signaling in humans. Our goal is to understand the potential dangers of Triclosan in the environment.

I contributed to this project by working closely alongside a graduate student and constructing a literature matrix on how Triclosan behaves in the ocean. I participated in laboratory experiments, collected data, maintained the laboratory, and helped proofread material for presentations.

For my work, I was acknowledged in "The Effects of Triclosan on Reflex Responses and Anti-Predator Behavior in an Estuarine Fish" (Tiffany L. Hopper-Hedrick and Sandra L. Diamond), a poster that my group presented at the Ecological Society of America.

1b) TTU Shark Team (May 2012-December 2012)
Upon completion of the toxicology project, Dr. Diamond hired me onto the TTU Shark Team, a group seeking to establish multi-national management of shark fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico through a deeper understanding of shark ecology. Historically, the oceans have been overexploited due to advances in technology and competition for resources. Because sharks have long generation times, they are particularly vulnerable. We use geographic information systems and statistical analyses to map out seasonal distributions for fourteen species of sharks.

In this group I contributed to the construction of a literature matrix containing over 800 papers to communicate large-scale trends, such as seasonal distributions. This experience has developed my critical reading skills, increased my general understanding of scientific thought, and prepared me to design an experiment of my own.

1c) TTU/Howard Hughes Medical Institute Affiliated Project (May 2012-Present)
After earning designation as a TTU/Howard Hughes Medical Institute Undergraduate Research Scholar in May of 2012, Dr. Diamond gave me the scientific freedom to design and carry out a research project.

The concentration of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere is increasing, causing the pH of the oceans to lower significantly. In addition, ocean fertilization (the mass addition of nitrogen and phosphorus) is causing algal blooms. Because algae use up oxygen, the dramatic increase in algal populations has resulted in the creation of 'dead zones' in which there is little or no oxygen. My research examines the synergistic effects of acidification and hypoxia on Atlantic Croaker.

I am responsible for designing experiments, writing protocols for acceptance by our Animal Care and Use Committee, collecting data, making decisions concerning our budget, communicating with companies to purchase scientific equipment, and writing a technical paper. Five months ago, I was given the responsibility of organizing and training five undergraduates in our lab to maintain our artificial ocean system while Dr. Diamond was in Australia for two semesters. In addition, an undergraduate researcher worked on a sub-assignment under my project.

I have presented my work in this lab at four conferences: Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center Student Research Week, TTU/Howard Hughes Medical Institute Best and the Brightest: Research Forum, The Texas Chapter of the American Fisheries Society, and Texas Tech University Undergraduate Research Conference. Abstracts for this work have been accepted at the Arkansas Chapter of the American Fisheries Society and the 2013 TTU/Howard Hughes Medical Institute Undergraduate Research Forum.

I was also part of a panel of researchers from TTU for Earth Day at North Ridge Elementary School. At this event, I delivered a presentation on Marine Biology and Environmental Sustainability with an emphasis on mantis shrimp and sharks.

2) Plant Evolution and Ecology Lab

Dr. Dylan Schwilk (Ph.D., Ecology and Evolution, Stanford University), Assistant Professor, Texas Tech University
October 2012-Present

2a) TTU/Howard Hughes Medical Institute Affiliated Project (October 2012-Present)
In Dr. Schwilk’s lab, we are pursuing an understanding of tree ecology in the mountain ranges of Texas. The water transporting vessels (xylem) of trees become clogged, much like arteries in humans, in a process known as drought-induced embolism. Although it is impossible for negative pressures to exist in gaseous systems, this is not the case with liquids. Trees rely on extreme negative tension to pull water to heights much greater than those allowed by adhesion, cohesion, or atmospheric pressure. When trees experience drought conditions, the strength of these tensions increases as the amount of water available to them decreases. This makes the pressure within the xylem so low that water starts to boil, and bubbles form within vessels. Once a certain percentage of the xylem within a branch becomes embolized, it is sacrificed by the tree. My project examines the point at which branches are sacrificed in four oak species.

My reasons for joining Dr. Schwilk’s lab are unique. Normally, TTU/HHMI Scholars work in a single lab due to the expected levels of involvement. However, in October of 2012, one of my fellow scholars, Chris, passed away in an automobile accident. Because the TTU/HHMI Scholars are a tight-knit family, I decided to inherit his project and finish it for him. I invited every TTU/HHMI Scholar to participate in completing his project to help us heal as an organization.

My responsibilities in Dr. Schwilk’s lab include writing, modifying, and developing the protocol for an experiment, training undergraduate researchers and delegating scientific tasks, participating in expeditions to the Davis, Guadalupe, and Chisos Mountains, carrying out laboratory experiments, and recruiting new laboratory members.

I led one trip to Davis Mountains with a single non-scientist assistant to gather data.

An abstract for this work has been accepted for the 2013 TTU/Howard Hughes Medical Institute Undergraduate Research Forum, where I will present our findings in honor of Chris’s memory.

For simultaneously working full-time in the Diamond and Schwilk labs, successfully lobbying for Texas Tech University to continue its support of TTU/HHMI, and organizing and training groups of scholars to participate in Chris’ project, I received the Dr. Richard L. Blanton Endowment for Undergraduate Research.

3) Honors Thesis in Physics and Biology

Dr. Micah Green (Ph.D., Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology), Assistant Professor, Texas Tech University
January 2012-Present

3a) Honors Thesis as part of the TTU Honors College
I received approval in January of 2012 to conduct an Honors Thesis outside of my major on the fine-tuning of four cosmic parameters in phase space. Normally, students are encouraged to pursue topics related to their undergraduate major when conducting an Honors Thesis. However, I was allowed to proceed with a physics-based inquiry, since I had gained competency in physics and cosmology as a result of personal study.

Over the past hundred years, physicists and cosmologists have started to notice that if certain fundamental characteristics of our universe had been anything other than what they are, the evolution of life in our universe would have been impossible. An example of one of these characteristics, called “parameters”, is the gravitational constant. If the force of gravity had been stronger during the big bang, the exploding matter would have re-condensed into a black hole. Alternatively, if gravity had been weaker during the big bang, there would not have been enough attraction between particles for stars to form, resulting in a universe comprised almost entirely of hydrogen and helium. In either case, the evolution of life in our universe would have been impossible. The general consensus of the scientific community at this point is that many parameters are finely tuned, meaning that miniscule variations in their values would render the universe lifeless.

My Honors Thesis is a review of the current scholarly conversation on the fine tuning of the universe. My primary insight concerns the target of fine tuning. Historically, physicists assumed that the universe needed to be fine-tuned for our form of carbon-based life specifically. As an evolutionary biologist, I know that this is not the case. A universe only needs to maintain a stable environment, contain the essential building blocks for complex molecules, and be expansive enough for origin events to be probable. Once an origin event takes place, natural selection could cause those collections of molecules to evolve in any number of directions. Dr. Green and I conclude that our four target parameters display fine tuning, but to a much lesser degree than has traditionally been accepted.

Because this project serves as an interdisciplinary link between biology and physics, I presented my work at GK-12 Building Bridges: Integrating Math, Science and Engineering on the South Plains. I was also invited to participate in a panel on trans-disciplinary research at this conference.

For my work on this project I received the 2013 Honors College Collaborative Learning Award.

Jesus was stabbed in the stomach

Blood mixed with water flowed out of Jesus' spear wound because he was stabbed in the stomach (probably).

We have almost no detailed information on the location of Jesus' spear wound. However, we do know three things:
1. The spear head must enter the "side", which could mean anywhere on the lateral aspect of Jesus' abdomen or torso.
2. Jesus was elevated on a cross, therefore the spear thrust would have been at an upward angle.
3. Blood mixed with water exited the wound.

There are numerous complicated scenarios in which water could have exited through the wound along with blood--most notably a pleural effusion that built up from a previous injury. These scenarios are less likely because they require an additional hypothesis (that one of the previous injuries caused abnormal fluid buildup in one of Jesus' body cavities, and this was later pierced by the spear).

But there are two situations that do not require an additional hypothesis. There are two locations where "water" builds up under normal circumstances--the stomach (Figure 1) and the bladder.

A spear wound to the bladder is so unlikely that it is hardly worth mentioning*.

A spear wound to the stomach is extremely likely (Figure 1). First, a spear wound that entered Jesus' stomach definitely would have been described as a spear wound "to the side". Second, the elevation of Jesus and the upward angle of the thrust favors a stomach wound (Figure 2). Third, Jesus had fluid in his stomach (beyond the normal gastric acid that is always present):

"²⁸After this, Jesus, knowing that all things had already been accomplished, to fulfill the Scripture, *said, “I am thirsty.” ²⁹ A jar full of sour wine was standing there; so they put a sponge full of the sour wine upon a branch of hyssop and brought it up to His mouth. ³⁰ Therefore when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, “It is finished!” And He bowed His head and gave up His spirit." (John 19:28-30)

Figure 1. Spear thrust to the stomach. Modified from http://healtharchives.info.

The stomach wound scenario is so obvious that I cannot fathom how it isn't widely accepted as the leading hypothesis for Jesus' spear wound.

If Jesus had died from previous injuries, there would have been fluid in his stomach, and the spear would have caused that fluid to mix (at least partially) with blood. If Jesus were alive, the same thing would have happened.

In fact, the stomach would have been hard to miss using an upward thrust to the side of an elevated victim. Check out a horizontal cross-section of the upper abdomen (Figure 2). Because the spear was traveling at an upward angle into an elevated victim, the horizontal plane is especially helpful for illustrating what organs would have been in the way of the spear thrust. The primary target (that definitely would have produced blood mixed with water) is the stomach.

Figure 2. Stomach outlined in green. Modified from http://www.netanatomy.com.

Conversely, at an upward angle, a spear thrust would have difficulty passing directly between two ribs (the more vertical the angle, the harder it would be). This isn't to say that a spear thrust couldn't break ribs (it could), it's just less likely than a stomach wound (which wouldn't have needed to either "thread the needle" or break ribs). This is especially true if the spear had a broad head. And again, the scenarios in which "water" is mixed with blood require additional hypotheses for thorax wounds. A stomach wound scenario does not.

A spear wound to the heart would have released SO MUCH blood  that it is unlikely that observers would have been able to appreciate any "water" coming from the wound, even if fluid had built up somewhere (unless it was a very large amount of fluid--which again requires far more mental gymnastics than a simple stomach wound). Observers definitely would have noted the watery appearance of fluid emanating from a stomach wound.

In conclusion, by far the most likely scenario is that Jesus was stabbed in the stomach.


The bladder-wound scenario
*Because Jesus was elevated on the cross, a spear wound thrust upward would have needed to enter Jesus' leg and travel upward to eventually pierce his bladder, and it would have needed to pass through thick bones to do so. This did not happen.

But the stomach is only on one side!
 True. Only wounds to Jesus' left side fit with this scenario. Similar wounds to the right side of Jesus' body would have hit the liver, which would not have resulted in "water" mixed with blood exiting the wound.

What about hitting both the stomach and the heart?
A spear thrust could go all the way through the stomach and then enter the heart. This definitely would have killed Jesus. However, this scenario is less likely than a simple stomach wound.

The dehydration of Jesus

This is part 3 of a series I'm writing on the crucifixion from a medical perspective. Check out parts 1 and 2 first if you haven't seen them! Part 1, Part 2

For the purposes of this post, let's assume Jesus survived the crucifixion and the spear wound and was laid in the tomb unconscious. Would dehydration ensure death?

A common popular belief is that people can survive no more than three days without water. This belief is far too simplistic. The actual length of time a person can survive without water depends heavily on the ambient temperature and the activity level of the person. For example, someone would absolutely die if they tried to exercise in the desert for three days straight without water. On the other hand, a person lying in bed sleeping in a cool room would almost certainly survive (unless they had some sort of underlying condition, injury, or blood loss).

Jesus is an interesting case because he is a combination of both of the two examples listed above, and was something of an Olympic-level faster (Luke 4:1-13). Uninjured, Jesus definitely would have survived three days without food or water lying down in a cool tomb.

But Jesus was injured--he was close enough to death that Roman soldiers thought he was dead, and after that they stabbed him.

Let's break down Jesus' hydration status throughout the entire ordeal. (Green for hydration events, red for dehydration events)

The last supper: Jesus was at a healthy hydration level after eating a meal.
Psychogenic hematidrosis (sweating blood): this would have dehydrated him some, but we don't know how much.
Two beatings: these would have involved intense physical exertion and possibly blood loss (but we don't know how much).
Crown of thorns: may have caused bleeding, but it wouldn't have been much.
Carrying the cross: Jesus collapsed en route to the crucifixion site, which indicates that Jesus was probably close to exhaustion at this point--or that he had sustained an injury that made carrying a beam of wood particularly difficult (for example, if he had sprained an ankle). It's also possible that Jesus wasn't physically exhausted, but mentally exhausted at this point (remember, he was distressed enough to sweat blood). At any rate, we don't know how exhausted he was, but he definitely would have been getting dehydrated.
Nails: blood loss from these wounds would not have been substantial, because the nails stayed in the wounds. This would have prevented much blood loss (medical side note--if you ever get, say, stabbed, leave the weapon where it is until you are in the care of a medical professional).
Hanging from the cross: this would have been physically exhausting. I won't go into detail here on why hanging from a cross is exhausting, but we could equate it to running 1 or 2 marathons in a row without a break (depending on how long he was on the cross). This would have severely dehydrated him. Not only was he constantly exerting himself to breath, he was completely exposed to the sun. He would have been sweating like crazy.
Hydration: Jesus received hydration while hanging on the cross (we have one documented instance of this happening). This could have been seen as a merciful gesture, easing his thirst, but it could be seen as equally cruel, as hydration would have prolonged the suffering. Jesus refused to drink wine mixed with myrrh just before his crucifixion (Mark 15:23). However, he accepted sour wine just before passing out:

"²⁸After this, Jesus, knowing that all things had already been accomplished, to fulfill the Scripture, *said, “I am thirsty.” ²⁹ A jar full of sour wine was standing there; so they put a sponge full of the sour wine upon a branch of hyssop and brought it up to His mouth. ³⁰ Therefore when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, “It is finished!” And He bowed His head and gave up His spirit." (John 19:28-30)

I speculate that over the course of the crucifixion Jesus received multiple drinks of sour wine, but we don't know. The jar of sour wine was present, the sponge was present, the branch of hyssop was present, and it's purpose was specifically to hydrate the victims.

We only know what is included in the text, which is unfortunate. Jesus could have actually been very hydrated if he received many drinks. Keep in mind--just because Jesus refused the drink before his crucifixion doesn't mean that he kept refusing drinks. According to William Lane:

"According to an old tradition, respected women of Jerusalem provided a narcotic drink to those condemned to death in order to decrease their sensitivity to the excruciating pain . . . . When Jesus arrived at Golgotha he was offered . . . wine mixed with myrrh, but he refused it, choosing to endure with full consciousness the sufferings appointed for him (The Gospel of Mark, p. 564)"

(https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/the-wine-jesus-drank)

So Jesus didn't want to drink the wine mixed with myrrh, but he was happy to drink the sour wine.
We have one documented instance of him stating his thirst and receiving a drink. Based on that I think it is likely that he received drinks whenever he asked for them, which would have actually kept him fairly well hydrated.
Passing out: The fact that Jesus passed out just after receiving a drink means that, most probably, he was very dehydrated. He may have been in hypovolemic shock. We don't know how long he was on the cross after passing out, which would have been an immensely helpful metric for us. If he passed out, and 10 minutes later he was taken down, the drink he had just before passing out wouldn't have been absorbed yet (so it's more likely that he would recover after some time). If he passed out and remained on the cross for several more hours, he was probably flat out dead and we don't even need to have this conversation.
Spear wound: The spear wound could have caused so much blood loss that he died instantly, or avoided all major blood vessels and caused minimal bleeding. It at least bled some (of course it did, it was a spear wound) as documented in the New Testament. This would have caused further dehydration on top of whatever dehydration state Jesus was already in. I discuss the spear wound in depth in this post: http://honestsearchfortruth.blogspot.com/2018/08/jesus-could-have-survived-spear-wound.html

Conclusion
If Jesus was alive after being taken down from the cross and being stabbed, we don't know whether or not he could have survived dehydration in the tomb, because we don't know his baseline level of hydration when he was taken down from the cross.

At best, Jesus received a substantial amount of sour wine, drank just before passing out, was taken down (and stabbed) soon after passing out, and recovered consciousness at some point while lying down in the cool tomb.

At worst, Jesus died of hypovolemic shock before they took him down from the cross.

And that's the problem with this entire endeavor, the more I search down this path. There is simply too much that we don't know. We don't know how bad Jesus' injuries were. We don't know exactly how long he was on the cross. We don't know how hot it was that day. We don't know how many pushups the soldiers could do. We don't know the exact nature and severity of the beatings. We don't know exactly where Jesus was stabbed. There is just so much essential information that we don't have.

But is it possible that Jesus survived (and specific to this post, didn't die of dehydration)? Yes.

The spear wound infliced on Jesus: centimeters would have been the difference between life and death

For the purposes of this post, I will examine a hypothetical scenario in which Jesus was alive (but unconscious) at the time when he was stabbed and taken down from the cross. I will address the issue of whether or not Jesus was alive (and the extent of his injuries) in other posts, except to point out that the soldiers felt the need to stab Jesus to make sure he was dead. Regardless of what we think about Jesus' previous injuries, the soldiers weren't sure that Jesus was dead, and demonstrated that uncertainty by stabbing him.

So if Jesus was alive, would the spear wound have killed him?

Instead of analyzing every possible spear wound Jesus could have received, I will illustrate two possible scenarios and use them to demonstrate a broader point--the difference between a mortal and a non-mortal wound would have been a matter of centimeters, and a soldier (even an experienced one) attempting to inflict a killing blow certainly could have failed to do so.

Scenario 1: because Jesus was elevated on the cross, was stabbed in the side, and "water" came out of the wound in addition to blood, one likely scenario is that the spear (green arrow) traveled up through Jesus' diaphragm, peirced his lung (allowing a pleural effusion caused by previous injuries to drain), and then peirced either the apex or the diaphragmatic surface of his heart. Because Jesus was alive, his blood had not clotted, and therefore blood was mixed with the "water". This kind of wound would have been instantly fatal, and meets the description documented in the new Testament.

Scenario 1: A fatal wound

Scenario 2: everything is the same as scenario 1, except that the spear stopped short of peircing Jesus' heart (or the angle changed such that his heart was missed). Jesus still could have died from such a wound, but he definitely could have survived as well. Jesus being alive would have meant that his blood had not coagulated, and so blood would have mixed with "water" from the pleural effusion. This wound would have been survivable, meets the description documented in the New Testament, and would have looked the same as scenario 1 to the soldiers (except that there would have been less blood).

Scenario 2: A survivable wound

In conclusion, the two nearly identical wounds from scenarios 1 and 2 would have looked the same to the soldiers,  resulted in blood and "water" emanating from the wound, and are only different by a few centimeters. The first scenario would have been instantly fatal, while the second scenario would have been survivable.

Similar fatal/non-fatal scenarios exist for many other situations, and also could have met the description documented in the New Testament (for example, spear thrusts that either hit or narrowly missed the aorta).

But my point is this: we don't know the precise nature of Jesus' spear wound. We can't know, because the texts don't give nearly enough detail. What we do know is that there are some scenarios that would have caused death, and others that would have permitted survival.

In short, Jesus could have survived even though the soldiers thought he was dead and inflicted a spear wound on him.

Could Jesus have survived the crucifixion? Yes.

The question of whether or not Jesus actually died on the cross is central to the truth of Christianity. If Jesus died and rose again, his divine claims gain validity--if he did not, Christianity is a sham (1 Corinthians 15:19). But how much can we actually know about the medical emergency that took place ~2000 years ago when Jesus was beaten, tortured, crucified, stabbed, and buried?

For the purposes of this blog post, I will consider the documents of the New Testament to be historically accurate. I will use them to establish what physical injuries were inflicted on Jesus before, during, and after his crucifixion, and then evaluate whether or not it would have been possible for Jesus to survive. In later posts I will evaluate whether or not survival was likely.

The injuries that Jesus suffered
1. Psychogenic hematidrosis (sweating blood) (Luke 22:44)
2. Beating #1 (Matthew 27:1–2)
3. Beating #2 (John 19:1–5)
4. Scourging (John 19:1, Mark 15:15, Matthew 27:26)
5. Crown of thorns placed on his head (Matthew 27:31)
6. Carrying the crossbar of the cross, being unable to continue (Matthew 27:31-33)
7. Nails driven through both wrists (probably) (Luke 23:33)
8. Nails driven through both feet (probably) (Luke 23:33)
9. Hanging from the cross for about 6 hours (Bergeron 2012)
10. Passes out (John 19:30)
11. Spear wound to the side  (John 19:31-33)
12. Removing the nails from both wrists (No citation--I assume this happened)
13. Removing the nails from both feet (No citation--I assume this happened)

Aid that Jesus received
1. Simon of Cyrene carried the crossbar of the cross for Jesus (Matthew 27:32)
2. Jesus received hydration from bystanders at least once. Notably, just before saying "it is finished" and passing out. (it is especially relevant to note that he received hydration and had enough energy to yell at this point) (John 19:28-30) (Matthew 27:48-49)
3. Taken down from the cross
4. Bound in linen with spices (relevant in that it could have stopped any bleeding) (John 19:38-42)

Would #1-8 definitely cause death? --No
No, not immediately. While beatings and scourging can cause death, Jesus was still alive after #1-8 according to the narrative. So in this case, the answer is obviously no. What we're interested in here is either how these injuries progress with time or how they influence later injury (for example, if he sustained an epidural hematoma from head trauma, he could remain conscious for some time, but later die due to pressure on his brain).

Would #9-10 definitely cause death? --No
No, not in this case. Remember, we have two control subjects who underwent the same crucifixion, and did not die.

"³¹ Then the Jews, because it was the day of preparation, so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. ³² So the soldiers came, and broke the legs of the first man and of the other who was crucified with Him; ³³ but coming to Jesus, when they saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs." (John 19:31-33)

Crucifixion certainly can cause death, but it is an extremely slow death, and one that requires "finishing blows" to ensure that the victim dies--breaking of the legs in the case of the thieves, a spear wound in the case of Jesus. Crucifixion was designed to torture over a long period of time, not to kill. Another way of putting it--it was designed to keep victims alive for as long as possible.

Further, Jesus was only on the cross for ~6 hours (Bergeron 2012), considerably shorter than most victims of crucifixion (citation.....). But even if he were on the cross for longer, the other two men were still alive. So crucifixion for this amount of time is not definitely lethal in-and-of-itself. In fact, it's probably not lethal.

It is possible that #1-8 or any underlying illnesses that Jesus may have had made him more susceptible to death by #9. I will address this further later in the post.

Would #11 definitely cause death? --No
This point depends entirely on the nature of the spear wound.Were any major blood vessels damaged? Was Jesus' atrium punctured? What about the aorta? What about the liver? Exactly what does "side" mean, and at what angle did the spear enter? How deep did it penetrate? How large was the spear tip? What about it's shape? Did the spear enter the abdomen or the thorax?

I think a plausible scenario is that the spear entered Jesus' upper abdomen, traveled up through the diaphragm, and then entered the thorax. Lets say that Jesus had a pleural effusion due to previous beatings, which would account for the "blood mixed with water" coming out of the wound.

Contrary to what I have frequently heard from Christians, "blood mixed with water" is in no way an indicator that Jesus was in fact dead. It simply means that some sort of fluid had built up, and the spear-thrust punctured whatever cavity was holding the fluid. There are numerous possible explanations for this, but for now, I offer my suggestion that a pleural effusion was responsible for the "water" component.

Another interesting point that goes contrary to popular Christian belief about the "blood mixed with water" is that the presence of blood actually lends credence to the idea that Jesus was in fact alive. When a person dies, their blood stops moving and coagulates--which means there actually wouldn't have been blood mixed with the "water". However, there are multiple ways in which blood could have been mixed with the "water" and it be the case that Jesus was dead. All I'm saying is that in general, the fact that blood came out slightly weighs in favor of the proposition that Jesus could have been alive.

At any rate, Jesus definitely could have survived the spear wound.

Would #12-13 definitely cause death? --No
I included this point for completeness. By the time the nails were removed, sufficient clotting would take place to stop any bleeding (leaving the nails in place for that long actually would have helped).

Would #1-13 combined together definitely cause death? --No, not in 24 hours
This isn't to say that someone definitely wouldn't die from #1-13--a person could die from any of them under certain circumstances, and combining all of them together certainly makes death more likely. Timing is also key--and I will say that death from any of the injuries on their own (except for the spear wound--again this depends on how severe the spear wound was--and did a soldier who though he was already dead put his best effort into the spear thrust? We don't know) would probably not be fatal in the time-frame of, say, half a day.

However, I think anyone who suffered as many wounds as Jesus did, if they had survived, almost certainly would have died of an overwhelming infection in the following weeks or months. But even in that sense, the answer to "if Jesus had survived a week, would an infection definitely cause death?" is still no--which illustrates the major flaw of this blog post.

The limited reach of this blog post
The major flaw of this blog post is that I set the bar very low--I only asked whether or not is was possible for Jesus to survive. If Jesus had been shot in the head, he still could have possibly survived, and that's not what we care about. We want to know how likely it is that Jesus could have survived.

Therefore, I will work on a series of blog posts over the next few months where I try to answer a better question--how likely is it that Jesus could have survived?
-------------------------------------
 
Thanks for reading! To discuss this blog post with me, hit me up on twitter! -@GoSearch4Truth

Citations:
1. Bergeron, Joseph W. "The crucifixion of Jesus: review of hypothesized mechanisms of death and implications of shock and trauma-induced coagulopathy." Journal of forensic and legal medicine 19.3 (2012): 113-116.
2. The New Testament, NASB version



Dear Mr. Strobel (or response team member),

My name is Joshua Willms. I am an MD/PhD student at Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center. I am writing you concerning the medical accuracy of your interview with Dr. Alexander Metherell, MD/PhD. I think that Dr. Metherell made critical errors in his interpretation of the text, implanting certainty into his statements that are not supported by the evidence.

First, there is not sufficient evidence to support his statement that Jesus was in hypovolemic shock after the flogging. In order to know that, we would need to determine Jesus' hydration status and know exactly how much blood he had lost. We don't know those details, so it is impossible to know whether or not Jesus was in hypovolemic shock. Jesus being unable to carry the cross could have been due to a multitude of reasons (examples include spraining an ankle, receiving severe lacerations on his shoulders, or being emotionally exhausted). The fact that Jesus said "I thirst" simply means he was thirsty--which he definitely would have been regardless of whether or not he was in hypovolemic shock.

Second, there is not sufficient evidence to support Dr. Metherell's statement that Jesus was experiencing heart failure. We would need detailed medical information about Jesus at the time to know that. Basically, Dr. Metherell is giving a hypothetical scenario of what could possibly happen if someone remained on a cross for long enough--but we have none of the diagnostic information we would need to confirm whether or not Jesus was actually experiencing heart failure. Dr. Metherell cannot have much certainty on this point with such limited information. This is also true with regards to his claim about respiratory acidosis--was Jesus experiencing some respiratory acidosis? Probably--but enough to cause an arrhythmia? We CANNOT know based on such limited medical information.

Third, there is not sufficient evidence to support Dr. Metherell's statement that Jesus was stabbed in the heart. The New Testament only says that Jesus was stabbed in the "side" and that water and blood flowed from the wound. Yes, one explanation for this is that the spear punctured a cardial and/or pleural effusion en route to the heart. Another, simpler explanation is that the soldier stabbed Jesus in the stomach (which also would have resulted in water and blood emanating from the wound, and does not require any additional hypotheses).

I do not mean to be rude, but it appears that Dr. Metherell simply took the guard's word for it that Jesus was dead and then cooked up a scenario that would fit with his preconceived conclusion. I assume you consulted with other medical experts to corroborate Dr. Metherell's statements? He has certainty about his scenario when other scholars do not--for example, see the work of Dr. Joseph W. Bergeron (citation below).

I sincerely hope that my comments in this letter are helpful, and if I am wrong, I certainly want it to be pointed out. Right now I think the evidence supports the notion that Jesus could have survived, and because of that, I do not consider myself to be a Christian. If I am wrong, I desperately want to know.

Sincerely,

Joshua Willms
MD/PhD student, 3rd year
TTUHSC School of Medicine
5054127111