9 replies to this topic

[browneyes23]

In chapter 1 Momoka is introduced as a 17 year old middle school student (p25,26). In most places that I know of, 17 year old would be 2nd or 3rd year high school student, middle school usually is 13~15 years old. Momoka looks and acts more like a high schooler than middle school, but in multiple places they refer to her as middle school. Why?

[Glad101]

I'll preface this answer with a bit of my history; my sister was born with spinobifida, a ruthless birth defect that kills most people that have it by the age of two.  My sister lived far beyond that, btw.

 

Because of this birth defect, she was normally grouped with other physically challenged kids.  I met several kids with MS, and I made friends with a couple.  And the sad truth is that when they get a strong attack, these kids don't spent 3-4 days in the hospital, it's usually 3-4 months.  And if they can't keep up with their schoolwork, they are often held back.  If Momoka was in the hospital twice after major attacks, she could have easily been held back two years, especially if she could not see well enough to do schoolwork.

 

So, in short, because she has MS, she could easily be a 17 year old middle school student.

 

This complicates her life, since it is mandatory in Japan that she finishes middle school.  She isn't required to attend high school though, and is likely not planning to attend it. But until she graduates middle school by law she has to attend.  I'm sure this is a deliberate part of the plot.

Edited by Glad101, 19 May 2015 - 09:21 PM.

[thorongil]

at least in the more recent chapters she's definetly called a high-schooler, and i thought she was called that from the beginning, but maybe i just read the middle-schooler part as some kind of mistranslation

[KingAntonius]

Most likely it was an error early on. The term used was probably Ninensei, which means Second year if I recall right and is often used in reference to a middle schooler. It can be used to mean a second year in high school (Senior) though.

[Ironclad]

I'll preface this answer with a bit of my history; my sister was born with spinobifida, a ruthless birth defect that kills most people that have it by the age of two.  My sister lived far beyond that, btw.

 

You're working with really out of date information. While it does have serious complications including paralysis and high risk for mental retardation, one recent cohort study found that out of like 200 affected, 80% lived at least up to 20-25 years. There isn't much data past that age. I did find another study with grimer results: 1/3 die before age 5, 1/4 before age 35. Prognosis varies greatly by the spinal level of injury, and deaths were due to how susceptible the shunt is too infection and other complications common to CSF disorders like epilepsy and acute hydrocephalus.

 

"Only 17% (7/42) of those born with a high sensory level (above T11) survived to the mean age of 40 years, compared with 61% (23/38) of those with a low sensory level (below L3; p=0.001)."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20015251

 

MS and Spina bifida really don't have much in common. One is a severe birth defect with immediate complications and the other is a neurodegenerative autoimmune disorder which usually first appears in the late 20s. There have been huge advances in management of MS in recent years, and people can go decades between attacks without any complications. With Spina bifida the damage is already done and their life is seriously compromised which is why when it is diagnosed early enough an abortion is usually done.

Edited by Jahiliyyah, 01 July 2016 - 11:27 PM.

[Master_Aricitic]

You're working with really out of date information. While it does have serious complications including paralysis and high risk for mental retardation, one recent cohort study found that out of like 200 affected, 80% lived at least up to 20-25 years. There isn't much data past that age. I did find another study with grimer results: 1/3 die before age 5, 1/4 before age 35. Prognosis varies greatly by the spinal level of injury, and deaths were due to how susceptible the shunt is too infection and other complications common to CSF disorders like epilepsy and acute hydrocephalus.
 
"Only 17% (7/42) of those born with a high sensory level (above T11) survived to the mean age of 40 years, compared with 61% (23/38) of those with a low sensory level (below L3; p=0.001)."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20015251
 
MS and Spina bifida really don't have much in common. One is a severe birth defect with immediate complications and the other is a neurodegenerative autoimmune disorder which usually first appears in the late 20s. There have been huge advances in management of MS in recent years, and people can go decades between attacks without any complications. With Spina bifida the damage is already done and their life is seriously compromised which is why when it is diagnosed early enough an abortion is usually done.

Wow, responding to a person speaking from personal, if second hand, experience of a sibling with a Google search...
Assuming the poster isn't saying that to make what they say sound more plausible (i.e. A lie) I am going to go with the person who grew up next to a person suffering the disease than someone who looked up statistics with a search engine.

Unless you are a doctor or researcher. But that is beside the point of "person grew up with an individual suffering the disease."


Finally, I am assuming it was a typo as well... I am fairly sure that she is in high school given the clear brilliance she displays (at least with programming).

[VeryMelon]

Yeah, I'm sure one person's experience backed by confirmation bias is worth more than medical research data.

[geenius3ab]

Wow, responding to a person speaking from personal, if second hand, experience of a sibling with a Google search...
Assuming the poster isn't saying that to make what they say sound more plausible (i.e. A lie) I am going to go with the person who grew up next to a person suffering the disease than someone who looked up statistics with a search engine.

Unless you are a doctor or researcher. But that is beside the point of "person grew up with an individual suffering the disease."


Finally, I am assuming it was a typo as well... I am fairly sure that she is in high school given the clear brilliance she displays (at least with programming).

 

Thing is that the information itself that the person gave in regards to the disease has different information online. The information you get through Google isn't actually wrong most of the time.

 

Also to note that the details that the person initially talked about with his sister, might have been assumptions in regards to what he heard the doctor say. Because he's the brother of the sister, it's unlikely that the doctor actually spoke to him in regards to the details of the disease.

 

Anyway you should be more skeptical, it shouldn't be a case of "Emotions" and "I'd rather believe what he said from personal experience than listen to statistics you get from google". Not about what someone said from personal experience, but you should understand that the statistics you can find on Wikipedia or some legit health websites have an extremely high percentage of being correct. He might've talked about his personal experience, but we don't know when it happened, how he was informed of it, did the doctor himself say that "Most die before they're 2", etc. It's highly likely that the doctor himself spoke from personal experience, which doesn't really mean much in terms of the total average statistics. What the previous person said was simply to inform that according to the statistics currently available the situation isn't that bad at least.

[Ironclad]

Wow, responding to a person speaking from personal, if second hand, experience of a sibling with a Google search...
Assuming the poster isn't saying that to make what they say sound more plausible (i.e. A lie) I am going to go with the person who grew up next to a person suffering the disease than someone who looked up statistics with a search engine.

Unless you are a doctor or researcher. But that is beside the point of "person grew up with an individual suffering the disease."


Finally, I am assuming it was a typo as well... I am fairly sure that she is in high school given the clear brilliance she displays (at least with programming).

My main point was that MS probably wouldn't become symptomatic early enough for someone to fall behind in classes before high school as a result. That data was from a medical journal and a cohort study. I didn't mean to dismiss his personal experiences but I thought I should have some proof for why it wouldn't make a good reference for this series or MS in general.

[Master_Aricitic]

Thing is that the information itself that the person gave in regards to the disease has different information online. The information you get through Google isn't actually wrong most of the time.
 
Also to note that the details that the person initially talked about with his sister, might have been assumptions in regards to what he heard the doctor say. Because he's the brother of the sister, it's unlikely that the doctor actually spoke to him in regards to the details of the disease.
 
Anyway you should be more skeptical, it shouldn't be a case of "Emotions" and "I'd rather believe what he said from personal experience than listen to statistics you get from google". Not about what someone said from personal experience, but you should understand that the statistics you can find on Wikipedia or some legit health websites have an extremely high percentage of being correct. He might've talked about his personal experience, but we don't know when it happened, how he was informed of it, did the doctor himself say that "Most die before they're 2", etc. It's highly likely that the doctor himself spoke from personal experience, which doesn't really mean much in terms of the total average statistics. What the previous person said was simply to inform that according to the statistics currently available the situation isn't that bad at least.

I know this is old and probably dead, but I feel like I should clarify something.

"I looked up on Google," versus "I looked up on [verifiable source]" are two VERY different things. Academia and professionalism rarely allow Wikipedia (which is stupid, they either have to validate the source or someone else modifies it to say [source?]) and almost never allow Google to be used as a source for good reasons. Talk about opinionated: "the first few pages didn't agree with my belief/opinion/the point/story I want to get across, but page 'x' did. I got it off of Google's search engine and don't want to cite the actual location -as that would allow people to debate its validity, therefore my source is Google." (Longer than I meant it to be, but the point is there).
Effectively, "I [search engine-ed] it" is the same as saying "I heard in passing." Hey, I do it to, when in a hurry or when I cannot remember the actual source. But I try not to use it in an argument as it makes me look pretty and disallows others from validating its contents (why should anyone believe me or accept what I say if I end with "because I said so"?)
(Please prove me wrong, point out posts where I do this so I can fix my own idiocy...)

Anyway, this went longer than I meant for it to. I either got my point across, or failed (and would continue failing) to do so.