# Woman dies after water-drinking contest



## Jade Tigress (Jan 16, 2007)

We've had the discussion of drinking too much water here before. I thought I'd post this. Too much of anything is bad. 



> SACRAMENTO, Calif. - Contestants in a radio stunt called "Hold Your Wee for a Wii" have revealed new details about an on-air water drinking contest that left a 28-year-old mother of three dead.
> Jennifer Lea Strange died after drinking well over a half gallon of water Friday during the "Morning Rave" program on KDND-FM. About 18 contestants vied for a Nintendo Wii gaming console by drinking as much water as they could without going to the bathroom; Strange took second place.





> "It is sad that a mother had to lose her life to get something for her kids," he said. "None of us knew this could be a risk to our health."


Article.


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 16, 2007)

One thing I don't like is that this sort of thing can be used to justify a false sense of fear.  In reality most people don't drink enough water, and it is very hard to drink too much to the point of this.  You would need to be in a contest or something, and even then, it's not easy to run into problems.


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Jan 16, 2007)

Andrew Green said:


> One thing I don't like is that this sort of thing can be used to justify a false sense of fear. In reality most people don't drink enough water, and it is very hard to drink too much to the point of this. You would need to be in a contest or something, and even then, it's not easy to run into problems.


 
well said. To drink enough water to kill you would be an incredible feat. What is sad is that they probably failed to mention that she hadnt had anything to eat in a good number of hours either because to much water and not enough food in your body can have ill effects because it thins your blood and a whole list of other things. I drink a gallon or more a day (dont quote me on this i havent actually added it all up but i know i drink a lot of water, i will keep a tab to see how much i take in), more than that whether or not i hit the gym that day and im still kickin (no pun intended).

B


----------



## michaeledward (Jan 16, 2007)

It makes you wonder if this woman's kidneys had an underlying problem. 
The wiki article says that the kidneys can process .4 gallons of water per hour, which is just about how much the contestents took in during the first hour. Of course, the article doesn't report how much water she consumed, or how long she participated in the contest. But, at 8 ounces every ten minutes, the contestents consumed .5 gallons in 70 minutes. 

But, this shows people will do some really stupid stuff to get on the radio, or to get a free toy, eh?


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 16, 2007)

Exactly, the article ignores a lot.  Did she dehydrate her self for 2 days before hand to "prepare"?  Did she also skip eating to "make more room"?  Was there existing conditions?

Most people would have to work pretty hard at it to die from drinking water.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 16, 2007)

> "None of us knew this could be a risk to our health."


 
Give me a break, can you say irresponsible. They didn't check with anyone...say a medical person before trying this???? 

I know many do not drink enough water but I also know that drinking to much can be fatal.


----------



## Stan (Jan 16, 2007)

Wait, I don't get it.  I thought water was good for you.  So now it's bad.  And here I was all this time drinking water.  Which is it- is water GOOD or BAD?

I'm confused.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 16, 2007)

Water Intoxication 

http://chemistry.about.com/cs/5/f/blwaterintox.htm

http://www.answers.com/topic/water-intoxication


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 16, 2007)

No kidding.

Marijuana is impossible to overdoss on and die.  Water it is posible.  Therefor Water is more dangerous then Marijuana.  So, time for the War on Drugs to launch a offensive on the massive quantites of water available at low prices for the sake of the children who might be tempted by it.


----------



## tellner (Jan 16, 2007)

"Reasonable standard of care"
"Knew or should have known"
"Criminal negligence"
"Inciting hazardous behavior"
"Due care and diligence"

These are the sorts of words of which lawsuits are made. The stupid cork soakers (coke sackers? sock tuckers? caulk sockers?) who dreamed this thing up are "radio personalities", but that doesn't excuse them from doing a little research before coming up with this stupid-*** stunt. It's not common, but it's not that rare. They're going to have a non-consensual interaction with the court system, probably criminal as well as civil. And they deserve everything that is going to happen to them.


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Jan 16, 2007)

tellner said:


> "Reasonable standard of care"
> "Knew or should have known"
> "Criminal negligence"
> "Inciting hazardous behavior"
> ...


 
I agree. Like someone said before i know that drinking too much water can be fatal. How hard is it use google these days? Come on people.



Andrew Green said:


> No kidding.
> 
> Marijuana is impossible to overdoss on and die. Water it is posible. Therefor Water is more dangerous then Marijuana. So, time for the War on Drugs to launch a offensive on the massive quantites of water available at low prices for the sake of the children who might be tempted by it.


 
LOL this was sad and funny. Sad because it is true and funny because...well...its just frickin funny. 

B


----------



## Shirt Ripper (Jan 16, 2007)

I once downed a litre and a half by basically jugging it.  A little nose breathing but...


----------



## michaeledward (Jan 16, 2007)

Stan said:


> Wait, I don't get it. I thought water was good for you. So now it's bad. And here I was all this time drinking water. Which is it- is water GOOD or BAD?
> 
> I'm confused.


 

I don't know where it is good or bad ... .but this other stuff sure is scary ... it is just horrible ... .something called dihydrogen monoxide. 



> Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) is a colorless and odorless chemical compound, also referred to by some as Dihydrogen Oxide, Hydrogen Hydroxide, Hydronium Hydroxide, or simply Hydric acid. Its basis is the unstable radical Hydroxide, the components of which are found in a number of caustic, explosive and poisonous compounds such as Sulfuric Acid, Nitroglycerine and Ethyl Alcohol.


 
Spooky stuff ..... 



> Each year, Dihydrogen Monoxide is a known causative component in many thousands of deaths and is a major contributor to millions upon millions of dollars in damage to property and the environment. Some of the known perils of Dihydrogen Monoxide are:
> 
> Death due to accidental inhalation of DHMO, even in small quantities.
> Prolonged exposure to solid DHMO causes severe tissue damage.
> ...


Learn more here ... www.dhmo.org


----------



## Kacey (Jan 16, 2007)

Andrew Green said:


> No kidding.
> 
> Marijuana is impossible to overdoss on and die.  Water it is posible.  Therefor Water is more dangerous then Marijuana.  So, time for the War on Drugs to launch a offensive on the massive quantites of water available at low prices for the sake of the children who might be tempted by it.



The difference being, you can live without ingesting marijuana; lack of water (ingested either directly or within another substance) is deadly.



michaeledward said:


> Learn more here ... www.dhmo.org



I've seen that one before... amazing what changing the sequence of elements in the molecular name can do for a substance.


----------



## Jonathan Randall (Jan 16, 2007)

It's the talk around the water cooler at the office where I work (in Sacramento). Apparently the tragedy is magnified by the fact that a person called the station in the beginning of the contest and warned (and scolded) the DJ's that this could be extremely dangerous. From what I hear, the DJ scoffed at this and stated that he didn't worry because he was covered by a release (contestants sign a release). The station has since cancelled the show. Not too long ago, a Chico (in Northern California like Sacramento) student died in the same type of stunt, dare or something in his case, so the effects were not unknowable to an informed Northern California resident.


----------



## tellner (Jan 16, 2007)

They were warned? They knew? They said it didn't matter?

Ooh, baby! "Reckless disregard for human life". It doesn't matter that they cancelled the show and sacked everyone who worked for it. They are screwed beyond human belief. The waiver will get blown through by the lawyers. And the criminal charges get more likely.


----------



## exile (Jan 16, 2007)

Jonathan Randall said:


> It's the talk around the water cooler at the office where I work (in Sacramento). Apparently the tragedy is magnified by the fact that a person called the station in the beginning of the contest and warned (and scolded) the DJ's that this could be extremely dangerous. From what I hear, the DJ scoffed at this and stated that he didn't worry because he was covered by a release (contestants sign a release). The station has since cancelled the show. Not too long ago, a Chico (in Northern California like Sacramento) student died in the same type of stunt, dare or something in his case, so the effects were not unknowable to an informed Northern California resident.



Any time you mess with electrolyte balance, you're asking for severe, life-threatening trouble. Electrolytes are the basis for the propagation of neural signalsscrewed up electrolytes, screwed up nervous system, which can implicate the heart since the neural signals saying `pump... ok, pump again... and now again...' don't get through. Bodybuilders on radical diuretic regimes, to get that surreal shredded look, young girls going through bulemic/anorexic trauma, and many others put themselves in harm's way at a potentially fatal level. It sounds to me, from what the story and the various news reports are saying, that this woman did something like that... It's not that water is bad. But if you reduce the concentration of electrolytes below a certain point by increasing body fluid content unnaturally, _something_ is going to go horribly wrong....


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Jan 17, 2007)

exile said:


> Any time you mess with electrolyte balance, you're asking for severe, life-threatening trouble. Electrolytes are the basis for the propagation of neural signalsscrewed up electrolytes, screwed up nervous system, which can implicate the heart since the neural signals saying `pump... ok, pump again... and now again...' don't get through. Bodybuilders on radical diuretic regimes, to get that surreal shredded look, young girls going through bulemic/anorexic trauma, and many others put themselves in harm's way at a potentially fatal level. It sounds to me, from what the story and the various news reports are saying, that this woman did something like that... It's not that water is bad. But if you reduce the concentration of electrolytes below a certain point by increasing body fluid content unnaturally, _something_ is going to go horribly wrong....


 
Whats that saying..."too much of a good thing is a bad thing". Its a shame how people can so ignorant and that this woman had to lose her life as a result of their ignorance.

Like tellner said, it doesnt matter what kind of waiver they have the lawyer will look at it and laugh and then tear the radio station apart piece by piece in the court room. Serves them right

B


----------



## dubljay (Jan 17, 2007)

from the article said:
			
		

> KDND 107.9, The US radio station whose 'Hold your wee for a Wii' contest led to the death of a mother of three, has fired 10 staff involved - including five on-air personalities - after reports suggest that they made jokes after listeners expressed concerns over water intoxication on air.



http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=155667


----------



## Jonathan Randall (Jan 17, 2007)

dubljay said:


> http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=155667


 
Apparently, one of the callers who raised objections over the safety of the contest was a nurse. It appears that these radio folks were grossly irresponsible and, in my opinion, perhaps criminally negligent. What a damn fool stunt to play.


----------



## exile (Jan 17, 2007)

KempoGuy06 said:


> Whats that saying..."too much of a good thing is a bad thing". Its a shame how people can so ignorant and that this woman had to lose her life as a result of their ignorance.
> 
> Like tellner said, it doesnt matter what kind of waiver they have the lawyer will look at it and laugh and then tear the radio station apart piece by piece in the court room. Serves them right
> 
> B



KG, I hope with all my heart that that's how it plays out! This woman's life shouldn't be regarded as a used kleenex to be crumpled up and thrown away in the service of boosting the station's drive for ever-greater advertising revenue...


----------



## Carol (Jan 18, 2007)

According to Reuters, a caller even brought up a story of a NoCal freshman pledge that died in a similar fashion:

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/games/archives/2007/01/17/ten_sacked_in_wii_contest_tragedy.html

Very sad story.


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Jan 18, 2007)

exile said:


> KG, I hope with all my heart that that's how it plays out! This woman's life shouldn't be regarded as a used kleenex to be crumpled up and thrown away in the service of boosting the station's drive for ever-greater advertising revenue...


 
Absolutely. If there is any kind of justice out there these people should have to pay with their own lives because of what their stupidity has done to this woman and her children. But, alas there isnt a justice system like that. So my hopes and prayers go to the people representing the woman in hopes that they get the law to be a strict as it possibly can.

If anyone is following this closely please keep us updated.

B


----------



## exile (Jan 18, 2007)

KempoGuy06 said:


> Absolutely. If there is any kind of justice out there these people should have to pay with their own lives because of what their stupidity has done to this woman and her children. But, alas there isnt a justice system like that. So my hopes and prayers go to the people representing the woman in hopes that they get the law to be a strict as it possibly can.
> 
> If anyone is following this closely please keep us updated.
> 
> B



Amen to that. 

A lot of people in the media seem to regard the rest of the world as expenable cannon fodder for the entertainment industry. A TV studio or radio station can afford to throw enough $$ at an audience, many of whom are struggling to stay afloat, to get them to do demeaning or even dangerous things to have a chance at that brass ring. Talk shows have a particularly bad record in this regard, but it's much more general than that. I often find myself getting really impatent with, and critical of, people who buy into that sort of crap and put themselves in harm's way (or humiliation's way) to get a few extra (very transient!) bucks, but I try to remind myself that I'm not in their position and I don't know what I _would_ choose to do or not do if I were... you can never tell; we _hope_ we'd opt to keep our dignity and our safety even if, at the end of our tether, we were tempted, but.... ? The real issue, as I see it, is the disgusting cynicism of the tempters in these cases.


----------



## Infinite (Jan 18, 2007)

Posted in a new thread but!

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/01/18/radio.death.ap/index.html

More on that story justice is coming.


----------



## exile (Jan 18, 2007)

Infinite said:


> Posted in a new thread but!
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/01/18/radio.death.ap/index.html
> 
> More on that story justice is coming.



Let's hope so. The callousness of the SOBs they quoted is almost incomprehensible. OK, they lost their jobs, but there's a little kid without a mother out there now...


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Jan 18, 2007)

exile said:


> Let's hope so. The callousness of the SOBs they quoted is almost incomprehensible. OK, they lost their jobs, but there's a little kid without a mother out there now...


 
Yes lets hopes so. It is sick to imagine the conversation when those DJ's were joking about it. All I know is that those people are lucky that I dont get to decided their punishment. Remember there are things you can do to a person that is far worse than death. All of which might be to easy on them. God have mercy on cause no one else should.

B


----------



## dubljay (Jan 20, 2007)

Well I'm surprised that it took this long for it to happen.

http://ngc.boomtown.net/en_uk/articles/art.view.php?id=13272

The lawsuit has been filed.


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Jan 22, 2007)

dubljay said:


> Well I'm surprised that it took this long for it to happen.
> 
> http://ngc.boomtown.net/en_uk/articles/art.view.php?id=13272
> 
> The lawsuit has been filed.


Good. Im wondering what will happen to them, obviously money, how much time will they get if any? Does anyone have any professional input on this?

B


----------



## Carol (Jan 22, 2007)

KempoGuy06 said:


> Good. Im wondering what will happen to them, obviously money, how much time will they get if any? Does anyone have any professional input on this?
> 
> B


 
Time is only served if convicted on criminal charges.  I don't see anywhere that criminal charges have been brought about in this case, only a civil lawsuit.


----------



## BrandiJo (Jan 23, 2007)

Maybe i am missing something but why are we blaming the radio station? they did not hold a gun to her and make her drink. She was an adult and agreed to the game.  Regardless of the risks she could have stepped out once she started filling ill, she could have used the restroom anytime. I guess she might not have been totaly informed but thats still her job to ask the right questions, IMHO​


----------



## Carol (Jan 23, 2007)

BrandiJo said:


> Maybe i am missing something but why are we blaming the radio station? they did not hold a gun to her and make her drink. She was an adult and agreed to the game. Regardless of the risks she could have stepped out once she started filling ill, she could have used the restroom anytime. I guess she might not have been totaly informed but thats still her job to ask the right questions, IMHO​


 
Because the mother is guilty of, at worst, having poor analytical skills.  

OTOH, the radio station used FCC-licensed public airwaves to mass-promote a deadly stunt.  By applying for an FCC license, the broadcaster agrees to take certain steps to protect the public from harm (such as EAS broadcasts, reports of storms or civil disorder, etc.)  The radio station had a more wide-ranging resonsibility than the mother.

I'm sure the station will be hit with a serious fine from the FCC.  I don't know when their license is up for renewal again but they will likely face some serious challenges for their renewal.  The station owners may even face a landmark court challenge if there are some rigid complaints that their license was used for an "obscene broadcast".


----------



## exile (Jan 23, 2007)

Carol Kaur said:


> Because the mother is guilty of, at worst, having poor analytical skills.
> 
> OTOH, the radio station used FCC-licensed public airwaves to mass-promote a deadly stunt.  By applying for an FCC license, the broadcaster agrees to take certain steps to protect the public from harm (such as EAS broadcasts, reports of storms or civil disorder, etc.)  The radio station had a more wide-ranging resonsibility than the mother.



This is dead-on. Very few people are aware of what overconsumption of liquids can do; they've been told repeatedly, in fact, that they need to drink _more_ waterat least 8 8-oz glasses a day. Exactly what percentage of even a well-informed sample of the poplulation is aware that that kind of `water binge' can kill you? It would be interesting to find out; my guess would be, a very small one.  We're not talking here about having to warn people that hot coffee is _hot_ and not to pour it on yourself! 

By promoting an event which appeared to involve an inherently harmless activity, the station was in effect using its status as a quasi-public institution to vouch for the safety of the activityno warnings, no cautions given, although the DJ and station directors who planned the event were aware that they were asking people to do something quite dangerous. They didn't _have_ to hold a gun to her head to still be implicated in a criminally irresponsible action.


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Jan 23, 2007)

Carol Kaur said:


> Time is only served if convicted on criminal charges. I don't see anywhere that criminal charges have been brought about in this case, only a civil lawsuit.


 
Could some criminal charges be charged? Im sure that some how they could get charged with manslaughter. Or something like negligent homicide, is that even real or am I mixing things up? Let me know.

B


----------



## Carol (Jan 23, 2007)

KempoGuy06 said:


> Could some criminal charges be charged? Im sure that some how they could get charged with manslaughter. Or something like negligent homicide, is that even real or am I mixing things up? Let me know.
> 
> B


 
There isn't a clear-cut "they" in the situation though.    They meaning the Morning Show folks that got sacked?  They meaning the Program Director?  

Most of the focus is going to be on the company's assets and how those assets can translate to settlement checks for the family and fine payments for the government.   Prosecuting an individual radio schmuck or two may take away from that focus or even dilute the notion of who is responsble for what.

Tying down responsibility to an individual level in a way that a California jury will percieve as guilty beyond a reasonable doubt may not be so easy.  There also isn't a clear-cut case in FCC law that I can see as to whether this can be prosecuted at the federal level either.   That's not to say it won't happen...but I suspect there are a lot of powers watching to make sure that nothing interferes with the windfall checks that are likely to be written.


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Jan 23, 2007)

Carol Kaur said:


> There isn't a clear-cut "they" in the situation though.    They meaning the Morning Show folks that got sacked?  They meaning the Program Director?
> 
> Most of the focus is going to be on the company's assets and how those assets can translate to settlement checks for the family and fine payments for the government.   Prosecuting an individual radio schmuck or two may take away from that focus or even dilute the notion of who is responsble for what.
> 
> Tying down responsibility to an individual level in a way that a California jury will percieve as guilty beyond a reasonable doubt may not be so easy.  There also isn't a clear-cut case in FCC law that I can see as to whether this can be prosecuted at the federal level either.   That's not to say it won't happen...but I suspect there are a lot of powers watching to make sure that nothing interferes with the windfall checks that are likely to be written.


Oh. Very well explained.

B


----------

