Pictures So Horrific I Have No Adequate Words to Describe Them

The BBQ Pit
61

Well, maybe, but I was just kinda writing about the relative mundanity of the particular porn pictures referenced as tubgirl and goatse in my life, thanks to a former relationship. I mean, a dude’s spread asshole? Fountains of enema poo? That’s just a day in the life of my former bf and I. For ages I avoided looking at “tubgirl” because the picture was referred to vaguely, but as something really awful and horrible. Therefore, I thought it would be a picture of a dead person in a tub. If it was that horrible, it couldn’t be something like the fantasies I once acted out on a nightly basis!!! Those type of things definitely don’t shock me anymore! …*Ohhh… enemas… adult babies… watersports… AGAIN??? * :rolleyes: Bor-r-r-r-ingggggg…

Oh, and I defintely remain adamant against showing an innocent, dead child as “shock” value. Come on, now. I consider extreme scat to be relatively tame, but autopsy photos of someone’s tragic family death?? *Not * shocking. But definitely (IMO) gratuitous, rude, and disrespectful of others’ grief.

62

Oh, and woops, forgot to add, this is what I get for not looking at my own posts, ever. I should probably address a reply once in a while.

63

I’m glad broomstick said that these weren’t as bad as the mailer. Because in my mind, the word “weak” comes to mind. The save all worst thing I have ever had the benefit of 3 senses being traumatized was a man who had diabetes, as do most leg sore patients, but with one caveat. Meals on wheels found him. Leg sores crotch to heel. Filled with maggots. Imagine, a wound so bad that it offends the eyes, the nose, and the ears. (they make a squishy noise when they wriggle)(the maggots too). I saw at least 3 doctors ralph in the room or in the hallway outside the room as they ran. But for some reason, tubgirl upsets me more. Maybe its because I am more experienced with wounds. People I work with have this. The nurses don’t mind stool, the respiratory therapists don’t mind phlegm. Both of them hate the other (sample, not person).

64

I hate to ask- harlequin fetus?

Just a verbal description- no link necessary

65

Apligraf and most of that stuff doesn’t bother me. I can tell that you’re pretty inurred to that level of ick-ness, yourself. So anything that caused that reaction would have to be bad.

66

If you were to set up a website with these photos on it, & charge $35, no $40 a year, every sicko in the world would be pouring gold into your pockets.

67

I found this description:

"Harlequin ichthyosis, the most severe form of congenital ichthyosis, is characterized by a profound thickening of the keratin layer in fetal skin. The neonate who is affected is born with a massive horny shell of dense platelike scale and contraction abnormalities of the eyes, the ears, the mouth, and the appendages. This armor limits movement and compromises the protective skin barrier, leaving the newborn susceptible to metabolic abnormalities and infection.

The term harlequin derives from the newborn’s facial expression and the triangular and diamond-shaped pattern of hyperkeratosis. The newborn’s mouth is pulled wide open, mimicking a clown’s smile. The underlying biochemical and genetic abnormality is not understood."

in an article on emedicine.com.

68

Harliquin fetus = newborn child with lots of open red oozey extremely painful-looking fissues. Cracks to the flesh at every joint and lots of other places. Not quite human appearance.

69

Thanks, actually after I posted last, I actually thought to search the Boards & found what I needed to know except why they were called “harlequin”, which you all just told me.

TMI indeed! bangs head on monitor!

I do wonder if that’s what an acquaintance of mine had, the baby was either dead or going to be stillborn so they did a D&C & it was pretty messed up from what I heard (I gotta admit I kinda blocked out the details of what I was being told because it was so bad).

70

No, I actually did NOT show the pictures to anyone! Well, I sent them to our Medical Librarian, but I warned her what was coming.

Our pharmacist found the website - I knew as soon as I heard her go “Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww”

The rest of the office was off and running without seeing it - our RN and MD staff have all done clinical work even if they aren’t doing it anymore and just had to dredge up their old “war stories”.

Apligraf seems to like showing the graft material itself, which is pretty innocuous - just stretchy flesh-colored stuff, or little discs of fleshy stuff. No bloody ick, no rampaging infections, no hanging bits of flesh… When they do show uclers or burns they tend to focus on just the injury, without showing the whole person or even, say, the whole foot so while it’s ick it’s also taken out of context a bit and not so nasty. I remember one thing with Apligraf where they showed the whole little girl after successful treatment, which didn’t look too bad - happy 8 year old playing by a swimming pool, skin only a little mottled and patchy - and when they showed the “before” aspects it was skin, but cropped to just show the affected parts - nothing in those photos to make you think “cute little kid in agony”.

THIS crowd… pretty damn obvious you were dealing with 'people in agony" here. I mean, shit, I know it happens, I know there are horrific things that happen to people… but it seems gratuitous. Maybe it was because this was advertising intended to sell a product? I mean, if you’re documenting something with the interest of teaching someone how to deal with this situation - like in a medical textbook - that’s one thing. But they crop the photos quite a bit there, too.

Yeah, maybe that was part of it - they could have cropped some stuff out of the photos. On their website some of the pictures do this - it’s icky, but only as icky as it needs to be to get the message across. You don’t see 90% of the patient, including their grimacing and the tubes going up their nose and their colostomy bags and stuff. Did they need to include those details? Well, OK, in one picture they did because of the location of the feces bag, but that wasn’t the case in all of them.

Anyhow - the product idea they’re selling actually seems worthwhile. Some of the after pictures are pretty impressive - but how many folks are going to get stopped by the photos? I don’t know - they aren’t aimed at the general public, after all. It’s just gross, and probably needlessly so.

71

::finds notepad with list of important things to do::

::Writes on top of list

Always address bedsores and any open festering lesions as soon as possible::

72

My friend who will watch beheading videos without a second thought, was deeply disturbed by this photo. I guess that’s why I sent it to him. :wink:

I did warn him first though. I was also feeling quite violated after looking at it. Strangely though, not much else seems to get to me that badly. Maybe it’s because it looked like it would tickle. :eek:

73

It is icky to look at, but I honestly don’t understand how people thought it was real. That breast would be red, full of pus and funkdafied.

74

Could you at least name the punk band?

75

The absence of those things may be what contribute to it looking so disturbing. It looks like those things have nestled in there for the long haul. shudder