> And what is your source for whichever of your statements
> is closer to being true?
Cute implication. A pity you aren't as dedicated to reality as you are to whatever cause d'jour you're riding a white horse against.
Per the autopsy report (http://fl1.findlaw.com/news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/schiavo/61305autopsyrpt.pdf), "A total of 645 milliliters of cerebrospinal fluid (weighing 678 grams) were recovered upon opening the skull and exposing the brain."
Whereas "[a]dults average 140 mL of CSF volume" from http://www.utmb.edu/otoref/Grnds/CSF-Leaks-9905/CSF-Leaks-9905.htm.
The calculated ratio is 4.607, so 5 was technically "closer to the truth" as you so pejoratively put it.
I'll say again, in the absence of a living will and the presence of close relatives willing to care for her, Ms Schiavo's case seems to be an injustice. But on that note, I'm out of this thread because it feels a whole lot like a meeting of the flat earth society.
If you are trying to say in a different way that she suffered a brain injury and lost brain tissue, it is not disputed and not interesting at all. It says nothing new. HOW she was injured is the interesting question. Are you going to take my little quiz and explain it to me?