Dr Stenson claims that the article of Fugelseth et al¹ showed that “The use of 100% oxygen offered no benefit in terms of restoration of cardiac output or normalisation of pulmonary artery pressure after severe asphyxia”.² However, if we still take asphyxia to mean “without pulse”, the pigs were not asphyxiated, they were just rendered hypoxic.

Fugelseth et al largely avoid the term asphyxia in their article, but cite another study from Oslo³ which they state involved asphyxiated pigs (although actually that also involved hypoxia alone).

My dictionary does not help much here. It states that asphyxia used to mean “without pulse”, but now just means the same as suffocation. It clearly does not. Perhaps it’s time for us medics to reclaim this useful, and quite descriptive word.