3 ms·

> The hospital said it had “no indication” his death was related to the transplant. Additionally, the transplant happened in March, which is “weeks ago” but no

• gexla 2y ago
  Also, I'm guessing it's not actually the hospital's job to post the more detailed info which may be important related to learning from the transplant. I'm way out of my element here, but wouldn't the hospital just be the location and any important info sharing would be handled by someone else?
• AdamJacobMuller 2y ago
  Technically anything (>14 days) could be considered "weeks ago" I was born more than 2000 weeks ago. That bit of the headline is just pointless.
  • jraph 2y ago
    Commonly, you would say weeks when months wouldn't apply, otherwise it would be misleading if not plain wrong. Usually. (such rules aren't set in stone, allowing humor to exist for instance ("I had a child" "Aw! A boy or a girl?" "Yes"); context matters) Mathematically true isn't sufficient (and possibly sometimes not even relevant), "weeks ago" bears more meaning in common language than "there exists N such that N > 2 and N weeks passed". So you were born that many weeks ago, but not really weeks ago. What matters is how things are understood and it's not usually the interpretation of a formal version of the text (or it is, but a complex one that depends on the mood, the culture and the knowledge of the recipient, their understanding of the author, possibly on other factors as well, that most likely doesn't quite match a naive formal translation)
• aaron695 2y ago
  [dead]