I am sceptical about the 147 minutes, the child could have still clinging onto the ice and just drowned a minute before the parents reached the pond.

▲

ddeck 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

The timeline lists "Sled tracks seen to broken bond ice, EMS called" at 16:44. He was pulled from the water at 18:57. The article text further clarifies:

Parents discovered sled tracks from home onto broken pond ice through which he fell.

He left the house at 16:00, which is why they give the range of 147 to 177 minutes.

▲

looofooo0 2 days ago | parent [-]

Yes but ultimatively it could been 16:43 to 18:57 which is 134 Minutes.

▲

d1sxeyes 2 days ago | parent [-]

The first two reported timestamps are 16:00 and 16:30 which both fall conveniently on the half hour. This leads me to conclude that these are guesses, and could be either early or late. It seems most likely that the mother was not exactly aware of the time the child left the house. There is an incentive to minimise (to avoid it looking like a failure of supervision).

What we are certain of is the 16:44 call to the EMS, so you're right, 134 minutes is the lower bound. However, it's not unreasonable to assume that the parents did not immediately call on noticing the child missing, so the gap between 'noticing missing' and 'calling EMS' is real and non-zero.

The gap between 'leaving the house' and 'noticing missing' is something I'm less clear on: how did the parents 'notice' the child was missing when he was knowingly allowed to leave the house earlier? There's still a non-zero gap between 'last sighting' and 'realisation that he's missing' (i.e. he definitely wasn't missing at ~16:00, when the mother saw him leaving the house... what changed so that the parents believed he was missing at ~16:30? Was he supposed to check in with Dad and missed the check-in, etc?)

Either way, a difference of ±10% doesn't really make that much impact in interpreting the results.

	▲	cafebabbe 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Yes it's still more than 2 hours. two hours underwater! that's insanity.

▲

wahern 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It seems below about ~80F you lose consciousness. This kid was nearly half that. Moreover, there have been other similar cases: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32482520/

▲

duskwuff 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> It seems below about ~80F you lose consciousness.

Interestingly, the case report notes that "classic cardiac electrical activity" started once the patient reached 82°F.

	▲	wahern 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		FWIW, I got the 80F figure from the table at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothermia#Classification

▲

looofooo0 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Problem is that he could have drowned at 16:43.

▲

inglor_cz 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Ice-cold water won't let you have enough strength to cling to ice for two hours. Ten to fifteen minutes at most.

Survivors of Titanic would say that the shouts of people clinging to something in the water died off pretty fast.