what muscles/nerves in the hand could get screwed if one drove a nail through one's hand

[wickED_dude]

odd question indeed.
i wish i knew of some medical forum to ask this, but what muscles and/or nerves connect the hand to the brain?
i mean, say someone drove a nail through ur hand (Jesus style), u'd end up with a hole in the palm of ur hand right?
Would you lose control of ur fingers? Would it be permanent? Any people who maybe went to med school but dropped out and know abit about the human body?

[Ummon]

The nail is supposed to go in the forearm. I don't know the exact location, though I think it is necessarily between the radius and the ulna (to use them as locking mechanism to the cross). Said this it mostly depends on the level at which you have to place it. All hand function would be lost I think, but since you are supposed to die afterwards...

For consultation:

http://anatomy.med.umich.edu/musculo...rm_tables.html

[Banned]

Firstly, the nervous system of the body is responsible for various types of alerts including the messages sent to a person's brain relating to response to stimulus and other functions. The blood circulatory system plays no role here. Besides, there's not just one blood vessel that connects the hand to the brain, primarily there are two blood vessels which are connected to those in the fingers and they are ulnar and radial arteries. Moreover, these do not connect to the brain directly, but these do connect to the heart directly, and from the latter originate the carotid arteries which take blood to the brain. Similarly there are ulnar and radial nerves of the peripheral nervous system which connect to the spinal cord. Whether one loses control of his fingers or not depends on whether the afferent neurons associated with one or more fingers were damaged. This depends on the actual spot where the nail was driven into the palm. If the injury caused due to the nail action did hurt a spot beneath which lay a neuron connected to a finger, then it would result in loss of control over that particular finger due to loss of the path through which the message transfer would normally take place. In short, the person would lose control over one or more fingers only if there was any damage to the neurons associated with the respective fingers. It's relevant to note here that the circulatory system plays no role as far as we're concerned about possession of control over body parts. And the loss is permanent until the person goes for a surgery.

[Ummon]

This depends on the actual spot where the nail was driven into the palm.

It doesn't belong in the palm. Simulations I think, have shown hands would break under the weight of the body, etc.

If nerves are cut, besides, actually we cannot give back the function.

[Willys MB]

Any people who maybe went to med school but dropped out

Yes no real doctors allowed.

[wickED_dude]

Yes no real doctors allowed.

haha well i figured real doctors would prolly be out working long shifts and thus would have no time for public forums. anyways i am surprised i got so many responses from such an odd question. to be honest i was expecting people to be like wtf why are you even asking this?

but yea, i just wanted to know what kind of damage i'd be looking at if i drove a nail into my hand for real...especially cuz i play the piano so i wouldnt wanna lose control of my hand.

[Ludicus]

but yea, i just wanted to know what kind of damage i'd be looking at if i drove a nail into my hand for real...especially cuz i play the piano so i wouldnt wanna lose control of my hand.

Hehe.
Many things can happen. Just stay away from nails and hammers.

So, only obvious things:
1- the nail can hit one (or more) of the 27 bones of your wrist (8 bones) and hand.

2- the nail can damage one of the three nerves of your hand,and each of them have sensory and motor components, so, remember, take care..

3- And there are muscles and tendons in you hand (below the skin and the palmar fascia)

Some of them are only located in the hand (intrinsec muscles) and other muscles are located in the forearm and insert in the skeleton of the hand by long tendons (extrinsic muscles)
Some of these extrinsic muscles are extensors of wrist and fingers and some of them are flexors.

4- And there are arteries and veins.

Regarding the perforating lesions of the hand, one of the most feared lesions is the irreversible sensorial /motor damage to one of the three nerves of the hand (median, ulnar and radial branches) even when the reconstructive surgery goes well.
I hope this helps

[Ludicus]

For a better understanding here are (yellow) the three nerves of the hand:

[wickED_dude]

lol thnx for the picture.
i am really considering doing this. but it requires much thought from my part lol cuz im pretty sure i'd be like "aaaaa" and the pain wouldnt let me think properly.

[Banned]

It doesn't belong in the palm. Simulations I think, have shown hands would break under the weight of the body, etc.

No, the hand cannot break just because of the weight of the body. It’s just a misconception that it can. The human hand is full of conjunctive tissues. A conjunctive tissue is even stronger than a strong cord or rope. The tendons, ligaments and the membranes separating muscles are the conjunctive tissues in a human hand. These are strong enough to keep the hand affixed to a wooden cross such as the one which was used in Jesus’ crucifixion. I guess you think that the delicate hands would be ripped apart, but his hands cannot be considered delicate even. He was a carpenter. His hands can be considered stronger than those of an average man at his time.

Moreover, if the Roman soldiers had chosen to nail him to the cross through his wrists or forearms, they would have to risk breaking one or more bones which they could not do. Why? Because Jesus was the Passover Lamb who was going to be sacrificed, and according to the ordinances of the festival no bone in the lamb could be broken. The ceremonial act of the Passover prohibited the breaking of any bone in the lamb.

"Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us" ( I Co 5: 7 )

"Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they broke not his legs; but one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water. And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true; and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled: A bone of him shall not be broken." ( John 19: 32 - 36 )

If the nail had been driven into his wrists, it would have most certainly broken his bone. Human wrist has eight bones which are tightly held together by ligaments, in such a way, that if you want to push a nail right into it you need to pierce and break one or more bones, which the soldiers had to avoid at all cost. Jesus could not be nailed by the wrist. On the contrary, there are five metacarpal bones in the palm, and nail can be driven between any two of them without breaking any of them. Therefore, palm would have obviously been the choice of the person who had to nail him to the cross.

Above and beyond, the bible itself states at many places that Jesus was nailed to the cross through his hands and feet. There is no mention of Jesus’ wrists in the bible if I’m not wrong.

"The other disciples therefore said unto him: We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them: Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe. And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them; then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said: Peace be unto you. Then saith he to Thomas: Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing." ( John 20: 25-27 )

If nerves are cut, besides, actually we cannot give back the function.

Surgery of the peripheral nervous system is possible. Just for example, see here.

[Ummon]

No, the hand cannot break just because of the weight of the body. It’s just a misconception that it can. The human hand is full of conjunctive tissues. A conjunctive tissue is even stronger than a strong cord or rope. The tendons, ligaments and the membranes separating muscles are the conjunctive tissues in a human hand. These are strong enough to keep the hand affixed to a wooden cross such as the one which was used in Jesus’ crucifixion. I guess you think that the delicate hands would be ripped apart, but his hands cannot be considered delicate even. He was a carpenter. His hands can be considered stronger than those of an average man at his time.

I saw this misconception supported by respectable scientists, although it was a long ago. Besides, I am fully aware of the nature of human tissues. This would lead us to assert that after a nail has been driven through it a hand cannot hold the weight of the body in the position of the crucifixion for several hours.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion

Archaeological evidence for ancient crucifixion
Despite the fact that the ancient Jewish historian Josephus, as well as other sources, refer to the crucifixion of thousands of people by the Romans, there is only a single archaeological discovery of a crucified body dating back to the Roman Empire around the time of Jesus which was discovered in Jerusalem in 1968. It is not surprising that there is only one such discovery, because a crucified body was usually left to decay on the cross and therefore would not be preserved. The only reason these archaeological remains were preserved was because family members gave this particular individual a customary burial.

The remains were found accidentally in an ossuary with the crucified man’s name on it, 'Yehohanan, the son of Hagakol'. Prof. Nicu Haas, an anthropologist at the Hebrew University Medical School in Jerusalem, examined the ossuary and discovered that it contained a heel bone with a nail driven through its side, indicating that the man had been crucified. The position of the nail relative to the bone indicates that the feet have been nailed to the cross from their side, not from their front; various opinions have been proposed as to whether they were both nailed together to the front of the cross or one on the left side, one on the right side. The point of the nail had olive wood fragments on it indicating that he was crucified on a cross made of olive wood or on an olive tree. Since olive trees are not very tall, this would suggest that the condemned was crucified at eye level. Additionally, a piece of acacia wood was located between the bones and the head of the nail, presumably to keep the condemned from freeing his foot by sliding it over the nail. His legs were found broken, perhaps as a means of hastening his death as described in John 19:31-32. It is thought that, since in Roman times iron was expensive, the nails were removed from the dead body to cut the costs, which would help to explain why only one has been found, as the tip of the nail in question was bent in such a way that it couldn't be removed.

Prof. Haas had also identified a scratch on the inner surface of the right radius bone of the forearm, close to the wrist. He deduced from the form of the scratch, as well as from the intact wrist bones, that a nail had been driven into the forearm at that position.

Moreover, if the Roman soldiers had chosen to nail him to the cross through his wrists or forearms, they would have to risk breaking one or more bones which they could not do. Why? Because Jesus was the Passover Lamb who was going to be sacrificed, and according to the ordinances of the festival no bone in the lamb could be broken. The ceremonial act of the Passover prohibited the breaking of any bone in the lamb.

Driving a nail through his palm has the same if not more risk of doing this same damage.

If the nail had been driven into his wrists, it would have most certainly broken his bone. Human wrist has eight bones which are tightly held together by ligaments, in such a way, that if you want to push a nail right into it you need to pierce and break one or more bones, which the soldiers had to avoid at all cost. Jesus could not be nailed by the wrist. On the contrary, there are five metacarpal bones in the palm, and nail can be driven between any two of them without breaking any of them. Therefore, palm would have obviously been the choice of the person who had to nail him to the cross.

I said forearm, not wrist.

Above and beyond, the bible itself states at many places that Jesus was nailed to the cross through his hands and feet. There is no mention of Jesus’ wrists in the bible if I’m not wrong.

I should maybe trace the argument back, I remember this was tackled as well.

Here, same link as above.

Location of the nails
In popular depictions of crucifixion (possibly derived from a literal reading of the translated description in the Gospel of John, of Jesus' wounds being 'in the hands'), the condemned is shown with nails in their hands. Although historical documents refer to the nails being in the "hands", the word usually translated as "hand", "χείρ" in Greek, referred to arm and hand together, so that, words are added to denote the hand as distinct from the arm, as "ἄκρην οὔτασε χεῖρα" (he wounded the end of the χείρ, i.e. he wounded her hand)

Surgery of the peripheral nervous system is possible. Just for example, see here.

I'm glad to hear that, neurosurgery was actually always outside my formation. Well, not exactly: I had 1 credit of neurosurgery in neurology, but I guess that my memory doesn't cover ten hour subcourses today.

[ThiudareiksGunthigg]

No, the hand cannot break just because of the weight of the body. It’s just a misconception that it can.

Whatever the anatomical side of things may or may not say, the archaeological evidence of how people were nailed up in Roman crucifixion is quite clear - they were nailed through the wrist, not the hand.

Moreover, if the Roman soldiers had chosen to nail him to the cross through his wrists or forearms, they would have to risk breaking one or more bones which they could not do. Why? Because Jesus was the Passover Lamb who was going to be sacrificed, and according to the ordinances of the festival no bone in the lamb could be broken. The ceremonial act of the Passover prohibited the breaking of any bone in the lamb.

And Roman soldiers would give a flying rat's bum about the ceremonial ordinances of the Passover lamb while executing some ranting Galilean prophet, why exactly?

If the nail had been driven into his wrists, it would have most certainly broken his bone. Human wrist has eight bones which are tightly held together by ligaments, in such a way, that if you want to push a nail right into it you need to pierce and break one or more bones, which the soldiers had to avoid at all cost.

Eh? Why? Because of some Jewish ordinances about Passover lambs?! This makes zero sense. What on earth does that have to do with Roman executions?

Above and beyond, the bible itself states at many places that Jesus was nailed to the cross through his hands and feet. There is no mention of Jesus’ wrists in the bible if I’m not wrong.

The gospel account were written decades later by people who weren't even there, so why you expect journalistic accuracy from them is a mystery. More importantly, the Greek is far from precise on this point.

[Captain Arrrgh!]

Agreed. I'm pretty sure the Romans would care about breaking bones in Palestine as much as offending Cerunnos in the west. That is to say, nil.

[The Fish]

Hand movements are complex, because they involve muscles both in the arm, as well as in the forearm. Thus, the level at which nerve damage occurs governs the loss of function that occurs. In the forearm, the median nerve innervates the majority of the flexion musculature: basically the flexors of the wrist (several) and fingers except the thumb (the flexor digitorum superficialis and part of the flexor digitorum profundis). You can see this if you try making a fist with one hand but hold your fingers back with your other hand: muscles in the forearm will be prominent, and the tendons connecting these muscles with the fingers will be seen. The median nerve runs roughly in the middle of the forearm, so driving a nail through the middle of the forearm would have a good chance of damaging it. However, the loss of function that occurs would depend on where on the forearm the nail is driven; if it is near the wrist, most forearm muscles would be spared. The closer you get to the elbow, the more likely the forearm muscles "downstream" will be affected.

The other important forearm nerve is the radial nerve. This innervates the muscles that extend the fingers (the opposite of making a fist). As with the median nerve, the further up the arm the damage, the more likely the forearm musculature will be damaged. The ulnar nerve also innervates some forearm muscularture (flexor carpi ulnaris and the medial part of the flexor digitorum profundus) but is less important

In terms of the intrinsic muscles of the hand (that is, those muscles that are within the hand itself) the two important nerves are the median and ulnar nerves. The median nerve mostly controls thumb function; it innervates the so-called LOAF muscles (lumbricals, opponens pollicis brevis, abductor pollicis brevis, and flexor pollicis brevis). Damage to this part of the nerve would have to involve the thenar eminence (the bulge of muscles at the base of the thumb) where the nerve gives off the tiny branches that control the thumb.

The most important nerve in controlling the intrinsic muscles of the hand is the ulnar nerve. It controls all intrinsic hand muscles except the LOAF muscles; damage to this nerve causes "claw hand," a condition in which the person is unable to make a fist, but the distal joints of the fingers still flex because of the intact forearm muscles, causing a claw-like appearance. The radial nerve does not innervate any intrinsic hand muscles, but does provide sensory innervation to the back of the hand, so damaging it would cause numbness on that side.

Bottom line: my medical advice is to not drive nails into your hand or forearm.

And yes, doctors are busy, but we sometimes find time to revisit old haunts!

[Captain Arrrgh!]

We need some volunteers, like in the 'what happens after you die thread'. Start hammering and let us know what happens.

......If you don't post an answer we'll assume it affects your typing ability.

[Senno]

I highly recommend you NOT do this at all. Living with 2 numb fingers myself due to a severly broken arm, it's not worth the risk.

Find some other way to express yourself.

[Willys MB]

Ludicus: nah, i figure if i do it on my left hand (im right handed) the pain will be so excrutiating that my body will stop sinning because of the fear of pain. in a way i kind of want to trick it into being scared for its life LOL

I think you have more pressing psychological issues at hand than :wub:.

[Trax]

If you do this you may well end up in some kind of psychiatric institution, so don't, really. There's no reason for it.

[wickED_dude]

haha i think im offended. wait...no thats impossible, cuz i lack feelings! i am too detached from the world...that sound psyco enough? lol jk. as a matter of fact i am a very sensible person.

anyways i dun really see a point why if i went through with it, it'd mean im crazy. i mean, from my point of view, pain teaches and makes one stronger.

a little kid who touches something hot and gets burned wont touch it again. a cat who gets chased by his angry owners for peeing in the living room wont do it again (thats how my cat learned lol; took us 2 years, but he's been good for the last 10 yrs. he's 12). anyways there r plenty of examples.

i joined a medieval combat club a few weekends ago and since then i have begun to learn from pain. see, since both combatants basically hit each other with sticks, i have to be defensive, and when i make a mistake, i make myself more vulnerable thus usually get hit. this hurts lol...but i learn from it and wont commit the same mistake again.

[Willys MB]

Yes, but there isn't anything "wrong" with :wub:...

If you're convinced that this natural behavior is so wrong that you'd mutilate yourself, then yes, you need to seek help.

Whoever convinced you such is a terrible person.