It's hard to accurately gauge how much Fentanyl was in his system or for how long by blood samples alone. The liver is constantly absorbing toxins from the blood. He had a blood concentration that could be fatal or could be survivable varying from person to person. It would be negligent to determine overdose as COD by blood samples alone... equally to rule it out I think. They seem to have avoided making the most accurate conclusion on the overdose possibility by not even performing one of the basic tests. At least no mention of liver results in the report. Especially worrying in a case with so much political pressure and the crux of the matter being did George Floyd die of OD or police restraint. Cities burning over the conclusions makes it especially crucial in this case.
You're missing the point. Cause of death was technically asphyxiation, which could have resulted from a heart attack, strangulation, or opioid induced respiratory depression. All three of these were strong possibilities. Both coroners guessed other than overdose despite a potentially fatal blood concentration of fentanyl, yet both admitted the other two factors may have played a role. It is therefore crucial to perform common tests to potentially support or eliminate those possibilities. Especially when a definitive answer could be so monumentally consequential. They even did a covid test for no reason! Why cut corners and eliminate the information liver toxicology could provide regarding overdose, even if it turns out redundant or useless?
Let's put it this way. If Floyd had been brought in unidentified with no news or videos to complicate the issue, they likely would have determined overdose perhaps complicated by coronary artery disease as cause of death based on the physical evidence alone. Then the notorious cell video emerges afterwards... Is the family or black community going to remain happy with an overdose determination despite them neglecting to investigate liver toxicology? That oversight could become quite the contentious sticking point. We simply have a vice versa here. A questionable determination based on incomplete autopsy data. The crux of the matter being liver toxicology either way.
Even from a purely empirical perspective that while liver toxicology may be redundant in many cases making an overdose determination, it's usually performed anyway to corroborate. For instance borderline blood levels are more likely to be fatal in people whose liver shows no evidence of chronic drug use meaning they had no built up tolerance. Less data doesn't make for good science.
Lost in the mail like 10% of R's ballots...
It's hard to accurately gauge how much Fentanyl was in his system or for how long by blood samples alone. The liver is constantly absorbing toxins from the blood. He had a blood concentration that could be fatal or could be survivable varying from person to person. It would be negligent to determine overdose as COD by blood samples alone... equally to rule it out I think. They seem to have avoided making the most accurate conclusion on the overdose possibility by not even performing one of the basic tests. At least no mention of liver results in the report. Especially worrying in a case with so much political pressure and the crux of the matter being did George Floyd die of OD or police restraint. Cities burning over the conclusions makes it especially crucial in this case.
You're missing the point. Cause of death was technically asphyxiation, which could have resulted from a heart attack, strangulation, or opioid induced respiratory depression. All three of these were strong possibilities. Both coroners guessed other than overdose despite a potentially fatal blood concentration of fentanyl, yet both admitted the other two factors may have played a role. It is therefore crucial to perform common tests to potentially support or eliminate those possibilities. Especially when a definitive answer could be so monumentally consequential. They even did a covid test for no reason! Why cut corners and eliminate the information liver toxicology could provide regarding overdose, even if it turns out redundant or useless?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6212520/
Let's put it this way. If Floyd had been brought in unidentified with no news or videos to complicate the issue, they likely would have determined overdose perhaps complicated by coronary artery disease as cause of death based on the physical evidence alone. Then the notorious cell video emerges afterwards... Is the family or black community going to remain happy with an overdose determination despite them neglecting to investigate liver toxicology? That oversight could become quite the contentious sticking point. We simply have a vice versa here. A questionable determination based on incomplete autopsy data. The crux of the matter being liver toxicology either way.
Even from a purely empirical perspective that while liver toxicology may be redundant in many cases making an overdose determination, it's usually performed anyway to corroborate. For instance borderline blood levels are more likely to be fatal in people whose liver shows no evidence of chronic drug use meaning they had no built up tolerance. Less data doesn't make for good science.
Now Black Livers Matter, too? Where does it end?
For example... reporting on fentanyl concentration of Prince's blood AND liver samples. Did they neglect their did due diligence investigating Floyd overdose possibility?