Taste test could tailor antidepressants
I found the following on taste buds at Adverse Oral Effect of Medications
Dysguesia (taste changes)
Individuals taking any variety of medications may present with subjective complaints of taste changes. Patients may have complaints of a bitter, metallic, unpleasant or altered taste, "medication" taste, complete loss of taste, and decreased taste sensation.
There are more than 200 drugs in the that have the potential to cause changes in taste sensations. Numerous drugs can cause taste changes including clarithromycin, captopril, enalapril, griseofulvin, penicillamine, metronidazole, carbenicillin, chlorhexidine, diltiazem, chloral hydrate, gold salts, flecanide, lithium, vitamin D, and sulfasalazine. The most common complaint by patients taking medications is a sense of altered taste.
The mechanisms by which drugs affect the taste sensations vary. Researchers propose three mechanisms involved in medication taste disorders. First, there is the influence of saliva on taste, i.e. the drug itself may be secreted into the saliva, producing dyguesia.
Another potential mechanism is the effect of drug metabolite which could possibly interact with taste buds or saliva. Finally, drugs may directly damage the taste buds. There may be age-related effects on taste that can enhance medication taste disorders. The dentist will likely do a complete medication history in patients that present with complaints of taste changes. Once the offending agent has been identified, patients are usually relieved just to know that the medication is the cause of the alteration in taste perception.
Fortunately, many medications that cause taste disturbances, such as antibiotics , are only prescribed for a limited time period. However, some individuals may present with severe symptoms and may require a change in their chronic drug therapy (e.g. captopril).
I see contradicting arguments in the autopsy report i.e. whether Chloral hydrate could be detected by someone used to guzzling it. Or, when already sedated, would even care. One of the bases for Perper's conclusion, IIRC, is the inability to slip it to someone undetected. I don't buy that argument.
Rather than use hearsay to answer the Chloral hydrate administration question, I would think forensic evidence would take UTMOST priority. At that point in the investigation, the killer med, or WHAT, has been id'd... now, the big question is WHO?
I would like to know if the Chloral hydrate bottle was analyzed for fingerprints. And, if so, were any fingerprints over-lying ANS's? Whose fingerprints were the most recent? Is there any other objective forensic evidence that could indicate WHO?