Just like the pathology report can only report on what the brain looked like during the autopsy not before death, not before dehydration.
We do have reliable evidence to be able to surmise what dehydration does to a body, brain, the eyes, tongue, mouth, etc., though.
We know that dehydration can cause alot of damage to a body. I think it's abundantly clear that some of the damage that was reported at autopsy can be directly connected to the dehydration.
...even if the pathology report stated that her optic nerves were damaged or had died, it didn't state when the damage occured.
Please read the report. It isn't so much her optic nerves, but the "higher function" part of the brain that processes images. Without this, it's like a telescope that no one is looking through. Also, it takes time for a tissue to atrophy, and time for one type of cells to be replaced other types. As an analogy, for someone who died recently, you don't even have to be a pathologist to tell the difference between a years-old scar on the skin and a cut that's about a week old.
We know that dehydration can cause alot of damage to a body. I think it's abundantly clear that some of the damage that was reported at autopsy can be directly connected to the dehydration.
Please provide links to credible medical sources to back this up. Otherwise, I'm out of this conversation