Posted on 07/31/2024 6:16:28 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
If we’ve learned anything from our national COVID experience, it’s that science is not a collection of fixed, eternal declarations. Tools and terminology useful in the process of discovery can also be instruments of confirmation. A microscope can be a portal to the unexpected, or a prop in a theatrical performance.
True crime documentaries and news reports of deaths often feature a statement such as, “toxicology was performed,” “toxicology is pending,” or “toxicology showed X, Y and Z.” The word, “toxicology,” has an aura of a thorough, definitive procedure.
Typically, “toxicology” is understood as analogous to drug screening the living, but methods and reliability are very different. Usually screening for the living is something like a 10-panel test of a fresh sample of urine, plasma, or serum (occasionally hair), with results for limited categories (positive for opioid could mean morphine, oxycodone, or codeine, other medications, or recently-consumed poppyseed cake). Cross-positive results can be caused by unrelated consumption, such as quinine in tonic water (false positive for opiates), ephedrine, fluoxetine, metformin, and pseudoephedrine (false positive for methamphetamine,) and the proton pump inhibitor pantoprazole (positive for marijuana).
Because of the multitude of conditions and processes particularly affecting human remains, post-mortem testing is vulnerable to widely varied confounding artifacts and processes. Decomposition and/or bacterial action can alter the location or concentration of drugs or metabolites, a process called postmortem redistribution. In addition, physical and chemical changes within the body, or subsequent contamination, can create or destroy chemicals. Burial can affect results.
Factors affecting results are not only numerous, but often impossible to discover in retrospect. Who could determine temperature changes in a room in the hours or days before a body was discovered?
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Why Reliable Opioid Death Data is Impossible
~~~
I stopped reading there.
They never called covid19 death statistics unreliable, even though they institutionally bribed hospitals to qualify all co-morbidities with covid as a covid death.
So, I seriously doubt you can trust any health/medical statistics. It all really just depends on how the data itself is processed in, NOT how it gets analyzed after the fact.
in all honesty, how can you REALLY use data with this? certain things are just a hard reality.
yeah, i know the data geeks will beg to differ but something like this you just have to use your own eyes and ears —
how many people do you know / know of who have died from OD’s
my buddy DD’s brother died of an opiod OD back in 90’s
my school buddy T died of a heroin OD — had wife /3 kids / white affluent job
week later my old neighbor G died of an OD. was to be expected.
my buddy F has a daughter who has 4 kids of her own, who will always need a watchful eye over her to prevent a relapse (so i’ve been told)
my buddy C had a half brother that he met once in his life only the week before. a week later that half brother OD’d his first time shooting dope.
my old buddy from camp, J died “suddenly” during a solo visit back to his old state. he took a detour while in town and went to the hood. left 2 kids behind
another camp buddy died “suddenly” while his girlfriend/daughter were out-of-town.
i can think of a few others i’m sure
Thats the only data you need. Now put that in your pivot table!
It’s not a proper statistic until it says what I want it to say.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.