Do you honestly believe that an autopsy 15 years later is going to find that someone's potassium levels were depleted when they suffered cardiac arrest?
Some day science may reach that level, but it isn't there right now.
And you seem to disbelieve all her attending physicians, is that your stance? Even though they testified under oath, you believe those physicians who said her potassium level was severely low and that it was lower than what the Merck manual says can cause cardiac arrest.
Is that your position? Because frankly, reading your posts, it's hard to understand where you're coming from.
Even though they testified under oath, you believe those physicians who said her potassium level was severely low and that it was lower than what the Merck manual says can cause cardiac arrest.
Should have read "...you don't believe..."
Of course not. The ME read the same reports we read. He interviewed all of her acquaintences. He concluded the diagnosis of bulemia could not be made based on testimony and the medical record. You insist that the exact opposite is true when you have interviewed nobody and you are not a medical examiner. I think you should get your mcg/ml of hubris looked at.
Some day science may reach that level, but it isn't there right now.
Science will never reach the level you speak of.
And you seem to disbelieve all her attending physicians, is that your stance?
Incorrect, the attending physician noted that her urine screen was normal. You understand that an attending physician who saw fit to mention the patient drinking lots of iced tea in the report would surely have screened for elevated caffeine levels, right? You also understand that the body metabolizes caffeine at a rate allowing the physician to make a good estimate of her peak reading during the day, right? And now you should understand that her urine screen came back clean meaning she had no elevated caffeine level in her urine when they screened her.
Even though they testified under oath, you believe those physicians who said her potassium level was severely low and that it was lower than what the Merck manual says can cause cardiac arrest.
Her K level was low when tested. Why it was low can not be said with any degree of certainty based on the contemporaneous testing. The emergent care which would have lowered her K reading prior to hospital admittance per the ME.
Is that your position? Because frankly, reading your posts, it's hard to understand where you're coming from.
My posts are very clear, it your mind that is muddled. Stop making false assertions. How much clearer can I get?