SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: i-node who wrote (197698)4/2/2021 6:49:16 AM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 355700
 
I’m pretty sure you can’t assume that anyone taking a lethal dose will die of it.

I didn't. I assumed that someone with four times the lethal dose, as you claimed, would die from it. Four times the lethal dose for a human would most likely kill a horse.


My point is that when the coroner is making it clear drugs were some part of the cause (>0.0% responsible)


It depends on the law and I don't know for sure yet what it is. I watched some of the trial yesterday and the coverage of the trial. I don't recall the detail but one of the legal experts left me with the sense that other factors aren't to be considered as factors. The law will be precise wrt that. I'm waiting for it to be clarified.



To: i-node who wrote (197698)4/2/2021 2:36:45 PM
From: combjelly  Respond to of 355700
 
I’m pretty sure you can’t assume that anyone taking a lethal dose will die of it.

If you don't die or are in the process thereof when there is intervention, it isn't a lethal dose. Pretty much by definition.