I clearly stated in my response and/or in posts elsewhere that I'm
not a scientist, chemist or healthcare professional.
Are you suggesting that the body does
not reflexively vomit to expel poisons when they are detected in the stomach?
In regards to SN as a cyanide antidote, I was very clear that I did not understand exactly
how the life-threatening qualities of SN were avoided. I stated:
Once the cyanide is rendered harmless, I don't know whether the patient then needs to be treated with methylene blue to reverse the other life-threatening effects of the SN. Or whether the sequential use of sodium thiosulfate addresses this. Or whether all of the SN given is already used up in binding with the cyanide, and so there is no unused SN present to cause any life-threatening effects. Someone from a chemistry background will know this.
As a scientist and medical doctor, I'm sure you will be able to advise which of these scenarios is the case, or whether there is another answer.
In regards to SN as a medication for vasodilation, I clearly used the word 'presume' to show that I was making a presumption rather than speaking from any kind of experience or based on a reference. I'm not sure what your understandably greater level of knowledge on that topic is supposed to prove was wrong with my initial use of wording.
My use of the phrase 'the concrete answer' was not in regards to the pharmacology of SN, it was in response to the OP stating there was not a 'concrete answer' as to whether or not they could viably consume their SN inside non-insignificant quantities of food. I directed them to the fact that the two most definitive SN guides (The PPH written by doctors, and Stan's Guide written by a forum member) both clearly require fasting as part of the SN protocol. This response wasn't intended to suggest I had more medical knowledge than anyone else, it merely highlighted the fact that the OP clearly didn't have an understanding of what 'fasting' meant in practice, which as I explained:
Fasting means not eating, and this includes the whole timeframe ranging from hours beforehand right through to the actual moment of ingestion (and indeed the period after ingestion also).
As a scientist and medical doctor, are you suggesting that my definition of fasting is somehow incorrect?
You clearly have the knowledge and experience to elaborate on the areas I covered briefly. However, I don't see that I did anything wrong or even incorrect in covering them briefly myself, especially with the disclaimer that I'm not in any way an expert in them. You may well have a personal dislike for my tone or use of formatting in my posts, but that doesn't necessarily equate with them being technically incorrect.
My comment about the mechanism behind vomiting from SN was made to distinguish it from the opinion of the OP who incorrectly thought that this occurred due to the taste, as experienced in the tastebuds. It was in reference to the high dosage of SN when used for suicide. It was not meant to imply that any dosage of SN would necessarily cause vomiting. Because this is a suicide forum, there will be times when members (including myself) refer to things in shorthand based on the understood assumption that the context applies only to suicide scenarios. So for example, the (hypothetical) statement 'SN usually leads to death in
x minutes' is understood to actually mean 'The dose recommended for suicide, being 25g of SN usually leads to death in
x minutes'.
To me, and I may be mistaken, but your response seems a little pedantic and vexatious. I do concede I may have sounded slightly patronising in
my earlier response to you, but that was because I had no idea you were a scientist or doctor. At the time
your post seemed like an ignorant 'gotcha' attempt from someone, demonstrating a lack of understanding of basic physiology and pharmacology. Even with the further explanation of your current response, that post still seems to have these attributes.
As a scientist and doctor who presumably followed this thread from the early stages, I am unsure why you didn't use your significant experience to answer the original question from the OP. While you make reference to the consumption of SN in very small amounts of chocolate, you leave totally unanswered the significantly different suggestion of consuming SN in much larger quantities of food such as a burger or burrito. Would that not have been a better and more useful application of your skills rather than making a 'gotcha' post and then further nitpicking my tone and formatting?
In reference to which post?
I think their goal was mainly criticising me above all else. Per my response, I don't really feel it was warranted or deserved.
