Soul

Soul

gate gate paragate parasamgate bodhi svaha
Apr 12, 2019
4,704
This report is very weird . It is possibly alarmist and flimsy .

Asphyxiation is deprivation of oxygen via the airways . Hypoxia on the other hand is when body/organs are deprived of sufficient oxygen supply . Methemoglobinemia clearly causes hypoxia on the cellular level , not suffocation . The report states that the major findings were signs of asphyxiation , but those were only/mainly cyanosis , which is weird (nothing in the lungs) .

There are also serious questions about that "suicide kit" . The report states that the kit included "glasses to ingest the medicines Primperan and ranitidine" , which is odd because I did not know pills needed glasses . The glasses were two distinct and different glass cups , with no markings , and looked like randomly taken from someone's kitchen's closet . There is a small transparent bag with 35g SN , and a bigger white plastic bottle . The supplier is APC Pure , which has long stopped shipping SN to private customers due to public/LE pressure . All these things dent the idea of "ordered kit" . Although everything is possible . (Why ship these weird-looking glasses?)

Paraphrasing the report's abstract ( :blarg: ) :

It is clear that members must be aware of the proliferation of this forensic gibberish and the risks of improperly reading these materials through journals
available on the internet.

I'll have to switch to a computer to read the article, but the "kit" sounds like someone who got more SN than they need (the smallest quantity I've seen for sale is 100g) and decided to monetize the remainder. The little cups are doubtless there simply to make it a kit.
 
GoodPersonEffed

GoodPersonEffed

Brevity is my middle name, but my name was TL
Jan 11, 2020
6,727
I didn't read the article because I don't open PDFs.

Did the article specifically say and provide evidence that all of the contents were shipped together as a kit? Did they show or reference a packing list of items?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Soul
shipwreck

shipwreck

Student
May 7, 2020
155
I didn't read the article because I don't open PDFs.

Did the article specifically say and provide evidence that all of the contents were shipped together as a kit? Did they show or reference a packing list of items?

No to both questions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GoodPersonEffed
lostangel

lostangel

Enlightened
Mar 22, 2019
1,051
I don't mean to bring any panic or concern but I have a huge fear that SN will be banned.
 
T

Taraxias

Specialist
Feb 22, 2020
359
I dont think it was a bought ready kit. He just put in a box the stuff he needed to make his own kit and had them all together in a place to have them ready and carried all at once.so simple
 
SpottedPanda

SpottedPanda

I'm all about coffee and cigarettes
Jul 24, 2019
612
I don't fully understand what SN is, but it seems to be taking a kicking on the forum today, what with this and the other post about it being painful.

And I was not prepared for that image. Almost put me off death for good, until I remembered, oh yeah, it's inevitable.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Fedrea, GoodPersonEffed and Ulisses
U

Ulisses

Arcanist
Feb 21, 2020
487
This report is very weird . It is possibly alarmist and flimsy .

Asphyxiation is deprivation of oxygen via the airways . Hypoxia on the other hand is when body/organs are deprived of sufficient oxygen supply . Methemoglobinemia clearly causes hypoxia on the cellular level , not suffocation . The report states that the major findings were signs of asphyxiation , but those were only/mainly cyanosis , which is weird (nothing in the lungs) .

There are also serious questions about that "suicide kit" . The report states that the kit included "glasses to ingest the medicines Primperan and ranitidine" , which is odd because I did not know pills needed glasses . The glasses were two distinct and different glass cups , with no markings , and looked like randomly taken from someone's kitchen's closet . There is a small transparent bag with 35g SN , and a bigger white plastic bottle . The supplier is APC Pure , which has long stopped shipping SN to private customers due to public/LE pressure . All these things dent the idea of "ordered kit" . Although everything is possible . (Why ship these weird-looking glasses?)

Paraphrasing the report's abstract ( :blarg: ) :

It is clear that members must be aware of the proliferation of this forensic gibberish and the risks of improperly reading these materials through journals
available on the internet.
I found the article strange to talk about asphyxiation. no surviving members reported asphyxiation.
I don't fully understand what SN is, but it seems to be taking a kicking on the forum today, what with this and the other post about it being painful.

And I was not prepared for that image. Almost put me off death for good, until I remembered, oh yeah, it's inevitable.
Yes. I just made a post about this alarm all about sn
 
GoodPersonEffed

GoodPersonEffed

Brevity is my middle name, but my name was TL
Jan 11, 2020
6,727
So the article, while peer reviewed, clearly shows an agenda and disinformation. Which means the publishers of the journal have an agenda.

These are the exact same reasons why I caution against believing everything in the PPH just because it's written by a doctor. He doesn't provide evidential support for his claims or his rationale for peacefulness and reliability ratings. He runs businesses: a book, seminars, Max Dog. He ain't no tireless, selfless saint.

It's like being hit from both sides. No one in a position of power is genuinely on our sides.

And fear of SN becoming unavailable just makes it more desirable and appear more reliable, much as the accessibility of the PPH is limited.

On the forum, some folks have genuine concerns and fears about the method, and in response, some defend it more emotionally than factually, cherry picking the evidence and sources to support their defense. I get so tired of battling against it, it just keeps going. Others spread fear, like the repeating trend @SpottedPanda is picking up on -- they're not always people saying, "Hey, something's off," but a concerted effort from multiple directions to heighten fear, which means folks are more easy to manipulate in that state. I strongly suggest you recognize when you're in that state and step back from what's happening until you can get back to a state of being able to think critically.

How then to manage all this?

Take responsibility for your own death, your own wants, and your own goals. If you don't have the skills to read and understand how to accomplish the method, how to determine the potential symptoms and risks, and make an analysis about the reliability of information presented, either don't do the method, or take the risk at your own reward or peril. If something smells off, respect that. It's your instincts protecting you. The smell of bullshit means bullshit, and while it may fertilize flowers, they are just a diversion, the bullshit wasn't spread for them. Don't let your desires overwhelm your safety when your gut says you feel unsafe.

If you feel helpless about this, simply don't do the method. If you don't feel confident and in control of your ctb, you're more likely to fail or, in the case of this method, have to recover with outside intervention, which, based on your personal situation, could fuck up your life even worse. If you also feel helpless because you don't know what else to do, I get that. So many are in the same situation. All I can say is do your best to not let it push you into what your gut says is not safe or you're not sufficiently prepared to do. Find a cope. Keep researching reliable methods that are simpler. Desensitize yourself to them, like leaving out a rope and getting use to seeing it, play with making knots, watch videos. This is not encouragement to ctb, but empowerment to to be able to do as you choose. Who knows, you could overcome the fear of a method and realize there are a lot of other fears that you would be capable of overcoming and no longer seek to end your life because of them if fear is what motivates your voice to suicide.

TL;DR

If you need a TL;DR version of this comment, seriously, compassionately, I don't think it's wise for you to mess with SN. It's more complicated than reading and comprehending this post. There are a lot of variables to consider. I suggest instead that you try to read my last paragraph above this one, that starts, "If you feel helpless about this." Take your time with it. Ask me to clarify/simplify if there's something unclear about it. I'm happy to do so.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: killedbypsychiatry, peacefulhorizons, Ἡγησίας and 3 others
Quarky00

Quarky00

Enlightened
Dec 17, 2019
1,956
I'll have to switch to a computer to read the article, but the "kit" sounds like someone who got more SN than they need (the smallest quantity I've seen for sale is 100g) and decided to monetize the remainder. The little cups are doubtless there simply to make it a kit.
Sorry I don't see these odd glasses as part of any kit . There's plastic SN bottle (APC) plus SN plastic bag 35g . APC limited sales around May 2019 , so we might be seeing something that was purchased one year ago (though it is not indicative) , there were more options . White stuff in glasses is polyethylene . Sorry two SN packages and these odd glasses (no measurment but lovely texture and shape?) -- that doesn't look like a kit .

200609 a


--------------------------------------

I found the article strange to talk about asphyxiation
It is really weird cause this the second paper to mention suffocation after the notoriuos dutch paper that was critisised in the PPH . The thing is no survivors ever mentioned a feeling of suffocation or somthing to that effect. Cyanide does cause suffocation feeling and it is clear in the known video. It does also deprive oxygen to cells but with a different mechanism.. what do you think @Quarky00 ??
I tried to address that already , paper always "symptoms similar" or "like" ;) See --
it wasn't suffocation . Paper was careful never to note suffocation as cause of death but simply pointed to similar symptoms . The point was to educate forensics . SN shows preliminary signs of suffocation (cyanosis , visceral congestion , petechiae). Researchers are saying : 'it looks like suffocation but look deeper as it may be SN' .
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 1465

_
Jul 31, 2018
6,914
This is an open site that anyone can read. There are reasons for this. It also means that all the details are there for everyone to see. It is to be expected that there will be efforts to take this site down and that those efforts will concentrate on certain aspects of this site by cherry picking information to prove a point. Anyone with an agenda will almost certainly see only what they want to see, as usually any strong opinion blinds one to the broader picture. At some point it is entirely possible that those efforts will succeed.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Ἡγησίας, Quarky00 and Soul
Soul

Soul

gate gate paragate parasamgate bodhi svaha
Apr 12, 2019
4,704
I dont think it was a bought ready kit. He just put in a box the stuff he needed to make his own kit and had them all together in a place to have them ready and carried all at once.so simple

That's sensible, but the paper says the "kit" was bought on the internet, right?

Sorry I don't see these odd glasses as part of any kit .

Hon, I once saw a very excited guy trying to sell a cream bottle and two rubber bands as a "penis enlargement kit", which forced me to expand my definition of "kit" quite considerably. (There were also instructions about wadding up toilet paper to set on fire and stuff into the bottle to create a suction effect when you - well, you get the idea.) :pfff:
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Quarky00 and GoodPersonEffed
M

MaybeSoon

Experienced
Oct 11, 2019
261
Sorry I don't see these odd glasses as part of any kit . There's plastic SN bottle (APC) plus SN plastic bag 35g . APC limited sales around May 2019 , so we might be seeing something that was purchased one year ago (though it is not indicative) , there were more options . White stuff in glasses is polyethylene . Sorry two SN packages and these odd glasses (no measurment but lovely texture and shape?) -- that doesn't look like a kit .

View attachment 37111


--------------------------------------



I tried to address that already , paper always "symptoms similar" or "like" ;) See --

I wouldn't read too much into the 'kit' part. Callie Lewis apparently bought a suicide 'kit' online when in reality she bought multiple tents and charcoal from a shop.
 
  • Like
Reactions: autumnal, GoodPersonEffed, Ἡγησίας and 2 others
Quarky00

Quarky00

Enlightened
Dec 17, 2019
1,956
I wouldn't read too much into the 'kit' part. Callie Lewis apparently bought a suicide 'kit' online when in reality she bought multiple tents and charcoal from a shop.
Exactly .. @Soul -- more likely . (I have otherwise pretty much suppressed most of what you wrote;)
 
  • Hugs
  • Like
Reactions: autumnal and Soul
A

Anonymoussn

Specialist
May 12, 2020
381
Those pictures might have just put me off SN for good. I wont care what I look like when I'm dead but I certainly care what those left behind will see.
I think it's made worse than it could look by the fact the man has no clothes on. If you imagine what he might have looked like if he were clothed, that's much better imo (no offence intended to the guy!). If you factor in that his eye would be closed if it wasnt being pulled open - I dont think the face is anywhere near as horrific looking as the torso is - which seems to have taken the brunt.
I'll have to switch to a computer to read the article, but the "kit" sounds like someone who got more SN than they need (the smallest quantity I've seen for sale is 100g) and decided to monetize the remainder. The little cups are doubtless there simply to make it a kit.
The SN I've bought is 50g. It hasnt arrived yet, mind. Only ordered it less than a week ago.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: autumnal, Soul and MaybeSoon
M

MaybeSoon

Experienced
Oct 11, 2019
261
I think it's made worse than it could look by the fact the man has no clothes on. If you imagine what he might have looked like if he were clothed, that's much better imo (no offence intended to the guy!). If you factor in that his eye would be closed if it wasnt being pulled open - I dont think the face is anywhere near as horrific looking as the torso is - which seems to have taken the brunt.

I showed the pictures earlier to someone who deals with dead people a lot to see if it was normal (no context given obviously) and apparently the grey face and finger nails are normal for a body that has been dead for a while. The torso was seen as abnormal (the white and grey bits not the red patches) I was just shocked seeing the face photo compared to people who I have seen dead from compression methods and it looks much more grizzly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: autumnal and Anonymoussn
autumnal

autumnal

Enlightened
Feb 4, 2020
1,950
[...]
These are the exact same reasons why I caution against believing everything in the PPH just because it's written by a doctor. He doesn't provide evidential support for his claims or his rationale for peacefulness and reliability ratings. He runs businesses: a book, seminars, Max Dog. He ain't no tireless, selfless saint.
[...]

I've never understood this faulty rationale as a reason for criticising either Philip Nitschke or the PPH. Frankly it reeks of cynicism and seems to border on outright paranoia. Seeing as I have addressed these issues before, including directly with you on one occasion, I will just link to those posts rather than rehashing the same discussion again here.

These are not intended to attack (nor even persuade) you personally, but more provide a sensible counterpoint for anyone else who reads your response above and is tempted to give it any credence:
  • Reasons the PPH doesn't provide references.

  • Running a business and being altruistic at the same time.

  • Another response on business aspects and SN.
 
GoodPersonEffed

GoodPersonEffed

Brevity is my middle name, but my name was TL
Jan 11, 2020
6,727
I've never understood this faulty rationale as a reason for criticising either Philip Nitschke or the PPH. Frankly it reeks of cynicism and seems to border on outright paranoia. Seeing as I have addressed these issues before, including directly with you on one occasion, I will just link to those posts rather than rehashing the same discussion again here.

These are not intended to attack (nor even persuade) you personally, but more provide a sensible counterpoint for anyone else who reads your response above and is tempted to give it any credence:
  • Reasons the PPH doesn't provide references.

  • Running a business and being altruistic at the same time.

  • Another response on business aspects and SN.

I encourage others to read all available sources and opinions, and come to their own conclusions. If the conclusion at which they arrive differs from mine, I accept and honor their autonomy and right to determine for themselves. This is evidence of my ethos (see spoiler).


I respect that you have a differing opinion from mine, and your own assessment of my stance with regard to my assessment of Nitschke's. I respect that you provide a counterpoint to my stance. I have no issue with being challenged.

Not so much respect for labeling my stance as based on paranoia or cynicism, but I question others and must respect and value when I myself am questioned. Again, this demonstrates my ethos (see spoiler). So I recognize I felt provoked and set aside my emotions, and am now able to objectively see how you arrived your conclusions without having an understanding of my approach, so I explain it in the spoiler. Not only will this address your questioning of my ability to think rationally, but explain to you or any interested reader the basis for my reasoning when criticizing Nitschke. Thank you for highlighting that I needed to do so and I am happy to oblige.

In grad school, we were taught when reading any authoritative or academic text to always maintain a level of skepticism and to guard against undue influence by evaluating the text for the author's ethos, pathos, and logos, which are as important as the words they say and give a full picture of the text.

I quote here from pathosethoslogos.com, the use of bold type is theirs:

"Ethos or the ethical appeal, means to convince an audience of the author's credibility or character. Pathos or the emotional appeal, means to persuade an audience by appealing to their emotions. ... Logos or the appeal to logic, means to convince an audience by use of logic or reason."

The logical appeal in academic and medical writing is traditionally presented by citing sources on which one bases and supports their claims and opinions. I've often criticized Nitschke for not doing so. I don't have the medical knowledge to assess his advice otherwise.

I question Nitschke's ethics. If I cannot trust one's ethics, then I have to more carefully consider whether I deem their claims and their position to be trustworthy. This means looking at all he does as an ostensible advocate for self-deliverance. To do so is the same as evaluating Trump's business interests and how he manages them in order to determine whether he has the necessary ethical foundations to be an influential and powerful leader. Nitschke is also an influential and powerful leader in his own field.

The PPH seeks to persuade a reader of the reliability and peacefulness of methods. I have already addressed logos and ethos in that regard. In considering Nitschke's pathos, I consider the emotions one may experience by making the PPH difficult to obtain and therefore more desirable, which can lead to an emotional rather than reasoned acceptance of his claims, and to therefore potentially accept his ethical appeal not only because of scarcity, but also because he is a doctor -- a type of authority which can override critical thinking. Scarcity and authority as tools of undue influence are explained and discussed in the book Persuasion.


Well done acknowledging that you've preciously addressed me and the issues I presented, and not rehashing so as to not derail the thread, instead referencing other conversations.

The first link you provided of your counterpoint included my own quote that was my thorough and reasoned response to your own rationale, with which I equally and respectfully already took issue. In retrospect, I only wish that I had thought to include what I wrote in the spoiler, so I'm glad you brought it up again. Because the quote provides both sides, there is balance in that link, and anyone who chooses to pursue this topic has presented to them the full picture for their consideration in order to encourage them to arrive at their own conclusions.

The other two links were responses to other members who questioned Nitschke's motives. I just wanted to highlight, for anyone reading who chooses to pursue, that your comments in those links indeed addressed my stance which you quoted in your comment above, but were in response to the comments of other members, lest there be confusion when reading the links.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: autumnal
shipwreck

shipwreck

Student
May 7, 2020
155
I've never understood this faulty rationale as a reason for criticising either Philip Nitschke or the PPH. Frankly it reeks of cynicism and seems to border on outright paranoia. Seeing as I have addressed these issues before, including directly with you on one occasion, I will just link to those posts rather than rehashing the same discussion again here.

These are not intended to attack (nor even persuade) you personally, but more provide a sensible counterpoint for anyone else who reads your response above and is tempted to give it any credence:
  • Reasons the PPH doesn't provide references.

  • Running a business and being altruistic at the same time.

  • Another response on business aspects and SN.

I encourage others to read all available sources and opinions, and come to their own conclusions. If their conclusion differs from mine, I accept and honor their autonomy and right to determine for themselves. This is evidence of my ethos (see spoiler).


I respect that you have a differing opinion from mine, and your own assessment of my stance with regard to my assessment of Nitschke's. I respect that you provide a counterpoint to my stance. I have no issue with being challenged.

Not so much respect for labeling my opinion as based on paranoia or cynicism, but I question others and must respect and value when I myself am questioned. Again, this demonstrates my ethos (see spoiler). So I recognize I felt provoked and set aside my emotions, and am now able to objectively see how you arrived your conclusions without having an understanding of my approach, so I explain it in the spoiler. Not only will this address your questioning of my ability to think rationally, but explain to you or any interested reader the basis for my reasoning when criticizing Nitschke. Thank you for highlighting that I needed to do so and I am happy to oblige.

In grad school, we were taught when reading any authoritative or academic text to always maintain a level of skepticism and to guard against undue influence by evaluating the text for the author's ethos, pathos, and logos, which are as important as the words they say and give a full picture of the text.

I quote here from pathosethoslogos.com, the use of bold type is theirs:

"Ethos or the ethical appeal, means to convince an audience of the author's credibility or character. Pathos or the emotional appeal, means to persuade an audience by appealing to their emotions. ... Logos or the appeal to logic, means to convince an audience by use of logic or reason."

The logical appeal in academic and medical writing is traditionally presented by citing sources on which one bases and supports their claims and opinions. I've often criticized Nitschke for not doing so. I don't have the medical knowledge to assess his advice otherwise.

I question Nitschke's ethics. If I cannot trust one's ethics, then I have to more carefully consider whether I deem their claims and their position to be trustworthy. This means looking at all he does as an ostensible advocate for self-deliverance. To do so is the same as evaluating Trump's business interests and how he manages them in order to determine whether he has the necessary ethical foundations to be an influential and powerful leader. Nitschke is also an influential and powerful leader in his own field.

The PPH seeks to persuade a reader of the reliability and peacefulness of methods. I have already addressed logos and ethos in that regard. In considering Nitschke's pathos, I consider the emotions one may experience by making the PPH difficult to obtain and therefore more desirable, which can lead to an emotional rather than reasoned acceptance of his claims, and to therefore potentially accept his ethical appeal not only because of scarcity, but also because he is a doctor -- a type of authority which can override critical thinking. Scarcity and authority as tools of undue influence are explained and discussed in the book Persuasion.


Well done acknowledging that you've addressed me before on this subject, and not rehashing so as to not derail the thread, instead referencing other conversations.

The first link you provided of your counterpoint included my own quote that was my thorough and reasoned response to your own rationale, with which I equally and respectfully already took issue. In retrospect, I only wish that I had thought to include what I wrote in the spoiler, so I'm glad you brought it up again. Because the quote provides both sides, there is balance in that link, and anyone who chooses to pursue this topic has presented to them the full picture for their consideration in order to encourage them to arrive at their own conclusions.

The other two links were responses to other members who questioned Nitschke's motives. I just wanted to highlight, for anyone reading who chooses to pursue, that your comments in those links indeed addressed my stance which you quoted in your comment above, but were in response to the comments of other members, lest there be confusion when reading the links.

Motives aside, PN is one of a handful of physicians who specialize in medically assisted suicide. As far as I'm aware it's not a subject taught in medical schools: knowledge at this point is limited, compared with medical procedures that are carried out all over the world hundreds or thousands of times a day. PN is one of the best sources of medically informed information by virtue of being practically the only voice out there, but his advice is not gospel.

Medical standards are based on statistics: "75% percent of patients who receive treatment X experience side effect Y". But responses are highly individual. A good doctor will work with a patient and tailor their treatment to their individual needs. If everyone on this forum who ends their life followed PN's methods to the letter, a large fraction of them would undoubtedly be better served than if they had no guidance at all, but they'd be even better off if they did their own research and tailored their methods to their own needs.

Only you know what your needs and sensitivities are, and you are well advised to study all the available resources and review them critically. Don't take anyone's advice for granted. For goodness sake, it's not just academic. It could make the difference between peace and intense physical suffering, or survival with debilitating injuries.

All of us, to some degree, are guilty of confirmation bias and wishful thinking. We'd like to believe that by following an authority we trust we're likely to have a good outcome. We'd like to believe that a particular method is painless. We all want assurance, but in the end we don't know what we don't know.
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Hugs
Reactions: x-Ace-x, autumnal, Ulisses and 1 other person