PPeH reliability rating SN

[Rising Phoenix]

If you look at the PPeH Oct 2019 update and it says an * indicates uncertainty about the rating.

SN has a 7* for reliability with an * next to it. It used to be rated a 6.

Speed has a 3 next to it also with an * asterisk.

Basically they are uncertain how reliable and fast it is? How do you feel about there being an asterisk * around the 7/10 reliability of SN?

They said they had 10 monitored nitrite accounts sent to them all were peaceful.

Keep in mind the reliability rating is low because if your found you can easily be revived. Also it's low for the fact that if you vomit without antiemetics you can be saved. So as long as your not found and you take antiemetics the reliability rating would be higher.

 

[FallenX]

Keep in mind the reliability rating is low because if your found you can easily be revived. Also it's low for the fact that if you vomit without antiemetics you can be saved. So as long as your not found and you take antiemetics the reliability rating would be higher.

I mean N requires antiemetics and reliability is 9 or 10/10 without question. SA reliability without antiemetics is a 9/10. So it's really pray to god you don't vomit the first or second dose. People have vomited on stat dose meto here. Doesn't mean failure but vomiting definitely lowers reliability.

 

[woxihuanni]

As has already been pointed out, though one is free to torture themselves and seek for a certainty the universe does not happen to provide, it is not OK to spread paranoia to other people in pain and in need of an exit.

I really am starting to think all mental anguish stems from two things: Having shitty circumstances, or not making peace with the fact that the universe is what it is and we are not special.

 

[Untitled]

I'll just stop posting about SN I guess. My questions just make people mad. But really I'm just afraid of doing it. It seemed so easy unlike other methods just a drink. I have the info now it's either I choose SN or I leave it behind.

I think it's good that you're questioning the method, especially considering how new it is. Please, if you find anything new that hasn't been addressed yet, let us know! Don't stop posting just because some people here are mad at you! Ask again and again until you either know this is the method for you or that it isn't.

We should all be very careful! Getting things wrong could mean the difference between dying and living with severe disability!

If someone is mad at you for asking questions, they don't have to reply. They can just let the thread reach the bottom of the page.

 

[Stan]

I can't ask cause they don't have the answers. The answer is in plain site. Many vomit from SN and then end up having to call emergency. If you down another glass and keep it down that's different. Vomiting risk is big risk and PPH even questions their own score of its reliability and speed.

But the other option Azide is way more dangerous brutal not peaceful and not much faster anyway. If you don't die from Azide you can end up way worse than SN. But reliability is 9/10. But it can explode, harm others, create toxic gas. Not fun.

By yours and our admittance, nobody has definitive answers to your question. If you want a qualified answer I would suggest you pay to subscribe to the Exit organisation and perhaps attend one of their conferences where you can get some facetime with the author.

 

[Stan]

 

[MeltingHeart]

I can't ask cause they don't have the answers. The answer is in plain site. Many vomit from SN and then end up having to call emergency. If you down another glass and keep it down that's different. Vomiting risk is big risk and PPH even questions their own score of its reliability and speed.

But the other option Azide is way more dangerous brutal not peaceful and not much faster anyway. Zero accounts from PPH.

When you say the answer is in plain site (sight?) that normally means you can actually see the answer, what do you think is the answear to all yr questions and problems?

 

[Stan]

He doesn't even know. That's why they ask for people to mail them if they take SN and now Azide too. Azide seems reliable but if you survive you will be way more messed up than SN. And if you don't it seems like agonizing pain for up to 40 hours.

Can you link to the site where you are getting '40 hours of agonising pain'? Did a search and I see that a man took 40 hours to die in hospital. No mention of agonising. If it was severe pain would the doctors have not done something? Even if it was a medically induced coma?

 

[LonelyLight]

Hey Fallen, I'm not sure if you've watched this video but I just seen a thread another user shared, it might be of interest to you.

https://sanctioned-suicide.net/threads/sn-amount-of-water.25730/

 

[itistimetoleave]

It means that you can't spell 'undetectability.'

Well that was rude and unnecessary.

 

[Neville1]

I think it's good that you're questioning the method, especially considering how new it is. Please, if you find anything new that hasn't been addressed yet, let us know! ... Ask again and again until you either know this is the method for you or that it isn't.

We should all be very careful! Getting things wrong could mean the difference between dying and living with severe disability!

The questions aren't about getting it right or wrong. @FallenX is not asking questions about the method. Instead, they say compared to N or sa that it is less reliable because of reversibility, lesser speed allowing discovery, entails the risk of brain damage, is prone to vomiting, that meto has adverse effects and that acid reducer reduces effectiveness of domperidone. Then they ask the questions will I (ergo anyone) be found, vomit, suffer hypoxic brain injury or adverse meto reaction (EPS), fail because of not using acid reducer knowing that, for any particular individual, even if the odds are 1 in 500, the question cannot be answered. They'll don't just ask once but somewhere between 6 and more than a dozen times. No new issues are raised, it's rehash of well known concerns about SN. What's the purpose of asking an unanswerable question repeatedly, ad nauseum, which has already been discussed in the forum? Can it be.any other than discrediting the method? There's no rule against that, but masquerading as someone whose preferred method is SN while undermining it is disingenuous and such posts amount to spamming and trolling.

 

[AnxiouslyDepressed]

I agree that it is at the point now where all these questions are causing paranoia in people already anxious about ctb via SN. I'm slowly becoming less anxious with my decision and will execute my plan in the next 3 weeks when my materials arrive. However I realise at the time of ctb I will be anxious as hell, and seeing this on the site all the time cannot be good for anyone in that position.