A Cautionary Note For Medical Examiners:
Accurately determining blood/alcohol levels for victims of drowning
The National Institute for Health and the National Study Center for Trauma and Emergency Medical Science has recently urged medical examiners and police forensic teams not to jump to conclusions about toxicology reports for drown victims which show extremely elevated BAC readings.
A victim's high blood/alcohol content does not provide irrefutable evidence that he was intoxicated at the moment of his death, they are warning.
In the published results of a study these well-respected institutes jointly conducted on over 500 males who died in both cold and warm water, it was proven conclusively that, in the case of a drowning, alcohol production from decompostion begins as soon as 12 hours after death from submersion. In part, this advanced decay is promoted by water and the effect it has on the lungs.
The comprehensive report, titled Evidence For Early Endogenous Alcohol Production In Bodies Recovered From Water: Implications for Studying Alcohol and Drowning, cites the hallmark drop in mean lung weight of drown corpses as the chief trigger for early postmortem decay. Alcohol is a natual byproduct of putrefaction in all deceased bodies, but, as the study demonstrates, this substance is significantly enhanced in those who have perished in water:
"Endogenous alcohol production can increase the blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of drowning victims following submersion and confound epidemiological studies of the role of alcohol," the authoritative analysis unequivocally states.
And yet, in the case of the drowning men syndrome that's been vexing America's northland since 1997, this empirical data is routinely being ignored by local law enforcement officials in a rush to judgement of "no signs of foul play." Time and time again, police and medical examiners have swept these matters under the rug in such an offhand manner, leaving unanswered one of the most important questions about these water fatalities: If a young man, headed for home after midnight, was in fact not drunk when he went missing, then how in the world did he drown?
A victim's high blood/alcohol content does not provide irrefutable evidence that he was intoxicated at the moment of his death, they are warning.
In the published results of a study these well-respected institutes jointly conducted on over 500 males who died in both cold and warm water, it was proven conclusively that, in the case of a drowning, alcohol production from decompostion begins as soon as 12 hours after death from submersion. In part, this advanced decay is promoted by water and the effect it has on the lungs.
The comprehensive report, titled Evidence For Early Endogenous Alcohol Production In Bodies Recovered From Water: Implications for Studying Alcohol and Drowning, cites the hallmark drop in mean lung weight of drown corpses as the chief trigger for early postmortem decay. Alcohol is a natual byproduct of putrefaction in all deceased bodies, but, as the study demonstrates, this substance is significantly enhanced in those who have perished in water:
"Endogenous alcohol production can increase the blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of drowning victims following submersion and confound epidemiological studies of the role of alcohol," the authoritative analysis unequivocally states.
And yet, in the case of the drowning men syndrome that's been vexing America's northland since 1997, this empirical data is routinely being ignored by local law enforcement officials in a rush to judgement of "no signs of foul play." Time and time again, police and medical examiners have swept these matters under the rug in such an offhand manner, leaving unanswered one of the most important questions about these water fatalities: If a young man, headed for home after midnight, was in fact not drunk when he went missing, then how in the world did he drown?
No comments:
Post a Comment