Death by nitrogen hypoxia

[Agast]

The execution has been carried out. They said it took 15 minutes and went according to protocol.

Source? It says here 22 minutes. Effin’ anesthesia charting.

Alabama carries out nitrogen hypoxia execution of Kenneth Smith

The latest updates in the untested execution of contract killer Kenneth Eugene Smith.

www.wvtm13.com

Lethal injection takes <5 minutes

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[GassYous]

Source? It says here 22 minutes. Effin’ anesthesia charting.

Alabama carries out nitrogen hypoxia execution of Kenneth Smith

The latest updates in the untested execution of contract killer Kenneth Eugene Smith.

www.wvtm13.com

Lethal injection takes <5 minutes

I could probably do it in half the time

 

[Agast]

Started at 7:53 pm but time of death is 8:25 pm, they did keep the mask on 5 minutes post flatline. Still, I think they were expecting him to die faster. There must have been a decent leak. That's like watching a whole episode of Friends. The nitrogen gas was protocoled to flow for 15 minutes or 5 minutes post flatline.

 

[Onefellswoop87]

Started at 7:53 pm but time of death is 8:25 pm, they did keep the mask on 5 minutes post flatline. Still, I think they were expecting him to die faster. There must have been a decent leak. That's like watching a whole episode of Friends. The nitrogen gas was protocoled to flow for 15 minutes or 5 minutes post flatline.

I don’t think it would take a full episode of Friends to push me to a flat line. That cause would be quicker but much more cruel

The curtain was closed 10 minutes prior to 8:25 as per the reporters who were present.

Now I'm concerned, I think my car tires are nitrogen filled. If I bleed them, am I in danger?

Do you bleed the tires into your mask?

 

[Gern Blansten]

I have this recurring nightmare that I’m breathing something like 78% nitrogen, but with 21% oxygen mixed in, so I just stay alive indefinitely. Then, I wake up and the feeling never goes away throughout the entire day.

 

[MirrorTodd]

It's all fun and games until reading about what a ****ty way that would be to go.

The Montgomery Advertiser’s Marty Roney, another journalist present at the execution, filed a timeline describing what he witnessed when the curtain was opened.

From 7:57 to 8:01 p.m., “Smith writhed and convulsed on the gurney. He appeared to be fully conscious when the gas began to flow. He took deep breaths, his body shaking violently with his eyes rolling in the back of his head. [Reverend] Hood, standing about 15 feet away, made the sign of the cross several times.

“Smith clenched his fists, his legs shook under the tightly tucked-in white sheet that covered him from his neck down. He seemed to be gasping for air. The gurney shook several times during this time.”

Mr Smith’s religious adviser Reverend Jeff Hood told reporters, “We didn’t see somebody go unconscious in 30 seconds. What we saw was minutes of somebody struggling for their life. We saw minutes of someone heaving back and forth. We saw spit. We saw all sorts of stuff from his mouth develop on the mask.”

“It was the most horrible thing I think I’ve ever seen,” said Hood, who has witnessed five execution in the past 13 months. “I stood there and cried while I saw someone get suffocated.”

 

[repititionition]

I could probably do it in half the time

in my experience plenty of CRNAs can do it even quicker

 

[coffeebythelake]

They were upset that he appeared to struggle a bit? IM B52 and then nitrogen gas. Easy

 

[pgg]

They were upset that he appeared to struggle a bit? IM B52 and then nitrogen gas. Easy

It's more important for executions to look humane to uninformed lay observers, than to actually be humane.

100 mg of IV lidocaine chased with 200 mg of rocuronium would honestly raise fewer objections from the public, despite being a freakishly horrifying way to go. Assuming there's an IV.

 

[TheLoneWolf]

It's more important for executions to look humane to uninformed lay observers, than to actually be humane.

100 mg of IV lidocaine chased with 200 mg of rocuronium would honestly raise fewer objections from the public, despite being a freakishly horrifying way to go. Assuming there's an IV.

500 mg rocuronium IM. Would assume onset of 30ish seconds to a minute. If you wanna be nice, maybe add some versed or ketamine.

 

[coffeebythelake]

It's more important for executions to look humane to uninformed lay observers, than to actually be humane.

100 mg of IV lidocaine chased with 200 mg of rocuronium would honestly raise fewer objections from the public, despite being a freakishly horrifying way to go. Assuming there's an IV.

100%

The Vanderbilt Vaught method

 

[coffeebythelake]

Why would you think they care? Medical professionals with a conscience will not engage in anything where a human is being harmed. My understanding is "prison staff" carry out the executions. I'm assuming they receive some type of training but I don't believe actual medical professionals carry out executions.

Again, the whole debate comes back to politics and ideology.

Capital Punishment | AMA-Code

Code of Ethics Opinions pages. As a member of a profession dedicated to preserving life when there is hope of doing so, a physician must not participate in a legally authorized execution.

code-medical-ethics.ama-assn.org

As you've said it goes against the ethical principles of physicians to participate in our professional capacity in the execution of a prisoner

 

[Beeftenderloin]

It's more important for executions to look humane to uninformed lay observers, than to actually be humane.

100 mg of IV lidocaine chased with 200 mg of rocuronium would honestly raise fewer objections from the public, despite being a freakishly horrifying way to go. Assuming there's an IV.

Throw in 100mg of esmolol and even the EKG won’t suggest anything untoward is happening.

 

[TheLoneWolf]

Why would you think they care? Medical professionals with a conscience will not engage in anything where a human is being harmed. My understanding is "prison staff" carry out the executions. I'm assuming they receive some type of training but I don't believe actual medical professionals carry out executions.

Again, the whole debate comes back to politics and ideology.

Not true.

The operative field is built upon the premise of intentionally harming the patient with the intention that our intervention has a greater benefit than the harm incurred.

Eg every surgery ever...in ye olden days and in surgeon OP reports it's called a surgical insult.

 

[psycho-matic]

I don't know why they don't do long drop hanging. Japan uses this method. Simple. Painless. Instant unconscious as the spine is severed from the brain.

 

[mdo1738]

500 mg rocuronium IM. Would assume onset of 30ish seconds to a minute. If you wanna be nice, maybe add some versed or ketamine.

The ketamine would be rough. I’m paralyzed AND there’s some acid trip monster coming for me I can’t run from? Let’s start doing this to all of them.

 

[nimbus]

I don't know why they don't do long drop hanging. Japan uses this method. Simple. Painless. Instant unconscious as the spine is severed from the brain.

Some people are afraid of heights..😬

 

[Crabbygas]

Did anyone else notice the news story that said they made him NPO for 8 hours? Wouldn't want to aspirate.

 

[nimbus]

Did anyone else notice the news story that said they made him NPO for 8 hours? Wouldn't want to aspirate.

I gave our old dog ice cream and a hot dog before he was euthanized.

 

[JoelJoel84]

I wouldn't compare surgery to executions.

Then you haven’t worked at our nearby community hospital.

 

[Dr. Rude]

Did anyone else notice the news story that said they made him NPO for 8 hours? Wouldn't want to aspirate.

Bad visual if he did.

 

[anonperson]

Why would you think they care? Medical professionals with a conscience will not engage in anything where a human is being harmed. My understanding is "prison staff" carry out the executions. I'm assuming they receive some type of training but I don't believe actual medical professionals carry out executions.

Again, the whole debate comes back to politics and ideology.

I know of places where you can terminate a healthy 23 week fetus no questions asked from the physician. Had a patient do that last year.

I guess that gestational age straddles the "human" line.

I'm sure you could find a few board certified physicians who would participate. They would probably make the process more efficient if given the chance.

 

[anonperson]

It's because we (collectively) are stupid. Execution itself is dumb. Capital trials and sentencing and appeals cost far more than life imprisonment; wrongful convictions, whether because of incompetence or more sinister reasons are probably at least in the ~5% range; it's irreversible; prosecution and sentencing is not uniformly applied to all defendants.

If it's punishment that is desired, life in a small concrete box is a far more severe sentence than the sweet release of death.

People keep saying life in prison is worse than execution.

Why is it that nearly every dirt bag death row inmate does their damnedest to appeal their death sentence so they can get life in prison instead? If death was so sweet, they sure aren't running towards it.

Maybe I'm cruel but some people commit heinous acts and deserve to be put down. The expense is artificially inflated due to the ridiculous appeals process.

Leslie Van Houten helped brutally murder a couple and because of some lame liberal appeals, she's now free. That's an insult to the LaBianca family and a slap in the face of victims everywhere.

 

[TheLoneWolf]

I wouldn't compare surgery to executions.

"Medical professionals with a conscience will not engage in anything where a human is being harmed."

Your exact words

Many drugs also have pretty horrible side effects. We consciously expose patients to those risks in the hopes that the benefit outweighs real or potential risks.

Life ain't so black and white fella

 

[Angus Avagadro]

I wouldn't compare surgery to executions.

Respectfully, surgeries without our involvement would be far worse that what the prisoner experienced.

 

[Beeftenderloin]

What I meant to say was that surgeries might be seen as "harmful" but they are done with the end goal in mind. The other poster was comparing harm with surgery to harm with an execution.

If you don't execute people, they will live. With surgery, sometimes you need it for the patient to survive.

If society has decided these people should die, why not have it be done by the highest level experts capable of doing it in a way that minimizes suffering to the greatest extent possible.

If you know that this man is condemned to death (no matter what you say or how you feel about it, this piece has been determined) and in the absence of people like us doing it, these individuals will (and are) suffer(ing) more. A strong argument can be made that a lack of physician involvement in capital punishment is resulting in more suffering, not less.

 

[Beeftenderloin]

Yes, but physicians should NEVER be involved with capital punishment. Again, the issue here is politics and ideology, not health.

But why? Because the AMA said it’s unethical and you agree with them? I’m in the business of minimizing suffering. The AMA doesn’t speak for me. Nor do you. Being a physician/annesthesiologist isn’t the higher order calling you dreamed as a pre-med. It’s a job. A job where I’ve been trained to render people unconscious and pain free while things are done to them that would otherwise be unconscionable. Assuming these people will inevitably undergo their capital punishment, involvement of qualified medical personnel would result in net-net less suffering. So it doesn’t have to go down like this:

Anybody get a chance to read the spiritual advisor's account? According to him, what actually went on was pretty horrific.

I suspect we won’t agree on this, which is totally fine. But you don’t get to have it both ways. You can’t demand that the only de facto experts (us) not be involved then complain about how horrific it plays out when you get your way and it’s run by a bunch of novices.

 

[Beeftenderloin]

Forgive me, I do not understand what you are saying.

Are you suggesting physicians should be involved in executions? I was saying executions are political in nature. If executions were outlawed, we would not be having this type of a discussion.

You said physicians should NEVER be involved and in another post mentioned how horrific it all played out. I’m just suggesting that if you’d like it to not play out horrifically, physicians should probably be involved in some capacity. I say that recognizing that you would prefer it did not happen at all.

 

[Beeftenderloin]

But it is understood that physicians don't engage in these activities right? I mean even suggesting that goes again the Hippocratic Oath that you all took.

Never took it. For real. My school didn’t do it.

 

[Radetzky]

What does the Hippocratic oath have to do with anything? It also forbids you from taking up a scalpel and says you have to house and feed anyone wanting to take up the study of medicine.

 

[IlDestriero]

With great surprise to no one, that didn’t work out so well. Just invest in the suicide pod and be done with it. 500 IM ketamine, close lid, night night MF’er. Pedos can still get 500 of Roc IM instead and leave the O2 on.

 

[drmwvr]

Executions should not use medical or semi-medical means. Lethal injection is stupid. If there are executions, the traditional method of hanging works. Alternatively, the electric chair works.

Lots of failure with electricity. It's why the gas chamber was developed. Hanging, firing squad or beheading. Fail safe. But therein lies our problem. We've come to the point in history (method has only become a question in the 20th century) where material stability of society has caused crippling hesitation in carrying out executions. It started with the robust appeals process and is now continuing with the absurd kinder and gentler ways. I expect ever greater and paradoxically more macabre developments. It's the cost of doing business in the West. There are no conflicted emotions on the topic in China.

 

[anonperson]

I personally don't see why people are not satisfied with a life sentence with no parole. That is justice and there is not threat to society or the possibility of executing an innocent person.

Because liberals/progressive have bastardized the concept of life without parole.

They change the the rules and let people out.

Leslie Van Houten was released.

Then you have bogus compassionate releases for criminals.

This happens regularly.

 

[coffeebythelake]

Executions should not use medical or semi-medical means. Lethal injection is stupid. If there are executions, the traditional method of hanging works. Alternatively, the electric chair works.

As far as costs, the high costs of the legal system is purely the lawyers' fault. If the costs of the legal system is so high in death penalty cases, then what is happening with life sentence cases? Are they railroaded? Or are they processed correctly and the additional cost of handling death penalty cases just wasted bureaucracy?

Not a traditional electric chair. Literally just pads on the chest like we use for defibrillation

 

[psycho-matic]

But why? Because the AMA said it’s unethical and you agree with them? I’m in the business of minimizing suffering. The AMA doesn’t speak for me. Nor do you. Being a physician/annesthesiologist isn’t the higher order calling you dreamed as a pre-med. It’s a job. A job where I’ve been trained to render people unconscious and pain free while things are done to them that would otherwise be unconscionable. Assuming these people will inevitably undergo their capital punishment, involvement of qualified medical personnel would result in net-net less suffering. So it doesn’t have to go down like this:



I suspect we won’t agree on this, which is totally fine. But you don’t get to have it both ways. You can’t demand that the only de facto experts (us) not be involved then complain about how horrific it plays out when you get your way and it’s run by a bunch of novices.

The problem is the medicalization (I probably just made up a word) of the death penalty in the first place. An execution doesn't require a doctor's expertise to be quick and painless. By prticipating in an execution by providing medical expertise, a doctor is condoning the execution.

In my opinion, the government should not be in the business state-sanctioned executions of its own citizens. As far as I know, Singapore and Japan are the only other first world countries that have the death penalty. They both use hanging. When done correctly, it's painless and instantaneous. A bullet to the brain stem would also be painless. As someone else said, an I/O would work (maybe a large dose of lidocaine first) or a massive dose of IM anesthetics/opiods.

If the state is going to sanction an execution, means already exist to do it with minimal suffering. Stop trying to reinvent the wheel.

 

[pgg]

If the state is going to sanction an execution, means already exist to do it with minimal suffering. Stop trying to reinvent the wheel.

The cruelty is the point.

Proponents favor it because they savor the suffering and are glad for the punishment.

Opponents of the death penalty get fodder to criticize the whole process.

No one is actually interested in making it quick and painless.

 

[Dr. Rude]

The cruelty is the point.

Proponents favor it because they savor the suffering and are glad for the punishment.

Opponents of the death penalty get fodder to criticize the whole process.

No one is actually interested in making it quick and painless.

Almost no one. The fact that executions sometimes appear uncomfortable and/or unsmooth feed ancillary arguments against the death penalty. If they actually were that way or at least appeared that way that would potentially enable more executions. Therefore at least some of those who want more executions would like it to be quick and painless.

 

[ASA6]

Because liberals/progressive have bastardized the concept of life without parole.

They change the the rules and let people out.

Leslie Van Houten was released.

Then you have bogus compassionate releases for criminals.

This happens regularly.

I'm not sure, what this has to do with liberals or progressives? Or why that you need to feel like you have to take a swipe at them. Leslie Van Houten sentence to life with the possibility of parole. In fact, she could have been given parole after 7 years but served much longer than that. So I'm unclear what rule that progressives changed that caused her to be released or that you feel needs to be attacked during this conversation?

 

[coffeebythelake]

Executions can be quick and painless but appear horrific and violent. Shooting the condemned prisoner in the head is quick and painless.

 

[drmwvr]

Executions can be quick and painless but appear horrific and violent. Shooting the condemned prisoner in the head is quick and painless.

Not for the guy that pulls the trigger or that needs to clean up...

 

[anonperson]

I'm not sure, what this has to do with liberals or progressives? Or why that you need to feel like you have to take a swipe at them. Leslie Van Houten sentence to life with the possibility of parole. In fact, she could have been given parole after 7 years but served much longer than that. So I'm unclear what rule that progressives changed that caused her to be released or that you feel needs to be attacked during this conversation?

What's so confusing?

People are commenting that life without the possibility of parole should be sufficient because then the criminal is stuck in jail forever.

I've correctly pointed out that life without parole can easily be changed to life with the possibility of parole. All it takes is a liberal parole board and there you go.

Leslie Van Houten is a perfect example. Liberal parole board keeps saying she is rehabilitated so they kept wanting to let her free. She was denied by the governors. She participated in a brutal murder and was originally given the death penalty. This was the changed to life without parole. Then to life in prison with parole.

They kept slowly chipping away and lo and behold, she's free.

That's a liberal/progressive concept of letting criminals out.

Why so offended?

That's part of the reason I support the death penalty. Most Americans do, even in California.

 

[nimbus]

I remember this execution from when I was a kid.

Gary Gilmore - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[nimbus]

Not for the guy that pulls the trigger or that needs to clean up...

I think there are plenty of sickos who would happily volunteer. There was a death penalty thread on SDN a few years ago where a couple people said they would lend their expertise.

 

[ASA6]

What's so confusing?

People are commenting that life without the possibility of parole should be sufficient because then the criminal is stuck in jail forever.

I've correctly pointed out that life without parole can easily be changed to life with the possibility of parole. All it takes is a liberal parole board and there you go.

Leslie Van Houten is a perfect example. Liberal parole board keeps saying she is rehabilitated so they kept wanting to let her free. She was denied by the governors. She participated in a brutal murder and was originally given the death penalty. This was the changed to life without parole. Then to life in prison with parole.

They kept slowly chipping away and lo and behold, she's free.

That's a liberal/progressive concept of letting criminals out.

Why so offended?

That's part of the reason I support the death penalty. Most Americans do, even in California.

It's just a weird time to blame progressives. Like your whole world view is if you don't like something it's because of liberals. Her sentence after her retrial because her lawyer died during the first one was life with possibility of parole. Even progressive governors brown and Newsom denied her parole several times. So her getting out has nothing to do with liberals.

Isn't saving money a conservative idea? Life in jail is cheaper than the death penalty, so shouldnt you be in favor of life in prison?

 

[anonperson]

It's just a weird time to blame progressives. Like your whole world view is if you don't like something it's because of liberals. Her sentence after her retrial because her lawyer died during the first one was life with possibility of parole. Even progressive governors brown and Newsom denied her parole several times. So her getting out has nothing to do with liberals.

Isn't saving money a conservative idea? Life in jail is cheaper than the death penalty, so shouldnt you be in favor of life in prison?

The parole board members are appointed by the governor.

Brown and Newsom don't get a pass. Besides it's a ploy for them to look tougher on crime knowing full well their appointees will do their dirty work.

I'm not getting why you're purposely being dense?

It is definitely a progressive/liberal agenda to go against the death penalty and against long prison sentences.

Activist DAs are proudly running on these platforms like Gascon, Boudin, Price, Krasner, etc.

Why are you putting your head in the same sand?

The death penalty cost is artificially inflated because of the numerous appeals baked into the process.

But my entire point is, life without the possibility of parole is no longer a guarantee. We are seeing situations where life without parole gets changed based on the whims of the current political flavor.

You know what would save a lot of money? If we catch a murderer or rapist and ask them to say sorry very nicely and promise not to be bad, we can let them go and wouldn't Even have to pay for any prison time!

 

[ASA6]

I'm not getting why you're purposely being dense?


But my entire point is, life without the possibility of parole is no longer a guarantee.

Because life without parole wasn't the sentence. It was 7 years to life with the possibility of parole. No liberal changed anything. You said you opposed life sentences because liberals and progressives keep changing things. Yet, you cited a case where nothing was changed. You are literally arguing a strawman.

You said you support the death penalty because you don't like liberal because they change things. Then gave only one example where nothing was changed. That's a weird stance to take.

 

[ASA6]

Brown and Newsom don't get a pass. Besides it's a ploy for them to look tougher on crime knowing full well their appointees will do their dirty work

Activist DAs are proudly running on these platforms like Gascon, Boudin, Price, Krasner, etc.

You know what would save a lot of money? If we catch a murderer or rapist and ask them to say sorry very nicely and promise not to be bad, we can let them go and wouldn't Even have to pay for any prison time!

Why doesn't Brown get a pass? He denied her parole and she wasn't released. You make it seem like she served no time. She was in jail for 54 years, had 23 parole hearings, was granted parole 4 times and all four of those were over turned by a progressive governor. The scenario you are arguing against just doesn't exist in reality.

 

[anonperson]

Because life without parole wasn't the sentence. It was 7 years to life with the possibility of parole. No liberal changed anything. You said you opposed life sentences because liberals and progressives keep changing things. Yet, you cited a case where nothing was changed. You are literally arguing a strawman.

You said you support the death penalty because you don't like liberal because they change things. Then gave only one example where nothing was changed. That's a weird stance to take.

She was given the death penalty. That was overturned by the California Supreme Court and then turned into life without parole.

Then she got a new trial and got life with the possibility of parole.

How is that not a clear example?

Fine, if you need more examples:

Motorcycle club founder and 'violent sociopath' convicted of executing 3 people to be released from prison after terminal diagnosis

Hessian motorcycle club co-founder and convicted murderer Thomas F. Maniscalco will be released from prison after being diagnosed with terminal cancer.

www.google.com

Murdered several people. Raped and tortured a 19 year old. Was supposed to get 46 years to life. Being let out after 40. The guy should die in prison but won't.

Is this more to your liking?

 

[anonperson]

Why doesn't Brown get a pass? He denied her parole and she wasn't released. You make it seem like she served no time. She was in jail for 54 years, had 23 parole hearings, was granted parole 4 times and all four of those were over turned by a progressive governor. The scenario you are arguing against just doesn't exist in reality.

She stabbed an innocent woman 14 times and helped murder her in a really brutal manner.

I know it's shocking to think that deserves either the death penalty or life in prison.

LaBiancas remaining family aren't happy with Van Houtens release so obviously 54 years isn't long enough.

 

[ASA6]

She was given the death penalty. That was overturned by the California Supreme Court and then turned into life without parole.

Then she got a new trial and got life with the possibility of parole.

How is that not a clear example?

Fine, if you need more examples:

Motorcycle club founder and 'violent sociopath' convicted of executing 3 people to be released from prison after terminal diagnosis

Hessian motorcycle club co-founder and convicted murderer Thomas F. Maniscalco will be released from prison after being diagnosed with terminal cancer.

www.google.com

Murdered several people. Raped and tortured a 19 year old. Was supposed to get 46 years to life. Being let out after 40. The guy should die in prison but won't.

Is this more to your liking?

The supreme Court of California overturned all deaths sentences on a different case, not just hers. When Reagan was the president. Her second trial was actually a mistrial, and her third was 7 years to life with parole. She was never sentenced to life without parole.

And we can agree the second example shouldn't be released. But he did serve 40 years and is about to die of cancer.

Nonetheless, none of this changes your stance that you only favor the death penalty because you don't like liberals. Its a weird position to take. People were discussing if physicians should take part. No one was mentioning liberal or conservative policies. For some reason you brought it up that the only reason you supported the death penalty was because liberals keep changing things. That's all I was pointing out. You felt the need to shoehorn in a stance about why you don't like liberals when it wasn't really relevant.