4 ms·

The Two Autopsies of George Floyd Aren’t as Different as They Seem

2 points by rectang 6y ago

rectang 6y ago
Like many, I've been wondering whether there was any malfeasance by the Hennepin County Medical Examiner because their report did not attribute Floyd's death to "asphyxiation". This article thoroughly examines the issue and barring the emergence of new and unexpected information, puts it to rest in my mind. It explains in detail why the both the official autopsy and the independent autopsy are basically saying the same thing. The article also anticipates that the bogus diagnosis of "excited delirium" will be brought up at Chauvin's trial — but it was not in any of the autopsies, but an assessment by one of the officers on the scene.
- eesmith 6y ago
  See also https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/george-floyds-autopsy-and-the-structural-gaslighting-of-america/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/george-floyds-au... titled "George Floyd’s Autopsy and the Structural Gaslighting of America". > The world was gaslit by misreporting about George Floyd’s initial autopsy report. As concerned physicians, we write to deconstruct the misinformation and condemn the ways this weaponization of medical language reinforced white supremacy at the torment of Black Americans.
  - cicada3301 6y ago
    > As concerned physicians, we write to deconstruct the misinformation and condemn the ways this weaponization of medical language reinforced white supremacy at the torment of Black Americans Holy shit. I had no idea science already has become such an ideological battlefield. These people want to do away with inconvenient findings when these findings prop up some 'white supremacy at the torment of Black Americans'. (Notice the capitalization of 'white' and 'Black' in the quote.)
    - eesmith 6y ago
      What "inconvenient findings" are you referring to? To quote the 538 link: "The two autopsy reports aren’t actually all that different in their conclusions." So you can't be referring to this autopsy report, right? Regarding "ideological battlefield", to quote the SciAm editorial: > We wish to remind fellow physicians that medical science has never been objective. It has never existed in a vacuum; there have and will always be social, political and legal ramifications of our work. What is your point about the capitalization of "white" and "Black"? We often if not nearly always use capital letters for ethnic groups. We write "Hispanic Americans" and "Latino Americans" and "Native Americans". The Wikipedia page at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans uses "African Americans (also referred to as Black Americans or Afro-Americans)" shows about a 50-50 split between "black American" and "Black Americans." We also write "Hispanic", and "Creole" and "Cajuns". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Americans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Americans shows "White Americans", "White Hispanics", and "White" when referring to "a racial or ethnic group of Americans who identify as and are perceived to be white people". While my spot check of "White Supremacy", with that capitalization, is not used on Wikipedia, outside of titles. The strong preference is instead for "white supremacy". Your point is surely not that white supremacists should be considered an ethnic group, so what's your actual point?
solongmyfriend 6y ago
Unfortunately the article omits 2 important details: 1. The toxicological report. George Floyd had a blood concentration of Fentanyl 11 ng/mL plus Norfentanyl 5.6 ng/mL plus Methamphetamine 19 ng/mL. I'm no expert but I've read a few papers and these concentrations seem pretty high and have been linked to fatal cases in the past. 2. The 'independent' autopsy wasn't done on the body Media reporting on this detail is very shoddy. The 'autopsy' commissioned by the family of the deceased and carried out by some Dr. Michael Baden wasn't actually performed on Mr. Floyds body but was merely remote review/diagnosis of the widely-circulated video and reading the coroner's report. 3. Floyd was complaining about being unable to breathe before he was even on the ground In a differently angled video preceding the viral video Floyd can be heard telling the police officer he had problems breathing before he even was in a restraint hold or on the ground.
- rectang 6y ago
  The article deals extensively with the subject of drugs over several paragraphs. For starters: > The Hennepin County autopsy may have mentioned factors beyond police conduct, but it was really just saying Floyd’s heart stopped while police were restraining him and pressing on his neck, said Melinek, Carter and Dr. Michael Freeman, professor of forensic medicine and epidemiology at Maastricht University in the Netherlands. It's not a claim that he died of a heart attack, drugs, or pre-existing conditions, they told me. "The cause of death is police restraint," Melinek said, just like in the autopsy Floyd’s family commissioned. The objection that the "toxicological report" is not mentioned by name is a completely superfluous and superficial critique.
- plun9 6y ago
  Link to the video?
  - brandonorozco 6y ago
    >Link to the video? Don't know about any footage of this moment but inside the official criminal complaint against Derek Chauvin you can find this on page 2: >While standing outside the car, Mr. Floyd began saying and repeating that he could not breathe. Thedefendant went to the passenger side and tried to get Mr. Floyd into the car from that side and Lane andKueng assisted. https://www.hennepinattorney.org/-/media/Attorney/Derek-Chauvin-Criminal-Complaint.pdf https://www.hennepinattorney.org/-/media/Attorney/Derek-Chau... I'm sure police officers hear these kinds of complaints all day long: 'the cuffs are too tight', 'you're breaking my arm' etc. I don't know if police officers receive enough medical training to discern a true medical emergency from a pretense in order to get into a better position to fight back or escape.

2 points by rectang 6y ago

Like many, I've been wondering whether there was any malfeasance by the Hennepin County Medical Examiner because their report did not attribute Floyd's death to "asphyxiation". This article thoroughly examines the issue and barring the emergence of new and unexpected information, puts it to rest in my mind. It explains in detail why the both the official autopsy and the independent autopsy are basically saying the same thing. The article also anticipates that the bogus diagnosis of "excited delirium" will be brought up at Chauvin's trial — but it was not in any of the autopsies, but an assessment by one of the officers on the scene.

eesmith 6y ago
See also https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/george-floyds-autopsy-and-the-structural-gaslighting-of-america/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/george-floyds-au... titled "George Floyd’s Autopsy and the Structural Gaslighting of America". > The world was gaslit by misreporting about George Floyd’s initial autopsy report. As concerned physicians, we write to deconstruct the misinformation and condemn the ways this weaponization of medical language reinforced white supremacy at the torment of Black Americans.
- cicada3301 6y ago
  > As concerned physicians, we write to deconstruct the misinformation and condemn the ways this weaponization of medical language reinforced white supremacy at the torment of Black Americans Holy shit. I had no idea science already has become such an ideological battlefield. These people want to do away with inconvenient findings when these findings prop up some 'white supremacy at the torment of Black Americans'. (Notice the capitalization of 'white' and 'Black' in the quote.)
  - eesmith 6y ago
    What "inconvenient findings" are you referring to? To quote the 538 link: "The two autopsy reports aren’t actually all that different in their conclusions." So you can't be referring to this autopsy report, right? Regarding "ideological battlefield", to quote the SciAm editorial: > We wish to remind fellow physicians that medical science has never been objective. It has never existed in a vacuum; there have and will always be social, political and legal ramifications of our work. What is your point about the capitalization of "white" and "Black"? We often if not nearly always use capital letters for ethnic groups. We write "Hispanic Americans" and "Latino Americans" and "Native Americans". The Wikipedia page at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans uses "African Americans (also referred to as Black Americans or Afro-Americans)" shows about a 50-50 split between "black American" and "Black Americans." We also write "Hispanic", and "Creole" and "Cajuns". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Americans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Americans shows "White Americans", "White Hispanics", and "White" when referring to "a racial or ethnic group of Americans who identify as and are perceived to be white people". While my spot check of "White Supremacy", with that capitalization, is not used on Wikipedia, outside of titles. The strong preference is instead for "white supremacy". Your point is surely not that white supremacists should be considered an ethnic group, so what's your actual point?

solongmyfriend 6y ago

Unfortunately the article omits 2 important details: 1. The toxicological report. George Floyd had a blood concentration of Fentanyl 11 ng/mL plus Norfentanyl 5.6 ng/mL plus Methamphetamine 19 ng/mL. I'm no expert but I've read a few papers and these concentrations seem pretty high and have been linked to fatal cases in the past. 2. The 'independent' autopsy wasn't done on the body Media reporting on this detail is very shoddy. The 'autopsy' commissioned by the family of the deceased and carried out by some Dr. Michael Baden wasn't actually performed on Mr. Floyds body but was merely remote review/diagnosis of the widely-circulated video and reading the coroner's report. 3. Floyd was complaining about being unable to breathe before he was even on the ground In a differently angled video preceding the viral video Floyd can be heard telling the police officer he had problems breathing before he even was in a restraint hold or on the ground.

rectang 6y ago
The article deals extensively with the subject of drugs over several paragraphs. For starters: > The Hennepin County autopsy may have mentioned factors beyond police conduct, but it was really just saying Floyd’s heart stopped while police were restraining him and pressing on his neck, said Melinek, Carter and Dr. Michael Freeman, professor of forensic medicine and epidemiology at Maastricht University in the Netherlands. It's not a claim that he died of a heart attack, drugs, or pre-existing conditions, they told me. "The cause of death is police restraint," Melinek said, just like in the autopsy Floyd’s family commissioned. The objection that the "toxicological report" is not mentioned by name is a completely superfluous and superficial critique.
plun9 6y ago
Link to the video?
- brandonorozco 6y ago
  >Link to the video? Don't know about any footage of this moment but inside the official criminal complaint against Derek Chauvin you can find this on page 2: >While standing outside the car, Mr. Floyd began saying and repeating that he could not breathe. Thedefendant went to the passenger side and tried to get Mr. Floyd into the car from that side and Lane andKueng assisted. https://www.hennepinattorney.org/-/media/Attorney/Derek-Chauvin-Criminal-Complaint.pdf https://www.hennepinattorney.org/-/media/Attorney/Derek-Chau... I'm sure police officers hear these kinds of complaints all day long: 'the cuffs are too tight', 'you're breaking my arm' etc. I don't know if police officers receive enough medical training to discern a true medical emergency from a pretense in order to get into a better position to fight back or escape.