You’re right, you would. CPAP masks include deliberate leak paths so that your exhaled air all vents to atmosphere instead of accumulating in the hose to be inhaled over and over again.
My alarm is set to CBC1 (Radio 1?). This morning I awoke to a story about the execution. One of the reporters said that veterinarians who euthanise animals with nitrogen calls the procedure (of euthanising the animals) ‘disturbing’.
They are euthanizing animals that cannot be placed in shelters that are overly full. They are often healthy animals. Is that the disturbing part?
Maybe we just think the execution itself is inhumane?
Well, I have a little list…
“I just don’t understand. We have proposed serving it cold, putting it in tea, flavoring it, sprinkling it in salad etc., but you have objected to every single method of giving people cyanide. Could you just tell us what method of giving people cyanide you would approve of?”
I don’t recall them elaborating. But then it was my alarm to wake me up.
When you say, “Now they’re putting it in cake, which is entirely untested.” as though it were the cake that was the problem, then “how would you suggest we do it?” is an entirely reasonable question.
Anybody tearing their hair out because this method is ‘untested’ should surely be able to answer, “How should new methods be tested?” and “Which other method would you prefer?”.
If I were to be executed, I would definitely prefer “untested” nitrogen over lethal injection, hanging, firing squad, or (shudder) electric chair.
I see what you did there.
The report on NPR Up First this morning said something a bit different. They don’t have a transcript up, so this is going by memory: “Nitrogen asphyxiation is only authorized by veterinarians for use on pigs.”
I know they said something about it only being used on pigs. A very brief search tells me it is something called “gas stunning,” and that nitrogen has been tested/proposed/adopted(?) as an alternative to using carbon dioxide, supposedly because the animal “won’t notice that it dies.”
Then just say that. Focusing on the details weakens that argument, especially since nitrogen asphyxiation is well-tested under other conditions and relatively easy to administer.
The sense I get from some of the opposition is that its positive qualities are exactly the problem. They were hoping that the lack of lethal injection drugs would mean the end of executions. That didn’t happen, so now the plan is to cast doubt on the new method.
If there must be executions [sidestepping that whole question here] then the most humane method would be what’s used routinely by veterinarians: injection of a sedative in a dose that puts the animal into unconsciousness, then a second drug that stops the heart.
I’ve had cats and horses euthanized by this method, stayed with them throughout, and can attest that it’s a painless lights out. It ends pain, doesn’t inflict it. And it happens fast.
Obviously you need a trained professional to calculate the correct doses and do the injections properly. I can see why doctors would refuse to participate.
States have a hard time getting any of those drugs, and most animals were probably not IV drug users and have better veins. And, doctors won’t help get the IVs into the condemned veins.
You’re basically describing lethal injection, which has a host of issues that nitrogen doesn’t.
IIRC it was proposed for mass depopulation during COVID.
Oh, agreed. I’m just noting that as a purely hypothetical matter that’s the most humane method of ending life. You’re quite right that in real life it’s problematic for all the reasons you cite.
Does anyone else find it peculiarly ironic that the world’s most obsessive gun-loving nation has such a hard time figuring out how to kill people when it’s sanctioned by legal ceremony?
Its a combination of two things. First is the diveristy within the country. The people who are obsessed with guns are generally mutually exclusive with the ones who are worried about the cruelty of the execution procedures.
Second both sides are backed up by our consitution, with peacenicks not being able to grab guns like they would like due to the second amendment, and gun nuts not being able to blast the heads off of the condemned like they might like due to the eighth.
That’s exactly the regimen proposed when lethal injection was first implemented.
In theory, it’s as painless (aside from placing the IV) as anything could be.
In practice, it has not turned out that way (e.g. the first attempt to execute Smith). Not just the availability of the drugs, but the skills of the people conducting the state-sanctioned murder.
Obviously, I am opposed to the death penalty, and this case is a really glaring example of its useless application (35 years after the crime, hanging judge overrules 11 out ot 12 jurors to impose the penalty, AND one botched attempt).
But a big part of my anger is using a method that has not been tested (to be fair, how WOULD you test it?) on humans. You might argue that all of the other methods (electric chair, gas chamber, lethal injection) were at one point untested… well, yeah. Shouldn’t have used THEM either.
Well, yeah. If all works well, it’s as “humane” (if murder ever is humane) as anything could be. On paper, it’s painless. It has not worked out that way in practice.
Good point. A non-rebreather mask would seem to be the right sort of thing (I know there are various other types of masks available).
If we’re lucky, manufacturers will now refuse to sell such masks to any prison system, which poses its own problem (as they have legitimate uses in, say, the prison infirmary).
For those with literal morbid curiosity, the death warrant has been in effect since midnight local time and ends at 6am tomorrow.
That’s a charming fantasy, but of course it’s not going to happen. This method uses completely common industrial-grade components that are simply immune to supply-chain disruptions, and there’s no underlying formal ethics system like medicine has to enforce consensus.
I don’t see any easy back-door way to stop this form of execution unless it turns out to be massively more cruel than any alternative.