Hii Cecil, I read your explanation about Spontaneous human combustion… I have an idea… SHC can happen if the victim accidentally puts cigarette-fire to mouth, having enough alcohol to track the flame to the stomach… Sorry if it is a rubbish 
There are two columns this could be referring to: Do people really die from “spontaneous human combustion”? and a shorter Is there such a thing as spontaneous combustion?.
In either case, your “theory” is rubbish. Total, complete rubbish.
I agree the idea (OP never used the word “theory”) is rubbish but it’s been proposed in good faith and VARUN MOHAN deserves to be given reasons why the idea is rubbish.
- An alcohol/water mixture must be at least 50% alcohol before it will burn and I doubt anyone with a concentration of alcohol in their stomach that high would be in any condition to put cigarette-fire to their mouth.
- Alcohol also needs oxygen to burn and there isn’t enough in your stomach to support combustion.
In other words, wet puke would put the fire out before it started.
There are other reasons why this can’t work but those are the two that spring to my mind.
Moderator note: I’ve edited the title of this thread to be helpful to other readers to know what it’s about.
Could you edit his user name so it’s not all CAPS? 
Of course, Varun, people in bars around the world imbibe far too much alcohol and put lit cigarettes in their mouths on a daily basis, been doing so for a hundred years, and yet there’s never been a documentaed case of this causing SHC. So your ‘theory’, although tested extensively under the widest possible range of conditions, has failed to ever have been proven viable.
It’s entirely feasible to cause oneself extensive burns by accidentally igniting alchohol. But it wouldn’t happen easily. Most forms of alcoholic beverage contain too much water to ignite accidently, and the amount of alcohol in your breath doesn’t form a readily flammable mixture. But the use of high enough proof alhohol such as Everclear could lead to accidental combustion, possibly killing the victim. This happens occasionally to ‘fire breathers’, who sometimes use alcohol. The results are severe burns to the face, mouth, throat, sometimes lungs, and sometimes all sorts of other things if it’s a fool who is holding the container of fuel at the time of the accidental ignition.
So it just requires a few more steps in the process to be an explanation for SHC, a person has consume too much alcohol, causing him to believe he can perform a lethally dangerous fire-breathing stunt. Of course at that point there are a number of other lethally dangerous stunts the sot could attempt leading to similar or even more devasting results. So yes, drinking and smoking can lead to SHC, if you add a few more elements into the picture.
Is this correct?
I have set fire to brandy on top of a Christmas pudding, which is typically about 40% alcohol, AFAIK.
Is that pudding warm and in a bowl? You can ignite the alcohol fumes from brandy in a bowl or glass by getting it warm enough. Without some sides on the container to hold the vapor you get a flash at most.
I disagree with this. If you put any number of spirits of around 39% alcohol in a shot glass, you can set them on fire.
Straight Vodka, Whiskey, Brandy. Don’t need to be warmed up or anything before hand.
Prior to the energy drink fad, people used to do shots of white Galliano with a coffee bean in the glass, light it first wait a few seconds for the mix to heat up, then blow out the flame and drink. (I have seen the result of having too many of these and repeatedly forgetting to blow out the flame before drinking but that’s a different story)
I did some googling and found out I was wrong. Ignorance fought. Thanks.
I think SHC can be explained quite well by the Wick Effect: Wick effect - Wikipedia
It’s not spontaneous, merely a sleeping or disabled person is set on fire via a candle or cigarette or something and whilst they sleep (or helplessly watch) they burn slowly with body fats fuelling a slow but thorough fire.
Is it really the liquid alcohol that burns and not the vapour?
Well, if you get really drunk, drive home, crash your car and die in the flaming wreckage, does that count?
This would be the evaporating vapors burning, not the liquid. IIRC, the very concept of “proof” alcohol is that a 50-50 mixture is the lowest alcohol mix that will burn through a cotton wick. If it’s not 100 proof (50% alcohol) it won’t burn that way.
Only for the Darwin Awards.
Alcoholic drinks have varying amounts of alcohol in them,
not many people drink proof or overproof straight from the bottle.
proof means the liquor is just about flammable.It might produce a flame for a few seconds.
overproof means it wil easily catch fire and produce a weak flame,
but still being stronger than 60% alcohol is rare.
So as to whether overpoof liquor is related to any SHC ?
-
the presence of the overproof liquor would guide the investigation,
they might test it to see what happens , to see if the liquor burning would produce the same effect ? So no thats not an explanation as its obvious enough for the investigators.. -
People do set themselves on fire due to overproof liquor.. what happened to them ? how come no one 1/4 burnt ? no one was spotted to have the SHC effect start and then the fire put out ?
-
the stomach would quickly dilute the overproof drink, down to below proof.
-
people self-immolate with petrol all the time, and the body doesn’t ignite and get burnt away .. so if a very high energy fuel like petrol doesn’t cause it, why would a mere drink with the very low energy flame of ethanol ?
-
Even if you ignited the overproof liquor in your mouth, its very low heat flame, that is easy to put out, and unlikely to cause a serious injury. You might get a scorched mouth, but it not going to melt your nose away or cause fatal injury.. well it might cause fatal scorching of the airway, because thats rather sensitive to that, so don’t go to test the idea that its perfectly safe..
SHC is definitely only the wick effect…
If the victim is found before the ambdomen is burnt away, they can find a cause of death, and so they don’t categorise it as SHC or fire… they just say the person died and then caught fire.
Very drunk people may be so drunk they catch fire and then burn, but probabl they were dead before MUCH burning occurred.