politics

I'd like to wonder how Nitrogen Asphyxiation, which I know from my LN2 safety training is extremely dangerous due solely to the fact humans can't tell it's happening until they faint and die, can't be used because it's inhumane and dangerous, yet lethal injections, electric chairs, and toxic chambers are perfectly fine to use.

I don't support the death penalty/capital punishment, but if the punishment is the death itself, torturing prisoners is plain unnecessary

My God this article is full of stupid, awful arguments. Seriously some sort of agenda behind it. I hate the death penalty. However, if they're going to do it anyway, nitrogen hypoxia is definitely the most humane method.

Air forces around the world use nitrogen inhalation to simulate the effects of hypoxia caused by high altitude decompression for training.

From that we know for a fact that it is absolutely painless all the way to loss of consciousness.

We also know that it is perfectly safe to have people in the same room who do not participate in the exercise.

And we also know that you don't need a perfectly fitting mask if the had mixture is supplied in it at positive pressure.

The author is reaching at straws for arguments so he makes them up. He's imagining possible problems or downsides and calls them as immediately disqualifying without ever bothering to look for their validity or solutions.

I'm against capital punishment. But if it has to be done this seems to be the least cruel method to do it by far.

Is he arguing that this is cruel and unusual punishment because they have to continue breathing? Otherwise they will feel the CO2 build-up if they hold their breath. I'm sorry, but if capital punishment has to be a thing, I'll take Nitrogen poisoning over any current method.

I'm torn about this. I'm against execution in any event, but the idea that this is somehow worse than other methods is a silly proposition. Good job on the article author for making it sound as awful as possible, but there's a lot made of small things that are by and large better than other techniques that are considered constitutional. I strongly feel like this is more about preventing this particular execution than making sure the best method possible is used.

And that's great. This execution should be stopped, but since it's legal for now it would be a shame for this one case to deny this method to other prisoners who would otherwise be subject to lethal injection or electrocution, both of which are far worse.

I cannot believe we still have the death penalty. Crazy.

There's nothing cruel about nitrogen hypoxya death, it's one the most peaceful ways to die actually.

So many arguments in here are basically "I don't like the orphan crushing machine, but I guess if we have to have it, I'd rather the machine be on the fastest setting."

There's no "execution method" argument that can exist with an anti-capital punishment opinion.

In a veterinary euthanasia study comparing death from pentobarbital injection to nitrogen gas inhalation, most animals exposed to nitrogen gas developed early convulsions. In a prior physiology experiment exploring human adaptations to hypoxia, healthy volunteers breathing pure nitrogen often experienced seizures within 17-20 seconds.

I'd love to read these studies if available. But the author forgot to reference their sources. So I don't know what they're referring to

What ridiculous reasoning! They are required to participate … by breathing normally? Year somehow participating by your heart beating is ok?

They are against it because they don’t want to set a precedent allowing it. Death penalty opponents have come as close as they ever have at abolishing it by lobbying drug makers to stop providing standard drugs. Nitrogen gas, however, is cheap and easy to obtain. Right now the only argument against it is that it’s “experimental” (despite plenty of accidental deaths providing ample data), but once successfully used, that argument is gone.

If it were just about execution being painless, we'd execute people by detonating a block of C4 taped to their skull. 100% guaranteed instant and painless. But it's not about that. It's about those who oppose execution coming up with every reason to abolish the practice. I don't think there's a single proponent of capital punishment opposing nitrogen gas.

My personal opinion is that capital punishment should be reserved for a new standard of proof - beyond any doubt. If there's the slightest doubt, the sentence drops to incarceration.

I guess my biggest question is if this only works well with someone who cooperates, why are they not allowed to put the person under with anesthesia first, then administer nitrogen as part 2?

I am against the death penalty across the board, but this article is bad. It makes a lot of claims about nitrogen asphyxiation without citation, and one thing it does cite contradicts what they write.

There's tons of hand wringing about how the prisoner would be an active participant in their execution. By breathing. They spend an awful lot of time on this point, and it's almost silly.

There's some points about how responders would be able to safely enter the room in case of problems. A portable oxygen source with a mask would do.

And then there's this huge misrepresentation for the one scientific study they actually cite:

A group of Swiss researchers conducted research in 2019 on the comparative humanity of nitrogen versus carbon dioxide in euthanizing mice. Their conclusion? That nitrogen did produce a fear response, raising questions about its ethical use as a mouse execution method, and that further studies would be required to determine whether nitrogen would be a suitable euthanasia agent for mice.

Here's the study they cite for it: https://boris.unibe.ch/136198/1/pone.0210818.pdf

Abstract from there: "Carbon dioxide (CO2) is one of the most commonly used gas euthanasia agents in mice, despite reports of aversion and nociception. Inert gases such as nitrogen (N2) may be a via- ble alternative to carbon dioxide. Here we compared behavioural and electrophysiological reactions to CO2 or N2 at either slow fill or rapid fill in C57Bl/6 mice undergoing gas euthana- sia. We found that mice euthanised with CO2 increased locomotor activity compared to baseline, whereas mice exposed to N2 decreased locomotion. Furthermore, mice exposed to CO2 showed significantly more vertical jumps and freezing episodes than mice exposed to N2. We further found that CO2 exposure resulted in increased theta:delta of the EEG, a measure of excitation, whereas the N2 decreased theta:delta. Differences in responses were not oxygen-concentration dependent. Taken together, these results demonstrate that CO2 increases both behavioural and electrophysiological excitation as well as producing a fear response, whereas N2 reduces behavioural activity and central neurological depression and may be less aversive although still produces a fear response. Further studies are required to evaluate N2 as a suitable euthanasia agent for mice."

The tone is completely different. The study thinks N2 would be a good candidate for euthanasia in mice. They do conclude that there is a fear response, but less so. Far from "raising questions about its ethical use as a mouse execution method", the authors think it's worth pursuing as a more humane method.

Again, the death penalty should be abolished. This article is garbage.

"We can't use nitrogen! Lethal injection and the gas chamber and electric chair are all way worse and more painful, like to the point of excruciating torture, and nitrogen is painless, but I just don't like nitrogen!"

"We can't vote for Biden! Look at all the..."

I see a pattern.

(Yes I know Biden's not "painless," it's a flawed analogy a little bit)