Why does SN only have a reliability score of 6 according to PPeH

Jessica-

Wise
Mar 27, 2019
234
422
SN was ( and may still be my method). IIRC it used to be scored higher on the reliability scale. Why was the score revised to only 6 in the latest PPeH?
 
Last edited:

EddieAllenPoe

Veteran
Mar 19, 2019
187
517
Because 60% of the time, it works every time. That's half a joke and half a reality. I'm certainly not making light of it. In truth, the effectiveness of SN in killing someone cannot be known because there hasn't been clinical trials on humans for obvious reasons. The score or 6/10 seems to be made up. It still seems fairly lethal, but.... It's not guaranteed. Knowing this hasn't helped me, but it's at least the truth.
 

Jessica-

Wise
Mar 27, 2019
234
422
It is ONLY a 6 because it can be reversed and because there aren't many documented reports of monitored deaths
We can continue here without derailing the other thread.

 

JustOverIt

Wise
Nov 8, 2018
236
522
Australia
Because 60% of the time, it works every time. That's half a joke and half a reality. I'm certainly not making light of it. In truth, the effectiveness of SN in killing someone cannot be known because there hasn't been clinical trials on humans for obvious reasons. The score or 6/10 seems to be made up. It still seems fairly lethal, but.... It's not guaranteed. Knowing this hasn't helped me, but it's at least the truth.
I know you were joking by that is definitely NOT the case. If you take 20-25g of SN with all the anti-emetics and anti-acids it is very likely that you will die; not 60% of the time, everytime.
 

EddieAllenPoe

Veteran
Mar 19, 2019
187
517
I know you were joking by that is definitely NOT the case. If you take 20-25g of SN with all the anti-emetics and anti-acids it is very likely that you will die; not 60% of the time, everytime.
I agree with the confidence. SN seems lethal. I'm not really joking about the estimate. If you look up poisoning statistics on lostallhope.com you'll notice the lower odds. For all we know it's 40% or 80%. Saying it's guaranteed isn't true. Anecdotal evidence on here suggests some have survived large doses. Maybe they were lying, but... How could you know?
 

JustOverIt

Wise
Nov 8, 2018
236
522
Australia
I agree with the confidence. SN seems lethal. I'm not really joking about the estimate. If you look up poisoning statistics on lostallhope.com you'll notice the lower odds. For all we know it's 40% or 80%. Saying it's guaranteed isn't true. Anecdotal evidence on here suggests some have survived large doses. Maybe they were lying, but... How could you know?
What poisoning statistics are these? For people that have taken exactly the right dose and exactly the right medications? Or just much smaller doses of SN without any of the assisting medications? Lmao, I definitely can't know if people were legit at all. Yes I am aware but I have been around for nearly all of them and ALL of them have failed because of either they didnt follow the correct process or they were found.

I don't understand people's distrust in reasonably truthful information. This is a suicide forum, you can't really be too picky given the serious lack of options.
 

JustOverIt

Wise
Nov 8, 2018
236
522
Australia
@JustOverIt , while you claim to be through and objective, you have failed to provide a shred of evidence to substantiate your claims. Can you please provide some links?
Please look for them yourself, there is a tonne of information on this forum about it. It is not my fault if you distrust people. I'm not about convincing people, just about giving them reasonably trusting information. People are going to make their minds up on their own either way.
 
Reactions: Lifeisatrap

Jessica-

Wise
Mar 27, 2019
234
422
Please look for them yourself, there is a tonne of information on this forum about it. It is not my fault if you distrust people. I'm not about convincing people, just about giving them reasonably trusting information. People are going to make their minds up on their own either way.
How much do you trust accounts written by complete strangers on a suicide forum?
 
Reactions: whatever1111

Jessica-

Wise
Mar 27, 2019
234
422
That is true we are all strangers here so I understand your reluctance. Though I hope my presence and contributions to it can affect your trust somehow.
You would really instill confidence if you can provide some links to your claims.
 

JustOverIt

Wise
Nov 8, 2018
236
522
Australia
You would really instill confidence if you can provide some links to your claims.
Some of the claims I make are made by common sense from the information available to me through Nitschke's PPEH and livestreams + also from some case reports and one or two articles: I do not claim to have all/any of the answers just educated opinions from scowering this method heavily, like I have said. I am well aware that those case reports and articles on this forum can be scrutinized to hell so feel free to do so.

It is our OWN jobs to instill confidence in ourselves if we so choose to. Not that of someone else's. My information is to my own benefit and that of whoever else is receptive to information that makes some sense I guess.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Lifeisatrap

Jessica-

Wise
Mar 27, 2019
234
422
Some of the claims I make are made by common sense made from the information available to me through Nitschke's PPEH and livestreams + also from some case reports and one or two articles: I do not claim to have all/any of the answers just educated opinions from scowering this method heavily, like I have said. I am well aware that those case reports and articles on this forum can be scrutinized to hell so feel free to do so.
At one point, you claimed that SN is the second most reliable method, how did you come to that conclusion?
 

JustOverIt

Wise
Nov 8, 2018
236
522
Australia
At one point, you claimed that SN is the second most reliable method, how did you come to that conclusion?
Given that its the second method with the most solid information attached to it.

It goes N 100% guaranteed death over 1000's of monitored cases. Then SN, 6 monitored deaths.

Use whatever vocabulary you want to use.
 
Last edited:

Bentham

Member
Feb 21, 2019
28
69
It seems really arbitrary but why would they lower it from a 7 or 8( I can't remember exactly, sorry)
"For Nitrite, a larger quantity is needed, vomiting risk greater, and reliability is a little less, R=6."
in Mar. 2019 where PN said "[v]omiting is possible though".

"For Nitrite, a larger quantity is needed, and reliability is a little less, R=7."
in Oct. 2018 where he said "[v]omiting is unlikely."
 

Jessica-

Wise
Mar 27, 2019
234
422
Given that its the second method with the most solid information attached to it.

It goes N 100% guaranteed death over 1000's of monitored cases. Then SN, 6 monitored deaths.
Have you not heard of cyanide, fentanyl, firearms, jumping from height or even chloroquine ( where a report was done that all 50 patients died with 2-3 hrs)
 

JustOverIt

Wise
Nov 8, 2018
236
522
Australia
Have you not heard of cyanide, fentanyl, firearms, jumping from height or even chloroquine ( where a report was done that all 50 patients died with 2-3 hrs)
Well what are we talking about? Effectiveness or peacefulness? I should have written that SN is the second most reported peaceful method. Or third or fourth or fifth like does it matter? It's reportedly peaceful.
 

Jessica-

Wise
Mar 27, 2019
234
422
"For Nitrite, a larger quantity is needed, vomiting risk greater, and reliability is a little less, R=6."
in Mar. 2019 where PN said "[v]omiting is possible though".

"For Nitrite, a larger quantity is needed, and reliability is a little less, R=7."
in Oct. 2018 where he said "[v]omiting is unlikely."
Thanks, that's very helpful but wouldn't the meto counteract the vomiting?
Well what are we talking about? Effectiveness or peacefulness? I should have written that SN is the second most reported peaceful method. Or third or fourth or fifth like does it matter? It's reportedly peaceful.

According to you above, in terms of lethality.
 

Jessica-

Wise
Mar 27, 2019
234
422
Dude why are we even arguing?
We are only discussing whether my current method of choice ( due to lack of means) is peaceful and effective, the more info we share , the better for us and others considering this method. Given you have so much faith in this method, it would be good to pick your brain.
 
Reactions: Lifeisatrap

JustOverIt

Wise
Nov 8, 2018
236
522
Australia
We are only discussing whether my current method of choice ( due to lack of means) is peaceful and effective, the more info we share , the better for us and others considering this method. Given you have so much faith in this method, it would be good to pick your brain.
Right, well if that is the case I would ask if you would try to phrase your responses a bit less invasively so I don't misinterpret you as being unnecessarily abrupt. Feel free to pick away.
 

Jessica-

Wise
Mar 27, 2019
234
422
Right, well if that is the case just try to phrase your responses a bit less invasively so I don't misinterpret you being unnecessarily abrupt. Feel free to pick away.
ok, my apologies!

Could you kindly provide some credible evidence to your claim that the SN method is both peaceful and reliable. Preferably with some links? This would greatly assist me and others considering the method given you have in- depth knowledge on the subject. Thanks!
 
Reactions: Lifeisatrap

JustOverIt

Wise
Nov 8, 2018
236
522
Australia
ok, my apologies!

Could you kindly provide some credible evidence to your claim that the SN method is both peaceful and reliable. Preferably with some links? This would great assist me and others considering the method given you have in- depth knowledge on the subject. Thanks!
Haha, no I don't mean that much sorry. Ahh the joys of communicating over text, so much is left to interpretation. Please give me a few minutes I guess while I gather all the information I have used to back my opinion of the SN method with.

This may not in any way convince you the same way it has me.

Note: So apparently PNG's aren't able to be uploaded, give me a sec to convert to jpg.
 
Last edited:

Darkhole

Member
Feb 22, 2019
39
94
You would really instill confidence if you can provide some links to your claims.
This forum is over a year old, if you want to know for yourself then start digging, go through the user discussion thread, sn megathread and consider taking Philip Nitschke at his word. He calls SN the poor man’s Nembutal, it’s rated a 6 because of how easily it can be reversed- unlike the other inorganic salts. There’s a fine line between skepticism and cynicism and I’m afraid you’re leaning towards the latter.
 

Davy

Have a great day!
Mar 24, 2019
128
562
Australia
The rating is low because there have only been a small handful of monitored deaths in humans, so the unreliability is uncertain and not conclusive given the small amount of data. Like some people have said, there is also the risk of vomiting which raises the survival rate. Being discovered too soon can also lead to a full recovery. When exposed to air, SN pulls moisture out of the air and loses its lethal properties so that might also contribute to many non-fatal attempts. [1]

I have no doubts that SN is lethal, here are some toxicology reports on Sodium Nitrate. Nitrates are converted to nitrites in our digestive system.
Some reports that I found were interesting:
  • /CASE REPORTS/ ... A patient with lethal course after ingestion of 25 g sodium nitrate was reported. After efficaciously treated with high doses of toluidine blue, hemodialysis and partial exchange transfusion the patient died 6 days after admission as a consequence for secondary pulmonary complications.
  • /CASE REPORTS/ Sodium nitrate ... in the only reported instance of eye disturbance from ingestion, caused transitory blindness, deafness, speechlessness, and tetanic convulsions, but gradually recovery in a girl who took 16 grams.
  • /CASE REPORTS/ Death and severe effects of nitrate ingestion are generally associated with doses above 10 g NO3-. Doses between 2 and 9 g NO3- have been reported to cause methemoglobinemia. These values correspond to 33 to 150 mg NO3-/kg. /Nitrate/
SN is also used to humanely control the feral pig population [1][2], 8 grams of sodium nitrite is enough kill a 100-pound pig . It is reported that an animal will feel faint and pass out, and then die in a humane manner after first being rendered unconscious. Here is a study regarding the humaneness and efficiency of the pig bait:
https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/091b0583-f35c-40b3-a530-f2e0c307a20c/files/pigs-imvs-report.pdf
  • It is the opinion of the authors that the development of methaemoglobinaemia as a result of sodium nitrite ingestion leads to a state of unconsciousness without a prolonged preliminary excitatory state.
  • The nitrite containing toxic baits fed to the pigs in this study were efficacious and resulted in an apparently humane death. Biochemical changes other than the rise in lactate and cortisol, were not different between test and control animals.
The PPHB also has one closely monitored case on an elderly woman, but video link seems to be down at the moment.

10012


Anyways I wrote too much :ohhhh:, I should really make a new thread about this. I'll be using the SN method because I am being monitored by people so I can not do anything suspicious or be away for long periods of time.
 

JustOverIt

Wise
Nov 8, 2018
236
522
Australia
I am most grateful!
Alright so here's a blob of relevant information, not in correct order unfortunately (perhaps I will clean this up later on). I'm really sorry about the quality. For some reason PNG's just won't upload.

So the majority of the information I have supplied is from firsthand discussions about user's SN ingestion. Eden2k, Minudah and Lunaemoth are all confimed to have ctb according to users whom have known them here (those people I do not know personally).
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Bentham

Member
Feb 21, 2019
28
69
Thanks, that's very helpful but wouldn't the meto counteract the vomiting?
PN recommends the meto and I believe it works, but I must admit also that I have no idea on which receptors (D2, 5HT3, NK-1, H1...) in the CTZ and GI track are affected by SN. I think one of the reasons why he recommends the meto is because it's one of general prescription drugs when the exact cause of nausea and vomiting (NV) is unknown. Actually, the NCCN (National Comprehensive Cancer Network) guidelines recommend the first choice of D2 antagonists such as meto in case of NV of unknown cause, then 5HT3 to be added. D2 antagonists seem a very good treatment for NV caused by toxic substance in stomach generally but afaik it's not highly effective when for example orally ingested opioid-induced NV is the case.
 

Jessica-

Wise
Mar 27, 2019
234
422
The rating is low because there have only been a small handful of monitored deaths in humans, so the unreliability is uncertain and not conclusive given the small amount of data. Like some people have said, there is also the risk of vomiting which raises the survival rate. Being discovered too soon can also lead to a full recovery. When exposed to air, SN pulls moisture out of the air and loses its lethal properties so that might also contribute to many non-fatal attempts. [1]

I have no doubts that SN is lethal, here are some toxicology reports on Sodium Nitrate. Nitrates are converted to nitrites in our digestive system.


Some reports that I found were interesting:
  • /CASE REPORTS/ ... A patient with lethal course after ingestion of 25 g sodium nitrate was reported. After efficaciously treated with high doses of toluidine blue, hemodialysis and partial exchange transfusion the patient died 6 days after admission as a consequence for secondary pulmonary complications.
  • /CASE REPORTS/ Sodium nitrate ... in the only reported instance of eye disturbance from ingestion, caused transitory blindness, deafness, speechlessness, and tetanic convulsions, but gradually recovery in a girl who took 16 grams.
  • /CASE REPORTS/ Death and severe effects of nitrate ingestion are generally associated with doses above 10 g NO3-. Doses between 2 and 9 g NO3- have been reported to cause methemoglobinemia. These values correspond to 33 to 150 mg NO3-/kg. /Nitrate/
SN is also used to humanely control the feral pig population [1][2], 8 grams of sodium nitrite is enough kill a 100-pound pig . It is reported that an animal will feel faint and pass out, and then die in a humane manner after first being rendered unconscious. Here is a study regarding the humaneness and efficiency of the pig bait:
https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/091b0583-f35c-40b3-a530-f2e0c307a20c/files/pigs-imvs-report.pdf
  • It is the opinion of the authors that the development of methaemoglobinaemia as a result of sodium nitrite ingestion leads to a state of unconsciousness without a prolonged preliminary excitatory state.
  • The nitrite containing toxic baits fed to the pigs in this study were efficacious and resulted in an apparently humane death. Biochemical changes other than the rise in lactate and cortisol, were not different between test and control animals.
The PPHB also has one closely monitored case on an elderly woman, but video link seems to be down at the moment.

View attachment 10012

Anyways I wrote too much :ohhhh:, I should really make a new thread about this. I'll be using the SN method because I am being monitored by people so I can not do anything suspicious or be away for long periods of time.

Many thanks for this but re your point on feral pigs, I think they severely lack the enzyme, methemoglobin reductase , which is used to counteract the effects of SN making their deaths much more peaceful. I think Exit International released an article on this but couldn't find it any more.
Last one:
Thanks so much for making the effort to compose all the info!
 

DarkStar1

Member
Apr 2, 2019
35
52
I have read the PPeH and many posts on this forum. There's a lot of contradictory info on the reliability and reversability of SN. After reading this information I believe the reliability rating of SN at 6/10 was based on all conditions being met: taking metro/Dopamine blocking anti-emetic, Tagamet, and not being discovered. I could and hope I am wrong. I was planning on taking SN but am not sure at this point due to the reliability and potential brain damage from failed attempt.
 

Psilo

-
Dec 29, 2018
486
1,398
I believe the PPH dropped the reliability of SN from 7 to 6 out of 10 because of several factors:

1. It is reversible! There is an antidote for SN in contrary of SA and SC. So you can be saved if discovered. The antidote is Methylene blue.

2. SN taken all alone is unlikely to kill you! Because you will probably puke it out. Worse if that happens you have high chances to still be very conscious.
If you truly wish to end your life as peaceful as SN can be, you need:
Antiemetics, to avoid throwing up. Drinking SN is not the problem here, your body knows that SN is no good so it will make you sick and throw up.
Acid regulator, to enhance and accelerate the absorption of SN from your body.

3. Fast! Having an empty stomach is much better, because your body will process all of the SN.
So no last meal just before taking SN. Sorry!

4. Dosing! Ok here is the thing: elderly people have generally speaking weaker bodies than younger people. The old version of the PPH gave approximately 15g of SN, but I suspect this is more likely for elderly people. In the last stream (6th of April 2019) from PN, he mentioned that people generally take between 20 to 25g of SN (high assay/purity). This could be a dose adapted for healthy/young people.

5. Purity! It is advised to have a high purity SN, at least 99%. If the purity is not as high as this, it is logic that the dose taken has to be higher. Problem: impurities can potentially give side effects.
 
Last edited:

Jessica-

Wise
Mar 27, 2019
234
422
Many thanks for your reply, here are some of my thoughts, feel free to correct me if I am wrong as I am braindead most of the time.

It is reversible! There is an antidote for SN in contrary of SA and SC. So you can be saved if discovered. The antidote is Methylene blue.
Most methods are reversible eg. chloroquine, CO, amitriptyline, exit bag and surprisingly even N

SN taken all alone is unlikely to kill you! Because you will probably puke it out. Worse if that happens you have high chances to still be very conscious.
If you truly wish to end your life as peaceful as SN can be, you need:
Antiemetics, to avoid throwing up. Drinking SN is not the problem here, your body knows that SN is no good so it will make you sick and throw up.
Acid regulator, to enhance and accelerate the absorption of SN from your body.
Again that applies to other methods like amitriptyline, chloroquine , why is this only a relevant factor for SN? I would suggest that they would naturally assume that everyone follows the protocol they suggest in coming to the relevant score.

3. Fast! Having an empty stomach is much better, because your body will process all of the SN.
So no last meal just before taking SN. Sorry!
This would apply to nearly all other methods which involve the ingestion of poisons ( save for the ultra lethal stuff like cyanide, N). If they want fasting , why not just put it down as part of the protocol instead of lowering the score?

Dosing! Ok here is the thing: elderly people have generally speaking weaker bodies than younger people. The old version of the PPH gave approximately 15g of SN, but I suspect this is more likely for elderly people. In the last stream (6th of April 2019) from PN, he mentioned that people generally take between 20 to 25g of SN (high assay/purity). This could be a dose adapted for healthy/young people.
Why is this even a factor? When coming up with the score, do they not assume that people take the recommended dose. If it needs a higher dose for healthy young people, they can simply state it in the book. Afaik The does went up from 5g to 12g to 15g and now 20-25g.

Purity! It is advised to have a high purity SN, at least 99%. If the purity is not as high as this, it is logic that the dose taken has to be higher. Problem: impurities can potentially give side effects.
Any impurities would affect the results , why would this only apply to SN?

My guess from reading the PPeH multiple times plus other resources on SN is that the Final Exit simply DO NOT know about this method enough to give it a higher rating. The background to the addition of SA and SN to the PPeH under the chapter Inorganic Salts is that a dutch euthanasia group was proposing to offer an unnamed lethal inorganic salt to its members for a peaceful exit. Nitschke was guessing what it was and wanted to join in the action, he knew it was wither SN or SA, and amidst all interest in this easily accessible/lethal/ peaceful mysterious substance, he wrote a new chapter on the 2 said inorganic salts adding sodium cyanide to the mix. Originally, on his twitter he was saying that the dutch substance should be SN but it was later revealed to be SA. Now that the SN method has already been included in the book, he has to continue his research on it and keep updating the chapter. It seems the more they research the more they find SN to be not as promising as originally thought.
 
Last edited:

Psilo

-
Dec 29, 2018
486
1,398
Many thanks for your reply, here are some of my thoughts, feel free to correct me if I am wrong as I am braindead most of the time.



Most methods are reversible eg. chloroquine, CO, amitriptyline, exit bag and surprisingly even N



Again that applies to other methods like amitriptyline, chloroquine , why is this only a relevant factor for SN? I would suggest that they would naturally assume that everyone follows the protocol they suggest in coming to the relevant score.



This would apply to nearly all other methods which involve the ingestion of poisons ( save for the ultra lethal stuff like cyanide, N). If they want fasting , why not just put it down as part of the protocol instead of lowering the score?



Why is this even a factor? When coming up with the score, do they not assume that people take the recommended dose. If it needs a higher dose for healthy young people, they can simply state it in the book. Afaik The does went up from 5g to 12g to 15g and now 20-25g.



Any impurities would affect the results , why would this only apply to SN?

My guess from reading the PPeH multiple times plus other resources on SN is that the Final Exit simply DO NOT know about this method enough to give it a higher rating. The background to the addition of SA and SN to the PPeH under the chapter Inorganic Salts is that a dutch euthanasia group was proposing to offer an unnamed lethal inorganic salt to its members for a peaceful exit. Nitschke was guessing what it was and wanted to join in the action, he knew it was wither SN or SA, and amidst all interest in this easily accessible/lethal/ peaceful mysterious substance, he wrote a new chapter on the 2 said inorganic salts adding sodium cyanide to the mix. Originally, on his twitter he was saying that the dutch substance should be SN but it was later revealed to be SA. Now that the SN method has already been included in the book, he has to continue his research on it and keep updating the chapter. It seems the more they research the more they find SN to be not as promising as originally thought.
All the points I mentioned are valid, I don't made them up just like that.

I have to be honest, the PPH has a major flaw: nowhere NP explains how they come up to rate the reliability nor the peacefulness of each method.

Ok N is regarded as the premium EoL choice, it kills you in your sleep. It scores max at both.

Exit has only 6 cases in where they have monitored SN method very carefully, it is true that it is not much but for me it is very promising.

Again some points I mentioned were not in the PPH so what I did is only speculation about how they come up with the score.

The PPH is plain and simply incomplete at least for SN.
 

JustOverIt

Wise
Nov 8, 2018
236
522
Australia
Many thanks for your reply, here are some of my thoughts, feel free to correct me if I am wrong as I am braindead most of the time.



Most methods are reversible eg. chloroquine, CO, amitriptyline, exit bag and surprisingly even N



Again that applies to other methods like amitriptyline, chloroquine , why is this only a relevant factor for SN? I would suggest that they would naturally assume that everyone follows the protocol they suggest in coming to the relevant score.



This would apply to nearly all other methods which involve the ingestion of poisons ( save for the ultra lethal stuff like cyanide, N). If they want fasting , why not just put it down as part of the protocol instead of lowering the score?



Why is this even a factor? When coming up with the score, do they not assume that people take the recommended dose. If it needs a higher dose for healthy young people, they can simply state it in the book. Afaik The does went up from 5g to 12g to 15g and now 20-25g.



Any impurities would affect the results , why would this only apply to SN?

My guess from reading the PPeH multiple times plus other resources on SN is that the Final Exit simply DO NOT know about this method enough to give it a higher rating. The background to the addition of SA and SN to the PPeH under the chapter Inorganic Salts is that a dutch euthanasia group was proposing to offer an unnamed lethal inorganic salt to its members for a peaceful exit. Nitschke was guessing what it was and wanted to join in the action, he knew it was wither SN or SA, and amidst all interest in this easily accessible/lethal/ peaceful mysterious substance, he wrote a new chapter on the 2 said inorganic salts adding sodium cyanide to the mix. Originally, on his twitter he was saying that the dutch substance should be SN but it was later revealed to be SA. Now that the SN method has already been included in the book, he has to continue his research on it and keep updating the chapter. It seems the more they research the more they find SN to be not as promising as originally thought.
This is getting ridiculous. No matter how much information we throw at you, there will always be something to pick at. Please stop being cynical.
 

Jessica-

Wise
Mar 27, 2019
234
422
All the points I mentioned are valid, I don't made them up just like that.

I have to be honest, the PPH has a major flaw: nowhere NP explains how they come up to rate the reliability nor the peacefulness of each method.

Ok N is regarded as the premium EoL choice, it kills you in your sleep. It scores max at both.

Exit has only 6 cases in where they have monitored SN method very carefully, it is true that it is not much but for me it is very promising.

Again some points I mentioned were not in the PPH so what I did is only speculation about how they come up with the score.

The PPH is plain and simply incomplete at least for SN.
Agreed , the PPeH seems very wishy washy on SN.
This is getting ridiculous. No matter how much information we throw at you, there will always be something to pick at. Please stop being cynical.
I don't think it's ridiculous for having a discussion on a method I am interested in.
 
Last edited:

snowman626

Veteran
Jan 28, 2019
141
419
Agreed , the PPeH seems very wishy washy on SN.


I don't think it's ridiculous for having a discussion on a method I am interested in.
im not confident in even N. i think the best way to make sure you ctb 100% is to stack methods on top of each other.

for myself i'll find a big national park and hike 5 hours deep into the woods, in the middle of a cold snowy winter. i'll jump into a river to wet my clothes, or wet my clothes with bottles of water. i'll bring N or if i can't find then SN will do. in the woods i'll find a good hiding spot, a cave or in a hidden spot like throwing myself into a big bush. then i'll drink the N or SN.

So this way i'll have 3 methods working for me at once.

  1. the N or SN will kill me, if not
  2. the hypothermia from being in wet clothes will kill me, if not
  3. starvation/dehydration will kill me (nobody will find me for months or ever since im in the middle of nowhere in winter in a well hidden spot)
i believe this will give me 100% chance of ctb, not 99.9% but 100%. i don't want to do this in a hotel room not knowing wtf will actually happen and HOPING my N or SN is good, and HOPING that it really does what it's suppose to do, and if not paying for it with a lifetime of being paralysed or whatever.
 
Last edited:

Jessica-

Wise
Mar 27, 2019
234
422
im not confident in even N. i think the best way to make sure you ctb 100% is to stack methods on top of each other.

for myself i'll find a big national park and hike 5 hours deep into the woods, in the middle of a cold snowy winter. i'll jump into a river to wet my clothes, or wet my clothes with bottles of water. i'll bring N or if i can't find then SN will do. in the woods i'll find a good hiding spot, a cave or in a hidden spot like throwing myself into a big bush. then i'll drink the N or SN.

So this way i'll have 3 methods working for me at once.

  1. the N or SN will kill me, if not
  2. the hypothermia from being in wet clothes will kill me, if not
  3. starvation/dehydration will kill me (nobody will find me for months or ever since im in the middle of nowhere in winter in a well hidden spot)
i believe this will give me 100% chance of ctb, not 99.9% but 100%. i don't want to do this in a hotel room not knowing wtf will actually happen and HOPING my N or SN is good, and HOPING that it really does what it's suppose to do, and if not paying for it with a lifetime of being paralysed or whatever.
I understand your thinking having 2 failed attempts under my belt. Best of luck!
 
Reactions: Lifeisatrap

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top