What happened to this California family?

[Anonymous]

It sounds like they may be suggesting the illegal grows used fertilizers that exacerbated the growth of the toxic algae, which would explain high concentrations of it that are normally unusual.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it wasn't FA, it wasn't heat related, they weren't unprepared for the hike, they aren't bad parents.

Something killed them, maybe the toxic algae, maybe something related to growers.

That's not what they said at all.

Please tell us what they said.

They said the pathologist is awaiting complete toxicology results before releasing any conclusions.

Concluding it was toxic algae and only toxic algae based on its existence in the river is not different from saying it was heat and only heat based only on it having a high temperature of 109. Actually the latter conclusion would be more logical given many people die every year from heat and there is maybe one death attributed to algae.

Oh, you're back to blaming the victim. "Bad parenting" killed them.

Experienced hikers would not be drinking untreated river water.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it wasn't FA, it wasn't heat related, they weren't unprepared for the hike, they aren't bad parents.

Something killed them, maybe the toxic algae, maybe something related to growers.

That's not what they said at all.

Please tell us what they said.

They said the pathologist is awaiting complete toxicology results before releasing any conclusions.

Concluding it was toxic algae and only toxic algae based on its existence in the river is not different from saying it was heat and only heat based only on it having a high temperature of 109. Actually the latter conclusion would be more logical given many people die every year from heat and there is maybe one death attributed to algae.

Oh, you're back to blaming the victim. "Bad parenting" killed them.

Oh no.. I'm back to you're a hypocrite

Your first sentence was useful. Your second paragraph was pure victim blaming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it wasn't FA, it wasn't heat related, they weren't unprepared for the hike, they aren't bad parents.

Something killed them, maybe the toxic algae, maybe something related to growers.

That's not what they said at all.

Please tell us what they said.

They said the pathologist is awaiting complete toxicology results before releasing any conclusions.

Concluding it was toxic algae and only toxic algae based on its existence in the river is not different from saying it was heat and only heat based only on it having a high temperature of 109. Actually the latter conclusion would be more logical given many people die every year from heat and there is maybe one death attributed to algae.

Even ingesting the toxic algae has almost never resulted in death, much less encountering it airborne. The chances of airborne anatoxin-a causing death in 3 people and a dog are extremely rare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it wasn't FA, it wasn't heat related, they weren't unprepared for the hike, they aren't bad parents.

Something killed them, maybe the toxic algae, maybe something related to growers.

That's not what they said at all.

Please tell us what they said.

They said the pathologist is awaiting complete toxicology results before releasing any conclusions.

Concluding it was toxic algae and only toxic algae based on its existence in the river is not different from saying it was heat and only heat based only on it having a high temperature of 109. Actually the latter conclusion would be more logical given many people die every year from heat and there is maybe one death attributed to algae.

Even ingesting the toxic algae has almost never resulted in death, much less encountering it airborne. The chances of airborne anatoxin-a causing death in 3 people and a dog are extremely rare.

Everything that's happened in the recent past has been extremely rare. Covid, Ida, the fires in Canada, etc.

[Anonymous]

The sheriff said in the NYT article that it’s the most mysterious case he’s seen in his career. If it was as simple as heat stroke, he wouldn’t have called in the FBI and laboratories around the country to work around the clock on this case. My theory is that the illegal growers’ fertilizer run-off and the high temps contributed to a higher than usual amount of toxic algae making it even more poisonous than usual. They were well prepared for the hike so wouldn’t have suffered from heat stroke but for being weakened or even killed by the algae. Perhaps they got overheated and took a dip in the water to cool off. Perhaps Oski went in first and stirred up the blooms. The toxin can be ingested, inhaled, or dermal. Maybe the baby died from heatstroke after the parents were incapacitated. I doubt they would have given the baby the water to drink or even put her in the water.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The sheriff said in the NYT article that it’s the most mysterious case he’s seen in his career. If it was as simple as heat stroke, he wouldn’t have called in the FBI and laboratories around the country to work around the clock on this case. My theory is that the illegal growers’ fertilizer run-off and the high temps contributed to a higher than usual amount of toxic algae making it even more poisonous than usual. They were well prepared for the hike so wouldn’t have suffered from heat stroke but for being weakened or even killed by the algae. Perhaps they got overheated and took a dip in the water to cool off. Perhaps Oski went in first and stirred up the blooms. The toxin can be ingested, inhaled, or dermal. Maybe the baby died from heatstroke after the parents were incapacitated. I doubt they would have given the baby the water to drink or even put her in the water.

Why are you assuming they wouldn't have drunk the water? They had the bad judgment to undertake an 8+ mile hike on a 97+ degree day. You think the bad decisions stopped there?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it wasn't FA, it wasn't heat related, they weren't unprepared for the hike, they aren't bad parents.

Something killed them, maybe the toxic algae, maybe something related to growers.

That's not what they said at all.

Please tell us what they said.

They said the pathologist is awaiting complete toxicology results before releasing any conclusions.

Concluding it was toxic algae and only toxic algae based on its existence in the river is not different from saying it was heat and only heat based only on it having a high temperature of 109. Actually the latter conclusion would be more logical given many people die every year from heat and there is maybe one death attributed to algae.

Oh, you're back to blaming the victim. "Bad parenting" killed them.

You're a fool to equate what is the most logical reason for their deaths to victim blaming.

[Anonymous]

Based on the recent developments, do you think the authorities have effectively ruled out FA? They seem very focused on anything but that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sheriff said in the NYT article that it’s the most mysterious case he’s seen in his career. If it was as simple as heat stroke, he wouldn’t have called in the FBI and laboratories around the country to work around the clock on this case. My theory is that the illegal growers’ fertilizer run-off and the high temps contributed to a higher than usual amount of toxic algae making it even more poisonous than usual. They were well prepared for the hike so wouldn’t have suffered from heat stroke but for being weakened or even killed by the algae. Perhaps they got overheated and took a dip in the water to cool off. Perhaps Oski went in first and stirred up the blooms. The toxin can be ingested, inhaled, or dermal. Maybe the baby died from heatstroke after the parents were incapacitated. I doubt they would have given the baby the water to drink or even put her in the water.

Why are you assuming they wouldn't have drunk the water? They had the bad judgment to undertake an 8+ mile hike on a 97+ degree day. You think the bad decisions stopped there?

They had water left over in their pack. Maybe they drank the water too saving the clean water for the baby. That’s why I said maybe the parents and dog succumbed to the poison and baby died of heatstroke. But anatoxin can be inhaled so maybe getting in the water (they themselves or Oski) stirred things up and they inhaled it. You keep saying they had bad judgment. I don’t know if hiking in that heat, by itself, without toxin, would have killed them. I myself have hiked or run in pretty extreme conditions and was no worse for the wear. I always went prepared (as the sheriff said they were) and have years of conditioning and acclimating under my belt.

[Anonymous]

I could see dummies thinking the water off this sort of trail was a "pure" spring. The same sort of dummies who take a baby and dog on a 100-degree extreme walk, err sorry, "hike".

[Anonymous]

Didn't it say they just moved to the area? Or just bought a brand new house? What if the presumably well water (?) they got from the new house is actually contaminated? Presumably that's what they filled all their gear up with, which would be fed to dog and baby bottle?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Didn't it say they just moved to the area? Or just bought a brand new house? What if the presumably well water (?) they got from the new house is actually contaminated? Presumably that's what they filled all their gear up with, which would be fed to dog and baby bottle?

No, they moved to the area at least a year ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That slope is unsuitable for a grow operation. No water, no shade, hikers.

I think the grow operations are upstream and the runoff from them are in the water/river. They’re not right there on the path, but farther up river

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The sheriff said in the NYT article that it’s the most mysterious case he’s seen in his career. If it was as simple as heat stroke, he wouldn’t have called in the FBI and laboratories around the country to work around the clock on this case. My theory is that the illegal growers’ fertilizer run-off and the high temps contributed to a higher than usual amount of toxic algae making it even more poisonous than usual. They were well prepared for the hike so wouldn’t have suffered from heat stroke but for being weakened or even killed by the algae. Perhaps they got overheated and took a dip in the water to cool off. Perhaps Oski went in first and stirred up the blooms. The toxin can be ingested, inhaled, or dermal. Maybe the baby died from heatstroke after the parents were incapacitated. I doubt they would have given the baby the water to drink or even put her in the water.

That seems like a HUGE leap. It was a difficult, unshaded, 9 MILE hike in 109 degree heat. Nobody can really prepare for that, by definition. Especially not an infant and a double-coated older dog. My guess is the sheriff isn't too bright, and that heat exhaustion deaths are new to him (because the are rare and the area is not that highly trafficked compared to say Zion or Death Valley.) And because he went out the gate with the "hazmat" thing, he's now stuck with that.