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