It CAN, but can your eye detect the difference between 3.14159 and 3.142857 (the nominal value, 22/7) displayed on the slide rule?!
It is, after all, an analog device and not digital (except for it being held by your digits!
Gee, can't my slide rule indicate the value of pi to 3.14159. . . . . . . .
Not me; Not yet. I would like to know what the drug was and whether a 30% overdose really is a lethal dose. Not many drugs (? any) have that acute a lethal to therapeutic dose range. Most are many 100%'s greater.In this case I think everyone agrees that it was the guy fault. However this is not because the digital readout. The readout would clearly show that it has the resolution of 10mg (that is what it can display and not speaking of accuracy) and if he want to measure 105mg with that is his fault. It's not the digital display that gives the false sense of accuracy. It's more likely that such a guy would have tried to guess between the mark when he used a scale with analog pointer.
But this is about using a tool in a foolish way, which he is at fault. Whether he did the killing is arguably another matter.Not me; Not yet. I would like to know what the drug was and whether a 30% overdose really is a lethal dose. Not many drugs (? any) have that acute a lethal to therapeutic dose range. Most are many 100%'s greater.
I asked that myself. However the actual error he made may even have been greater. The prosecution had it about overdoses of a multiple each.I would like to know what the drug was and whether a 30% overdose really is a lethal dose. Not many drugs (? any) have that acute a lethal to therapeutic dose range. Most are many 100%'s greater.
... and what about this aspect?But the suppliers are to blame too, for negligence or even intent.
With intent I mean those who emphasize the several-digit readout, but give no hint at tolerances.
With negligence I refer to manufacturers like the one of this scale, who not add features. As clearly stating the max error next to the display and blocking the display at loads below the minimum one.
I guess I’m a real hard-ass on this topic, but that expectation is a normal expectation of any competent equipment user. Often skipped but I don’t cut anyone slack for that kind of laziness, or arrogance, or foolishness... however one might want to classify it. The jury finding was a no-brainer.Good point.
The jury seemingly expects from a person doing such difficile treatment (by selfmade infusions of a non-clinically tested chemical, which showed to be very criticil in dosage in animal testing) a higher degree af alertness, which includes reading the manual/data sheet.
It CAN, but can your eye detect the difference between 3.14159 and 3.142857 (the nominal value, 22/7) displayed on the slide rule?!
It is, after all, an analog device and not digital (except for it being held by your digits!
Clearly the answer is to build a bigger, more accurate slide rule...
I like this approach. Too many plea deals in NA. In many cases people who have done nothing wrong are made to feel they have no way out but to plea to a lesser charge than what they are being threatened with just to have some hope of ever getting out of jail. It's a sick system all around.In Germany and other European countries the accused cannot settle things with the prosecutor in advance in cases of severity.
In general the system of criminal justice in Germany is very different from that of the USA.
But this all is going off topic.
Eric:I like this approach. Too many plea deals in NA. In many cases people who have done nothing wrong are made to feel they have no way out but to plea to a lesser charge than what they are being threatened with just to have some hope of ever getting out of jail. It's a sick system all around.
This is especially true of a physician. I use laser measures in my line of work, and I always check new equipment against an actual tape. There is no excuse for a doctor to simply assume a scale is right. In fact, a competent doctor would assume it is wrong until he can prove otherwise.I guess I’m a real hard-ass on this topic, but that expectation is a normal expectation of any competent equipment user. Often skipped but I don’t cut anyone slack for that kind of laziness, or arrogance, or foolishness... however one might want to classify it. The jury finding was a no-brainer.
I like this approach. Too many plea deals in NA. In many cases people who have done nothing wrong are made to feel they have no way out but to plea to a lesser charge than what they are being threatened with just to have some hope of ever getting out of jail. It's a sick system all around.
The thread is about a criminal charge arising out of a failure to use equipment properly.Please explain what the Hell this has to do with inaccuracies of either analog or digital light meters. And exactly how pleas bias the exposure.
At least in Canada I feel things are a bit better than the US.Eric:
I understand where you are coming from, but I've got another perspective, because I've worked with clients who chose to plead guilty, and as a result both they and the populace in general benefited from that choice. The populace benefits from certainty, prompt resolution, reduced cost and reduction of suffering for victims.
One of the things that most people don't realize that, at least in Canada, pleas don't generally happen until after there has been extensive disclosure of the Crown's case against the accused.
And in most cases, if there is going to be a trial, it will be before an experienced jurist, with a lot of experience working with "beyond a reasonable doubt", rather than inexperienced jurors.
Some of the absolutely best results I ever helped my clients obtain were sentences after a guilty plea.
And like most counsel who have appeared in criminal law courts, I certainly have helped the court reach a not guilty result.
Don't be misled by what you see on TV - most pleas happen after either careful deliberation or, in some cases, when the evidence against is overwhelming, and the offer from Crown Counsel is appropriately fair, in light of the accused accepting responsibility.
What I hate about lawyers is that somehow they take oath to protect accused from all charges no matter what the evidence is, and they view that as their success story to boot. And I don't know of a single system where actual justice is served regularly. Pleas make me sick in all serious cases, but far worse are those who did commit an atrocious crime getting off on a technicality. I don't know what kind of person can sleep knowing from evidence alone his client committed, saw all suffering, yet was beyond extatic to serve victims absolute vindication of his client on an irrelevant procedural misdeed.Eric:
I understand where you are coming from, but I've got another perspective, because I've worked with clients who chose to plead guilty, and as a result both they and the populace in general benefited from that choice. The populace benefits from certainty, prompt resolution, reduced cost and reduction of suffering for victims.
One of the things that most people don't realize that, at least in Canada, pleas don't generally happen until after there has been extensive disclosure of the Crown's case against the accused.
And in most cases, if there is going to be a trial, it will be before an experienced jurist, with a lot of experience working with "beyond a reasonable doubt", rather than inexperienced jurors.
Some of the absolutely best results I ever helped my clients obtain were sentences after a guilty plea.
And like most counsel who have appeared in criminal law courts, I certainly have helped the court reach a not guilty result.
Don't be misled by what you see on TV - most pleas happen after either careful deliberation or, in some cases, when the evidence against is overwhelming, and the offer from Crown Counsel is appropriately fair, in light of the accused accepting responsibility.
I best not respond fully, as this will change from just an aside to a complete derailment of the thread.What I hate about lawyers is that somehow they take oath to protect accused from all charges no matter what the evidence is, and they view that as their success story to boot. And I don't know of a single system where actual justice is served regularly. Pleas make me sick in all serious cases, but far worse are those who did commit an atrocious crime getting off on a technicality. I don't know what kind of person can sleep knowing from evidence alone his client committed, saw all suffering, yet was beyond extatic to serve victims absolute vindication of his client on an irrelevant procedural misdeed.
The problem with justice everywhere is that it is controlled by too many who do not support justice in the first place.
Let me focus on the case that introduced the thread. First, I want to say that I do not know about the particulars of the case. However, there is a point that everyone seems to have missed, and that is whether the accused was following the standard operating procedure (SOP) for preparation of the dose. I worked for about 16 years in the medical field, specifically clinical laboratory science. Clinical laboratory science is not necessarily a perfect analogy to preparing a dose of medication, but for purposes of discussion I am going to assume that the analogy is quite close.
Clearly the answer is to build a bigger, more accurate slide rule...
[I'm totally not wondering how much the girlfriend will yell at me if I make a ring-rule as replacement for the dining room table.]
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?