This enhancement is set forth in Section 481.141 of the Texas Health and Safety Code. This statute applies if a person dies or suffers serious bodily injury “as a result of ingesting, inhaling or introducing into the person’s body any amount of controlled substance manufactured or delivered by the defendant.”
This is what is called a strict liability offense. You don’t have to prove intent or even negligence. All the State has to prove is that the defendant provided the drugs, and someone dies or suffers serious bodily injury. Of course, the State still has to prove the drugs the person took came from the defendant.
No I don’t have research but that may in fact be the problem
People I have spoken to who are experts in the field claim lipid nano delivery systems cause a much more broad absorption of the actives in part the reason some are used
So as moveweight said a 17 year old experiencing 150 mg was likely too much for the system to handle
Especially if there was any sort of higher absorption rate due to nanoemulsion
It is known that THC can cause an increase in heart activity
I have no idea what goes on in the heads of others, so sometimes when I’m particularly vexed I’ll ask them wtf they mean. I’m as guilty as most of making the offhanded inartful comment. shrugs.
In the mean time I’ll wager that it had nothing to do with the speed of uptake but rather with some underlying metabolic issue/condition
“In conclusion, there is rising clinical evidence that there are THC dependent effects on myocardial ischemia and infarction. With rising legalization of THC around the US and increasing clinical use it is important to understand the effects of THC exposure. Further studies are needed to understand the interaction between THC, metabolic derangements, inflammation, vasoreactivity, platelet aggregation that result in myocardial ischemia and infarction. Efforts to meticulously characterize patients at risk of suffering from myocardial infarction associated with THC are needed.”
You’re really quite strange. You started off making baseless claims. When asked for any kind of basis for those claims:
Then immediately turn around and demand sources from those questioning you on it…
You understand, making baseless claims, having no proof or sources, then attacking those that want you to ‘show your work’ isn’t how scientific debate goes?
I’d ask you to follow your advice when posting,
And
Because we do like
Your citing a paper on bioavailability has no correlation to what is happening here. You cite it trying to give credibility to your poorly presented hypothesis. That might fly on reddit but we like science here.
I don’t discount the notion you may be correct. That is why we ask for the research and proof, not conjecture.
MO is the best, they have insane protections of the corporate veil. Trying to find the owner of a MO corporation is like trying to find the owner of a swiss bank account
I do believe things I’ve stated here have been misinterpreted and the tone misread
This is often the case so I don’t mind
I only meant to posit that the likelihood of higher bioavailability is high which I thought would be a simple statement based on research showing lipid nanoemulsions are often used for that
I also stated that as far as published research available on the internet there is little to none in regards to THC prepared in the manner
I made no definite claims only that the likelihood was high and that the concept was notable
when i eat edibles it fucks me up and the last thing i do is kill people. But maybe she was a bitch and nagging him. I dont know delta 8 but eating 150 mg is a standard dose imo and if his body was weak and about to have a heart attack then tehy cant just blame everything on his weak body.