Method (Sorry for all of the posts) Carbon monoxide, charcoal thread. With full, correct, working explanation. (I promise this time)

[knion]

Hey!


(As this is its own thread, I'd like to say that a lot of this first part is in relation to previous posts I have made on this website. If you want to read the actual helpful information, I would scroll to the end!
And, yet again, I'm sorry for posting so much).


FIRSTLY I WANT TO SAY THAT I HAVE MADE A GRAVE MISTAKE IN MY ORIGINAL POST.

I WILL KEEP IT POSTED AS A LOT OF THE INFORMATION (such as pictures and the weights of carbon) MAY STILL BE USEFUL.



HOWEVER, MY CALCULATIONS OF THE SPACE WITHIN A CAR AND THE TIME IT WOULD TAKE TO FILL WAS WRONG.



I HAVE NOW FIXED THIS MISTAKE IN THIS COMMENT/ POST.



THESE CALCULATIONS ARE NOT ONLY MORE ACCURATE BECAUSE I DID NOT MAKE A STUPID MISTAKE, BUT THEY ARE ALSO MUCH MUCH MORE IN DEPTH.



I would like to thank Bedrock48 for their comment. Without it I wouldn't have found my mistake.



I also realise that I am posting a lot on this website, so don't worry, I will take a while off after this! Haha.





IF YOU WISH TO SEE THE HELPFUL STUFF, RATHER THAN A WHOLE LOT OF WORKINGS OUT, PLEASE SCROLL STRAIGHT TO THE BOTTOM.





Ok, so it took a little while, but I found some info on this.

Here is a picture that outlines the properties of different types of charcoal (incase anyone was interested)







I also found a study about the concentration of CO in a certain area. And this study appears to have used Binchotan as it's charcoal of choice.



"if the concentration of carbon in the briquettes is 85%, the lethal concentration of CO is 10 000 ppm and the volume of an apartment is 100 m3, then burning 629 g of charcoal briquettes could produce a potentially toxic atmosphere." - (https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2012...nduced-death-and-toxicity-charcoal-briquettes).



Sadly this study didn't focus on the time it took to produce this effect.

HOWEVER, it does tell us that only 629 g of Binchotan charcoal briquettes will achieve 10000ppm at some point, a particularly lethal concentration.





To help understand what this means and even try to figure out the timings on this, I also found another study.



This study measured the speed at which 50-100g of charcoal produced Carbon monoxide.



these were the results:









(https://www.jniosh.johas.go.jp/en/indu_hel/doc/IH_49_3_393.pdf)



I'm entirely new to the "±" symbol, but apparently it is "the confidence interval or error in a measurement"



So, for example, sample A, where it says 185 ± 31, it actually just means *roughly 185*. This is because, if I'm right, the outcome is within the realm of 185 but potentially plus OR minus 31.







It's at this point I'd like to say that I'm sorry. This reply is extremely lengthy.

I at least hope that they are genuinely useful.







Anyways.

To continue, it looks as though (If I understand this correctly), the 'best' binchotan (sample A) which i'd imagine is 85% carbon at least, releases roughly 185 ml of CO per minute.



To figure out how long it would take to get to a high enough ppm using this 85% carbon, we'll need to do some equations.



By the way, for anyone confused, as I was for a long while, PPM is an abbreviation for "parts per million" and it also can be expressed as milligrams per liter (mg/L)

PPM is calculated by dividing the mass of the solute by the mass of the solution, then multiplying by 1,000,000





So.



Let's use the example of the the room from earlier (100 m3). This room as litres would be 100,000 litres



1,000 ml is a litre.



185 ml is 0.185 litres.



So, the mass of the 'solution' (the air in the room), is 100,000 litres.



(1 minute of carbon burning) 0.185(ml) X 60 (mins) = 11.1 (litres)



11.1 (litres) / 100,000 (litres) = 0.000111 (litres)



0.000111 (litres) X 1,000,000 = 111 ppm



So it would take an hour for 50-100g (let's say 75g) of 85% Carbon to get to 111pm in a 100m3 room.







I mean, this obviously isn't going to be enough to satisfyingly end your life. So, let's use the amount of charcoal from earlier.



75g/75 = 1g



111pm / 75 = 1.48



1.48 X 629 = 930.92



So, 629 grams of 85% charcoal in a 100m3 room would take an hour to get to 930.92 ppm of CO.

So this means, in the initial test that I talked about, they probably measured that it got to 10,000 ppm after around, well, 10 hours

(which would obviously still make sense and be alarming in the context of the research, because it is surrounding cooking inside buildings such as restaurants, which are open for extended periods of time)





Anyway.



To finally answer your (Bedrock48) question.

If we assume that binchotan is 85% charcoal, and the BBQ charcoal briquettes are roughly 75% you would be correct in saying that the effect would not only create less smoke (as that is something binchotan does), but it would also cause death much more quickly, (or you would at least need more of the briquettes to achieve the same effect, but not A LOT more as far as I can tell).





If we want prove this, all we really need to do is as follows:



If it takes 629 grams of 85% charcoal an hour to fill a 100m3 room with 930.92 ppm, then:



629g / 85 = 7.4 g



85g - 75g = 10g



85g + 10g = 95



7.4 X 95 = 703



It would take 704 grams of 75% carbon an hour to fill a 100m3 room with 930.92 ppm.



So 85% charcoal only needs 629 grams to beat 75% charcoal's 704 grams to achieve the same goal in the same time.







CHARCOAL CARBON MONOXIDE IN A SMALL SPACE.



So, as I said at the beginning of this post/ reply, I made a massive mistake in the original post.



So, this is where I would like to make up my mistake by talking about the time it would take to die in the same space as, say, a car, through this method.



(Just an FYI, it gets even MORE tricky from this point.)





So, 930.92 ppm is 930.92 g/ litre.



A single m3 is 1000 litres and 100m3 holds 100,000 litres.



So If it takes one hour to reach 930.92 g/litre in a 100,000 litre room, Then, in a room only 3,000 litres big:



100/3 = 33.43333333333333



33.43333333333333 X 1,000 = 33,433.33333



33,433.33333 X 930.92 = 31,123,758.66666667



An hour would've been enough time to reach 31,123,758.666666667ppm (which obviously doesn't make sense).



So this means, if 60 minutes would have had to have passed to achieve the 31,123,758.7ppm, we would achieve 1ppm in 0.000001927787728 minutes. This is 1.927788e seconds



SO, to achieve the lethal dose of 10,000ppm that we want in our (on average) 3 cubic metre car, we would want to wait:



1ppm X 10,000 = 10,000 ppm



1.927788e X 10,000 = 19,277.88



This is equal to 5.3547222222222 hours!

(And this is the case with 705 grams of 75% charcoal, and 629 grams of 85% charcoal, more charcoal would achieve affects more quickly)









ANYWAYS, THE REAL IMPORTANT, MINI VERSION OF THIS STUFF IS BELOW:



If you saw this post/ reply and thought, wow, that's way too much to read. Here is what I have found.

1,600 ppm (0.16%), (1.6‰)

Headache, increased heart rate, dizziness, and nausea within 20 min; death in less than 2 hour

3,200 ppm (0.32%), (3.2‰)

Headache, dizziness and nausea in five to ten minutes. Death within 30 mins.

6,400 ppm (0.64%), (6.4‰)

Headache and dizziness in one to two minutes. Convulsions, respiratory arrest, and death in less than 20 minutes

12,800 ppm (1.28%), (12.8‰)

Unconsciousness after 2–3 breaths. Death in less than three minutes

It would take 629 grams of 85% charcoal (binchotan) one hour to reach 930.92 ppm in a room 100 cubic metres big.

It would take 704 grams of 75% charcoal to have the same effect.



AND, most importantly, it would take just over 5 hours for 629 grams of 85% charcoal, OR 704 grams of 75% charcoal to reach 10,000ppm in a car with an interior that measures 3 cubic.







Anyways.



Yet again, I profusely apologise for the mistake I made in my last post. I am extremely sorry about that.



I hope that this message will be helpful and easy to read for all of you who wish to CTB by carbon monoxide poisoning via Charcoal.



Thank you all so much,



Knion.

 

[knion]

Hey!


(As this is its own thread, I'd like to say that a lot of this first part is in relation to previous posts I have made on this website. If you want to read the actual helpful information, I would scroll to the end!
And, yet again, I'm sorry for posting so much).


FIRSTLY I WANT TO SAY THAT I HAVE MADE A GRAVE MISTAKE IN MY ORIGINAL POST.

I WILL KEEP IT POSTED AS A LOT OF THE INFORMATION (such as pictures and the weights of carbon) MAY STILL BE USEFUL.



HOWEVER, MY CALCULATIONS OF THE SPACE WITHIN A CAR AND THE TIME IT WOULD TAKE TO FILL WAS WRONG.



I HAVE NOW FIXED THIS MISTAKE IN THIS COMMENT/ POST.



THESE CALCULATIONS ARE NOT ONLY MORE ACCURATE BECAUSE I DID NOT MAKE A STUPID MISTAKE, BUT THEY ARE ALSO MUCH MUCH MORE IN DEPTH.



I would like to thank Bedrock48 for their comment. Without it I wouldn't have found my mistake.



I also realise that I am posting a lot on this website, so don't worry, I will take a while off after this! Haha.





IF YOU WISH TO SEE THE HELPFUL STUFF, RATHER THAN A WHOLE LOT OF WORKINGS OUT, PLEASE SCROLL STRAIGHT TO THE BOTTOM.





Ok, so it took a little while, but I found some info on this.

Here is a picture that outlines the properties of different types of charcoal (incase anyone was interested)

View attachment 79825





I also found a study about the concentration of CO in a certain area. And this study appears to have used Binchotan as it's charcoal of choice.



"if the concentration of carbon in the briquettes is 85%, the lethal concentration of CO is 10 000 ppm and the volume of an apartment is 100 m3, then burning 629 g of charcoal briquettes could produce a potentially toxic atmosphere." - (https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2012...nduced-death-and-toxicity-charcoal-briquettes).



Sadly this study didn't focus on the time it took to produce this effect.

HOWEVER, it does tell us that only 629 g of Binchotan charcoal briquettes will achieve 10000ppm at some point, a particularly lethal concentration.





To help understand what this means and even try to figure out the timings on this, I also found another study.



This study measured the speed at which 50-100g of charcoal produced Carbon monoxide.



these were the results:



View attachment 79823

View attachment 79824



(https://www.jniosh.johas.go.jp/en/indu_hel/doc/IH_49_3_393.pdf)



I'm entirely new to the "±" symbol, but apparently it is "the confidence interval or error in a measurement"



So, for example, sample A, where it says 185 ± 31, it actually just means *roughly 185*. This is because, if I'm right, the outcome is within the realm of 185 but potentially plus OR minus 31.







It's at this point I'd like to say that I'm sorry. This reply is extremely lengthy.

I at least hope that they are genuinely useful.







Anyways.

To continue, it looks as though (If I understand this correctly), the 'best' binchotan (sample A) which i'd imagine is 85% carbon at least, releases roughly 185 ml of CO per minute.



To figure out how long it would take to get to a high enough ppm using this 85% carbon, we'll need to do some equations.



By the way, for anyone confused, as I was for a long while, PPM is an abbreviation for "parts per million" and it also can be expressed as milligrams per liter (mg/L)

PPM is calculated by dividing the mass of the solute by the mass of the solution, then multiplying by 1,000,000





So.



Let's use the example of the the room from earlier (100 m3). This room as litres would be 100,000 litres



1,000 ml is a litre.



185 ml is 0.185 litres.



So, the mass of the 'solution' (the air in the room), is 100,000 litres.



(1 minute of carbon burning) 0.185(ml) X 60 (mins) = 11.1 (litres)



11.1 (litres) / 100,000 (litres) = 0.000111 (litres)



0.000111 (litres) X 1,000,000 = 111 ppm



So it would take an hour for 50-100g (let's say 75g) of 85% Carbon to get to 111pm in a 100m3 room.







I mean, this obviously isn't going to be enough to satisfyingly end your life. So, let's use the amount of charcoal from earlier.



75g/75 = 1g



111pm / 75 = 1.48



1.48 X 629 = 930.92



So, 629 grams of 85% charcoal in a 100m3 room would take an hour to get to 930.92 ppm of CO.

So this means, in the initial test that I talked about, they probably measured that it got to 10,000 ppm after around, well, 10 hours

(which would obviously still make sense and be alarming in the context of the research, because it is surrounding cooking inside buildings such as restaurants, which are open for extended periods of time)





Anyway.



To finally answer your (Bedrock48) question.

If we assume that binchotan is 85% charcoal, and the BBQ charcoal briquettes are roughly 75% you would be correct in saying that the effect would not only create less smoke (as that is something binchotan does), but it would also cause death much more quickly, (or you would at least need more of the briquettes to achieve the same effect, but not A LOT more as far as I can tell).





If we want prove this, all we really need to do is as follows:



If it takes 629 grams of 85% charcoal an hour to fill a 100m3 room with 930.92 ppm, then:



629g / 85 = 7.4 g



85g - 75g = 10g



85g + 10g = 95



7.4 X 95 = 703



It would take 704 grams of 75% carbon an hour to fill a 100m3 room with 930.92 ppm.



So 85% charcoal only needs 629 grams to beat 75% charcoal's 704 grams to achieve the same goal in the same time.







CHARCOAL CARBON MONOXIDE IN A SMALL SPACE.



So, as I said at the beginning of this post/ reply, I made a massive mistake in the original post.



So, this is where I would like to make up my mistake by talking about the time it would take to die in the same space as, say, a car, through this method.



(Just an FYI, it gets even MORE tricky from this point.)





So, 930.92 ppm is 930.92 g/ litre.



A single m3 is 1000 litres and 100m3 holds 100,000 litres.



So If it takes one hour to reach 930.92 g/litre in a 100,000 litre room, Then, in a room only 3,000 litres big:



100/3 = 33.43333333333333



33.43333333333333 X 1,000 = 33,433.33333



33,433.33333 X 930.92 = 31,123,758.66666667



An hour would've been enough time to reach 31,123,758.666666667ppm (which obviously doesn't make sense).



So this means, if 60 minutes would have had to have passed to achieve the 31,123,758.7ppm, we would achieve 1ppm in 0.000001927787728 minutes. This is 1.927788e seconds



SO, to achieve the lethal dose of 10,000ppm that we want in our (on average) 3 cubic metre car, we would want to wait:



1ppm X 10,000 = 10,000 ppm



1.927788e X 10,000 = 19,277.88



This is equal to 5.3547222222222 hours!

(And this is the case with 705 grams of 75% charcoal, and 629 grams of 85% charcoal, more charcoal would achieve affects more quickly)









ANYWAYS, THE REAL IMPORTANT, MINI VERSION OF THIS STUFF IS BELOW:



If you saw this post/ reply and thought, wow, that's way too much to read. Here is what I have found.

1,600 ppm (0.16%), (1.6‰)

Headache, increased heart rate, dizziness, and nausea within 20 min; death in less than 2 hour

3,200 ppm (0.32%), (3.2‰)

Headache, dizziness and nausea in five to ten minutes. Death within 30 mins.

6,400 ppm (0.64%), (6.4‰)

Headache and dizziness in one to two minutes. Convulsions, respiratory arrest, and death in less than 20 minutes

12,800 ppm (1.28%), (12.8‰)

Unconsciousness after 2–3 breaths. Death in less than three minutes

It would take 629 grams of 85% charcoal (binchotan) one hour to reach 930.92 ppm in a room 100 cubic metres big.

It would take 704 grams of 75% charcoal to have the same effect.



AND, most importantly, it would take just over 5 hours for 629 grams of 85% charcoal, OR 704 grams of 75% charcoal to reach 10,000ppm in a car with an interior that measures 3 cubic.







Anyways.



Yet again, I profusely apologise for the mistake I made in my last post. I am extremely sorry about that.



I hope that this message will be helpful and easy to read for all of you who wish to CTB by carbon monoxide poisoning via Charcoal.



Thank you all so much,



Knion.

….
I promise this is my final addition.

I did some workings out for my personal attempt. These workings will be what I use when I make my next attempt and hopefully say goodbye to the world.


In a car that is (probably/ statistically) 3 cubic metres in size, Just about 2,000 grams of charcoal (4 bar-be-quicks) at probably 75% carbon content, will take 1 hour and 3/4 to reach the extremely Fatal level of 10,500, at which point, I will probably get into my car.

Potentially I will wait a little longer to make up for any escaped CO, but other than that, this seems like a pretty good plan.

Thanks for reading!

 

[trying.to.find.peace]

….
I promise this is my final addition.

I did some workings out for my personal attempt. These workings will be what I use when I make my next attempt and hopefully say goodbye to the world.


In a car that is (probably/ statistically) 3 cubic metres in size, Just about 2,000 grams of charcoal (4 bar-be-quicks) at probably 75% carbon content, will take 1 hour and 3/4 to reach the extremely Fatal level of 10,500, at which point, I will probably get into my car.

Potentially I will wait a little longer to make up for any escaped CO, but other than that, this seems like a pretty good plan.

Thanks for reading!

I think your math is flawed or theres a missing variable. If it reached 10,000 ppm in 1.75 hours you would already have succeeded with your first attempt as you sat in the car for 2-3 hours. Sorry to be so negative, im just observing.

 

[knion]

I think your math is flawed or theres a missing variable. If it reached 10,000 ppm in 1.75 hours you would already have succeeded with your first attempt as you sat in the car for 2-3 hours. Sorry to be so negative, im just observing.

Hey! Don't worry about it!
I can't imagine people on here doing anything other than trying to help each-other, I appreciate your concern!

at first glance at your comment, I thought I'd made a full on error… again!
However, I think it's more a problem with the idea of the buildup over time…. as well as my shoddy story telling.

I've got to be honest, I was rather drunk, probably made worse by the lack of oxygen in my system towards the end, and I was quite badly poisoned to boot, so I'd imagine the timings I said in my story are a little mixed up.
I mean, I vaguely remember leaving my car before my girlfriend got to me and getting back in, but I'm not entirely sure if that happened (I mean, I'd imagine it did seeing as I survived).

Anyways, my theory is:
A) I got out of the car at the 1 hour 15 ish mark? in a dazed stupor. "For a quick breather" (ha)

B) my girlfriend would've been there pretty soon after. And, as much as I was back IN the car in between me (probably) getting out and her arriving, the majority of the gas would've probably escaped, giving my body time to recouperate and not get much worse.

And C) because I got in at the start with the charcoal, I feel that in the first half an hour or so, maybe even the first 45 mins, I can't imagine much would've happened.

Even after doing the calculations, I'd imagine it'd be somewhere along the lines of 1,600ppm to 5,000ppm for most of the time I was sitting in the car, meaning my body would start experiencing nausea and dizziness at around the 1 hour mark, if not before.
I gave myself nowhere near enough time to pass out or cause any real damage :(


Anyways, yeah, my 2-3 hours in the car was probably closer to 1 hour.
However, the exaggeration wasn't intentional!
The whole night felt like a long one as you can probably imagine and I don't actually remember a whole lot from inside the car.

But yeah. Thank you for your reply!
And I apologise for any confusion I caused!

Knion.

 

[trying.to.find.peace]

Hopefully the next attempt will work better. I appreciate the journaling of your attempt. It would be good to just be able to fall asleep and not wake. I tried to ctb with CO but the levels only reached like 500ppm and even after a few hours it had no effect at all. I like the mini bbq idea beacuse i could just set them up as they are without any extra gear as they come with their own stand and they are quite cheap to buy. My main concern is having enough coals to be effective in a timely manner.

 

[FromGermany]

A "promise" in the thread title regarding CO, that there is a "working" explanation, ist very dangerous to the health of people, because there is absolutely no always-the-same-way working method for CO. Probably I have investigated and tested this method more than anybody else over years.

Thread titles like that are playing into the hands of the enemy of free CTB, because some of them I believe have also knowledge about some methods and can argue "Look, how dangerous these people are to others."

CTB advice is no game. If people will suffer under brain damage after some days or weeks due to a failed CO attempt, will the people, who gave "promise" advice also pay the medical costs, will talk to them to explain, why they have been wrong, have not warned also about the risks, so that people have a fair chance to chose their own CTB method properly and wisely?

No, of course not. I will never happen.

 

[cambrai33]

A "promise" in the thread title regarding CO, that there is a "working" explanation, ist very dangerous to the health of people, because there is absolutely no always-the-same-way working method for CO. Probably I have investigated and tested this method more than anybody else over years.

Thread titles like that are playing into the hands of the enemy of free CTB, because some of them I believe have also knowledge about some methods and can argue "Look, how dangerous these people are to others."

CTB advice is no game. If people will suffer under brain damage after some days or weeks due to a failed CO attempt, will the people, who gave "promise" advice also pay the medical costs, will talk to them to explain, why they have been wrong, have not warned also about the risks, so that people have a fair chance to chose their own CTB method properly and wisely?

No, of course not. I will never happen.

Sorry you are completely out of order. The OP clearly stated it was for educational purposes and they did not condone or encourage ctb in any way.

Your opinion is not the only opinion or view and you should try to accept that others may differ. Also the title means he promises that this is the last explanation and not a promise of a foolproof ctb, construct and context should have illuminated this to you.

If you have any 100 percent foolproof solution I and I'm sure many others would love to hear it and could you please go through every other ctb method on here and review accordingly

 

[FromGermany]

The title of a thread is the main thing. It's like the title of a book. It's a message. This is my point.

Some people would not even read the whole thread, because the title already confirms their hope for an easy, painless and fast CTB, and all three element will not happen with CO.

Even the wind outside and the material of the walls, the personal breath volume, how large a person is, all that has a huge impact on the set. If one has not a CO meter with at least 2.000 ppm and did not many tests with that, he should not even give any advice to this method in my opinion.

There is no 100 % solution with the exception of two bottles of N, Meto and 24 hours without being found, it's a solution with a probability bordering on certainty. Also the method I and some others here have chosen, ist not 100 %, but our method is at least very close to it.

I have explained the basics thousands of times now. If one will click on my profile and content, it's no secret.

I don't like poison at all, but SN, I don't like and it will be never my method, is more safe, less painful and much more quicker than CO, if done properly.

In some cases, people died, who want to rescue their relatives from the CO. The CTB people survived.

With SN no one will be put at risk.

 

[knion]

Sorry you are completely out of order. The OP clearly stated it was for educational purposes and they did not condone or encourage ctb in any way.

Your opinion is not the only opinion or view and you should try to accept that others may differ. Also the title means he promises that this is the last explanation and not a promise of a foolproof ctb, construct and context should have illuminated this to you.

If you have any 100 percent foolproof solution I and I'm sure many others would love to hear it and could you please go through every other ctb method on here and review accordingly

Hey!
Thank you so much for standing up for me!
I really appreciate it!

You are right, I only really meant that I promise this post would be my last.

However, I have more to say, but I will reply to 'FromGermany' directly.

Thank you again!

Knion.

The title of a thread is the main thing. It's like the title of a book. It's a message. This is my point.

Some people would not even read the whole thread, because the title already confirms their hope for an easy, painless and fast CTB, and all three element will not happen with CO.

Even the wind outside and the material of the walls, the personal breath volume, how large a person is, all that has a huge impact on the set. If one has not a CO meter with at least 2.000 ppm and did not many tests with that, he should not even give any advice to this method in my opinion.

There is no 100 % solution with the exception of two bottles of N, Meto and 24 hours without being found, it's a solution with a probability bordering on certainty. Also the method I and some others here have chosen, ist not 100 %, but our method is at least very close to it.

I have explained the basics thousands of times now. If one will click on my profile and content, it's no secret.

I don't like poison at all, but SN, I don't like and it will be never my method, is more safe, less painful and much more quicker than CO, if done properly.

In some cases, people died, who want to rescue their relatives from the CO. The CTB people survived.

With SN no one will be put at risk.

Hey!
As always, I really appreciate criticism and comments on my posts, just because you disagree with what I said, this is no different.

I do get a little wound up, you could say, towards the end of this comment.
I don't like getting angry at people, but what we are talking about is SERIOUS, and you can't be making these accusations and the claims you have made willy nilly.

Anyways, to reply to your comments, Cambria33 explained correctly that what I meant by "promise" Is that I promised this post would be my last (I have posted A lot over the past few days)
However, I would like to add that what I meant by "Full, correct, working explanation" is that the calculations and following explanation should be correct based on the information given.

My calculations were only really meant to show how much charcoal would achieve a certain PPM within a certain time limit.

People say that a 10,000 ppm is enough to kill someone, but as you said, you obviously need to take into account other factors, such as any air holes, wind outside, an individuals health prior to the attempt (including their weight potentially, as you said).

Also, you said
"If one has not a CO meter with at least 2.000 ppm and did not many tests with that, he should not even give any advice to this method in my opinion." However I refer to two studies in which PPM is recorded (the second study enacted the test 10 times for each charcoal), so I think it's a little absurd to suggest that I shouldn't be able to give "ANY" advice on this method.
I know I'm no professional, but it's not like I'm doing this completely off the top of my own head. I have done my research.


Anyway, on a serious note, I never claimed that the CO method would be guaranteed to kill you, however you have made this claim:
"There is no 100 % solution with the exception of two bottles of N, Meto and 24 hours without being found"
In the same way I couldn't guarantee someone would die using the CO method, you can't say that the N method is quote "very close" to "100%" effective.

Someone might drink the drinks too slowly, or someone (again) might have adverse health problems that will effect the attempt.
Also, Meto isn't guaranteed to work, the individual attempting to CTB could end up vomiting no matter what.
IF ANYTHING, the N method is less rigorously tested than the CO method.

There have been clinical studies to find out how much CO is produced by charcoal because that is helpful for the 'usual' people who want to live (as in, to be able to prevent deaths in future), whereas, I can't imagine that there are many, IF ANY clinical studies surrounding the success of death in people who CTB through the consumption of N.

Yeah, we see success stories on this website, but really how do we know N is more successful than anything else.
You can say "if N is done correctly then you will die" but I could say the same thing about the CO method.

And again on a serious note, YOU CANNOT CLAIM THAT "With SN no one will be put at risk.", here you are doing exactly what you are criticising me for doing… which I didn't even doing.


Also, I haven't even STARTED on your first comment.

You said "Thread titles like that are playing into the hands of the enemy of free CTB, because some of them I believe have also knowledge about some methods and can argue "Look, how dangerous these people are to others.""
Are you saying here that I shouldn't be using this website for its intended purpose?
I wanted to make my thread title CLEAR so that it could be easily found by people who need it.
I think it's absurd to suggest that people will read it and say "look how dangerous these people are", people are going to say that about this website anyway!
I don't think people shouldn't be able to post methods like I have for the reason that people will find it appalling, because most people are sadly going to find what we talk about appalling anyway.


Anyway, finally, as for you saying:
"If people will suffer under brain damage after some days or weeks due to a failed CO attempt, will the people, who gave "promise" advice also pay the medical costs, will talk to them to explain, why they have been wrong, have not warned also about the risks, so that people have a fair chance to chose their own CTB method properly and wisely?

No, of course not. I will never happen"

Whilst yes, I didn't write about the potentially devastating implications of a failed CO attempt, I think people are well aware of the fact that what they are doing is dangerous. The very reason I posted what I did is to make sure that people are hopefully educated enough to make a well informed decision when it comes to their death.
I'm sure people are aware that they may end up on a vegetative state, but that is the case with ALL CTB methods.
I don't see you warning people about the ills effects of a failed N attempt.


Anyways, yes, as I said, I don't like to get angry, so I hope that this was civil (enough).

Again.
Thanks for your reply.
I wish you all the best,

Knion.

 

[FromGermany]

I have overlooked your post, only needed one sentence to know, where the wind is blowing.

"People say that a 10,000 ppm is enough to kill someone"

"People say".
Hearsay are no facts.

"10,000 ppm is enough to kill someone"
There is no way, one can get 10.000 ppm in a small room or car or tent with charcoal. Only theoretically scenarios.

Not even the poor guy who mixed the chemicals in his sealed car to get more higher ppm and has filmed everything, came close to 10.000 and he suffered so bad, that this incident was one of the top mind-changer for me aside the criminal cases here in Germany, when after failed attempt people can not walk, can not think, can not behave as it was before, for the rest of their lives.

Hearsay nonsense and lack of research and knowledge is so bad, because it can bring desperate people in a very dangerous situation.

I at least have fortunately so much intellect and discipline, that I have changed my method and ran away from CO, not because of hearsay but because of researching everything which has been written, discussed also on scientific studies, all cases of accidents or criminal cases and I made countless real tests and not bla bla over more than 2 years after I lost my wife, also with expensive equipment.

As I have pointed out, there are so many individual factors with that method. It's unpredictable. Everyone, who says the opposite, is telling the dangerous untruth.

Sorry, that I have read only this one sentence from your post, but I have really no time to back and forth with people, who are unable to recognize, that this is here not a computergame or a joke. It's about death and health of people and not about becoming a fame hearsay artist or playing a method guru without taking any responsibility for the own writing.

 

[knion]

I have overlooked your post, only needed one sentence to know, where the wind is blowing.

"People say that a 10,000 ppm is enough to kill someone"

"People say".
Hearsay are no facts.

"10,000 ppm is enough to kill someone"
There is no way, one can get 10.000 ppm in a small room or car or tent with charcoal. Only theoretically scenarios.

Not even the poor guy who mixed the chemicals in his sealed car to get more higher ppm and has filmed everything, came close to 10.000 and he suffered so bad, that this incident was one of the top mind-changer for me aside the criminal cases here in Germany, when after failed attempt people can not walk, can not think, can not behave as it was before, for the rest of their lives.

Hearsay nonsense and lack of research and knowledge is so bad, because it can bring desperate people in a very dangerous situation.

I at least have fortunately so much intellect and discipline, that I have changed my method and ran away from CO, not because of hearsay but because of researching everything which has been written, discussed also on scientific studies, all cases of accidents or criminal cases and I made countless real tests and not bla bla over more than 2 years after I lost my wife, also with expensive equipment.

As I have pointed out, there are so many individual factors with that method. It's unpredictable. Everyone, who says the opposite, is telling the dangerous untruth.

Sorry, that I have read only this one sentence from your post, but I have really no time to back and forth with people, who are unable to recognize, that this is here not a computergame or a joke. It's about death and health of people and not about becoming a fame hearsay artist or playing a method guru without taking any responsibility for the own writing.

Well, if you aren't going to read the full post, all the best to ya.



If you only read a sentence, that's as much as testament to your character as it is to your ability to do any form of scientific study. It really makes me question whether you have the patience to do such scientific tests with your 'expensive equipment'


(To anyone else reading, I'm sorry about being so rude. It isn't really necessary.)

By the way, I am deeply sorry to learn of the loss of your wife.
I wish you only the best.

Anyways,
All it takes is a quick search to find this:

Study of the lethal effect of the inhalation of gaseous fluorine (F/sub 2/) at concentrations from 100 ppM to 10,000 ppM (Technical Report) | OSTI.GOV

The U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Scientific and Technical Information

www.osti.gov

"The lethal effect arising from the inhalation of air containing relatively high concentrations of fluorine was studied in 4 animal species. Eight rabbits, 20 guinea pigs, 45 to 50 rats, and 45 to 50 mice were exposed each to concentrations of fluorine approximating 100, 200, 500, 1000, and 10,000 ppM, respectively. The duration of exposure ranged from 7 hours at 100 ppM to 5 minutes at 10,000 ppM. At a concentration of 10,000 ppM all animals died during the 5-minute exposure period, with the exception of one rabbit, which died within 24 hours after exposure."

Whilst yes, this means that statistically 12.5% of rabbits die within 24 hours of exposure to 10,000 ppm rather than within 5 minutes, only 0.595238095% of the animals didn't die within 5 minutes at 10,000 ppm.

Meaning a whopping 99.404761905% of all test subjects died within 5 mins of exposure to 10,000ppm.

Yes, I said "some people say" but I said so with good reason.
If you actually read any of my posts you'd know that I'm only trying to help people have easy, understandable (ish) access to this information and you'd know the effort that I have put into the findings (within sounding too full of myself. I apologise).


I'd also like to point out by the way that you have not given any sources or references to back up your arguments. So it really worries me that you are attempting to gatekeep what people post in this community.
At this point, as far as I can tell, all you are giving people is your own 'hearsay'.

Anyways. As ever, thanks again for your reply.

I honestly don't mind what you do, but I'd like to think that you can at least take the time to read this response.

Knion.

(PS. I am In no way trying to mock your English language skills, as I am aware you are "fromgermany" but I greatly appreciate that in the beginning of your reply, you said "I overlooked your post" rather than "I looked over your post". Because overlook, is exactly what you did).

Well, if you aren't going to read the full post, all the best to ya.



If you only read a sentence, that's as much as testament to your character as it is to your ability to do any form of scientific study. It really makes me question whether you have the patience to do such scientific tests with your 'expensive equipment'


(To anyone else reading, I'm sorry about being so rude. It isn't really necessary.)

By the way, I am deeply sorry to learn of the loss of your wife.
I wish you only the best.

Anyways,
All it takes is a quick search to find this:

Study of the lethal effect of the inhalation of gaseous fluorine (F/sub 2/) at concentrations from 100 ppM to 10,000 ppM (Technical Report) | OSTI.GOV

The U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Scientific and Technical Information

www.osti.gov

"The lethal effect arising from the inhalation of air containing relatively high concentrations of fluorine was studied in 4 animal species. Eight rabbits, 20 guinea pigs, 45 to 50 rats, and 45 to 50 mice were exposed each to concentrations of fluorine approximating 100, 200, 500, 1000, and 10,000 ppM, respectively. The duration of exposure ranged from 7 hours at 100 ppM to 5 minutes at 10,000 ppM. At a concentration of 10,000 ppM all animals died during the 5-minute exposure period, with the exception of one rabbit, which died within 24 hours after exposure."

Whilst yes, this means that statistically 12.5% of rabbits die within 24 hours of exposure to 10,000 ppm rather than within 5 minutes, only 0.595238095% of the animals didn't die within 5 minutes at 10,000 ppm.

Meaning a whopping 99.404761905% of all test subjects died within 5 mins of exposure to 10,000ppm.

Yes, I said "some people say" but I said so with good reason.
If you actually read any of my posts you'd know that I'm only trying to help people have easy, understandable (ish) access to this information and you'd know the effort that I have put into the findings (within sounding too full of myself. I apologise).


I'd also like to point out by the way that you have not given any sources or references to back up your arguments. So it really worries me that you are attempting to gatekeep what people post in this community.
At this point, as far as I can tell, all you are giving people is your own 'hearsay'.

Anyways. As ever, thanks again for your reply.

I honestly don't mind what you do, but I'd like to think that you can at least take the time to read this response.

Knion.

(PS. I am In no way trying to mock your English language skills, as I am aware you are "fromgermany" but I greatly appreciate that in the beginning of your reply, you said "I overlooked your post" rather than "I looked over your post". Because overlook, is exactly what you did).

By the way, I realise that you may think that I made a mistake referencing a study that used animals.
(Who knew that humans weren't allowed to be killed in clinical studies)

But, Before you say "but animals aren't humans! Animals are much smaller and much more different" I'd like to add:

"All animals exposed at 1000 and 500 ppM were dead within 6 days after exposure. All animals exposed at 200 ppM, with the exception of 2 guinea pigs, were dead within 14 days after exposure. The 7-hour exposure at 100 ppM resulted in the death of 7 of 8 rabbits, 27 of 50 rats, and 43 of 45 mice within 14 days after exposure"

So it would appear that these animals acted in a similar fashion to the way we'd expect humans to act in exposure to the smaller PPMs.
Huh, who would've thought?

(Yet again, apologies for being rude, I just want to get the point across… in as fun a way as possible).

 

[FromGermany]

With every more post it becomes more clear, that you don't know, what you are talking about and that you have absolutely no idea about the facts.

Rats and similar animals are no human beings and are reacting different to any gas, because they live underground.

A "quick search" is not enough to be the King.

I could do this with almost every of your claims, but I do not care anymore. If one has the desire to have brain damage, they shall follow your "advices" and they have as everyone a 50:50 chance of failing and walking perhaps also with a rollator like this women here, who failed with CO, and this is only one case of many documented.

https://sanctioned-suicide.net/attachments/1-jpg.79138/
She was 41, in best health and after that failed attempt, when her kids died but she did not, she not only was unfit to stand trial for a long time. She could only move with a rollator for the rest of her life, and the lawyer had to help her walking with it.

That is the difference between quick rat search and facts.

 

[Bedrock48]

With every more post it becomes more clear, that you don't know, what you are talking about and that you have absolutely no idea about the facts.

Rats and similar animals are no human beings and are reacting different to any gas, because they live underground.

A "quick search" is not enough to be the King.

I could do this with almost every of your claims, but I do not care anymore. If one has the desire to have brain damage, they shall follow your "advices" and they have as everyone a 50:50 chance of failing and walking perhaps also with a rollator like this women here, who failed with CO, and this is only one case of many documented.

https://sanctioned-suicide.net/attachments/1-jpg.79138/
She was 41, in best health and after that failed attempt, when her kids died but she did not, she not only was unfit to stand trial for a long time. She could only move with a rollator for the rest of her life, and the lawyer had to help her walking with it.

That is the difference between quick rat search and facts.

Look man, I appreciate the concern and what you're trying to put across with this post.

I'm just finding it less than helpful and I feel I'm more confused than ever at this current moment. This is my one chance at freedom, I don't think I'm gonna get a much better method.

From this all I can see is maybe I should just throw myself under a train cause at least I won't be brain damaged.

 

[knion]

Look man, I appreciate the concern and what you're trying to put across with this post.

I'm just finding it less than helpful and I feel I'm more confused than ever at this current moment. This is my one chance at freedom, I don't think I'm gonna get a much better method.

From this all I can see is maybe I should just throw myself under a train cause at least I won't be brain damaged.

I'm so sorry that confusion has been caused by all of this!
This is exactly what I wanted to avoid.

If you need someone to talk to as a result of what has been posted here, especially seeing as I was involved, please don't hesitate to give me a message.

Again, all I can do is apologise profusely.

Just know that help is available.

As much as this website is a place to become educated on CTB methods, it shouldn't be a place to make you feel worse.


The major thing that I hope hasn't happened is a lack in faith surrounding any of the methods involved in this thread.
Don't let bickering between two idiots confuse, annoy, or upset you.

I am so Sorry,

Knion.

 

[Bedrock48]

I'm so sorry that confusion has been caused by all of this!
This is exactly what I wanted to avoid.

If you need someone to talk to as a result of what has been posted here, especially seeing as I was involved, please don't hesitate to give me a message.

Again, all I can do is apologise profusely.

Just know that help is available.

As much as this website is a place to become educated on CTB methods, it shouldn't be a place to make you feel worse.


The major thing that I hope hasn't happened is a lack in faith surrounding any of the methods involved in this thread.
Don't let bickering between two idiots confuse, annoy, or upset you.

I am so Sorry,

Knion.

I'm alright for the moment but I appreciate the offer nonetheless. It's not on your end for the most part so don't worry too much. I'm just very tired (physically/mentally/in general) and any upset on plans is not gonna help me. I might take a break from this site if I am able to, just for a day or so to clear my head. Thank you dude for the kind reply.

 

[Wrennie]

Could a generator act as a substitute for charcoal?

 

[FromGermany]

For the intelligent readers and new people, there is a new real report about a failure by a forum member I believe from Germany, who had a failure, was on intensive care, very lucky and was also so intelligent to switch to another method.

You can use the Google translator or another tool.

https://sanctioned-suicide.net/threads/der-deutsche-thread-german.58668/page-6#post-1407278

Facts no hearsay.

 

[art]

@FromGermany Thanks a lot for all the excelent information you share. Thanks a lot.

 

[knion]

Could a generator act as a substitute for charcoal?

I'm sorry to say that I haven't done any research into generators.

However, I would recommend doing your own research into the CO output of generators if you wish to CTB using this method.

One thing I would mention is that no matter what, you probably don't want to be sitting in the enclosed space with whatever item you are using (I.e. charcoal, wood fire, generator), as you will most likely feel very ill and have an unpleasant end.

I hope that this reply is somewhat useful!

 

[knion]

For the intelligent readers and new people, there is a new real report about a failure by a forum member I believe from Germany, who had a failure, was on intensive care, very lucky and was also so intelligent to switch to another method.

You can use the Google translator or another tool.

https://sanctioned-suicide.net/threads/der-deutsche-thread-german.58668/page-6#post-1407278

Facts no hearsay.

Ok, so, Just as a preface to what is about to come.
This is a post in defence of the validity of the posts I have made overthe past few days.
I wanted to make sure I didn't come across as angry or bratty at all, however, I AM angry, so that (and brattiness) may come across in some of my writing.

The user 'fromgermany' is calling what I have been saying in my posts, 'hearsay', and I think that this has made some people lose faith in the charcoal CO method, this is the main reason as to why I want to defend my posts.


So, to start, I would usually have put these references later in the post, however, the user 'fromgermany' doesn't seem to read through my posts without just giving them a "look over".
So, here's at least some proof that what I am saying is not hearsay, but research.

https://www.osti.gov/biblio/5483041

This link is a study that ran tests on over 100 animals to find out how the concentration of CO in an enclosed area effected the animals. Over 99% of all animals (so, all of the animals bar 1) died within 5 minutes of exposure to 10,000 ppm of CO.


https://www.bfr.bund.de/en/press_in...definitely_not_an_indoor_pursuit_-187998.html

This study showed the rate of production of CO when burning charcoal briquettes, As is the following link:

https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2012...nduced-death-and-toxicity-charcoal-briquettes


https://www.jniosh.johas.go.jp/en/indu_hel/doc/IH_49_3_393.pdf

And finally, this study shows how much carbon monoxide is produced by Binchotan, a charcoal with an extremely high carbon content.
I used this study to compare how much quicker CO was produced by a higher content of carbon in charcoal.


So, I hope that you can see, what I have shown in my last few posts is not just hearsay.

User 'fromgermany' hasn't shown any evidence to support his claims, other than a picture of a lady on a zimmer and a link to another post on this website.
(And before anything is said about how little I talked about this, I will talk about both of these things a little bit, later)




Ok.
Now that that is out of the way, this is where my post WOULD'VE started, had I not needed to cater for 'fromgermany's inability to read through long posts.
(Yet again, I apologise for being bratty)



The following passages of text are meant as a direct reply to 'fromgermany', but it is also (I hope) a testament to how serious I am about this topic and the posts that I have been making.


Ok, so, this is really starting to annoy me.
Of course people are entitled to their own opinion and they are entitled to post what they want, But, What you are saying is starting to really concern people.
And yeah, ok that would be fair enough…. if what YOU were saying wasn't hearsay and what you were saying had means to actually concern them.

I want to be clear, I am not just trying to defend my position because I think I'm right, or I think I'm a "guru of methods" as you put it. I think that this information is important, and you trying to debunk it (Poorly) is not going to help people.


As I said earlier in the post, you have given no references for your claims apart from a picture of a woman with a stroller and saying who she was (by the way, I do believe that this IS in fact a woman who failed a CO attempt, but you haven't linked to a reliable source for her story), and you've referred to another post on this website, however this post doesn't appear to refer to any reliable sources either.

That being said, I do appreciate that the post you referenced on this website outlines a members own experience, so I do not want to make it seem like I am denying what they have said is true.
I have posted my own story recently, and I'd like to believe that people could trust me enough to believe it, and I'd imagine the OP of that post would like to be treated equally.


Anyways, as I said earlier in this post, what I have been saying is not just Hearsay.
I don't feel I HAVE to prove this to you, 'fromgermany' (even though i've already taken the time to do so), because to be honest you just don't seem like a very nice person, saying "for the intelligent readers" in your last post, and in general just not reading my posts the whole way through (if at all). You have also been rather rude throughout the entire exchange.
(I know I have been rude too, but it's difficult not to be in this situation)
To be honest, I just don't think I'm going to get through to you. (Not to sound as full of myself as you have in your posts)


Anyway, my rant is now coming to an end.


I want to finish by saying, yes, I understand that some people fail the charcoal CO method… People fail attempts with all methods every now and then.
But, This doesn't mean that people shouldn't be able to have a place to educate themselves on how they might want to CTB and take that risk (if they so wish)
Hopefully, if they look in the right places, their attempt won't be as much of a risk.


I hope that this post was helpful rather than the opposite, and I hope that any anxiety caused by the interaction between me and 'fromgermany' has been at least somewhat resolved.

I would put a little "facts not hearsay" at the end, here, but I don't think I'm cocky enough to do so.

Thank you for reading,

I wish all of you all the best,

Knion.

 

[knion]

I hope that this all hasn't become too annoying. I do apologise.

I wanted this thread to be a helpful one, rather than one filled with argument.
I hope that the information posted in the first part of this thread is still read and considered useful.


With this being said, I just can't let this go.

In the reply further up in this thread, @FromGermany said "there is a new real report about a failure by a forum member I believe from Germany, who had a failure, was on intensive care"
They linked to the post in the German thread.

The report ended up being what follows:

"I failed with carbon monoxide in the bathroom and ended up in the intensive care unit even though I passed out in the meantime. The concentration of CO probably fell too quickly again, even though I had already sealed the bathroom, including the keyhole and the bottom of the door."

Whilst yes, this is a personal report from a user on this website and it shouldn't be taken lightly, I mean no offence when I say that there is a complete and utter lack of detail in the story.

(This story, by the way, is still the only evidence that @FromGermany has given in support of his outbursts towards not only me, but the charcoal CO method).


I am never going to claim and have never claimed that any method is perfect. And I do not wish to guide anyone into a situation at which they fail with drastic consequences. (I have said multiple times that I do not encourage anyone to CTB)

If anything, the reason I posted the research and made this thread in the first place is to prevent this (I.e. failed attempts that lead to hospitalisation)

I mean, heck, as much as I didn't talk about it in the thread, this source: https://www.jniosh.johas.go.jp/en/indu_hel/doc/IH_49_3_393.pdf
Talks about the required ventilation needed to survive CO build up (meaning you could do the opposite of this advice to achieve a successful CTB attempt)…. I mean, preferably you'd have no ventilation, but still.
(Ventilation is shown on the right)




Anyways, @FromGermany still fails to prove what I have done wrong by posting what I have posted and has ended up scaring or worrying people as a result.
I even think that they said what they have said to fear monger and get a reaction from people.

I appreciate trying to look out for people, but at the same time as trying to destroy this thread, @FromGermany has unapologetically suggested that methods such as N would be better for people…. AGAIN, WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE OR REASON TO SAY SO.



Finally, with all of that being said, I would just like to add a few of the things that @FromGermany has said in his posts on the German thread.
I will be putting some of the more problematic statements in bold.

"Sometimes I really have the impression that for some people this is just a computer game or that something is missing upstairs. Just terrible. I have to say honestly. "

"If the writing is more reminiscent of a hype or dangerous half-knowledge, is therefore very few facts or alleged facts can be refuted, it is better to invest time in your own research. That is always rewarded. "
(Even though I disagree massively with @FromGermany, The one thing I can agree with them on is doing your own research. It is most certainly always rewarded, and can put your mind at ease).

"I will definitely not bend to false or half-baked facts or leave things as they are, which lead to unsuccessful attempts with health consequences in a not inconsiderable frequency. "


The next one is In response to the individual talking about their failed CO attempt.

"That's exactly what I'm trying to make clear in some English threads, but some of them, as you can see, are just wild fanatics with no idea of anything and think they know better because they deal with half-knowledge or superficial research piece together something that best suits your needs.

They can gas their brains out of my own accord, but I think people like you or those who are new here should know that it is not that easy. I will not take part in their discussions any more than necessary, and most of them will no longer be read at all because it is sometimes so absurd and dangerous and leads exactly to what you have unfortunately also experienced. You were still lucky."

I appreciate pushing people to proceed with caution around the topic of suicide, but It would seem that other than that @FromGermany is using this website as a place to build arguments with people, fear monger and talk about people behind their backs. (That last bit is childish I know)



Anyway.
I must admit, I despise that I am posting so much about this argument in this thread or on this website in general actually.
It's really upsetting to think that people will potentially find the sources and research posted early in this thread any less reliable because I come across as unhinged.


Anyway, as the title of this thread says, I'm sorry for posting so much!

I hope everyone is doing well.

Thanks so much,

Knion.

With every more post it becomes more clear, that you don't know, what you are talking about and that you have absolutely no idea about the facts.

Rats and similar animals are no human beings and are reacting different to any gas, because they live underground.

A "quick search" is not enough to be the King.

I could do this with almost every of your claims, but I do not care anymore. If one has the desire to have brain damage, they shall follow your "advices" and they have as everyone a 50:50 chance of failing and walking perhaps also with a rollator like this women here, who failed with CO, and this is only one case of many documented.

https://sanctioned-suicide.net/attachments/1-jpg.79138/
She was 41, in best health and after that failed attempt, when her kids died but she did not, she not only was unfit to stand trial for a long time. She could only move with a rollator for the rest of her life, and the lawyer had to help her walking with it.

That is the difference between quick rat search and facts.

I'm sorry, but IT JUST GETS WORSE.


I did a backwards image search for this case and the woman put 2 charcoal grills in her BEDROOM! And the attempt killed her 3 children as well as leaving her in need of intense medical care.

The news article is here:

Prozess in Münster: Mutter gesteht Gift-Mord an ihren drei Kindern

Eine Mutter aus dem Münsterland hat vor Gericht gestanden, ihre drei Kinder mit Kohlenmonoxid aus Holzkohlegrills getötet zu haben. Die 41-Jährige hatte im Mai 2014 zwei Grillgeräte mit glühenden Kohlen in das Schlafzimmer ihrer Wohnung in Steinfurt gestellt und die drei, vier und elf Jahre...

mobil.ksta.de

As @FromGermany has said multiple times, It's awful to think that people will attempt to CTB incorrectly and end up with life changing injuries, as this woman obviously has.
However, maybe if she had done some research, or read about how CO fills an enclosed area, say on oh, maybe this website? maybe she wouldn't be in the situation she is in.
(and I am aware that this sounds extremely, extremely harsh, but I'm just trying to make a point)


Not only this though!
As this news story tells us, (as horrible, dreadful and sickening as it is) There was enough CO in the room to kill her 3 year old, 4 year old AND her 11 year old children!
The article states that the 41 year old woman admitted to murder.
She wanted to die and wanted to take her children with her, so seeing as she didn't die, she committed premeditated murder.


Anyway, having said all this, what is apparent here is that EVEN IN THIS FAILED CASE, 3/4 individuals died!
This means, as much as this attempt was unsuccessful for the mother, this attempt was 75% successful at killing the people involved! As well as being enough to leave the final 25% close to death.


Sadly, this news report does nothing to tell us about the time this woman spent in the room with the BBQ's or how much ventilation was in the room (or even whether she only allowed herself to get to the point where she was extremely disabled to try and get away with murder?)
but what it does tell us is that @FromGermany was hiding major details from this story (as well as not linking it in the first place) and that this story should not be enough to put people off being fully educated upon the topic of the charcoal CO method.


Anyway, thank you for reading, and as always, I hope that this was useful rather than detrimental to how anyone is feeling after reading it.

Knion.

 

[trying.to.find.peace]

I agree some members here are angry and trying to start a fight everwhere they go. This should be a place of acceptance and compassion where we can all learn from each other. There is no 100% guarantee, not even with N or SN, as shown by the people who failed with these methods and were brave enough to share their experiences here.

 

[StarryStarry]

Hey!


(As this is its own thread, I'd like to say that a lot of this first part is in relation to previous posts I have made on this website. If you want to read the actual helpful information, I would scroll to the end!
And, yet again, I'm sorry for posting so much).


FIRSTLY I WANT TO SAY THAT I HAVE MADE A GRAVE MISTAKE IN MY ORIGINAL POST.

I WILL KEEP IT POSTED AS A LOT OF THE INFORMATION (such as pictures and the weights of carbon) MAY STILL BE USEFUL.



HOWEVER, MY CALCULATIONS OF THE SPACE WITHIN A CAR AND THE TIME IT WOULD TAKE TO FILL WAS WRONG.



I HAVE NOW FIXED THIS MISTAKE IN THIS COMMENT/ POST.



THESE CALCULATIONS ARE NOT ONLY MORE ACCURATE BECAUSE I DID NOT MAKE A STUPID MISTAKE, BUT THEY ARE ALSO MUCH MUCH MORE IN DEPTH.



I would like to thank Bedrock48 for their comment. Without it I wouldn't have found my mistake.



I also realise that I am posting a lot on this website, so don't worry, I will take a while off after this! Haha.





IF YOU WISH TO SEE THE HELPFUL STUFF, RATHER THAN A WHOLE LOT OF WORKINGS OUT, PLEASE SCROLL STRAIGHT TO THE BOTTOM.





Ok, so it took a little while, but I found some info on this.

Here is a picture that outlines the properties of different types of charcoal (incase anyone was interested)

View attachment 79825





I also found a study about the concentration of CO in a certain area. And this study appears to have used Binchotan as it's charcoal of choice.



"if the concentration of carbon in the briquettes is 85%, the lethal concentration of CO is 10 000 ppm and the volume of an apartment is 100 m3, then burning 629 g of charcoal briquettes could produce a potentially toxic atmosphere." - (https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2012...nduced-death-and-toxicity-charcoal-briquettes).



Sadly this study didn't focus on the time it took to produce this effect.

HOWEVER, it does tell us that only 629 g of Binchotan charcoal briquettes will achieve 10000ppm at some point, a particularly lethal concentration.





To help understand what this means and even try to figure out the timings on this, I also found another study.



This study measured the speed at which 50-100g of charcoal produced Carbon monoxide.



these were the results:



View attachment 79823

View attachment 79824



(https://www.jniosh.johas.go.jp/en/indu_hel/doc/IH_49_3_393.pdf)



I'm entirely new to the "±" symbol, but apparently it is "the confidence interval or error in a measurement"



So, for example, sample A, where it says 185 ± 31, it actually just means *roughly 185*. This is because, if I'm right, the outcome is within the realm of 185 but potentially plus OR minus 31.







It's at this point I'd like to say that I'm sorry. This reply is extremely lengthy.

I at least hope that they are genuinely useful.







Anyways.

To continue, it looks as though (If I understand this correctly), the 'best' binchotan (sample A) which i'd imagine is 85% carbon at least, releases roughly 185 ml of CO per minute.



To figure out how long it would take to get to a high enough ppm using this 85% carbon, we'll need to do some equations.



By the way, for anyone confused, as I was for a long while, PPM is an abbreviation for "parts per million" and it also can be expressed as milligrams per liter (mg/L)

PPM is calculated by dividing the mass of the solute by the mass of the solution, then multiplying by 1,000,000





So.



Let's use the example of the the room from earlier (100 m3). This room as litres would be 100,000 litres



1,000 ml is a litre.



185 ml is 0.185 litres.



So, the mass of the 'solution' (the air in the room), is 100,000 litres.



(1 minute of carbon burning) 0.185(ml) X 60 (mins) = 11.1 (litres)



11.1 (litres) / 100,000 (litres) = 0.000111 (litres)



0.000111 (litres) X 1,000,000 = 111 ppm



So it would take an hour for 50-100g (let's say 75g) of 85% Carbon to get to 111pm in a 100m3 room.







I mean, this obviously isn't going to be enough to satisfyingly end your life. So, let's use the amount of charcoal from earlier.



75g/75 = 1g



111pm / 75 = 1.48



1.48 X 629 = 930.92



So, 629 grams of 85% charcoal in a 100m3 room would take an hour to get to 930.92 ppm of CO.

So this means, in the initial test that I talked about, they probably measured that it got to 10,000 ppm after around, well, 10 hours

(which would obviously still make sense and be alarming in the context of the research, because it is surrounding cooking inside buildings such as restaurants, which are open for extended periods of time)





Anyway.



To finally answer your (Bedrock48) question.

If we assume that binchotan is 85% charcoal, and the BBQ charcoal briquettes are roughly 75% you would be correct in saying that the effect would not only create less smoke (as that is something binchotan does), but it would also cause death much more quickly, (or you would at least need more of the briquettes to achieve the same effect, but not A LOT more as far as I can tell).





If we want prove this, all we really need to do is as follows:



If it takes 629 grams of 85% charcoal an hour to fill a 100m3 room with 930.92 ppm, then:



629g / 85 = 7.4 g



85g - 75g = 10g



85g + 10g = 95



7.4 X 95 = 703



It would take 704 grams of 75% carbon an hour to fill a 100m3 room with 930.92 ppm.



So 85% charcoal only needs 629 grams to beat 75% charcoal's 704 grams to achieve the same goal in the same time.







CHARCOAL CARBON MONOXIDE IN A SMALL SPACE.



So, as I said at the beginning of this post/ reply, I made a massive mistake in the original post.



So, this is where I would like to make up my mistake by talking about the time it would take to die in the same space as, say, a car, through this method.



(Just an FYI, it gets even MORE tricky from this point.)





So, 930.92 ppm is 930.92 g/ litre.



A single m3 is 1000 litres and 100m3 holds 100,000 litres.



So If it takes one hour to reach 930.92 g/litre in a 100,000 litre room, Then, in a room only 3,000 litres big:



100/3 = 33.43333333333333



33.43333333333333 X 1,000 = 33,433.33333



33,433.33333 X 930.92 = 31,123,758.66666667



An hour would've been enough time to reach 31,123,758.666666667ppm (which obviously doesn't make sense).



So this means, if 60 minutes would have had to have passed to achieve the 31,123,758.7ppm, we would achieve 1ppm in 0.000001927787728 minutes. This is 1.927788e seconds



SO, to achieve the lethal dose of 10,000ppm that we want in our (on average) 3 cubic metre car, we would want to wait:



1ppm X 10,000 = 10,000 ppm



1.927788e X 10,000 = 19,277.88



This is equal to 5.3547222222222 hours!

(And this is the case with 705 grams of 75% charcoal, and 629 grams of 85% charcoal, more charcoal would achieve affects more quickly)









ANYWAYS, THE REAL IMPORTANT, MINI VERSION OF THIS STUFF IS BELOW:



If you saw this post/ reply and thought, wow, that's way too much to read. Here is what I have found.

1,600 ppm (0.16%), (1.6‰)

Headache, increased heart rate, dizziness, and nausea within 20 min; death in less than 2 hour

3,200 ppm (0.32%), (3.2‰)

Headache, dizziness and nausea in five to ten minutes. Death within 30 mins.

6,400 ppm (0.64%), (6.4‰)

Headache and dizziness in one to two minutes. Convulsions, respiratory arrest, and death in less than 20 minutes

12,800 ppm (1.28%), (12.8‰)

Unconsciousness after 2–3 breaths. Death in less than three minutes

It would take 629 grams of 85% charcoal (binchotan) one hour to reach 930.92 ppm in a room 100 cubic metres big.

It would take 704 grams of 75% charcoal to have the same effect.



AND, most importantly, it would take just over 5 hours for 629 grams of 85% charcoal, OR 704 grams of 75% charcoal to reach 10,000ppm in a car with an interior that measures 3 cubic.







Anyways.



Yet again, I profusely apologise for the mistake I made in my last post. I am extremely sorry about that.



I hope that this message will be helpful and easy to read for all of you who wish to CTB by carbon monoxide poisoning via Charcoal.



Thank you all so much,



Knion.

I have a 16 pound bag of Kingsford Charcoal (U.S.). I'm not the brightest bulb in the pack when it comes to math - can you tell me how long it would take to ctb in either an enclosed vehicle or small tent?

 

[Danjor88]

Don't take this the wrong way, but you've posted reams and reams of "research". you also posted:

"I mean, I vaguely remember leaving my car before my girlfriend got to me and getting back in, but I'm not entirely sure if that happened (I mean, I'd imagine it did seeing as I survived).

Anyways, my theory is:
A) I got out of the car at the 1 hour 15 ish mark? in a dazed stupor. "For a quick breather" (ha)

B) my girlfriend would've been there pretty soon after. And, as much as I was back IN the car in between me (probably) getting out and her arriving, the majority of the gas would've probably escaped, giving my body time to recouperate and not get much worse."

If you'd been in the car with it for so long with it able to poison you (make you dazed, etc), then you'd be dead.

You can't get out for a quick breather and magico presto you've purged your body of CO, it takes AGES.

It seems to me a bit ..... well manipulative, where you are getting your girlfriend to play the rescuer.

How did she even know where to find you, or what you were doing? Just lucky/unlucky, eh?

If your relationship with her is good, why do you want to kill yourself and put her through that?

Why not break up with her first so she doesn't have to blame herself??

If that's wrong I apologise, but anyone who has gone to the lengths of calculating it all out, then has sat in a car full of smouldering charcoal for nearly 1 1/2 hours (which must have been while it was producing CO rather than smoke, otherwise it would be unbearable instantly) is either not telling the truth, the luckiest/unluckiest person on earth, or playing a part for dramatic effect.

Are you still with this girl?

Will you ever let her go, or is this the game you're going to force her to play forever?

Have you left your devices lying around for her to find so she can discover your new "suicide plans"?

Girl, if you're reading this get away from this manipulator asap.

 

[knion]

Don't take this the wrong way, but you've posted reams and reams of "research". you also posted:

"I mean, I vaguely remember leaving my car before my girlfriend got to me and getting back in, but I'm not entirely sure if that happened (I mean, I'd imagine it did seeing as I survived).

Anyways, my theory is:
A) I got out of the car at the 1 hour 15 ish mark? in a dazed stupor. "For a quick breather" (ha)

B) my girlfriend would've been there pretty soon after. And, as much as I was back IN the car in between me (probably) getting out and her arriving, the majority of the gas would've probably escaped, giving my body time to recouperate and not get much worse."

If you'd been in the car with it for so long with it able to poison you (make you dazed, etc), then you'd be dead.

You can't get out for a quick breather and magico presto you've purged your body of CO, it takes AGES.

It seems to me a bit ..... well manipulative, where you are getting your girlfriend to play the rescuer.

How did she even know where to find you, or what you were doing? Just lucky/unlucky, eh?

If your relationship with her is good, why do you want to kill yourself and put her through that?

Why not break up with her first so she doesn't have to blame herself??

If that's wrong I apologise, but anyone who has gone to the lengths of calculating it all out, then has sat in a car full of smouldering charcoal for nearly 1 1/2 hours (which must have been while it was producing CO rather than smoke, otherwise it would be unbearable instantly) is either not telling the truth, the luckiest/unluckiest person on earth, or playing a part for dramatic effect.

Are you still with this girl?

Will you ever let her go, or is this the game you're going to force her to play forever?

Have you left your devices lying around for her to find so she can discover your new "suicide plans"?

Girl, if you're reading this get away from this manipulator asap.

I didn't know whether to reply to this comment or not.
I don't want to sound bratty by coming in and saying "um, actually, I'm NOT manipulative", so I'll actually defend myself.


Firstly, I'd like to say that I love my girlfriend, and we are still together.
She is one of the things I feel I need for a perfect life.
But obviously, even with these intense feelings, life can still suck massively.
I'm not ashamed to say that there is a lot else missing in my life, even with, what I see to be, the perfect relationship.

My girlfriend and I have known each-other since comprehensive school, and we also went to university together.
Our time in university is where we became an item, and ACTUALLY, it is the place in which we talked about and planned our potential suicide together.
We were on the same boat.


Since finishing university however, she is a lot more happy with life. She no longer wants to die.
(And just to be EXTREMELY clear, that makes me extremely happy, I have not in any way, shape or form tried to convince her otherwise. Heck, I wish I felt the same way).


My girlfriend and I are well versed in eachothers feelings and reasonings behind those feelings. We are great communicators.
I am confident that she will NEVER blame herself for my death. Because she knows that she is perfect. I make sure she knows every day.

Anyways, even if she didn't know before the first attempt, not that she said she felt guilty, I made sure she knew that none of it was her fault.


—————-


Anyways, to continue on about your reply.

All I can say is that I'm honestly telling the truth about my experience:


The attempt to end my life that I am talking about, in the part you quoted, took place before I did ANY real research of my own, so it's hard to say if I did any of it correctly. (This explains why I say in the car whilst the CO built)
I came onto this website, found a post that wrote about the charcoal method and based on what that post said, I took a rough estimate and went through with the plan.
This was because I was so desperate.


During the attempt, after sitting in the car for some time, my chest began to hurt, and my head started to go fuzzy and there was a ringing in my ears. It was scary. But I had not called my girlfriend at this point.
After the pain and confusion is when I threw up on myself.

I was cold, shaking, in pain, and this attempt was taking a lot longer than I thought it would.

Then, I have no recollection of ACTIVELY doing it, I left my car.
I kinda came too outside of my car, throwing up on the floor.
It took about half a minute to a minute for my ears to stop ringing, but I was still completely off my face in confusion and dizziness.


It was at this point I got back in the car.
I was hoping that I could still go through with the attempt. There was no way I could handle anyone finding out what I had done.
However, sitting in my cold vomit, realising that there was no way that there was going to be enough CO produced after leaving the car, it was THEN, that I called my girlfriend.
My girlfriend, the person I trust more than anyone in the world, and the only person I'd want to come and be with me.
(Besides, my parents were away, hence being able to make the attempt).


Also, the reason my girlfriend knew where I was was because I TOLD HER, on the phone after I failed.

I needed to get to the hospital.
I knew I wasn't going to die, and I didn't want any issues left for me to deal with if I was going to have to live through the attempt.


Again, at this point, I want to reiterate as clear as I can that I was scared, cold, wet, confused and alone. I knew I wasn't going to die, so I knew I needed help if I didn't want to do any serious damage to myself AND LIVE to deal with the consequences.


Also also, I'd just like to point out, that I know that a 'quick breather' doesn't rid your body of CO, but it certainly stopped the dizzy feeling and stopped me from throwing up/ not knowing what was happening.
All I can talk about is my own experience.

Just go go a little further:
When I arrived at the hospital my eyes and skin turned red.
When I was finally seen, I was on oxygen for over 2 hours, and I had my blood taken 3 times (injected 7 times, if you include the failed attempts to draw my blood).
They would not let me take the oxygen mask off or leave until my CO levels had come down.

So YES, I was poisoned to the point I felt woozy, threw up and was confused, and NO I didn't die… it IS possible.


I don't know if this is what you were doing, I don't want to wrongly accuse you, but I don't appreciate, at all, being accused of lying about this stuff.


————


Now, I also want to say that YES, my relationship with my girlfriend is great, and I wouldn't want to cause her suffering after I die.
BUT, as I said before, she is one of the only things I feel I need in my life.

It may seem selfish, and fine, you can call me that.

But I would never leave my girlfriend.
Firstly, she's incredibly strong, and if I were to die, I feel she could handle it extremely well.
Secondly, if any attempt that I made in the past/ make in future were to fail, I'd want her to be a part of my life through the 'recovery' and the tough times that come with failing to take your own life.

If I left her to 'spare' her feelings… where does that leave our relationship if I were to live?

She loved/ loves me after my last attempt, and if I were to fail again, NOT THAT I PLAN TO FAIL A SECOND TIME, I'd like to think she'd love me then.

I want to die with us loving each-other.

Both because I never want to be apart from her whilst I live, but also because, if I DO live, she will still be in my life.


———-


Anyways, after all of that…

Finally, I kept my composure through the entirety of this reply.
But I want to reply to what you said in these two parts.

First:

"If that's wrong I apologise, but anyone who has gone to the lengths of calculating it all out, then has sat in a car full of smouldering charcoal for nearly 1 1/2 hours (which must have been while it was producing CO rather than smoke, otherwise it would be unbearable instantly) is either not telling the truth, the luckiest/unluckiest person on earth, or playing a part for dramatic effect."

Firstly, I resent completely that you would even suggest that I would attempt to take my own life for dramatic effect, or lie about any of this.
That's just a horrible thing to say.

Like, ok, you don't know me, there's a possibility I was lying, and there's the possibility that I did it for 'dramatic effect'.

But did you think about the 'possible' eventuality that I'M NOT?

You don't know me, and you don't know my situation.
You assumed the worst of me, and that hurts awfully.

Secondly, as I have said, it wasn't until AFTER this first attempt that I did the full calculations posted above in this thread.
If I were to attempt again, I'd get in the car AFTER 2 hours.
I just wish I'd known before.



Then:

"Have you left your devices lying around for her to find so she can discover your new "suicide plans"?"

You really seem to have some sort of picture of me painted in your head.
Why did you feel the need to say this?

Even if it HAD been the case that I left my phone out with suicide plans on it, who would this be helping?
What did you have to gain?


By the way, just to be clear, I don't just go around leaving suicide notes, or plans lying around.

———

It is now, at the real, full end of this reply that I'd like to do the childish "I'm not manipulative"
I think I'm entitled to at least that much after you made such grand assumptions about me.


(Also, I hate to be petty, but)
"Girl, if you're reading this get away from this manipulator asap."

Anyone, if you're reading this, get away from this person who calls people out on online suicide discussion boards, in an apparent attempt to make them feel bad…. ASAP.

I have a 16 pound bag of Kingsford Charcoal (U.S.). I'm not the brightest bulb in the pack when it comes to math - can you tell me how long it would take to ctb in either an enclosed vehicle or small tent?

Hey!

I'm super sorry, but I can't seem to find anywhere online what percentage carbon Kingsford charcoal might be.

I couldn't with good conscience estimate how long it would take to fill a car or a tent.


Also, as much as I have given the full workings of how this method works above (to certain degrees), I don't think I'd be super willing to give anyone any further help in their SPECIFIC situations.

I hope you find what you are looking for, and sorry again.

 

[Seiba]

"Don't take this the wrong way, but" then outright stating someone's partner should leave them and that they're manipulative for not succeeding at suicide is hardly ethical, good faith, or kind. Sorry you had to deal with that OP, I don't have anything to say about the method because my preferences lean towards more so to the ingesting subsection of methods. You should have never felt pressured to such an extent to have to post so much about your failed attempt, or to justify yourself as not manipulative or abusive.

 

[knion]

"Don't take this the wrong way, but" then outright stating someone's partner should leave them and that they're manipulative for not succeeding at suicide is hardly ethical, good faith, or kind. Sorry you had to deal with that OP, I don't have anything to say about the method because my preferences lean towards more so to the ingesting subsection of methods. You should have never felt pressured to such an extent to have to post so much about your failed attempt, or to justify yourself as not manipulative or abusive.

Thank you, I really appreciate your reply.

I'm quite open mostly, so I'm not too worried about over sharing.
BUT, I've gotta admit, it still hurt having to try and defend myself like that.

Again, thank you though.

 

[Seiba]

Thank you, I really appreciate your reply.

I'm quite open mostly, so I'm not too worried about over sharing.
BUT, I've gotta admit, it still hurt having to try and defend myself like that.

Again, thank you though.

No problem, most members are not like that thankfully.