Why Biochemical Pathology Is Considered Unreliable In Determining The Cause Of Death In Forensic Cases

The use of biochemical pathology to carry out postmortems in the event of death revolves around the analysis of biochemical tests of bodily fluids such as blood. The processes involved in biochemical pathology are thus geared towards analyzing samples from the body or the physical changes of the body anatomically(Sachdeva, Rani, Singh, & Murari, 2011). In the event of death, large postmortem changes and deviations from healthy subjects occur, these changes are natural and occur in a sequence that is relatively orderly although both internal and external factors present during the time may either retard or accelerate the process of decomposition. These changes begin at the molecular level and in sequence make progress towards microscopic and eventual gross morphology. Along the timeline of postmortem changes are two major processes that alter the body: autolysis and putrefaction, and depending on the climate and circumstances that surround the death, either one of the two processes may be dominant but in most circumstances, the processes occur concurrently. Autolysis involves endogenous substances that the breakdown the body, while putrefaction involves bacterial activities on body tissues. These processes alter the body and have the potential to hamper postmortem interpretations.

These deviations from healthy subjects and large postmortem changes occur after death make forensic pathologists hesitate to use biochemical pathology because the results are most likely to be inaccurate(Uemura, et al., 2008). Despite the fact that biochemical pathology is inaccurate, the process can aid in the determination of the cause of death for instance in sudden unexpected death where there is no obvious cause. This can be achieved by evaluating pathological status using the biochemical analyses of postmortem blood.

Share with your friends
Order Unique Answer Now

Add a Comment