I checked Minnesota's Department of Health website about preparing the cause of death on death certificates. Their link states that the CDC guidelines should be used.

The CDC shows that for the Significant Other Causes section illnesses that contributed to the death should be listed.

I am providing the links below.

After reading this, I see why Significant Other Causes on Prince's short form death certificate states NA. Other illnesses don't apply for death due to a drug overdose. It would seem you need to see the entire medical examiner's report to know what they found in the autopsy.

http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/chs/osr/physician-me/

Reference: http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/chs/osr/physician-me/statutes.html

Providing Cause of Death Information

For more information about providing cause of death including tutorials and handbooks, see the National Center for Health Statistics' Writing Cause of Death Statements.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/writing_cod_statements.htm

Reference Sheets: Instructions for Completing the Cause-of-Death Section of the Death Certificate[PDF – 76 KB](https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/blue_form.pdf)

ITEM 32 - CAUSE OF DEATH Take care to make the entry legible. Use a computer printer with high resolution, typewriter with good black ribbon and clean keys, or print legibly using permanent black ink in completing the cause-of-death section. Do not abbreviate conditions entered in section.

Part I (Chain of events leading directly to death) • Only one cause should be entered on each line. Line a MUST ALWAYS have an entry. DO NOT leave blank. Additional lines may be added if necessary. • If the condition on Line a resulted from an underlying condition, put the underlying condition on Line b, and so on, until the full sequence is reported. ALWAYS enter the underlying cause of death on the lowest used line in Part I. • For each cause indicate the best estimate of the interval between the presumed onset and the date of death. The terms “unknown” or “approximately” may be used. General terms, such as minutes, hours, or days, are acceptable, if necessary. DO NOT leave blank.

• The terminal event (e.g., cardiac arrest or respiratory arrest) should not be used. If a mechanism of death seems most appropriate to you for Line a, then you must always list its cause(s) on the line(s) below it (e.g., cardiac arrest due to coronary artery atherosclerosis or cardiac arrest due to blunt impact to chest). • If an organ system failure such as congestive heart failure, hepatic failure, renal failure, or respiratory failure is listed as a cause of death, always report its etiology on the line(s) beneath it (e.g., renal failure due to Type I diabetes mellitus). • When indicating neoplasms as a cause of death, include the following: 1) primary site or that the primary site is unknown, 2) benign or malignant, 3) cell type or that the cell type is unknown, 4) grade of neoplasm, and 5) part or lobe of organ affected. Example: a primary well-differentiated squamous cell carcinoma, lung, left upper lobe.

Part II (Other significant conditions) • Enter all diseases or conditions contributing to death that were not reported in the chain of events in Part I and that did not result in the underlying cause of death. See examples. • If two or more possible sequences resulted in death, or if two conditions seem to have added together, report in Part I the one that, in your opinion, most directly caused death. Report in Part II the other conditions or disease

leec1 said:

I checked Minnesota's Department of Health website about preparing the cause of death on death certificates. Their link states that the CDC guidelines should be used.

The CDC shows that for the Significant Other Causes section illnesses that contributed to the death should be listed.

I am providing the links below.

After reading this, I see why Significant Other Causes on Prince's short form death certificate states NA.

Other illnesses don't apply for death due to a drug overdose.

It would seem you need to see the entire medical examiner's report to know what they found in the autopsy.

http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/chs/osr/physician-me/

Reference: http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/chs/osr/physician-me/statutes.html

Providing Cause of Death Information

For more information about providing cause of death including tutorials and handbooks, see the National Center for Health Statistics' Writing Cause of Death Statements.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/writing_cod_statements.htm

Reference Sheets: Instructions for Completing the Cause-of-Death Section of the Death Certificate[PDF – 76 KB](https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/blue_form.pdf)

ITEM 32 - CAUSE OF DEATH Take care to make the entry legible. Use a computer printer with high resolution, typewriter with good black ribbon and clean keys, or print legibly using permanent black ink in completing the cause-of-death section. Do not abbreviate conditions entered in section.

Part I (Chain of events leading directly to death) • Only one cause should be entered on each line. Line a MUST ALWAYS have an entry. DO NOT leave blank. Additional lines may be added if necessary. • If the condition on Line a resulted from an underlying condition, put the underlying condition on Line b, and so on, until the full sequence is reported. ALWAYS enter the underlying cause of death on the lowest used line in Part I. • For each cause indicate the best estimate of the interval between the presumed onset and the date of death. The terms “unknown” or “approximately” may be used. General terms, such as minutes, hours, or days, are acceptable, if necessary. DO NOT leave blank.

• The terminal event (e.g., cardiac arrest or respiratory arrest) should not be used. If a mechanism of death seems most appropriate to you for Line a, then you must always list its cause(s) on the line(s) below it (e.g., cardiac arrest due to coronary artery atherosclerosis or cardiac arrest due to blunt impact to chest). • If an organ system failure such as congestive heart failure, hepatic failure, renal failure, or respiratory failure is listed as a cause of death, always report its etiology on the line(s) beneath it (e.g., renal failure due to Type I diabetes mellitus). • When indicating neoplasms as a cause of death, include the following: 1) primary site or that the primary site is unknown, 2) benign or malignant, 3) cell type or that the cell type is unknown, 4) grade of neoplasm, and 5) part or lobe of organ affected. Example: a primary well-differentiated squamous cell carcinoma, lung, left upper lobe.

Part II (Other significant conditions) • Enter all diseases or conditions contributing to death that were not reported in the chain of events in Part I and that did not result in the underlying cause of death. See examples. • If two or more possible sequences resulted in death, or if two conditions seem to have added together, report in Part I the one that, in your opinion, most directly caused death. Report in Part II the other conditions or disease

Haven't read any links past your copied text - inaccessible. Still confused. I see no reason why, given that terminal illnesses - nevermind a chronic pain condition - result in need to medicate with painkillers, something like cancer would be omitted.

fortuneandserendipity said:

fortuneandserendipity said:

If Tyka knows something that noone else does, it's a bit fucked up. I mean it's been 18 months, but in the interview she appears to be saying 'Wait for the book. The book will reveal all!'

Oh goodie! Did someone say a book? The publishing gods have struck again! I will buy it if Tyka confirms that Prince had set fire to Mayte's shit, threw Manuela's belongings under Larry's porch( after he took a scissor to each and every item) and whether or not Sheila turned him down for another girl.

ThatWhiteDude said:

fortuneandserendipity said:

Haven't read any links past your copied text - inaccessible. Still confused. I see no reason why, given that terminal illnesses - nevermind a chronic pain condition - result in need to medicate with painkillers, something like cancer would be omitted.

You'd think

Using your example of cancer, what the CDC is stating is the cancer would have to be contributory towards the death for it to be listed on the death certificate. In this instance, if Prince had cancer, it would not be part of the reason why he died.

Prince could have had various other illnesses that are not shown on the death certificate because they did not contribute/cause his death.

The autopsy is what will show if he had other illnesses.

fortuneandserendipity said:

2004Fan said:

laurarichardson said:

2004Fan said:

Not necessarily. Prince could have had an addiction to opiates for awhile and around 2013/2014, have an unrelated illness, potentially terminal, diagnosed. It could then explain why that illness was not on the short form, since P didn't die from that illness but rather a fentanyl overdose. He may have been taking opiates for pain and not necessarily for the terminal illness. IMHO.

[Edited 10/25/17 15:44pm]

Many terminal illnesses cause pain as well but I see some will not be happy until we get the cause of the illness and even then some will never believe it. 😳

But it as not as if that"terminal illness" or chronic hip pain began on the night of the show in Atlanta.


The key point for me is that everything was being managed privately and quietly.

Once it all started coming out, what was left? I think it was the perfect time to check out.

Sounds like a couple of people just refuse to believe how cause of death vs existing/terminal illness works. Pick up the phone and call the medical examiner to get your answer since you choose not to believe anything else you see re MN law nor the CDC nor are told by a lawyer. No doubt you won't believe that either because I suspect it's just trolling and arguing that is driving the disbelief now

Carver County Medical Examiner

• A. Quinn Strobl, M.D.
  Chief Medical Examiner/Forensic Pathologist
  Midwest Medical Examiner’s Office
  14341 Rhinestone St NW
  Ramsey, MN 55303
  Phone: (763) 323-6400
  Fax: (763) 323-6479
  quinn.strobl@co.anoka.mn.us

[Edited 10/25/17 18:50pm]

He might have known he had a terminal ilness, kept it quiet and continued managing his pain. Hence the illegal drugs, cause he did not want to risk the publicity. When it started to show, both physically and not, he decided to put an end to it, rather than waste away. Remember both his parents died of cancer. The autopsy report accessible to the public only states the minimum info and if the cause of death was overdose, that's what was written down. The rest of the document might have all the other relevant info. For all we know, the coroner may have simply written Non Applicable as to underlying causes and written a more complete examination on the following pages.

laurarichardson said:

fortuneandserendipity said:

Haven't read any links past your copied text - inaccessible. Still confused. I see no reason why, given that terminal illnesses - nevermind a chronic pain condition - result in need to medicate with painkillers, something like cancer would be omitted.

—Because a terminal illness was not the cause of death. I had a in-law who died from a stroke while in the hospital it was discovered that he had pancreatic cancer stage 4 his cause of death was due to a heat attack in had in the hospital a few days later not the cancer that was killing him.

I know terminal illness was not a direct cause of death. But as i keep on saying, there's no point having on that single page certificate 'Other significant conditions'.... if it's always going to be left blank! At what point is stage 4 cancer not significant?

Mumio said:

Sounds like a couple of people just refuse to believe how cause of death vs existing/terminal illness works. Pick up the phone and call the medical examiner to get your answer since you choose not to believe anything else you see re MN law nor the CDC nor are told by a lawyer. No doubt you won't believe that either because I suspect it's just trolling and arguing that is driving the disbelief now

Carver County Medical Examiner

• A. Quinn Strobl, M.D.
  Chief Medical Examiner/Forensic Pathologist
  Midwest Medical Examiner’s Office
  14341 Rhinestone St NW
  Ramsey, MN 55303
  Phone: (763) 323-6400
  Fax: (763) 323-6479
  quinn.strobl@co.anoka.mn.us

[Edited 10/25/17 18:50pm]

Nah, I'm going to trust my cognition.

fortuneandserendipity said:

laurarichardson said:

fortuneandserendipity said: —Because a terminal illness was not the cause of death. I had a in-law who died from a stroke while in the hospital it was discovered that he had pancreatic cancer stage 4 his cause of death was due to a heat attack in had in the hospital a few days later not the cancer that was killing him.

I know terminal illness was not a direct cause of death. But as i keep on saying, there's no point having on that single page certificate 'Other significant conditions'.... if it's always going to be left blank! At what point is stage 4 cancer not significant?

When it is either directly or indirectly a result in cause of death. In this case it was NEITHER!

1. it was not directly a cause of death, because the OD was.

2. it was not INDIRECTLY a cause of death because regardless of whether or not there was "other significant conditions", what he OD'd on was not even indirectly related to his death because the meds were illicit and not prescribed, therefore there was no viable medical connection to an illness....no matter what else may have been in his system, it is not what killed him.

Plainly stated: there was no other significant conditions that either directly or indirectly caused his death. No way no how did he directly or idirectly die of said illness.


Anyway..who said it was stage 4 cancer??

precioux said:

When it is either directly or indirectly a result in cause of death. In this case it was NEITHER!

1. it was not directly a cause of death, because the OD was.

2. it was not INDIRECTLY a cause of death because regardless of whether or not there was "other significant conditions", what he OD'd on was not even indirectly related to his death because the meds were illicit and not prescribed, therefore there was no viable medical connection to an illness....no matter what else may have been in his system, it is not what killed him.

Plainly stated: there was no other significant conditions that either directly or indirectly caused his death. No way no how did he directly or idirectly die of said illness.


Anyway..who said it was stage 4 cancer??

Give it up prexioux.

We have been trying to explain this to Fortune for at least 3 pages on this thread.

precioux said:

fortuneandserendipity said:

I know terminal illness was not a direct cause of death. But as i keep on saying, there's no point having on that single page certificate 'Other significant conditions'.... if it's always going to be left blank! At what point is stage 4 cancer not significant?

When it is either directly or indirectly a result in cause of death. In this case it was NEITHER!

1. it was not directly a cause of death, because the OD was.

2. it was not INDIRECTLY a cause of death because regardless of whether or not there was "other significant conditions", what he OD'd on was not even indirectly related to his death because the meds were illicit and not prescribed, therefore there was no viable medical connection to an illness....no matter what else may have been in his system, it is not what killed him.

Plainly stated: there was no other significant conditions that either directly or indirectly caused his death. No way no how did he directly or idirectly die of said illness.


Anyway..who said it was stage 4 cancer??

How is a terminal illness not significant? It could easily have incurred the use of fentanyl/other opiates on P's part, to alleviate pain from terminal condition. Bear in mind also, ME had access to P's medical records, including all recent blood tests, and perhaps crucially, Dr S's results. Enough to rule something in or rule it out. No illness is mentioned, so I'm assuming he didn't have a serious terminal disease. If he did have one, then ME's report is totally misleading!

Part II (Other significant conditions) • Enter all diseases or conditions contributing to death that were not reported in the chain of events in Part I and that did not result in the underlying cause of death. See examples. • If two or more possible sequences resulted in death, or if two conditions seem to have added together, report in Part I the one that, in your opinion, most directly caused death. Report in Part II the other conditions or disease

Reading above, I can't see how a terminal illness doesn't play a part as a disease or condition contributing to death. Why mention a terminal illness later on in the report and not on the first page? Doesn't it more likely suggest P didn't have a terminal illness.

An example from own family. Godfather died of a stroke, not old. Was suffering from cancer (not stage 4). I believe the chemotherapy he was given caused the stroke. So there were 3 causal factors, the cancer, cancer treatment and stroke. 2 of 3 of them, secondary factors. But something tells me one of those three would have got ignored. No prizes for guessing which!

Noone said it was stage 4 cancer. It was a hypothetical example. Read before you post.

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

precioux said:

When it is either directly or indirectly a result in cause of death. In this case it was NEITHER!

1. it was not directly a cause of death, because the OD was.

2. it was not INDIRECTLY a cause of death because regardless of whether or not there was "other significant conditions", what he OD'd on was not even indirectly related to his death because the meds were illicit and not prescribed, therefore there was no viable medical connection to an illness....no matter what else may have been in his system, it is not what killed him.

Plainly stated: there was no other significant conditions that either directly or indirectly caused his death. No way no how did he directly or idirectly die of said illness.


Anyway..who said it was stage 4 cancer??

Give it up prexioux.

We have been trying to explain this to Fortune for at least 3 pages on this thread.

I understand everything you've said. I just don't agree with you. And I don't think you get what I'm driving at. I'm saying if the ME doesn't include terminal illness on the first page, then she's misleading...

Your argument is, her practice is in accordance with the law. If you think that Minnesotan law has been applied correctly, that's your opinion. What might actually make more sense is if the 'family' had a word, and the ME complied with their and maybe P's wishes. Because your argument makes fuck all sense to me...

Namely, Prince was dying from terminal illness, but his taking of opiates had nothing to do with that terminal illness whatsoever l o l

Do you see the problem with your argument now?

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

fortuneandserendipity said:

fortuneandserendipity said:

precioux said:

fortuneandserendipity said:

I understand everything you've said. I just don't agree with you. And I don't think you get what I'm driving at. I'm saying if the ME doesn't include terminal illness on the first page, then she's misleading...

Your argument is, her practice is in accordance with the law. If you think that Minnesotan law has been applied correctly, that's your opinion. What might actually make more sense is if the 'family' had a word, and the ME complied with their and maybe P's wishes. Because your argument makes fuck all sense to me...

Namely, Prince was dying from terminal illness, but his taking of opiates had nothing to do with that terminal illness whatsoever l o l

Do you see the problem with your argument now?

FYI: this is not "an argument" - it's a fact. And believe me, ISLIJAG knows EXACTLY what she's talking about

So ISLIJAG is a working medical examiner in the state of Minnesota? No fuckin way, what despite the fact she can't apply logical reasoning?

You are aware fentanyl is administered to all stage 4 cancer patients?

You also know that it's the go-to drug for terminal disease patients in general?

You're also aware that ME in Prince's case made assumption it was accidental OD instead of marking box 'undetermined' - in so doing ruling out suicide? (you don't rule out possibilities however slight, esp with the alleged fentanyl measured)

You also acknowledge that in order to rule out terminal illness as contributing factor Medical Examiner has to assume P took fentanyl IN SPITE of terminal illness?

Is it not more likely P took fentanyl BECAUSE of terminal illness? oops... that may be where your bs reasoning comes unstuck ISKUJAG that's what i mean by logical reasoning...

and i quote from Minnesota Health Department...

Enter all diseases or conditions [in Part 2].... that were not reported in the chain of events in Part I and that did not result in the underlying cause of death.

[like terminal cancer/other disease for which he used fentanyl to self-medicate] ffs!

Like, what part of that do you not understand? It is logical.

I know it's really hard for you and friend to understand, but P self-administering fentanyl to deal with a terminal pain issue (if that was the situation) warrants inclusion on the one page report, under 'other significant conditions'

If we go with your theory, what comes across is 'Prince was a junkie off the strongest opiate. Fuck any terminal illness - that's inmaterial L O L

Do you understand any better now?

As one poster on here said recently, ME verdicts are FLUID and are sometimes revised and changed. He/she quoted actual evidence, and knew what they were talking about.

Menes said:

fortuneandserendipity said:

If Tyka knows something that noone else does, it's a bit fucked up. I mean it's been 18 months, but in the interview she appears to be saying 'Wait for the book. The book will reveal all!'

Oh goodie! Did someone say a book? The publishing gods have struck again! I will buy it if Tyka confirms that Prince had set fire to Mayte's shit, threw Manuela's belongings under Larry's porch( after he took a scissor to each and every item) and whether or not Sheila turned him down for another girl.

Don't worry Menes. Tyka's worked harder than ever on that book (even making her lose weight in the process). There are going to be 10 conflicting theories as to why P died - all equally confusing. One, involving flaming cheetos that literally caught fire.

Each and every one supposedly starting with the line "Prince told me he was going to die?!?!" ergh!

fortuneandserendipity said:

precioux said:

Sweetheart, I am not the one with difficulty in the comprehension department. Go on blissfully ignorant. I care not. Btw..."tut tut"? Wth is that? (Your attempt at an orgnote) Touché fortuneandserendipity said:

So ISLIJAG is a working medical examiner in the state of Minnesota? No fuckin way, what despite the fact she can't apply logical reasoning?

You are aware fentanyl is administered to all stage 4 cancer patients?

You also know that it's the go-to drug for terminal disease patients in general?

You're also aware that ME in Prince's case made assumption it was accidental OD instead of marking box 'undetermined' - in so doing ruling out suicide? (you don't rule out possibilities however slight, esp with the alleged fentanyl measured)

You also acknowledge that in order to rule out terminal illness as contributing factor Medical Examiner has to assume P took fentanyl IN SPITE of terminal illness?

Is it not more likely P took fentanyl BECAUSE of terminal illness? oops... that may be where your bs reasoning comes unstuck ISKUJAG that's what i mean by logical reasoning...

and i quote from Minnesota Health Department...

Enter all diseases or conditions [in Part 2].... that were not reported in the chain of events in Part I and that did not result in the underlying cause of death.

[like terminal cancer/other disease for which he used fentanyl to self-medicate] ffs!

Like, what part of that do you not understand? It is logical.

I know it's really hard for you and friend to understand, but P self-administering fentanyl to deal with a terminal pain issue (if that was the situation) warrants inclusion on the one page report, under 'other significant conditions'

If we go with your theory, what comes across is 'Prince was a junkie off the strongest opiate. Fuck any terminal illness - that's inmaterial L O L

Do you understand any better now?

As one poster on here said recently, ME verdicts are FLUID and are sometimes revised and changed. He/she quoted actual evidence, and knew what they were talking about.

It would help if you could read? But i know you're the type who doesn't understand anything not black and white simple. Duh!

laurarichardson - Rocks!

laurarichardson said:

You must be joking about Jimi Hendrix and Ray Charles. Jimi was so wacked on acid he once left the stage after pronouncing "that is what happens when earth collides with space" He crashed a half a dozen cars, he was so drunk he destroyed a hotel room, beat up a women, and died because he gobbled down wine and sleeping pills and chocked on his own vomit. Ray Charles was a herion addict who constantly was scratching and bobbing his head. He was once so high he fell asleep and put his hand thru a dinning room table and would have bleed to death if son did not come along. I could make a laundry list of people who screwed up on stage and some like Sly who could not find the venue. I never saw or heard of Prince doing those things and he even went so far as to do extra shows and then leave those to record more music. None of the Rock N Roll crazy shit. You cannot be addicted to drugs and maintain a work ethic. He could have been dependent on drugs with an Rx and a doctor's supervision and worked but abusing for years not buying it.

I know this is probably not worth mentioning but it isn't unusual that terminal illnesses aren't mentioned anywhere on death certificates, for a number of reasons.
.
My Dad had highly aggressive bladder cancer - it was inoperable and going to kill him in a drawn-out, very painful way. One of its effects was to block his kidneys. The surgeon offered to unblock his kidneys but said that, actually, kidney failure was a preferable death to the cancer because it would quickly render him unconscious and he would pass away with less pain. He opted for that approach. The subsequent death certificate listed kidney failure as cause of death and, actually, I don't recall the bladder cancer even getting a mention!
.
Many moons ago, I also posted that, as part of my work, I attended a national public health conference where one of the speakers was a lead coroner for the NHS, responsible for auditing autopsy results and death certificates. He said that approximately 40% of them would contain errors or have to be changed in some way, following further discussions / evidence. This was a fairly typical statistic in the developed world.

.
In short, there is an argument to be made for Prince having an illness which wasn't mentioned on the SHORT / published version of the death certificate. It may well be edited farther down the line as more evidence comes to light - we shall see.

precioux said:

Sweetheart, I am not the one with difficulty in the comprehension department. Go on blissfully ignorant. I care not. Btw..."tut tut"? Wth is that? (Your attempt at an orgnote) Touché fortuneandserendipity said:

Hi, Precioux.

Dibblekins said:

.
In short, there is an argument to be made for Prince having an illness which wasn't mentioned on the SHORT / published version of the death certificate. It may well be edited farther down the line as more evidence comes to light - we shall see.

Yes, this is the truth. The short certificate only has to list the direct cause of death. If he had cancer and it was still going to be another year before that took him out, then that doesn't need to go on the short certificate.

It's no different to if he had got hit by a bus. Bus would have been cause of death, even if the cancer was going to kill him a year later.

Anyone else see Tyka is now saying that she knew for 3 years? She said 2 before, didn't she? But then again, she says this is the first time she hasn't been out of her face on drink and drugs since he died, so who knows.

http://www.dailymail.co.u...years.html

TheEnglishGent said:

Anyone else see Tyka is now saying that she knew for 3 years? She said 2 before, didn't she? But then again, she says this is the first time she hasn't been out of her face on drink and drugs since he died, so who knows.

http://www.dailymail.co.u...years.html

The time frame does not matter I seriously doubt she is going to mention this now twice in the media and now go into more detail without it being true. I am sorry if Prince had to take pain meds for some joint pain problem he was going to be on the road to organ issues Rx or no Rx.

We do not know what he was ill from but to assume he had no real reason for taking so many meds that he almost died is ridculous or the idea that he could not have a muliple issues.

Remember Sheila E said he did not like going to the doctor and would not even look into seeing a chiropractor.

fortuneandserendipity said:

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

Give it up prexioux.

We have been trying to explain this to Fortune for at least 3 pages on this thread.

I understand everything you've said. I just don't agree with you. And I don't think you get what I'm driving at. I'm saying if the ME doesn't include terminal illness on the first page, then she's misleading...

Your argument is, her practice is in accordance with the law. If you think that Minnesotan law has been applied correctly, that's your opinion. What might actually make more sense is if the 'family' had a word, and the ME complied with their and maybe P's wishes. Because your argument makes fuck all sense to me...

Namely, Prince was dying from terminal illness, but his taking of opiates had nothing to do with that terminal illness whatsoever l o l

Do you see the problem with your argument now?

You are so clueless. You cannot handle the fact that you have been wrong from almost the minute you showed up on this board.

Terminal illness would not be included on the short report because he did not die from a terminal illness. Plain and simple. The ME is not misleading anyone she put on the short report exactly what killed him.

It is not an opinion the ME followed the law and stop thinking the Nelson family who did not have enough pocket change to bury him ( which is not anyone's business) would be able to get a Medical Examiner to lie on the report.

It would not matter anyway because Tyka is now telling or going to be telling all so what would be the point of getting the ME to change anything.

Get off of the drug addict angle and let it go. He was taking pain meds because he was in fucking pain from illness. My guess is joint pain and whatever else was killing him. What are you going to say when we find out what he was ill from that it is all still being made up.