That article was published Sunday, Oct. 9, and the cause of death was not established until Monday, Oct.10. So it would have been presumptuous of the authorities to pronounce the cause of death before it was officially determined. In that case, appeared was the right word to use.
William Caviness, a 35-year-old firefighter from North Carolina, appeared to have suffered cardiac arrest, authorities said. He was running to raise money for burn victims.
The cause of death was pending an autopsy Monday. It is not known if the heat was a contributing factor.
It didn't say myocardial infarction or heart attack or dysrhythmia. It said cardiac arrest. I defy you to find someone who died who didn't have a cardiac arrest.
I posted the correct quote from the article, but not the article. Anyway, since it has now been established that it was in the Chicago Marathon, I can tell you that they still haven't determined the cause of death, even after the autopsy. But, again, we know for sure that he had a cardiac arrest, which merely means his heart stopped.
I interpreted "appeared to have suffered cardiac arrest" as meaning "it appeared cardiac arrest was the cause of death," as opposed to a heart attack. That's what I thought the reporter meant.
Well, maybe. That is very technical, though, and there was no evidence at all about his death at the time. Indeed, the autopsy, which was done later, showed nothing.
I think he meant "heart attack," but didn't realize that cardiac arrest is different. The fact is, Tinman, a cardiac arrest, in the end, is everyone's cause of death, if you think about it. The condition may be cancer or a stroke, but it's the cardiac arrest that stops the blood from circulating throughout the system. Oh well. Maybe I am being too technical!
I just thought it an odd comment. Clearly they had no idea of the cause of death at the time, nor do they now.
