15

In answering-islam (an anti-Islam site), it is claimed the prophet of Islam, Muhammad died because of poison given to him 3 years ago by a Jewish woman.

Immediately following the conquest of Khaibar, a Jewish woman prepared a dinner for Muhammad and some of his men. Unknown to the Muslims was that she had put a poison into the lamb (some say goat) that was served at dinner. Muhammad ate some of the poisoned lamb and died as a result three years later.

Is it possible someone can die because of poison given to them 3 year or even 1 year before his death?

TheTechGuy
  • 2,772
  • 6
  • 26
  • 37
  • It has become clear from the OP's responses that the question is unclear and isn't really getting at what the OP wants to have explained. – MetaEd Nov 28 '11 at 16:03
  • 1
    Sir Radio Active material is not a poison. I am talking about poisen. And even if i consider radio active as poisen, there is not quote example reference that it has killed someone years later. – TheTechGuy Nov 28 '11 at 16:14
  • 2
    Some radioactive materials are poisonous, and have been used to deliberately poison. I provided a reference to the claim that a radioactive material killed someone years later: please follow the link I provided, and read: "According to the IAEA in 1960 a person ingested 74 MBq of radium (assumed to be 226Ra) and this person died four years later." That statement is footnoted to an IAEA document available online. If you mean to limit the question to deliberate, onset-delayed poisonings using substances available to anyone, **kindly edit your question to be clear**. – MetaEd Nov 28 '11 at 16:26
  • 2
    Lets discuss it here http://chat.stackoverflow.com/rooms/5407/poisen-death – TheTechGuy Nov 28 '11 at 17:04
  • 2
    Another theoretically possible explanation for delayed effect of poisoning is bioaccumulation of fat soluble poison, released during a sudden period of weight loss. As far as I understand, however, this is usually caused by continuous exposure, where the concentration in the bloodstream is never strong enough to have any direct effects. In the case of an administered poison, this would mean several small doses over a prolonged period, each too small in itself to have any noticeable effects, and absorbed into the body before the next dose is administered. –  Nov 25 '11 at 09:18
  • Just to clarify the original post. This death is not "claimed" by answering-islam. It is believed by Muslims and is narrated in the hadith. Just looked it up, it's in Sahih Bukhari 3:47:786. It's clear that Muhammad was poisoned. It's not clear that it was the poison that killed him. – Mayo Jan 14 '20 at 17:53
  • Just as a side not: The cited part would not be in contradiction with Mohammed getting sick directly after the poisoning and dying after 3 years of illness. Which would be much less notable than poison intake -> 3 healthy years -> sudden death due to said poison. – cbeleites unhappy with SX Jan 17 '20 at 19:54
  • @TheTechGuy: not interested in getting into an edit war. Why undo the edit to make this less unnecessarily gendered? – Oddthinking Mar 29 '23 at 04:40
  • @Oddthinking I did not notice anyone edited this? There was some activity and I thought the title could be better. Again I am not aware if someone edit the title, I definitely did not get notification for that. – TheTechGuy Mar 30 '23 at 03:30
  • Plutonium is much more lethal as a poison than as a radioactive material. – gnasher729 Apr 12 '23 at 14:56

2 Answers2

28

Yes, a person can die because of poison given them several years earlier. In cases I am aware of, this is due to the poison remaining in, and reacting with, the body.

For example, death from ingesting a single dose of a radioactive material can take many years. I am not aware of any evidence that the danger of ingesting a radioactive material, such as natural oxides of uranium, was known at the time of Muhammad.

Lead poisoning would have been understood, but lead would have had to remain in the person to cause a delayed death. To illustrate, a woman who unwittingly ate a lead pellet which lodged in her colon declined in health over a period of ten years, but when the pellet was dislodged and expelled in a bout of diarrhea, the decline was halted, and she did not die of lead poisoning.

Normally, slow poisoning involves not the administration of a single dose but the regular administration of small doses which have a cumulative effect.

MetaEd
  • 1,737
  • 1
  • 16
  • 13
  • 1
    Let me explain more. You take the poisen, but you survive, the poisen has no effect. 3 years later the poisen become activted and kills you all of sudden. I realized slow death is one option and that makes sense. But I am really talking about `delayed response`. – TheTechGuy Nov 25 '11 at 07:55
  • 3
    @Believer: That's a time-delayed action. I suggest you post this as a separate question because I think MetaEd answered your question here very well before you introduced this. – Randolf Richardson Nov 25 '11 at 08:11
  • 1
    @MetaEd, I would say radio active is probably out of question. Also the prophet was ill for a total of 14 days, getting worser gradually, with last 3 days most severe. During this time he also needed help to get seated in the chair, more at http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?40388-The-Death-of-our-beloved-Prophet-Muhammad%28pbuh%29. You think this would be consistent with a poisen taken 3 years ago? – TheTechGuy Nov 25 '11 at 22:42
  • 4
    If your real question is whether ingestion of a poison can be followed by years of delay before onset of symptoms, suggest you edit the question. There is no clue in your question that you're looking for that specific situation. – MetaEd Nov 26 '11 at 19:33
  • Yes, radioactive material is probably out of the question in the case of Muhammad. As I said in my answer, I am not aware of any evidence that such a poison was known in his time. Nevertheless, your question is not specifically about Muhammad or about that time period. – MetaEd Nov 26 '11 at 19:34
  • My question is really a general question, but it does apply to poisen only and not radio active material. We know radio active is hazard. It has been used as poisen even only in one case I am aware of (by russia). Radio active material poisening I would say would be out of reach of any layman who want to use it as poisen. – TheTechGuy Nov 27 '11 at 19:45
  • 2
    If your real question is about a deliberate poison by a layperson, then I suggest you edit your question. This is not at all clear. Also, you have posed a false dichotomy between poison only and radioactive material in your comment. – MetaEd Nov 28 '11 at 16:01
  • @client9: of course there is no way we can know for sure whether Muhammad was really poisoned, or if he was sick for 14 days or whatever... that's at best an old wives' tale... – nico Feb 17 '13 at 07:50
  • @nico we dont know of course. But my question is he was given poison in food 3 years before. His two companions died at the spot. He had some effect but he stopped right when he sensed something is wrong. His companions at more. There is a claim that he died of that poison. – TheTechGuy Feb 17 '13 at 21:18
  • 1
    Although on the larger issue on whether it is at all possible to *know* that someone was the victim of a slow-acting poison a millennium and a half ago, I call total BS. – Acccumulation Jan 15 '20 at 05:11
  • There's another mechanism how lead poisoning can lead to sudden acute crisis and death years after the intake of the lead: lead can replace calcium in the bones. So chronic exposure to (low levels of) lead may lead to substantial amounts of lead in the body - so far possibly even without significant problems. However, there are circumstances under which quite a lot of Ca²⁺ is mobilized from bone in a short time. And in that case also the lead would be mobilized. I don't know the English term for this, literal translation of the German term is "lead crisis" and it's sufficiently important... – cbeleites unhappy with SX Jan 17 '20 at 19:50
  • .to be mentioned in my toxicology textbood and in Wikipedia https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bleivergiftung. However, the propsed uptake mechanism of the question wouldn't work: that would result in acute lead poisoning right after uptake. – cbeleites unhappy with SX Jan 17 '20 at 19:52
18

Yes: Asbestos Poisoning. A single fibre can get lodged in your lungs, and not cause problems until years later.

Asbestos poisoning has a median latency of 44.6 years

Source

fredley
  • 4,995
  • 2
  • 33
  • 50
  • 1
    Poisoning by inhalation of dust is not contemplated in the question. Are there documented cases of asbestos poisoning by ingestion and did they involve a long period of time? – MetaEd Nov 26 '11 at 19:26
  • 1
    @MετάEd that's not how I interpret the OP. Neither the question nor the clarification (*Is it possible someone can die because of poison given to them 3 year or even 1 year before his death?*) excludes inhalation. – Evan Carroll Feb 20 '13 at 03:16
  • 6
    @EvanCarroll You may be right, technically speaking. However the OP has been very quick to reject anything other than ingestion of a poison. I think the basic problem is that the question is unclear and does not accurately reflect what the OP wants to find out (or wants confirmed). – MetaEd Feb 20 '13 at 03:20