What were the key findings in the George Floyd toxicology report?
Executive summary
The official toxicology report for George Floyd found measurable amounts of fentanyl, its metabolite norfentanyl, methamphetamine, and THC in his system, with fentanyl at 11 ng/mL, norfentanyl at 5.6 ng/mL, and methamphetamine at 19 ng/mL [1]. Those chemical findings were reported by NMS Labs on May 31, 2020 and have been cited repeatedly, but medical examiners and independent fact-checkers emphasize that toxicology alone did not establish fentanyl or other drugs as the primary cause of death [2] [1] [3].
1. What the lab found: the measurable drugs and their levels
The laboratory toxicology screen disclosed fentanyl at about 11 ng/mL, norfentanyl at 5.6 ng/mL (a metabolic breakdown product of fentanyl), methamphetamine at roughly 19 ng/mL, and cannabinoids detected as THC metabolites — facts reproduced in the public toxicology report and summarized in news and fact‑check reporting [1] [2] [4]. The NMS Labs report that was released to prosecutors on May 31, 2020 is the primary source for these numeric results [2].
2. How doctors and examiners interpreted those findings
The Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s autopsy concluded Floyd’s manner of death as cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression, not a straightforward drug overdose; the toxicology data were one element among physical injuries and scene evidence considered in that ruling [2] [3]. Independent experts and organizations that scrutinized the case noted that postmortem drug concentrations cannot, by themselves, prove a lethal overdose because interpretation depends on factors like tolerance, timing, and the interactions with physiological stressors [1] [5].
3. Why the numbers do not equal a definitive overdose determination
Multiple fact‑checks and medical commentators warned that blood concentrations alone cannot establish cause of death: authorities and toxicologists told reporters that although fentanyl and methamphetamine were present, the overall forensic conclusion attributed death to restraint-related cardiopulmonary arrest rather than intoxication alone [1] [3] [5]. Scientific critiques published during and after the case reiterated that the video evidence of prolonged neck and body compression, observed blunt-force injuries, and the context of restraint were central to the medical and legal determinations [2] [3].
4. How the toxicology report has been used and contested in public debate
After release, the toxicology page was seized on by critics arguing Floyd died from drugs, while advocates and independent reviewers pushed back, pointing to the full autopsy language and a family‑commissioned autopsy that attributed death to asphyxia from sustained pressure — illustrating competing narratives that selectively cite pieces of the reports [6] [7] [8]. Major fact‑checking organizations and mainstream outlets found claims that the toxicology proved an overdose to be misleading, emphasizing that official and independent autopsies did not assign overdose as the primary cause [1] [3] [5].
5. Limits of available evidence and enduring questions
The public record contains the NMS Labs toxicology results and the county autopsy; court proceedings, expert testimony, and video evidence informed the final legal and medical conclusions, but toxicology remains a complex, context‑dependent dataset that cannot by itself resolve questions about causation [2] [4] [5]. Reporting and fact‑checks note that while the presence of fentanyl, methamphetamine, and THC is undisputed, interpretation of their role requires integrating clinical, video, and pathological evidence — a nuance often lost in politicized summaries [1] [8].