Very simply, if the execution is not a medical procedure, why is a doctor necessary? Having a physician monitor an EEG might not be able to determine the ultimate issue--that is if the inmate "experiences undo pain while dying". If he can not say anything or do anything why is a physician present? Just for show, to make he grizzly procedure more "medical" and therefore more acceptable.
The pancuronium acts at the motor nerve - muscle junction, blocking transmission from the nerve to the muscle. More activity might be seen on the EEG, but that can be confused with the effects of dying, primarily oxygen deprivation. Pain is felt by different (sensory) nerves, and perception is not diminished by the pancuronium bromide. The thiopental is supposed to put the inmate to sleep, but it does not abolish severe pain; , it does not work, and is not used alone during labor. Further, a control tracing should be made of the inmate, and that always has the potential to discover brain damage, which if known at trial, might act as a mitigator.
The net result is a doctor who doesn't want to be there, monitoring a machine that may not deliver the in formation desired, and could not communicate any suggestions to executioner even if s/he can identify problems on the EEG-- a procedure of nonsense, just for witnesses perceptions to dilute the horror of killing.
G M Larkin MD
Charlotte NC USA