Heart Doctors: No Question Tasers Cause Lethal Heart Attacks

Heart Doctors: No Question Tasers Cause Lethal Heart Attacks

www.infowars.net

"In summary, Tasers almost certainly can cause cardiac arrest in humans" Dr. Janusz said.

Despite these conclusions, according to a senior police officer, Taser International instructs that the exact opposite is true.

Staff Sgt. Joe Spindor, of the New Westminster Police Department, told the inquiry that he trains officers using Taser International guidelines and that he has never been informed of medical opinions on possible cardiac arrest.

"No. I've actually heard the opposite from Taser in my instruction." Spindor said.

Earlier this month doctors condemned as corporate "intimidation" a court decision ordering a chief medical examiner to remove any reference to the use of a taser as an antecedent in the deaths of three men.

Taser International filed and won a civil suit, forcing deletion all mentions of the weapons in the autopsy reports and requiring the deaths be termed "accidental".

(visit the link for the full news article)

So, yet again, a corporation has lied - this time with lethal consequences for many people.

They have attempted to cover up and suppress medical evidence.

Evidence that has been supported by human rights organisations.

The name of the game, as ever, is profit.

No matter to these people that others DIE from a supposedly "non-lethal" weapon, as long as they continue to make a profit - in more than a few cases, from the deaths of others.

www.infowars.net
(visit the link for the full news article)

Meh. For starters who is the audience of this article? Ma and Pa Kettle? Why not just call them 'Ticker" Docs in the title? Its a cardiac surgeon and a cardiologist. Now that we have the semantics out of the way.

Lots of things can cause V-Fib including a punch to the chest etc. So what is the solution here? beat the guy down with a billy club? Take him down with a 9MM?


They also offer a solution which I agree ever squad car should come equipped with a AED

Dr. Kerr also said that police should routinely carry defibrillators if they plan to employ Tasers and should be trained to initiate resuscitation after using the Taser on someone who is then unresponsive.

[edit on 5/23/08 by FredT]

[edit on 5/23/08 by FredT]

It doesnt take a medical doctor or a genius to figure out the harm that sending that much voltage through a human body can do.I have personally experienced unpleasant things like tasering personally through my training and will never agree to do it again.It may be very dangerous but in certain cases necessary.Tasers and batons should only be used against armed combatants not some random drunk who doesnt do what they are told.If you need to taser an unarmed person you shouldn't be in law enforcement.There are other ways to restrain and detain an unarmed combatant.

reply to post by FredT


Well, the point is that it is potentially lethal to anybody - and the manufacturers have repeatedly stated that it is completely safe, when this is clearly not the case.

I also agree with training the officers to resuscitate.

Just one point though - are you saying that a cardiac surgeon and a cardiologist have LESS expertise than the manufacturers?

Could there be an issue with the degree of voltage used in some of these devices?

I mean 100,000 Volts seems like overkill, but I wholely acknowledge that I have no expertise in this area and so my assessment may well be wrong.

A taser works by disrupting natural neural function by flooding neurons with electricity... this presumably includes the heart as well.

Further studies by an impartial third party would probably be the way to go.

reply to post by budski


No, Im not however, they did not present much int he way of evidence however:

Contrary to speculation that an electronic control device
could induce ventricular fibrillation, the rhythm found in
media-linked arrest-related deaths was primarily asystole which
is associated with drug overdoses and cannot be induced with
electrical stimulation;

* There was no interference with pacemakers and implantable
cardioverter defibrillators from TASER ECDs; and,

* Real time ultrasound showed that even when electronic control
device probes are placed across the heart, the ECD electrical
pulses have no effect on the human heart. This is in contrast
with the result occasionally seen in research using small pigs,
which have important physiological differences that make their
cardiovascular system significantly more sensitive to electricity
than in humans.
news.tradingcharts.com...

I looked, the abstracts are not in pubmed yet as this was just presented at a heart Arrythmia conference in San Fran. However, I will see if I can get the sylabus and abstracts from one of our cardiologists.

To be fair, while these appear to be peer reviewed articles, I have not had a chance to look at thier methodology, nor who sponsored them. Taser Int. did present them at this conference.

BTW to give a comparison here a taser depending on which site you read delivers 0.3 to 1 joules per pulse.

By comparison

For Sycronized Cardioversion: (Ventricular Tachycardia)

For pediatrics its 1 joule per kilogram

For adults it usally starts at 100 then goes to 200, then 300 with 360 being the Max.

If you are using a Bi-Phasic defribalator then you can cut that in 1/2 across the board.

For Ventricular Fibrillation (This what they are always shocking in the movies):

Peds: first shock is 2 jouls per kilogram 4 jouls per kilo after

Adults usually start at 200 and progress up as with cardiversion. (Again use of bi-phasic gear cuts the joules in half)



So based on that, unless the cops are trying to take down a toddler these doses are way way way below what is used in hospitals to resseutate patients. 100 times as low for adults. Most medical text have a 50 joule shock being lethal. We are really way below that

This is interesting as my state here in Australia has just order 229 new tasers. I think the argument is that tasers reduce the need for guns but that police are more likely to use tasers due to the perception that it is ultimately harmless, increasing the chances for the worst to happen, someone dies as a result. I guess its catch 22 for the cops. What bothers me is that we have strict gun laws and Police shootings are rare. But police are saying that this measure is to cope with drug and alcohol offenders who are hard to control. I think this is a matter of buying weapons to give the already limited number of police an easy fix instead of recruiting more officers to help deal with these types of problems. Lets see how many people are going to pay the highest price for this form of policing.

"We need a Taser for every police vehicle carrying two frontline police officers,'' Mr Pritchard said.

"If the Taser doesn't work then the second officer can use the gun.

www.news.com.au...

reply to post by 44soulslayer


voltage is the quantity of force involved in any given electric current (amps) it takes 1/20th or 50 milliamps to cause defibrillation. I think. It's the amps that kill, voltage is just the force it's delivered with.

reply to post by FredT


Fair point, but isn't the alleged safety of tasers leading to more widespread use and the usage of tasers when the situation doesn't demand it.

I refer in particular to the following cases:

TASERs have become the most prevalent enforcement tool in some departments. They have been used against unruly schoolchildren, mentally disturbed patients, intoxicated individuals; unarmed suspects in misdemeanor crimes and people who simply fail to comply immediately with a "command."Examples include:

A handcuffed nine-year-old girl in Arizona,

A six-year-old mentally disturbed boy in Florida, and

A 71-year-old woman in Oregon who is blind in one eye

And the list goes on.and on.
In Baytown, Texas, a man suffering from epileptic seizures was stunned while in the ambulance by one of Baytown's finest because he was resisted being strapped onto a stretcher while in post-seizure confusion. An Internal Affairs investigation into the incident found that the officer had not violated any policies. Right. The shepherd uses a staff and dogs to herd the sheep.

Also in Baytown, Naomi Autin, a 59-year-old disabled woman, was reportedly TASED three times by police officer Micah Aldred in July 2003 for banging on her brother's door with a brick. She was collecting his mail and keeping an eye on his house while he was away serving a sentence for drug possession. Mrs. Autin called the Police herself to help her get in, when she became worried that her brother's house sitter may have come to some grief, since they were not answering the door. In her lawsuit, she states she was TASED in the back because she kept banging on the door, the door of property she held effective control over, and remember, she was the one that called the cops to "protect and serve" her interests. When the officers would not help, she told them to leave, and went back to banging on the door. She states Aldred told her to stop and then TASED her. She fell, causing a sever head laceration requiring 17 stitches to close [Baytown Police version];. Mrs. Autin, is 5 feet 2 and suffers from severe arthritis. Hence the need for a brick to knock on the door.

source

Let's also consider the contradictions by the company which makes tasers:

In May 2004, Taser International Inc., spokesman Steve Tuttle made a frighteningly accurate prediction when he told the Atlanta Journal Constitution that the number of TASER-related deaths "will continue to increase with the number of devices we sell."

source

This makes no sense to me - a weapon that the makes say is safe, is going to cause more deaths as use of the weapon becomes more widespread.


Strange, no?

Perhaps they know something they're not telling the rest of us, OR the law enforcement officers who use them.

[edit on 23/5/2008 by budski]

This is all well and good, but what are the realistic less-than-lethal alternatives to tasers?

Batons? Beanbag shooting 12 gauges? Tear gas?

While tasers are fundamentally a good idea, I think they should only be used in cases where the officer thinks that he is at considerable risk. Tasers should be a replacement for a gun... they should not be routinely used against "unruly" bystanders.

I'm all for Tazers as long as every 'citizen' can also carry one.

Frankly I'm tired of the 'authorities' thinking that we are all cattle to be handled at will. I'm a proponent of equal force, if I am doing no wrong and am accosted by an 'officer', I have every right to not only resist, but fight back. There are too many incidents of unruly 'authorities', and in my opinion they have become the most dangerous criminals in our society (usa.) We have all been conditioned to succumb to their will, but that is directly against the principle this country was founded upon.

What would an unruly officer rather be stopped with, a 12ga 00 buckshot to the face, or a tazer? I know I would choose a tazer, but since we can't have those, WE have to defend ourselves with other weapons instead. Such double-standards.

reply to post by FredT

Meh. For starters who is the audience of this article? Ma and Pa Kettle? Why not just call them 'Ticker" Docs in the title? Its a cardiac surgeon and a cardiologist. Now that we have the semantics out of the way.

HAHAHAHHAH

It most definitely needs to be a defense only tool as opposed to the civil obedience regulator it currently thought of.

If an individual is not threatening an officer with bodily harm or is not wielding a weapon, then tazing should not be an option.

Ya know, there was a time that officers were actually trained in personal defense, submission techniques, Riot control, etc.
This gave them the advantage of being proficient in the use of non lethal means as well as a lethal option.
Nowadays it would seem that unless they are holding a tazer, ASP, or pistol they are helpless. Ability makes a person, not the weapon they are holding. It is only a substitute for the fear they hold due to not being trained to enforce the law in a civil manner. They seem to be in such fear of the general public that they feel no other alternative than threat of death at the drop of a hat. Literally.