Taser tied to 'independent' study that backs stun gun (New Info!)
Robert Anglen The Arizona Republic May. 21, 2005 12:00 AM
Taser International was deeply involved in a Department of Defense study that company officials touted to police departments and investors as "independent" proof of the stun gun's safety, according to government documents and e-mails obtained by The Arizona Republic and interviews with military officials.
This information is surfacing at a time when the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the Arizona attorney general are pursuing inquiries into safety claims that the Scottsdale firm has made.
The stun guns are being used by more than 7,000 law enforcement agencies in the United States, but a series of deaths and injuries associated with the devices have raised safety concerns.
E-mails that military officials exchanged also reveal for the first time that they asked Taser to tone down public statements about the study. In addition, they urged the company to commission an independent study rather than rely on the Defense study.
2. Nice job by that reporter at the Arizona Republic!
"...Since October, Taser officials have contended that the company had no involvement in the Defense study, which helped fuel a sharp rise in the company's stock price last year.
But information obtained by The Republic shows that Taser officials not only participated in three panels to determine the scope of the study, analyze data and review findings, it also provided the bulk of research material used in the study. ..."
Stun-guns are basically harmless (feels similar to a bee sting), but these Tasers deliver severe shocks (usually through shooting wires), and OBVIOUSLY either the police are out of control or the TASERS are DEADLY, or both...
6. you keep exposing how little you know about stun-guns...
stun guns like the XR-5000 (which was issue) can deliver just as long of a shock as the operator wants. It has a simple "on-off" switch. If you hold it "on", it can shock for as long as the power supply lasts without interruption. BTW, the XR-5000 runs 50,000 volts at between 3 and 6 milliamps and at around 20 shocks per second.
You keep saying stun guns feel like a bee sting. Can you cite a source that says that? Because I've had an issue stun-gun since the 1980s, and they NEVER felt like a bee sting.
10. At Least A Few Seconds But I Wasn't Counting...
Edited on Mon May-23-05 02:04 PM by thecai
although a stun-gun's 9 volt battery wears down a little each time the stun-gun is used. My stun-gun was a 50,000 volt. Others were as high as 200,000 volts and were NOT deadly like these TASERS. Only the manufacturers claimed they "leave the victim in a mound of quivering flesh", but in reality, they did not. Not at all.
they produce roughly the same voltage and amperage as a stun gun. Stun guns, as you know, can be used for variable duration, and can be used longer than a single taser burst can. Yes, many stun guns use a single 9 volt battery. Tasers use 8 "AA" 1.5 volt batteries, which not only power the stunning portion but also support the "on board" computer.
You say that stun guns don't leave people "a mound of quivering flesh". You also say that stun guns are like beestings. I suggest you try an experiment. You've still got access to a stun gun, yes? Get a friend, and lie down face-first on whatever exercise mats you use for sparring. Have your friend sit gently on your back, and have him or her hit the back of your neck for five seconds (have them use a stopwatch to time it, and make sure it's a full five seconds) with a stun gun sporting a fresh battery, and then get off you so you can get up and immediately perform the kata of your choice, while he or she videotapes you. I think you'll find your performance is NOT up to what you'd consider "snuff".
I'd like to hear your reasoning why Tasers are so "deadly". Is it because they look like a gun compared to a stun gun?
14. Hate to tell you this, but water or oxygen are DEADLY in the wrong hands
There's not a whole lot out there that CAN'T be misused to cause deaths. Stun guns can CERTAINLY kill too, if "the wrong hands" get ahold of them and use them improperly.
You can drown in a puddle. Life itself isn't safe, in fact, everybody who has ever been born will eventually DIE of SOMETHING.
While your post was amusing, you still have not explained why tasers are, in your opinion, more DEADLY than stun guns "In The Wrong Hands"!
abusing these DEADLY TASERS then! "Anything can kill ya, so anything goes in the police dept.", huh? "All's fair in love and police abuse", I take it? No guidelines anymore. That explains everything. Thank you, DoNotRefill.
17. I hate to throw gas on a fire, but there is a fundamental difference
Edited on Tue May-24-05 08:53 PM by Thor_MN
between a stun gun and a taser, namely, how the charge is presented. A stun gun has a couple of (usually) blunt electrodes and deliver the charge to a person's intact skin. In other words, some of the current is going to be used up breeching the skin's resistance.
A taser delivers its charge through a couple of electrodes that pierce the skin, thereby delivering the current more effectively to the body.
I'm going to leave the fact that the taser's electrodes will most likely be farther apart than a stun gun's (longer path of charge through the body) to someone who has knowledge of what effect that might have. I just don't know what effect that might have, but suspect that if that longer path passes by the heart, there would be a greater chance of disruption of cardiac pacing.
Short story long, although stun guns and tasers electrical circuitry are essentially identical, the way the charge is presented is different.
20. So does an electric chair, your point would be?
Tell you what, you can poke me with a 1/4 inch long 1/4 inch diameter rod with a rounded point and I get to poke you with an 2 inch long dart with fish-hook point and then I'll tell you the difference is semantics.
I admit that the above has nothing to do with the electrical circuitry, but it illustrates the point I made - the contact points between the two is very different.
I'm not taking the position that tasers are deadly - I'm just pointing that there are actual differences between stun guns and tasers.
Apples and oranges, they are both fruits, spherical, grow on trees, have seeds... Is the difference there semantics as well? On the other hand, nevermind, I'm not going to get into another nonsensical arguement.
"The major source of information on TASER is Taser International itself," Aveni said. "Every major study has either been directly or indirectly funded or influenced by Taser. There just hasn't been enough independent research to set the record straight."
Until there is, Amnesty International has called for a moratorium on the use of stun weapons until a rigorous, independent study of their use and effects can be completed. Failing that, AI recommends law enforcement agencies establish policies limiting use to situations in which the weapons are an alternative to deadly force, and create mechanisms for oversight and accountability when officers violate these policies.
Webster had coauthored articles with Taser affiliates Wayne McDaniel and Robert A. Stratbucker before, so their partnership was not news. But Webster was required to provide the curriculum vitae of each paid consultant in the budget to the Department of Justice. Yet consultant Stratbucker failed to disclose in his (redacted) curriculum vitae that he is the medical director of Taser International.
Documents that PETA obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request reveal that Stratbucker will be paid $18,000 over two years to work as a consultant on the study.
MADISON, Wis., May 12, 2005 (AP Online via COMTEX) -- A Wisconsin researcher has removed Taser International's medical director as an adviser to a study of the safety of stun guns after critics said his involvement with the manufacturer tainted the research.
University of Wisconsin-Madison professor John Webster had described his two-year, $500,000 study funded by the U.S. Department of Justice as the first to look at the safety of stun guns independent of Taser, the Arizona-based company that makes the weapons.
But documents uncovered this week show Robert Stratbucker, an Omaha physician who is Taser's top medical officer, is one of four consultants to the study, which will look at how pigs' hearts react to electric shocks from the devices.
<snip>
In his grant proposal, Webster proposed Stratbucker receive $18,000 in salary and travel expenses for his advice. Stratbucker's resume was included but did not mention his work for Taser, and Webster checked a box to deny any conflict of interest.
Amnesty International and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, which calls the research cruel and unnecessary, called for an end to the study on Thursday.
"This is not independent and there's an appearance that there was an attempt to hide the conflict," said Edward Jackson, a spokesman for Amnesty International, which says more independent studies are needed to determine whether Tasers are safe.
Interesting that two articles in the New York Times and San Francisco Chronicle mentioning the lack of independent Taser studies both end on the same note:
Claims for Taser safety based on pig, dog tests No agencies have studied deaths linked to stun gun
Alex Berenson New York Times Jul. 18, 2004 12:00 AM
<snip>
Smith said Taser would eventually run more tests. "In a perfect world, I'd love to have studies on all this stuff, but animal studies are controversial, expensive," he said. "You've got to do the reasonable amount of testing." Comparing Taser's tests to the studies conducted by makers of medical devices like pacemakers is unfair, he said.
Andrew Podgorski, a Canadian electrical engineer who conducted the 1989 study, said he was certain that Tasers were dangerous for people with pacemakers. More research is needed to determine if other people are vulnerable, he said.
"I would urge the U.S. government to conduct those studies," Podgorski said. "Shocking a couple of pigs and dogs doesn't prove anything."
Taser Sued Over 'Non-Lethal' Claim Company knew of design defects in gun that killed man in September, lawyer says San Francisco Chronicle - Alan Gathright 03/01/05
<snip>
"I've seen the Taser folks say, 'Oh, the guy had cocaine in his system, that's the reason for his death, ''said Dr. Zian Tseng, a cardiologist and electrophysiologist at UCSF who specializes in heart-rhythm disorders. "Well, someone with cocaine in their system is also much more prone to a Taser induced cardiac arrest.''
"They cannot say that it's safe in my opinion,'' he added.
Taser says company studies where researchers shock anesthetized pigs confirm the stun gun can't trigger erratic heart beats. Tseng said knocked-out pigs won't have the same panicked adrenaline response of a suspect clashing with police.
"So what can you say: It was safe on anesthetized pigs," Tseng added. "It's far from a real world test.''
As part of my laboratory safety training, we discussed the difference between an electrical charge delivered to dry skin and an electrical charge delivered to wet skin. Let's just say that would feel "like a bee sting" to the dry skin can very well lead to death if applied to wet skin. What's more is that electricity causes muscles to seize...all muscles, including the heart.
I am wondering if the application of a taser to sweaty skin has a different effect than laboratory tests on dry skin, but that is only a guess.
Regardless, 70+ people have been killed by tasers alone, and the cops LOVE to use them liberally. Because of this rash of "non-lethal" weapons, many cops don't even bother with an people skills anymore.
It really doesn't surprise me that Taser was involved in its own safety determination. That is the standard MO for this government. I would imagine that we have only seen the tip of the iceberg as far as damage to our country from having corporations write their own legislation or safety analyses.
WASHINGTON, May 23 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Today Dr. William F. Schulz, executive director of Amnesty International USA (AIUSA), released the following statement regarding documents listing Taser International executives, consultants and businesses partners as panelists in the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) TASER study. This discovery reported over the weekend by the Arizona Republic marks the third time in five months that the manufacturer has been linked to "independent" studies:
"Police departments around the world are purchasing TASERs based, in part, on constant reassurances from the manufacturer that numerous 'independent' studies have proven the electro-shock weapons to be safe and effective. But new revelations reported by the Arizona Republic over the weekend have made it abundantly clear that the company did not voluntarily reveal its connections to this study and the individuals who actually made the claim that TASERs are safe. In October 2004, a Taser International executive called the DoD report the 'granddaddy' of all independent studies. However, even as he made that claim, the company knew that their employees, business partners, and a long list of Taser's clients and supporters had participated in virtually every aspect of producing this report.
For example, the report states that the final version is a product that was reviewed by the 'Independent External Review Workshop.' But, Taser International has consistently failed to voluntarily reveal the fact that nearly half of the members of that panel were either employees of or had some other type of relationship with the company.
The Arizona Republic story marks the third time in five months that it has been revealed that Taser International has tried to hide its involvement in so-called independent studies. In January, media reports exposed information that three of the four researchers on an allegedly independent study were employees of Taser International and one was a paid consultant for the company. Two weeks ago, the public learned that the recipient of a $500,000 federal research grant tried to hide the fact that he would be paying Taser International's medical director $18,000 to consult on his supposedly independent study.
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
