WELCOME to TRUTH ... not TASERS

You may have arrived here via a direct link to a specific post. To see the most recent posts, click HERE.

Showing posts with label dr. andrew podgorski. Show all posts
Showing posts with label dr. andrew podgorski. Show all posts

Friday, September 23, 2011

Taser used to break up teen brawl

September 23, 2011
Dale Carruthers, QMI Agency

LONDON, Ont. - A teenager is in hospital and a group of high school students are threatening a protest against police after an officer used a Taser to break up a brawl in London, Ont., on Thursday.

The clash between two young men around noon was captured on a cellphone video reviewed by QMI Agency and later posted to YouTube.

The images show one combatant hitting the other with a chair, when an officer on foot hurries in from the street and shoots a dart from a Taser stun gun at a young man wearing jeans and a black shirt.

From the video, it appears the two boys had separated when the officer approached.

The crowd gasps in horror as the Taser's prongs appear to hit the young man in the face. He falls to the ground and is motionless for nearly one minute.

"You shot him in the head. You never even asked him," screams another male on the video.

The officer didn't give any warning before using his stun gun, said witness Vivian Greening.

"He just pulled out the Taser and shot him," she said. "They didn't even try to talk to the kids (or) yell at the kids."

Student Cody Hill, 17, who was in the crowd watching the fight, also said the cop Tasered the boy without warning.

It's not clear from the amateur video, with its imperfect audio, whether the officer gave a warning.

The onlookers spilled onto the street to watch the fight, many of them students at nearby H.B. Beal Secondary School.

Hill and a group of friends say they plan to hold a protest on Monday to decry the police response.

Police confirmed a 17-year-old who was Tasered was taken to hospital and another boy is in custody, but wouldn't comment if the officer issued a warning before using the stun gun.

"Our investigation is unfolding," said Const. Dennis Rivest. "There's a number of people that need to be interviewed right now and we still have a lot of work that we have to do to complete this investigation.”

The boy's injuries aren't life-threatening, police said.

"And we're going to wait before any further comment on the situation."

Canadian researcher Andrew Podgorski, who studied stun guns for the Canadian government, said youth are more at risk of injury and death from being hit with a Taser's 50,000-volt jolt.

"The younger you are, the more susceptible you are," said Podgorski. "Younger people are generally . . . smaller in size."

One in 1,000 people who get Tasered die, said Podgorski, adding those under the influence of drugs and alcohol are more likely to die.

According to use-of-force statistics, London police used stun guns 28 times in 2010.

In 2004, Londoner Peter Lamonday, 33, died shortly after being Tasered by police at a convenience store.

Sunday, January 11, 2009

Researcher says police who use stun guns could save lives with defibrillators

January 11, 2009
The Canadian Press

VANCOUVER, B.C. — If police are going to continue to carry stun guns, they should also have to carry defibrillators, says a retired expert in electromagnetics.

Andrew Podgorski has been fascinated with the devices since they went on sale in the United States decades ago, and has generated a half-metre-thick stack of files and reports on the weapons.

The Taser device is one of the most widely used shock weapons by Canadian police forces.

The conducted energy weapons have come under greater scrutiny across the country following deaths of several people after being shocked by police.

None of those deaths was more controversial than that of Robert Dziekanski, who died on the floor of Vancouver's airport after he was shocked five times. Witness video of Dziekanski's dying moments were broadcast around the world.

Podgorski's study, which was filed with the B.C. public inquiry looking into Dziekanski's death, concluded the stun guns "could induce a fatal fibrillation of the human heart."

The B.C. Crown prosecutor's office announced last month no charges would be laid against the officers involved in the incident.

The inquiry is set to resume Jan. 19.

Podgorski, who worked for Canada's National Research Council until 1995, said he believes the weapons are very dangerous.

And he said if every officer carrying a Taser also had a device to restart the heart, it would save lives.

"If you use Tasers, you have to have a defibrillator," Podgorski said in an interview from his Ottawa home.

He said that in almost all the cases where the heart stops beating, a defibrillator can revive the person.

Podgorski believes the weapon is connected to the deaths of about one in 1,000 people shocked by the devices.

Taser International, based in Phoenix, Ariz., has consistently argued the devices aren't the cause of people dying after police confrontations.

Pete Holran, vice-president of public relations at Taser, said dozens of tests show impulses from the device don't affect the heart.

He added that it wasn't until 1999, well after Podgorski's study, that the weapon was fully developed to incapacitate the body's muscles, making a person incapable of moving.

"Before it was just a pain-compliance device," he said.

RCMP started using Tasers in 2001 and the weapons now are widespread among Canadian police forces.

Podgorski's 1990 report concluded stun guns can affect the heartbeat and present a serious safety hazard.

The study was conducted on pigs with pacemakers. Each pig was killed by a stun-gun shock, then jolted back to life with a defibrillator.

"From the human point of view, this was stunning," Podgorski said. "I mean, the pig was dying and then we revived it."

But Podgorski said that would take more police training and it would be expensive for officers to carry around the life-saving devices.

He said he's sad to hear news stories about people dying after being jolted by Tasers.

"I predicted it. I'm sorry about it."

RCMP Sgt. Tim Shields said police haven't seen any documented evidence that would support Podgorski's theory.

"If someone has something that has been well-researched, then we would definitely like to see it," he said.

"Our priority is saving lives and we only use the Taser in cases where there are direct threats to the public or to the police officer."

Shields said the suggestion that police officers who carry Tasers also carry a defibrillator might not be practical because of the training and cost involved.

"However, if carrying defibrillators was a reality ... we would be all for it, because there are many other incidents where a defibrillator might come in useful to save somebody's life, completely unrelated to the Taser."

Last month, municipal police forces in B.C. agreed to remove and test stun guns acquired before 2006 over concerns they generated higher shocks than manufacturer specifications.

Several other forces across the country, including the RCMP, also announced they would begin a more rigorous testing process for the weapons.

Holran said defibrillators have been proven to save lives.

"What isn't proven is a direct correlation between the use of a Taser device and the need for a defibrillator," he said.

He said the Taser is probably the most tested device weapon a police officer carries, and human studies have shown the heart isn't affected.

"And so if there's no effect on the heart, if it's only affecting the skeletal muscles, then the correlation would be there would be no need for a defibrillator in direct causal relationship with Taser use," Holran said.

Saturday, February 09, 2008

The facts about tasers — and the lies

By Rob Wipond

Police adore Tasers. Medical researchers and coroners have become cozy with the manufacturer. Taser International has been threatening legal action against Canadian media. Whose claims can we trust?

Shortly after the horrifying, videotaped death of Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver Airport tore through our public consciousness, another frightening thing happened. The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police leaped up and gave Tasers a ringing public endorsement.

It was the most crass act the association could have committed, reminiscent of how the National Rifle Association parachutes gun proponents into the post-mortems of mass shootings.

“Forgive us if we sound biased,” announced association president Gord Tomlinson to the press.

But should we forgive them?

Well, there is one crucial aspect to the police side of this story that’s so far been underdiscussed.

Years of cutbacks by conservative-leaning governments to health care, welfare, assistance programs, and housing have created a volatile social milieu, particularly for people experiencing intense psychological or addictions-related crises. And police are now left alone as the front line responders to an increasing number of explosions of anxiety and frustration at overcrowded boarding houses, underfunded social service agencies, short-staffed care facilities, downtown streets and, sometimes, even homes and airports. (For more insight on this issue, see also this deputation to Toronto police by Canadian rights activist and survivor of forced psychiatric treatment Don Weitz.)

In 2005, Movie Monday showed Crisis Call by Canadian Laura Sky, a thoughtful documentary that had gathered interviews with police officers about this growing nation-wide phenomenon. Three area police officers answered questions after the showing, and overall it became clear that our police, mainly trained to handle criminals, dislike having to fill this gap in our social safety net, and are feeling increasingly overwhelmed and ill-trained for the role.

Victoria’s Sgt. Grant Hamilton confirms that “the majority” of police interventions today involve alcohol, drugs or mental health issues. “When no one else can come,” he adds, “you call the police. We’re the only ones who can always come.”

Though reluctant to comment on the broader political issues, Hamilton points to the significant impact on police of lack of housing alone and states, “We definitely want a solution.”

All of this could explain, in part, the rough, hurried way the RCMP treated Dziekanski. His situation seemed to require an interpreter, border staff who weren’t bogged down in the minutiae of ridiculously expanded anti-terrorism responsibilities, or maybe a crisis interventionist or just a responsible security guard. But to four heavily armed police officers, Dziekanski was just another time-sucking irritant.

All of which also begins to explain why quickie-takedown Tasers have become so popular, misused and vehemently defended by police.

WIDESPREAD IMPROPER USE

Since 1999, thousands of North American police forces have been arming with Tasers, and deployments are rising steadily. Municipal police in BC’s Lower Mainland used Tasers 152 times in 2006, up from 97 in 2005. With some controls in place, Victoria police Taser deployments remained steady, at 79 in 2005 and 74 in 2006 (though these numbers don’t distinguish between actual uses and merely drawing the Taser).

Conservative calculations link 300 North American deaths to Tasers, 20 in Canada.

Maybe most Taser uses are appropriate. Nevertheless, abuse of Tasers is obviously rampant. From Halifax to Victoria, Nunavut to Miami, six year olds, retirees, and even unarmed people in wheelchairs have been Tasered.

Particularly telling is the number of minor infractions that, somehow, escalate into violent conflicts. Amnesty International’s report on Canadian Taserings includes a speeding infraction, a suspected unpaid cab fair, a man refusing to leave a bar, and a man with cerebral palsy being evicted. Police searching an Edmonton hotel used Tasers to rouse sleeping suspects. A distressed 82-year old Victoria man was Tasered trying to escape Beacon Hill Villa. (The Villa itself is now under investigation for elder abuse.)

These aren’t the types of situations which we would ordinarily expect to cause officers to fear for theirs or anyone’s lives. And in the past, such situations were not typically associated with police shootings. So what’s going on? The chair of the Toronto Police Services Board recently expressed worry that “the Taser could lead to lazy policing”, and indeed, these accounts suggest police may become bolder, less patient and more provocative themselves when they have Tasers at hand.

Even when suspects are under control, Tasers are frequently used: An Ottawa protester passively resisting arrest was Tasered. An impaired driver resisted being fingerprinted and was Tasered three times. A jaywalker returned to talk, but refused to sit down, and was Tasered twice. A Halifax woman was shocked three times while handcuffed in a jail cell.

Far from saving lives, such situations are clearly more about what the UN Committee Against Torture has condemned as using Tasers for “pain compliance”. Indeed, while much attention has focused on Taser safety, Amnesty International has pointed out that equally concerning is the way Tasers give police a portable, easy-to-use manner to inflict terrible pain without leaving appreciable marks. (Public Taser demonstrations usually inflict split-second jolts, but in the field Tasers fire for five seconds, and can fire longer and repeatedly. By most accounts, the pain is excruciating. ) (Note: Here’s a police training video that looks at least a little more realistic…)

Yet our governments and police apparently don’t see a serious problem, and so far aren’t demanding or instituting fundamental changes to how Tasers are handled. Still more internal “reviews” are coming, but there’s been no commitment to a comprehensive, independent evaluation.

Instead, most North American police have become so attached to Tasers, they’re manipulating the political landscape and misleading public perception.

SEMANTIC SWINDLES

From the beginning, police have presented Tasers as a “nonlethal alternative to deadly force that saves lives”. How could any reasonable person not embrace that?

Unfortunately, every word of that statement is misleading.

When Victoria police wrote their “Final Report” on Tasers in 2005 for the Police Complaint Commissioner, they themselves lamented that the term “nonlethal” had “inadvertently” created “unrealistic” expectations in the public. They recommended Tasers be described as “lower lethality” weapons.

That description hasn’t caught on.

Meanwhile, claims about “saving lives” bloat absurdly.

Const. Mike Massine, who co-authored Victoria’s report, told the Canadian Press in November he would’ve had to kill several people but for the Taser. It’s hard to question such personal, anecdotal evidence. But police reps cobbled together these statements from officers and in 2004 told the CBC Tasers had saved 4,000 Canadian lives since 1999. (CBC updated that web page in 2007 and, somewhat ironically, kept the same figure. Here’s the original CBC page from 2004 thanks to Archive.org’s WayBackMachine.) At that point, such claims appear for what they are: pro-Taser propaganda. If true, that would mean without Tasers our police would’ve engaged in annual slaughters twenty or thirty times Canada’s historical rate for police shootings, making them bigger homicidal maniacs than all of our murderers combined. (Our suicide rates haven’t changed, so police weren’t saving those lives, either.)

As for Tasers being “an alternative to lethal force”, that was corrected during the 2005 inquest into the shooting death of Saanich’s Majencio Camaso. Use-of-force expert Const. Wayne Unger said Tasering the unstable man would have been inappropriate, unless the attending officer had been backed up by someone with a firearm. Similarly, Massine recently explained to CP, “I had somebody watching my back with a pistol. [A Taser] works in concert with lethal force. It’s never intended to replace it.”

Essentially, unless there’s still time, space and opportunity to turn to lethal force if need be, police aren’t supposed to use finicky, fallible Tasers.

So then, are Tasers an alternative to lethal force in life-threatening situations, or an alternative to try, along with patience, physical restraint and batons, before a situation becomes truly life-threatening? Police answer differently depending on whether they’re justifying their Taserings or their shootings.

This December, the RCMP Complaint Commissioner’s report confirmed such “usage creep” meant police were far too often using the Taser “earlier than reasonable” in situations that weren’t even “combative” let alone life-threatening for anyone.

Though he too still feels Tasers save lives, Victoria’s Sgt. Hamilton also confirms, “The Taser was never intended as a replacement to lethal force.” He instead describes a scenario where a knife-waving man ignores police commands. “Can we let that person walk away?” Depending on “very fluid” situational factors, Hamilton says, like relative size of a police officer to a suspect, officer skill level, or presence of different weapons, a Taser might become a helpful option in the use-of-force continuum.

Hamilton’s argument helps bring some focus and forthrightness to the whole Taser debate, but such honesty is still too rare. More often, for example, police have even been turning to bald cover-ups to protect the Taser’s reputation. The video of Dziekanski’s death showed the RCMP lied brazenly about how much they tried to calm Dziekanski and how dangerous he was. After Robert Bagnell died in 2004, Vancouver police didn’t even tell their own investigating detective they’d Tasered the heavily-drugged and disoriented man. The detective learned it from witnesses later, and then for weeks police hid the fact from the public and Bagnell’s family.

Certainly, shootings in some cities have become slightly less common after Tasers were introduced. Yet have Tasers made it more common for police to accidentally kill people they had no intention, or need, to kill?

POLICE AND CORONERS LINKED TO COMPANY

According to police and manufacturer Taser International, Tasers have been “contributing factors” and “linked” to deaths, but have virtually never caused a death. (Taser International sent “legal demand letters” to 60 Canadian news outlets insisting on corrections to statements “blaming the Taser” for Dziekanski’s death.)

However, many medical studies and field safety reviews were either funded by Taser International, or involved police and people who’ve been on Taser International’s payroll, and it’s on such literature that many coroners base their conclusions about cause of death.

These intertwining relationships between police, coroners and Taser International run deep. BC’s chief coroner was the Surrey RCMP superintendent until 2001. Victoria’s Sgt. Darren Laur held stock in Taser International and professionally trained other agencies in Taser use until a few months before he began work on the VPD’s Taser evaluation. Ontario’s deputy chief coroner has been accepting all-expenses-paid trips from Taser International to give speeches about excited delirium, the mystery “disease” that supposedly causes many Taser victims to die.

Growing awareness of these tight relationships has prompted our federal government to promise an investigation into Taser International’s links to Canadian officials. In the meantime, this “common ground” with coroners and police has been helping the company win a running gun battle of lawsuits from Taser victims and their families. In return, according to the Globe and Mail, the company assists governments and police in their own legal defenses.

And what happens if you’re not “on side”? In 2005, Cook County’s Medical Examiner declared that a police Tasering had in fact caused the death of a Chicago man. Taser International lobbied for a judicial review and its hired experts publicly attacked the coroner’s credibility.

Forensic Engineer James Ruggieri published a study suggesting Tasers in real circumstances could give more dangerously intense shocks than the manufacturer states. (See an interesting article about it all part-way down here.) The company called Ruggieri a “high school drop-out” who couldn’t do basic math. Yet Taser International’s own 2003 medical review had concluded that, due to “physiological variables”, it was “impossible to accurately calculate” how much electrical shock a Taser would deliver into a human body. Similarly, the most recent inquest into the Bagnell case featured expert testimony that Tasers can administer shocks many times the manufacturer’s specs.

And that’s just the beginning of the medical unknowns.

MISSING MEDICAL RESEARCH

In police Taser reviews, negative findings may be downplayed or disappear. For example, the Canadian government’s own investigation of “stun guns” in 1990 found the weapons deadly and recommended banning them. Lead scientist Andrew Podgorski still speaks out against Tasers (more from Podgorski here.) However, his study isn’t discussed in the VPD’s report.

Overall, Tasers appear to be relatively safe when used on healthy, relaxed people. But how many times are Tasers being used on healthy, relaxed people?

That summarizes the glaring, suspicious gap in the medical research.

We already know prolonged, multiple shocks from Tasers are dangerous. But how deadly is even one Taser shock for people undergoing heart stress already? This at-risk group would include people taking most recreational drugs, withdrawing from drugs, taking psychiatric medications with heart-related side effects, experiencing high levels of adrenaline-stress, or who are just unhealthy.

Basically, this at-risk group would include practically everyone most likely to be Tasered. Furthermore, it’s known electrical shocks could interact with these other risk factors to induce cardiac arrest much later.

Unfortunately, most Taser studies have considered electrical shock alone as a possible cause of immediate cardiac arrest. Even the VPD’s report lamented this dearth of research into “such potentially relevant factors as drug ingestion and the elevated heart rate provoked by physical struggle”. The authors hoped two upcoming studies would address these gaps.

In 2006, the University of Wisconsin released one of those studies. It concluded Tasers could very occasionally cause cardiac arrests, even in healthy humans, if the barbs land close to the heart.

Taser International called Webster’s study flawed.

This December, the British government released the other widely anticipated study. It boldly announced Tasers wouldn’t likely cause immediate heart attacks. On the final page, the scientists quietly qualify their findings, though, by noting that they didn’t consider some factors which could make heart attacks more likely, “such as illicit drug intoxication, alcohol abuse, pre-existing heart disease”, prescription drug use, or physical stress.

Evidently, it’s another useless study that’s nevertheless been useful for police and Taser International-the company promptly linked to it from their website’s front page. It’s helping them market their more powerful, wireless, shotgun Tasers to governments, and some sleek pistol models to women.

Reposted here with permission of the author. Copyright by Rob Wipond.

Monday, August 23, 2004

When Stun Guns Go Bad: After five deaths in one year, police chiefs order an investigation into Taser use

August 23, 2004
Graham F. Scott, Macleans

EARLY LAST WEEK, high and paranoid on cocaine, Samuel Truscott barricaded himself in his Kingston, Ont., bedroom with a knife and a baseball bat, threatening to hurt himself. Police were called, and when pepper spray failed to subdue the 43-year-old man, he was zapped through an open window with a Taser -- the sophisticated stun gun that disrupts muscle control and is used by more than 5,000 police forces worldwide. After being disarmed and searched, Truscott was taken to hospital for an evaluation of his mental health. Within hours he suffered a seizure and died.

Two days later, Ontario's deputy chief coroner reported the cause of death was a drug overdose -- not the stun gun. Still, Dr. James Cairns made it clear he was not yet ready to dismiss Tasers as a factor. How could he? Truscott was the fifth Canadian to die in the past year after being shocked with a police Taser. Formal investigations and coroner inquiries are ramping up in Brampton, Ont., as well as in Vancouver.(In both instances, drugs seemed to have played some role.)And now the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police has asked for a full review of the science and techniques of Taser use in Canada and around the world.

All this heightens a controversy that has been on the boil in the United States, where more than 50 deaths have been associated with the device over the past four years. Amnesty International and other human rights groups have issued calls to suspend their use. But Steve Tuttle, VP of communications at Arizona-based Taser International Inc., says such doubts are groundless, citing the more than 50,000 incident-free uses in the field as proof the devices are safe. "Our technology is explicitly designed not to cause fatalities," he says. "We've still not been listed as a direct cause of death."

That's true -- in only a few cases has a Taser been tagged as a contributing factor in a police suspect's death, and it's never been labelled the direct cause. But there is also little scientific consensus on the actual safety of the device, particularly when it's used on addicts or people with heart disease or pacemakers. Dr. Andrew Podgorski tested several early-model stun guns in 1989 at Canada's National Research Council. He found that pigs with implanted pacemakers could die from the electrical shocks. "I published this in a report," says Podgorski. "We suggested to police that maybe they shouldn't use the stun guns because nobody knows who has an implanted pacemaker."

Taser International says it has made significant improvements since then. And police forces believe in the Taser in part because standard training encourages officers to test the jolt on themselves. "It made me feel like I had no control over anything," wrote one officer of the experience, "I could not fight back." Another simply wrote, "Hurt like hell. Dropped like a stone." Edmonton police are one of 62 Canadian forces, including the RCMP, employing Tasers. Const. Shawna Goodkey, who works in the Officer Safety Unit, says the device "actually decreases injury for our subject and our officers out there because they can control somebody within five seconds."

Tasers work by shooting two small metal probes, attached to wires, into the body from up to six metres away. If both probes make contact -- even through several layers of clothes -- then the circuit is completed and the person's muscles are immobilized by 50,000 volts of electricity. That sounds like a lot -- it is -- but a Taser jolt is not the same as sticking your finger in a light socket and receiving a continuous shock. The Taser's zap is intermittent, and lasts five seconds -- just enough to force muscles into a rigid state.

The argument for Tasers is that they're a preferable alternative to guns, at least in situations where suspects are not armed. But police allow there are no silver bullets. Any time force is used, something bad can happen. The question where it comes to stun guns: when is it worth the risk?

Tasers in Canada
The Main Users
RCMP 640
MUNICIPAL FORCES
Edmonton Police Services 134
Vancouver Police Department 36
Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services 24
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
B.C. Sheriff's Service 55
Court Services Branch, Federal Ministry of Attorney General 53
Alberta Solicitor General's Correctional Branch 18
NUMBER OF POLICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES DEPLOYING
Tasers in Canada: 62, In U.S.: over 5,400
Number of devices in use in Canada: 1,193
In U.S.: over 100,000
NUMBER OF DEATHS ASSOCIATED WITH TASER USE:
Five in Canada, 50 in U.S., over four years
[SOURCE: Taser International Inc., media reports]

Sunday, July 18, 2004

As police use of tasers rises, questions over safety increase

July 18, 2004
Alex Berenson, The New York Times

AZARETH, Pa. — As the sun set on June 24, something snapped in Kris J. Lieberman, an unemployed landscaper who lived a few miles from this quiet town. For 45 minutes, he crawled deliriously around a pasture here, moaning and pounding his head against the weedy ground.

Eventually the police arrived, carrying a Taser M26, an electric gun increasingly popular with law enforcement officers nationwide. The gun fires electrified barbs up to 21 feet, hitting suspects with a disabling charge.

The officers told Mr. Lieberman, 32, to calm down. He lunged at them instead. They fired their Taser twice. He fought briefly, collapsed and died.

Mr. Lieberman joined a growing number of people, now at least 50, including 6 in June alone, who have died since 2001 after being shocked. Taser International, which makes several versions of the guns, says its weapons are not lethal, even for people with heart conditions or pacemakers. The deaths resulted from drug overdoses or other factors and would have occurred anyway, the company says.

But Taser has scant evidence for that claim. The company's primary safety studies on the M26, which is far more powerful than other stun guns, consist of tests on a single pig in 1996 and on five dogs in 1999. Company-paid researchers, not independent scientists, conducted the studies, which were never published in a peer-reviewed journal. Taser has no full-time medical director and has never created computer models to simulate the effect of its shocks, which are difficult to test in human clinical trials for ethical reasons.

What is more, aside from a continuing Defense Department study, the results of which have not been released, no federal or state agencies have studied the safety, or effectiveness, of Tasers, which fall between two federal agencies and are essentially unregulated. Nor has any federal agency studied the deaths to determine what caused them. In at least two cases, local medical examiners have said Tasers were partly responsible. In many cases, autopsies are continuing or reports are unavailable.

The few independent studies that have examined the Taser have found that the weapon's safety is unproven at best. The most comprehensive report, by the British government in 2002, concluded "the high-power Tasers cannot be classed, in the vernacular, as `safe.' " Britain has not approved Tasers for general police use.

A 1989 Canadian study found that stun guns induced heart attacks in pigs with pacemakers. A 1999 study by the Department of Justice on an electrical weapon much weaker than the Taser found that it might cause cardiac arrest in people with heart conditions. In reviewing other electrical devices, the Food and Drug Administration has found that a charge half as large as that of the M26 can be dangerous to the heart.

While Taser says that the M26 is not dangerous, it now devotes most of its marketing efforts to the X26, a less powerful weapon it introduced last year. Both weapons are selling briskly. About 100,000 officers nationally now have Tasers, 20 times the number in 2000, and most carry the M26. Taser, whose guns are legal for civilian use in most states, hopes to expand its potential market with a new consumer version of the X26 later this summer.

For Taser, which owns the weapon's trademark and is the only company now making the guns, the growth has been a bonanza. Its stock has soared. Its executives and directors, including a former New York police commissioner, Bernard B. Kerik, have taken advantage, selling $60 million in shares since November.

Patrick Smith, Taser's chief executive, said the guns are safe. "We tell people that this has never caused a death, and in my heart and soul I believe that's true," Mr. Smith said.

Taser did not need to disclose the British results to American police departments, he said. "The Brits are extremely conservative," he said. "To me, this is sort of boilerplate, the fine print." In addition to Taser's animal trials, thousands of police volunteers have received shocks without harm, Mr. Smith said.

But the hits that police officers receive from the M26 in their Taser training have little in common with the shocks given to suspects. In training, volunteers usually receive a single shock of a half-second or less. In the field, Tasers automatically fire for five seconds. If an officer holds down the trigger, a Taser will discharge longer. And suspects are often hit repeatedly.

Over all, Taser has significantly overstated the weapon's safety, say biomedical engineers who separately examined the company's research at the request of The New York Times. None of the engineers have any financial stake in the company or any connection with Taser; The Times did not pay them.

Relatively small electric shocks can kill people whose hearts are weakened by disease or cocaine use, said John Wikswo, a Vanderbilt University biomedical engineer. But no one knows whether the Taser's current crosses the threshold for those people, Dr. Wikswo said.

"Their testing scheme has not included the possibility that there is a subset of the population that is exquisitely sensitive," Dr. Wikswo said. "That alone means they have not done adequate testing."

Mr. 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 with the studies conducted by makers of medical devices like pacemakers is unfair, he said.

Dr. 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," Dr. Podgorski said. "Shocking a couple of pigs and dogs doesn't prove anything."

In More Officers' Hands

Many police officers defend the Taser, saying the weapon helps them avoid using deadly force and lowers the risk of injury to officers. Tasers let police officers subdue suspects without wrestling with or hitting them, said David Klinger, a former police officer and a criminology professor at the University of Missouri at St. Louis. And Tasers are surely safer than firearms.

"I think it is appropriate for deployment in the field," Mr. Klinger said. "You trust this guy or gal with a gun, you should be able to trust them with a less lethal device."

But human rights groups say the police may be overusing the Taser. Because the gun leaves only light marks, and because Taser markets it as nonlethal, officers often use it on unruly suspects, not just as an alternative to deadly force, said Dr. William F. Schulz, the executive director of Amnesty International USA. In recent incidents, officers have shocked a 9-year-old girl in Arizona and a 66-year-old woman in Kansas City.

"We think there should be controlled, systematic independent medical studies," Dr. Schulz said. "We would like to see these weapons suspended until these questions are answered."

A study by the Orange County, Fla., sheriff's office showed that officers used pepper spray and batons much less after getting the guns. But the use of Tasers more than made up for that drop, and the department's overall use of force increased 58 percent from 2000 to 2003. Last week, several police departments in Orange County agreed to restrict the use of Tasers to situations where suspects are actively resisting officers. The sheriff's office is not part of the agreement and says it is still studying the matter.

State and federal agencies do not keep tabs on Taser use, so no one knows how many times officers have fired the weapon. Officers have reported close to 5,000 uses of the M26 to Taser, but the company says the actual number is much higher.

Little evidence supports the theory that Tasers reduce police shootings or work better than other alternatives to guns, like pepper spray. Because of their limited range, Tasers are best in situations where an officer using a Taser is covered by another with a firearm, officers say.

A 2002 company study found that nearly 85 percent of people shocked with Tasers were unarmed. Fewer than 5 percent were carrying guns.

In Phoenix, which has equipped all its officers with Tasers, police shootings fell by half last year. Taser trumpets that statistic on its Web site. But last year's drop appears to be an anomaly. This year, shootings are running at a record pace, according to the Phoenix police department.

A 2002 study in Greene County, Mo., found that Tasers were only marginally more effective than pepper spray at restraining suspects. Pepper spray worked in 91 percent of cases, while the Taser had a 94 percent success rate.

The largest police departments have been slow to embrace the Taser. The New York Police Department owns only a handful of Tasers, which are used by specialized units and supervisors, a spokesman said.

'Gold in Those Hills'

The M26 was introduced only five years ago, but the technology is much older. John Cover, an Arizona inventor, created the Taser in 1969. Its name stands for "Thomas A. Swift Electric Rifle," an allusion to the Tom Swift series of science fiction novels.

Engineers have known for generations that relatively small electric currents cause painful and uncontrollable muscle contractions. Tasers operate on that principle, firing barbs that are connected by wire to the gun and flood the body with current. The gun can deliver its shock even if the barbs do not break the skin because its current can jump through two inches of clothing.

Weak currents are not inherently dangerous if they stop in a few minutes. But stronger shocks can disrupt the electrical circuitry of the heart. That condition, ventricular fibrillation, causes cardiac arrest in seconds and death in minutes, unless the heart is defibrillated with an even larger shock.

The exact current needed to cause fibrillation depends on technical factors like the current's shape and frequency, as well as the heart's condition, said James Eason, a biomedical engineering professor at Washington and Lee University. But because fibrillation is so dangerous, scientists can conduct only limited human trials. They must estimate the threshold of fibrillation from animal trials and computer models.

Still, the broad parameters for fibrillation are known, and the first Taser from Mr. Cover had a large safety margin. In 1975 the Consumer Product Safety Commission concluded that weapon, which was 11 percent as powerful as the M26, probably would not harm healthy humans.

Then, in March 1976, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms claimed it had jurisdiction over the weapons because gunpowder propelled their barbs. The firearms bureau essentially outlawed them for civilian use; no federal safety standard was ever created.

But the original Tasers were bulky and often ineffective. For almost two decades, they remained a niche product used by a few police departments.

That began to change after 1993, when Mr. Smith and his brother Thomas created a company to market electric weapons to civilians. Patrick Smith, who had just graduated from the University of Chicago business school, saw enormous potential for an alternative to firearms.

"I just figured I'm going to go to out to Arizona, and I'm going to scratch and sniff and dig, and figure there's going to be gold in those hills," Mr. Smith said in an interview.

In January 1995, the Smiths introduced their first electric gun, which was powered by compressed nitrogen. As a result, the weapon was not regulated by the firearms bureau and could be sold to civilians.

For the next several years, the company struggled, as concerns over the gun's power kept sales slow. By 1999, the company, now known as Taser International, was near bankruptcy, with only $50,000 in the bank and $2.7 million in debt.

"It was pretty humiliating," he said. "We had completely wiped out my parents financially."

Testing

Hoping to stay afloat, the company introduced the Advanced Taser M26 in December 1999. The weapon closely resembled a handgun, a feature many police officers liked, and was very powerful.

According to Taser, the gun produced 26 watts of power, four times the power of the earlier model. A field test in 2001 by the Canadian police showed that the M26 was even stronger, with an output of 39 watts.

(Stun gun power is usually gauged in watts, a measure of electrical energy, even though the biological effects of electricity are more closely related to current strength, measured in amperes. Electrical engineers often compare the flow of electricity to a river: amperes are like the river's speed, while watts are the amount of water flowing by each second. As watts increase, amperes rise, but more slowly.)

Taser's sales rose as officers learned about the new gun. At meetings with police officers, company representatives encouraged them to receive a half-second shock to feel the weapon's power for themselves. "These guys would leave just absolutely evangelical about the product because we would just drop them all," Mr. Smith said.

In its marketing, the company touted the safety of the M26, saying it had been extensively tested.

But Taser had performed only two animal studies before introducing the M26.

In 1996, Taser hired Robert Stratbucker, a Nebraska doctor and farmer, to test the weapon. Dr. Stratbucker, who is now Taser's part-time medical director, shocked a pig 48 times with shocks as large as those from the M26. The pig suffered no heart damage.

Three years later, the company hired Dr. Stratbucker and Dr. Wayne McDaniel, an electrical engineer, for an animal test at the University of Missouri. The scientists shocked five anesthetized dogs about 200 times with the M26. The dogs did not suffer cardiac arrest, although one animal had changes in its heartbeat, according to a report.

Taser has repeatedly said the studies proved that the M26 was safe. But the biomedical engineers who reviewed the gun's safety for The Times said Taser should have conducted far more research.

"I don't think there has been a definitive study saying that yes it can contribute to death or no it cannot," said Dr. Raymond Ideker, an electrophysiologist and a professor in the cardiology division at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. Taser must test more animals and vary the shocks they receive to find the gun's safety margin, Dr. Ideker said.

In addition, while Taser claims that its Missouri study proves that the gun is safe for people who have used cocaine, it never tested animals dosed with cocaine. Because cocaine substantially increases heart attack risk, and Tasers are used on people who have taken cocaine, that omission is a serious flaw, said Dr. Wikswo of Vanderbilt.

The company should also examine risks other than fibrillation, some scientists say.

Dr. Terrence Allen, a former medical examiner in Los Angeles who examined cases in the late 1980's when people died after being shocked with earlier-model Tasers, said he was sure the weapons could be lethal. Taser is misrepresenting the medical evidence, said Dr. Allen, who has consulted for people who have sued the company.

Dr. Mark W. Kroll, a Taser director and the chief technology officer of St. Jude Medical, one of the largest pacemaker manufacturers, said Taser had adequately tested its weapons and they were safe. External pacemakers deliver much larger charges and do not cause fibrillation, he said.

Dr. Ideker countered that pacemakers and Tasers could not be easily compared, because the Taser's shock is very short and powerful, while a pacemaker delivers its charge over a much longer period.

Although Taser has performed only rudimentary studies of the M26, it has more closely studied the X26, the gun it introduced last year. In a 2003 study at the University of Missouri, Taser found that a shock roughly 20 times that of the X26 caused a healthy, anesthetized 85-pound pig to fibrillate.

Mr. Smith cites the 2003 Missouri study as proof that all Tasers have a safety margin of 20-to-1 or more. But the new gun puts out a charge only one-fourth as large as the older model, a fact Taser does not generally advertise.

The study said nothing about the M26, or about hearts stressed by disease, drugs or physical activity. "I think another test is warranted," Dr. Ideker said.

Taser did not test the older gun, which is associated with nearly all the deaths, because "we believed that the M26's safety record and prior testing speaks for itself," Mr. Smith said. "Could it be done? Absolutely. There's time and expense involved."

The X26 has become Taser's biggest seller, based mainly on the company's claims that it is even stronger than the M26 despite its small size and lower power. The company says the new gun enables electrical current to enter the body more efficiently.

No independent agency has tested the guns side by side, and in Taser's patent on the M26, Mr. Smith himself argued that weaker guns were often ineffective because they do not deliver enough current to incapacitate suspects. But neither deaths nor concerns about effectiveness have dampened police support and investor enthusiasm for Taser International. Stock analysts predict Taser will have $15 million in profits on sales of $60 million in 2004. Investors have bid up the company's shares 60-fold since last February, giving Taser a value of $1.2 billion.

The Smith brothers and their father, Phillips, have sold $46 million in Taser shares since November, according to federal filings. They still own $130 million worth of shares. Other Taser executives and directors have sold $14 million in stock. Mr. Kerik, the former New York police commissioner and a director, has sold $900,000 in stock. Mr. Kroll of St. Jude Medical has sold $1.7 million.

"It's been great," Patrick Smith said of the company's recent success. But making money is not his main goal, he said. "If we could get a Taser on every officer's belt,'' he said, " it would save hundreds of lives or thousands of lives a year."

Deaths and Questions

Meanwhile, the number of Taser-associated deaths is rising. In June alone, at least six people died, the most ever in one month: Eric B. Christmas, James A. Cobb, Jacob J. Lair, Anthony C. Oliver, Jerry W. Pickens and Mr. Lieberman.

The circumstances of the deaths vary widely. Among the six, Mr. Pickens was the only one hit with the X26.

Mr. Cobb fought for several minutes after being shocked, which suggests that fibrillation could not have caused his death. Some of the other men collapsed immediately, according to news reports and witnesses. Some of the men were fighting with the police when officers shot them. Others simply refused to obey orders.

Mr. Pickens was one. On June 4, in Bridge City, La., the police were summoned to help calm him after an argument with his 18-year-old son, Taylor Pickens. Jerry Pickens confronted the police in the family's front yard.

"My dad, he had been drinking, and he was kind of hostile toward the police,'' Taylor said. "He kept trying to go back inside the house, and they said, 'If you're going to go back into the house we're going to Taser you.' " Mr. Pickens who was unarmed, began to walk inside, Taylor said.

"They counted down three, and then they shot him in the back," Taylor said. "My dad stiffened up, and fell back." Mr. Pickens hit his head on a cement walkway and began foaming at the mouth, Taylor said.

Sharon Landis, Taylor's mother and Mr. Pickens's wife, said officers did not need to shock her husband. "They could have pepper-sprayed him, they could have grabbed him," she said. "He's 55 years old, and these are big burly cops."

Mr. Pickens was pronounced brain-dead that day and removed from life support three days later, Ms. Landis said.

Toxicologic tests on Mr. Pickens are being conducted, said Gayle Day of the Jefferson Parish coroner's office. A spokesman for the sheriff's office said he could not comment on a continuing investigation. Mr. Smith said he could not comment on Mr. Pickens's death.

Three weeks later, Kris Lieberman died in Pennsylvania. The officers who shocked him were the only witnesses to his death, which the Pennsylvania State Police are investigating. But Mr. Lieberman's parents said the state police told them that their son was shocked twice and collapsed afterward. [Stan Coopersmith, chief of the Bushkill Township Police, whose officers responded to the call, said he could not comment on the incident until the state police finish their investigation.] But Taser said that the police chief had told the company that Mr. Lieberman fought briefly after the shocks and that an automatic defibrillator used by the officers indicated Mr. Lieberman was not fibrillating when he collapsed.

"I would suspect the autopsy will find a cause of death that does not include the Taser," Mr. Smith said.

Mr. Lieberman's parents say that he was troubled but that he did not use drugs. Police officers searched Mr. Lieberman's home after the shooting and did not find drugs, his parents say. Toxicologic tests are pending, the Northampton County Coroner said.

Mr. Lieberman's father, Richard, a plain-spoken farmer, said he had not decided whether to hire a lawyer. He simply wants to know if the gun caused his son's death. "If he was the problem, we have to accept it," Mr. Lieberman said. "If they were the problem, they have to accept it."

Eric Dash contributed reporting from New York for this article.

Tuesday, December 25, 1990

TM-03-90 - Evaluation of Personal Protection Device - Power Stun Gun

Canadian Police Research Centre
Technical Memorandum submitted by the National Research Council

By Dr. A. Podgorski and Dr. O.Z. Roy

Conclusion: Considering the results of our tests, we feel strongly that the use of the Stun Guns in their present form may create a serious safety hazard.