Tests on a shocking device—the stun gun

Roy, O. Z.; Podgorski, A.S.

doi:10.1007/bf02441441

Cited by 32 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous work on a series of stun gun (NOVA XR-5000) devices (Roy and Podgorski, 1989) reported cardiac and blood pressure changes in Yorkshire pigs following exposure. In this study, only the highest power device caused a change in cardiovascular measurements, and this device substantially exceeded the output of the M26 and X26 TASERs.…”

Section: Changes In Blood Pressure and Heart Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

“…They did not indicate whether these patients had an EKG test performed and/or ventricular fibrillation or asystole. Roy and Podgorski (1989) found that when the output of a stun gun (NOVA XR-5000) was applied to the chest wall of an anesthetized swine, asystole was induced. Sherry et al, (2003a) reported that a single monopolar pulse 4 caused asystole in an anesthetized swine and normal rhythm could not be restored with appropriate defibrillation.…”

Section: 3210mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Roy and Podgorski (1989) used a stun gun (NOVA XR-5000) with high voltage (> 100 kV), short duration (<20 microsecond), pulse output and current limited to less than 3.8 A. Stun gun output applied directly to the chest wall of an anesthetized pig caused asystole. Cardiac effects were reported only for the stun device with the highest electrical output, which exceeded the electrical output of either M26 or X26 TASER devices, and therefore, these results are not inconsistent with the absence of VF induction by M26 or X26 TASERs in field use or in controlled animal studies in pigs and dogs at the normal operation electrical output.…”

Section: Controlled Animal Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Human Effectiveness and Risk Characterization of the Electromuscular Incapacitation Device - A Limited Analysis of the TASER. Part 1. Technical Report

Maier¹,

Nance²,

Price³

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

"The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gatherng mnd maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display s currently valid OMB control number. 12. DISTRIBUTIONIAVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. PLEASE DO NOT SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES14. ABSTRACT A Human Effectiveness and Risk Characterization for Electromuscular Incapacitation (EMI) reflects the results from three workshops (data gathering/sharing, peer consultation, and independent external review) evaluating two EMI devices: the M26 and X26 TASERs. The intended effect of these devices is electromuscular disruption. Key potential unintended effects included ocular injury, seizures, ventricular fibrillation, or fall injuries. The likelihood of these effects were determined, based on an analysis of the TASER International Database (scrubbed to minimize false positives) and modeling. The probability of inducing a complete EMD ranges from 74% to 52% depending on distance to the target. Probability estimates were up to 0.04% for eye "strikes and 0.15% for fall injuries depending on distance to the target. Ventricular fibrillation (VF) is not expected to occur in an otherwise healthy adult population. Key data gaps include the biological basis for TASER effects and appropriate dosimetry. The results support the conclusion that the M26 and X26 TASERs are generally effective for their intended use. SUBJECT TERMS ABSTRACTA Human Effectiveness and Risk Characterization (HERC) for Electromuscular Incapacitation (EMI; also referred to as Electromuscular Disruption (EMD) when describing the intended effect of the TASER® products) devices has been conducted in an effort organized by the Human Effects Center of Excellence (HECOE). This HERC reflects the results from a three-workshop process with sequential workshops held for data gathering and sharing, peer consultation, and independent external review of the HERC document. This HERC included two EMI devices manufactured by TASER International, the M26 and X26 TASERs®.Probability estimates as well as data gaps and uncertainties were characterized for intended and potential unintended effects of the devices. The intended effect of the TASER is electromuscular disruption. During EMD, the individual experiences tetany and is temporarily incapacitated. Key potential unintended effects tha...

show abstract

Section: Changes In Blood Pressure and Heart Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: 3210mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Controlled Animal Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Human Effectiveness and Risk Characterization of the Electromuscular Incapacitation Device - A Limited Analysis of the TASER. Part 1. Technical Report

Maier¹,

Nance²,

Price³

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This particular study by Roy and Podgorski (1989) performed with a stun gun'"*, whose output is quahtatively similar to the TASER. Roy and Podgorski (1989) apphed a stun gun directly to the chest wall of an anesthetized swine and found that it induced asystole (absence of contractions of the heart). The pulse from the stun gun is high voltage (> 100 kV), short duration (<20 microsec), with current limited to less than 3.8 A.…”

Section: Risks Of Taser Usementioning

confidence: 99%

An Evaluation of the Electrical Properties and Bio-Behavioral Effects of Four Commercially Available Tasers and the JAYCOR Sticky Shocker

Sherry¹,

Brown²,

Beason³

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

' Dublic reoortinq burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, fierino and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection Sr^attoninSng suggestions for reducing the burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services Directorate for Information Operations and Reports 0T0I88) 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware thai notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be iject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if It does not display a currently valid 0MB control number.

show abstract

“…In contrast, induction of arrhythmia may relate to stimulation of the heart because, depending on pre-existing defects (e.g., a previous heart attack, drug intoxication), each person's heart may have a different susceptibility to life-threatening arrhythmia during stimulation. Podgorski and colleagues 23 found that the direct application of an older version of a stun gun to a pig heart, which was exposed but covered by a towel, produced stimulation of the heart.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cardiac stimulation with high voltage discharge from stun guns

Nanthakumar¹,

Massé²,

Umapathy³

et al. 2008

Canadian Medical Association Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

S tun guns are used to physically incapacitate a person by discharging controlled electrical energy into the body, thereby preventing effective muscular activity. Although the intention is to provide a safe means of subduing an uncooperative person, some studies have suggested that stun guns can stimulate cardiac muscle in addition to skeletal muscle, thus potentially promoting lethal cardiac arrhythmias. In this article, we review the scientific data about the direct effects of stun gun discharges on the heart during shock delivery. We discuss these issues in terms of electrostimulation and correlate them with theoretical and experimental data in the literature. We discuss the principles of cardiac stimulation from internal and external stimulation and examine the evidence for and against cardiac stimulation by stun gun discharges. Stun gun dischargesAn older method of stun guns application, called "drivestun," functioned like a cattle prod, which required direct contact between the electrodes of the source and the target. Stun guns are manufactured by different manufacturers (e.g., Aegis Industries, Stinger Systems, Taser International) and they operate under the general principle of high-voltage discharge with short pulse durations. However, their operation and shock charecteristics vary by manufacturer. For example, a recent model (X26, TASER International) feature 2 barbs attached to long copper wires that are rapidly propelled by compressed nitrogen and adhere to the target's skin or clothes. This stun gun generates an initial 3 microsecond electric pulse, which produces an electrical arc that creates a low-impedance pathway for electricity to reach the body with or without skin contact.1 The initial pulse is followed by longer pulses (100 microseconds) that deliver electrical energy to the target's body, which stimulates his or her nerves and skeletal muscles and results in incapacitation. This pattern is repeated at a frequency of 19 pulses per second. Incapacitation lasts for the duration of the discharge, which is typically 5 seconds but can be 15 seconds or longer if pressure on the trigger is maintained. The TASER X26 battery has the capacity to deliver up to 195 discharges of 5 seconds each, 1 which corresponds to a duration of over 15 minutes. Other devices that have been studied include the M26 (TASER International) and the MK63 Trident (Aegis Industries), which is a stun baton. Each of these devices uses high frequency electrical pulses to incapacitate the target. Method of stunningStunning can be attributed to 1 of 2 methods, which depend on the mode of application. In the "drive stun" method, the overwhelming factor is the creation of pain and hence compliance. The second method, in which electrodes are fired toward the target as projectiles, neuromuscular stimulation occurs over a larger area. In addition to pain, the device incapacitates the target by stimulating his or her motor nerves and muscles as well as sensory neurons. The duration and frequency of the pulses have been optimized to inc...

show abstract

Tests on a shocking device—the stun gun

Cited by 32 publications

References 3 publications

Human Effectiveness and Risk Characterization of the Electromuscular Incapacitation Device - A Limited Analysis of the TASER. Part 1. Technical Report

Human Effectiveness and Risk Characterization of the Electromuscular Incapacitation Device - A Limited Analysis of the TASER. Part 1. Technical Report

An Evaluation of the Electrical Properties and Bio-Behavioral Effects of Four Commercially Available Tasers and the JAYCOR Sticky Shocker

Cardiac stimulation with high voltage discharge from stun guns

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About