Don't Taze Me, Bro!

HomelandSecurityNewswire is parroting lurid headlines again...

Tasers are once again in the news.

Today the HomelandSecurityNewswire essentially reprinted a Michigan State University press release in an article titled "Stun guns increase chances of citizen injury, but protect police officers."

Haven’t seen the Justice Quarterly articles referred to by the HSN but I’ve done a quick scan of Bill Terrill's original study, "Assessing Police Use of Force Policy and Outcomes." The paper is a detailed analysis of use of force continuum policies, their application, and outcomes at eight different public law enforcement agencies.  The use of Conducted Energy Devices (CEDs), which includes but is not limited to Tasers, is only one of many elements evaluated in the 287 page report. In the press release and the article Terrill is quoted as saying: 

“There has been this increased perception that these devices are effective and safe.  But in terms of safeness, our data conclusively shows they are not safe to citizens. Now, are there concerns to the point that we’re recommending that law enforcement agencies not use them? Absolutely not. We think there needs to be more careful analysis done, and it has to be done in a way that’s fair and objective.” 

This conclusion does not leap from the pages of the full report.  In fact, such pronouncements serve to attract attention to some potential shortcomings in the study.

1) The report tracks injuries reported after a use of force incident without determining whether or not the injuries were the result of the subject's behavior that prompted the decision to apply force or if the injury was the result of the application of force by law enforcement.

2) The report analyzes the rate of reported injuries extracted from use of force reports, citizen complaints, and litigation.  With the exception of the self-descriptive category "broken bones" the study does not describe the severity of injuries in categories “bruise,” “abrasion,” or “laceration.”

3) Reported injuries resulting from use of force incidents involving Taser use include the abrasions (scrapes and skin marks) or lacerations (cuts to the skin) caused by the Taser barbs.

As Terrill picks sides in the TASER debate it appears he regards the word “safe” as synonymous with the term “injury-free”?  If so, that seems a little short-sighted.  Maybe I’ll ask him.[*]

Earlier this week...

In Tasers Pose Risks to Heart, a Study Warns the New York Times tells us of a study completed by cardiologist Douglas P. Zipes titled Sudden Cardiac Arrest and Death Associated with Application of Shocks from a TASER Electronic Control Device published in  Circulation, the journal of the American Heart Association.  

"The study, which analyzed detailed records from the cases of eight people who went into cardiac arrest after receiving shocks from a Taser X26 fired at a distance, is likely to add to the debate about the safety of the weapons. Seven of the people in the study died; one survived."

The article does not mention that tens of thousands of law enforcement officers have been "tazed" as part of their training to use Tasers and not one of them has experienced a cardiac emergency.  Some have experienced orthopedic injuries, but no deaths.

Nor does the article mention the controversy surrounding the concept of excited delirium.  While ExDS is not accepted by all professional medical associations it seems to have some explanatory power when it comes to sudden in-custody deaths of arrested persons, included those subdued using Conducted Energy Devices (CED). 

There is one more interesting detail in the article:

"The author of the study, Dr. Douglas P. Zipes, a cardiologist and professor emeritus at Indiana University, has served as a witness for plaintiffs in lawsuits against Taser — a fact that Mr. Tuttle [a spokesman for TASER International] said tainted the findings. 'Clearly, Dr. Zipes has a strong financial bias based on his career as an expert witness.'" 

That sounds more than a little like a notoriously small study written by former physician Andrew Wakefield alleging a connection between vaccines and autism.  His paper, which drew its death-dealing conclusions from a sample size of 10 patients, was fraught with flaws and ethical concerns, repudiated in peer review, disavowed by his fellow authors, and formally retracted from the Lancet.  When it was also discovered that Wakefield was employed by liability attorneys litigating alleged vaccine injury cases he was struck from the medical register.  

It would not take much for Zipes to be a better man than Wakefield, but the anti-Taser crowd may need a spokesman with little less baggage and a slightly larger sample size.

*UPDATE: I sent this message to Dr. Terrill today [3 May 2012]

I am not a subscriber to the print version of Justice Quarterly so I have only read the abstract on EBSCO and your statements in the MSU press release regarding Conducted Energy Devices (CEDs) and Citizen Injuries: The Shocking Empirical Reality.  I have, however, reviewed your earlier paper Assessing Police Use of Force Policy and Outcomes, from which I presume you extracted data for the JQ article.  With regard to the earlier paper I'm wondering if the following assessment of citizen injury data are accurate.

1) The report tracks injuries reported after a use of force incident without determining whether or not the injuries were the result of the subject's behavior that led to the decision to apply force or if the injury was the result of the application of force by law enforcement.

2) The report analyzes the rate of reported injuries extracted from use of force reports, citizen complaints, and litigation. With the exception of the self-descriptive category "broken bones" the study does not describe the severity of injuries in categories “bruise,” “abrasion,” or “laceration.”

3) It seems that reported injuries resulting from use of force incidents involving CED use include the abrasions (scrapes and skin marks) or lacerations (cuts to the skin) caused by the Taser barbs.

In this context when you are quoted as saying, "But in terms of safeness, our data conclusively shows they are not safe to citizens," do you regard the term "safe" as synonymous with "injury free?"  I propose there is a difference between minor injuries noted, those requiring medical treatment, and those resulting in long-term disability.  A pair of small abrasions from Taser barbs ought to be regarded as less significant than serious injuries resulting from the use of impact devices or a hogpile.  Is the data your team collected sufficiently granular to add a "severity of harm" axis to your injury results?

You May Have Heard I Have An Opinion

About Potential: Workplace Violence Prevention and Your Organizational Success by Bill Whitmore...

My review of Bill Whitmore's Potential has just been published in the March/April 2012 edition of the The Workplace Violence Prevention eReport.  The eReport requires a free subscription, which is painless enough to request.  What's more, subscribers to the eReport receive a promotional code for a free PDF version of Whitmore's book (and to think I paid cash for a copy printed on dead trees).  For some reason the review starts in the middle, so until that's fixed just follow the link to the complete text.  If for some reason you don't care to sign up for the eReport, I'll be posting the review here at The Breakfast next month.

Supersense

Why we believe in the unbelievable...

In Supersense Canadian research psychologist Bruce Hood does a very thorough job explaining the way the human mind is inclined to attribute essence to inanimate objects or intentionality to mindless physical processes. To that end Supersense is about why we believe in one particular sort of unbelievable - our very natural intuition that unseen forces energize the natural world around us. This tendency explains both the earliest of religious notions - animism - and the slightly more modern concept of the mind-body duality held by both the conventionally religious and the proponent of new age spiritualism. It is not so broad a book as I had expected, but is, on balance, the better for having remained focused.  His newest book, The Self Illusion is on my Goodreads "to-read" list as well.

Some Ideas Are Just Better Than Others

Even if the title is none too clever...

While the FDA is fending off a DHS plan to deliver anti-anthrax medication to every household in America, the USPS is going to test a simpler, smarter idea very plainly titled "Operation Medicine Delivery" by delivering 37,000 empty pill bottles to selected ZIP codes.  Here's the blurb from the ECHO (Emergency & Community Health Outreach) Team

"On May 6 a government exercise called "Operation Medicine Delivery" could be happening in your neighborhood and the neighborhoods of the people your organization serves - help people be informed!

On Sunday, May 6, U.S. Postal Service volunteers will make an unusual delivery of an empty pill bottle in selected Twin Cities' neighborhoods. People living in ZIP codes 55101, 55102, 55411, and 55422 (parts of Saint Paul, Minneapolis, Robbinsdale, Golden Valley, and Crystal) may receive an empty pill bottle in their mailbox - that's approximately 37,000 residences.

The pill bottle delivery is part of "Operation Medicine Delivery," an exercise designed to see how fast postal teams can deliver medicine to homes in a simulated public health emergency. ECHO's role in this event is to make sure that non-English speaking residents of these ZIP codes get the information they need to understand what the test is and why it is happening.

To help with this, ECHO has created materials in four languages (English, Spanish, Hmong, and Somali) including:

An Educational Video: These 3-4 minute videos will help community members learn more about the exercise. They are streamable online for free and are available on DVD upon request by emailing olson@echominnesota.org These videos are ideal for playing in waiting rooms and other public spaces. View them here.

An Outreach Flier: These fliers can be used to hand out at events, hang on community bulletin boards, distribute at community markets, and more. They can also be emailed to the mailing lists, clients, and staff in PDF form. View/download here.

A 5x7 Inch Advertisement: These advertisements can be used in print publications, posted online, in church bulletins, and more. Due to space limitations, they contain less information than the fliers. View/download here.

Translated Webpages: These webpages contain the video explaining the exercise, the information that is on the flier, as well as links to additional resources. View here.

A Pre-Event Audio Message: This is an audio version of the postcard residents will receive the week of May 1 explaining the exercise. Postcard recipients will see translated sentences directing them to ECHO's pre-recorded phone line (888.883.8831). Upon calling, listeners have the option to have the postcard read to them in either English, Spanish, Hmong, Somali, Vietnamese, or Karen. Read scripts and listen to audio here.

Please help get this important information to households in these four ZIP codes! Spread the information in English and also pass along the translated materials to those that may better understand this information in their native language.

Contact wanduragala@echominnesota.org to learn more about using these resources to communicate to the communities that your organization serves.

Thank you!

The ECHO Team"

Does This Strike Anyone Else As An Over-reaction?

At tale of two bomb scares...

Take One

This week Two World Financial Center, a 44 story, 2.4 million square foot office building in New York City, was completely evacuated because someone was concerned a gag hand grenade plaque might be a real grenade? Even if it were a real Mk2 hand grenade - which has a bursting radius of 10 meters - is dumping the entire building required?  How about simply clearing the floor where it was found? A "belt and suspenders type" could add the floor above it and below, but all 44 floors? Seems like a serious overabundance of caution by people who have seen one too many Hollywood special effects explosions on MacGyver.  At some point it seems we'd want to assess the risk that an evacuee will take a tumble, aggravate an existing medical condition, or die in a crush while evacuating an entire building due to the presence of a device - if it were real - intended to destroy a room.

Take Another

In Bomb Threats As a Denial-of-Service Attack Bruce Schneier and his minions have been examining the impact of the non-stop daily bomb threats at the University of Pittsburgh over the past week.  My first comment went like so:

Back in the day some telephonic malefactor was shutting down one of our fabs with daily bomb threats. When a threat was received in the mid-afternoon the predictable effect of the company's standard response was to provide employees an extra long break and then dismiss them for the day with pay. Needless to say no device was ever found, not that you'd need much more than a blasting cap in the right place to conflagrate the usual semi-conductor manufactory. When the fab manager announced the next evacuation would compromise the week's production another response was implemented. [When the next call was received] the threat was described on the public address system inside the fab, staff members were asked to inspect their work area for any unusual or unexpected items, no suspicious packages were found, and work resumed. The threats stopped.

This week the reign of fearfulness at University of Pittsburgh continues and seems to be drawing out the copycats and other nutjobs. Perhaps it's time to quit evacuating before some loose screw attacks students at the rally points?  Will it take a student "sit-in," or a tuition-payers' class action suit, to break the cycle being perpetuated by the administration's reflexive response to the pranksters?

Somebody please let me know if I'm way out of calibration on these cases.