Cardiac Effects of Electrical Stun Guns: Does Position of Barbs Contact Make a Difference?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The use of electrical stun guns has been rising among law enforcement authorities for subduing violent subjects. Multiple reports have raised concerns over their safety. The cardiovascular safety profile of these devices in relationship to the position of delivery on the torso has not been well studied. METHODS: We tested 13 adult pigs using a custom device built to deliver neuromuscular incapacitating (NMI) discharge of increasing intensity that matched the waveform of a commercially available stun gun (TASER(R) X-26, TASER International, Scottsdale, AZ, USA). Discharges with increasing multiples of output capacitances were applied in a step-up and step-down fashion, using two-tethered barbs at five locations: (1) Sternal notch to cardiac apex (position-1), (2) sternal notch to supraumbilical area (position-2), (3) sternal notch to infraumbilical area (position-3), (4) side to side on the chest (position-4), and (5) upper to lower mid-posterior torso (position-5). Endpoints included determination of maximum safe multiple (MaxSM), ventricular fibrillation threshold (VFT), and minimum ventricular fibrillation induction multiple (MinVFIM). RESULTS: Standard TASER discharges repeated three times did not cause ventricular fibrillation (VF) at any of the five locations. When the barbs were applied in the axis of the heart (position-1), MaxSM and MinVFIM were significantly lower than when applied away from the heart, on the dorsum (position-5) (4.31 +/- 1.11 vs 40.77 +/- 9.54, P< 0.001 and 8.31 +/- 2.69 vs 50.77 +/- 9.54, P< 0.001, respectively). The values of these endpoints at position-2, position-3, and position-4 were progressively higher and ranged in between those of position-1 and position-5. Presence of ventricular capture at a 2:1 ratio to the delivered TASER impulses correlated with induction of VF. No significant metabolic changes were seen after standard NMI TASER discharge. There was no evidence of myocardial damage based on serum cardiac markers, electrocardiography, echocardiography, and histopathologic findings confirming the absence of significant cardiac effects. CONCLUSIONS: Standard TASER discharges did not cause VF at any of the positions. Induction of VF at higher output multiples appear to be sensitive to electrode distance from the heart, giving highest ventricular fibrillation safety margin when the electrodes are placed on the dorsum. Rapid ventricular capture appears to be a likely mechanism of VF induction by higher output TASER discharges.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".