Knowledge Gaps Nix Firm Conclusions About CEW Risks, Experts Say

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

A blue ribbon panel of experts assigned to determine “what is known and not known about the physiological and health effects associated with CEW use” has presented five “key findings” in a recently issued report:

  1. “[W]hile fatal complications [from CEW deployment] are biologically plausible, they would be extremely rare.”
  2. When a sudden in-custody death does occur, “CEW exposure cannot [reliably] be confirmed or excluded as the primary cause,” due to the limited scientific evidence currently available.
  3. “[O]verarching challenges in funding, conducting, and interpreting CEW research” have created critical “knowledge gaps” about the health consequences of CEW deployment.
  4. Filling these gaps will require significant improvement in the reporting and study of CEW use and its health effects in real-world settings and circumstances.
  5. “Because the electrical characteristics of CEW devices are variable and evolving,” each CEW model must be tested “on its own merit” to assess its “ability to induce incapacitation and potential adverse health effects.” The 100+-page report, titled “The Health Effects of Conducted Energy Weapons,” was commissioned by the Council of Canadian Academies and the Canadian Academy of Health Sciences. It can be accessed in full, free of charge, by clicking here.

[Editor’s note: For a comment from a TASER spokesman on the report and its findings, see the end of this article.]


The expert panel was comprised of 14 members from the US and Canada, representing a wide range of disciplines, including cardiology, pathology, psychiatry, forensic and emergency medicine, biomedical engineering, criminology, and the law.

Among them was an instructor for the certification course in Force Science Analysis, Dr. Christine Hall, an ER physician in British Columbia and an internationally recognized authority on excited delirium and less-lethal use of force.

In Canada as in the US, CEW use has expanded exponentially in recent years, and some critics have attempted to brand TASERs and other electronic control devices as dangerous instruments in light of at least 33 Canadian deaths “proximate” to CEW deployment.

As part of a government initiative to investigate the facts about alleged risks, the expert panel was assembled to review existing research, scientific literature, and technical documents and determine “what is known and not known” about the threat to health from CEWs.

Here are the principal findings, itemized in an Executive Summary of the group’s conclusions and expanded on in the full report:


Apart from obvious superficial injuries produced by CEW probes, some animal studies suggest the potential for more serious consequences, including respiratory complications and the disruption of heart rhythm.

So far as humans are concerned, though, there is not currently enough scientific evidence “to confirm the presence and magnitude of any [such] risk,” the panel writes. Moreover, the extent to which “co-factors common to real-world CEW incidents [e.g., intoxication, exertion, restraint, body type, existing health problems] that may increase susceptibility to adverse effects has not been adequately tested.”

The “absence of high-quality evidence” makes it “difficult to state any firm conclusions” about the specific impact of CEWs on the human body’s cardiac, respiratory, or hormonal systems, the panel notes. But generally speaking, the group concludes that statistically CEW discharges “rarely pose serious medical risks” and that “while fatal complications are biologically plausible, they would be extremely rare.”


“Sudden in-custody death resulting from a use-of-force event typically involves a complicated scenario that includes multiple factors, all of which can potentially contribute” to the fatality, the report says. These may include “agitation, physical or chemical restraint, disorientation, stress or exertion, pre-existing health conditions, and the use of drugs or alcohol. This makes it difficult to isolate the contribution of any single factor.”

Some evidence shows the potential lethality of CEWs’ electrical characteristics, the panel states, but “no evidence of a clear causal relationship has been demonstrated” by any large-scale, real-world study. Thus, the experts–again because of scarce and inadequate evidence–could neither confirm or exclude “at this time” the possibility that CEWs can cause sudden death.

However, they speculate, “If a causal relationship does exist, the likelihood that a CEW will be the sole cause of a sudden in-custody death is low.”


The panel identified five “overarching gaps in health-related CEW knowledge”:

  • Establishing a cause-and-effect relationship between CEW deployment and adverse consequences is “difficult” because “in many cases there is simply not enough research to make any definitive conclusions.” Particularly lacking is information on the relative impact other factors may have on a subject’s wellbeing in a use-of-force encounter.
  • There are no timeline guidelines. How soon after a CEW deployment must an adverse health condition occur for a causal effect to be reasonably considered?
  • There is a “paucity of knowledge of the health effects associated with CEW use outside” of controlled laboratory settings and unrepresentative test subjects. Experimental CEW research on human volunteers “typically involves healthy, physically fit volunteers” instead of “potentially vulnerable populations” engaged under realistic street conditions.
  • Research is seriously “hindered by lack of standardization and inconsistent reporting and record-keeping practices related to use-of-force events.” With few central registries receiving input from law enforcement and medical personnel, the ability to conduct meaningful analyses and form evidence-based conclusions regarding CEWs becomes exceedingly difficult.
  • There needs to be more independent research by individuals and organizations “without financial or other ties to CEW manufacturers.” Now many studies are done by researchers who get funding or support from sources that would appear to have conflicts of interest. “[T]hese studies may be scientifically robust,” the panel notes, but suspicion of bias “limits their widespread acceptance.”


The panel suggests several “strategies” for filling today’s knowledge gaps. These include:

  • Creating a central repository for information about CEW deployment and other uses of force, with LEOs and medical personnel submitting data on standardized forms.
  • Educating health care professionals so they can “more routinely perform examinations relevant for evaluating CEW effects.”
  • Conducting future studies to compare sudden in-custody deaths both related and unrelated to CEW use, to better assess the risk of CEWs in relation to other interventions.
  • Prioritize future research to address the most urgent questions about CEW use. These include documenting whether “the electrical characteristics of CEWs cause cardiac arrhythmia and sudden in-custody death in humans when deployed in real-world operational settings…whether “certain groups or individuals with particular conditions [are] at increased risk for adverse outcomes related to CEWs”…and [w]hat CEW design and deployment features could minimize the risk of adverse health effects.”


In principle, the panel explains, a CEW delivers “short-duration electrical discharges [that are] highly effective in stimulating nerves, causing incapacitation and pain, but are much less effective in stimulating the heart muscle and thereby inducing potentially fatal disruptions of…rhythm and pumping ability.”

However, the panel points out, “[s]pecifications between CEW devices are variable…and the variations…are constantly evolving, so knowledge based on any particular model does not necessarily translate to other devices, and the characteristics of newer devices are unknown.”

Consequently, the researchers write, scientifically “evaluating the intended and unintended effects” of CEW use requires testing each model “on its own merit.”

While many issues regarding CEW use have yet to be resolved conclusively, the panel is hopeful that its report will inform both law enforcement and the public about the current status of the CEW’s ongoing evolution from a novelty to a standard piece of modern police equipment.

As research continues, “public perception and emotion, although important considerations, should not lead the debate” about this device, the panel stresses. Ultimately, “a range of scientific inquiry, risk assessment, and evidence must guide policy” and practice regarding its use.


A spokesman for TASER International, manufacturer of the most popular CEWs, told Force Science News: “The Canadian report states over and over that there needs to be more and more study. However, it is imperative to point out that TASER CEWs, the most researched force option, have been used on humans more than 3.4 million times, of which over 2,000,000 are field uses.

“Yet, as the report states, there is no conclusive proof of a cardiac death caused by the electrical effects of a CEW. This is important information for putting the report in context.”

Leave a Reply


  • Privacy Policy

Privacy Policy

Effective date: January 06, 2019

Force Science Institute, Ltd. (“us”, “we”, or “our”) operates the https://www.forcescience.org/ website (hereinafter referred to as the “Service”).

This page informs you of our policies regarding the collection, use, and disclosure of personal data when you use our Service and the choices you have associated with that data. Our Privacy Policy for Force Science Institute, Ltd. is based on the Privacy Policy Template from Privacy Policies.

We use your data to provide and improve the Service. By using the Service, you agree to the collection and use of information in accordance with this policy. Unless otherwise defined in this Privacy Policy, the terms used in this Privacy Policy have the same meanings as in our Terms and Conditions, accessible from https://www.forcescience.org/

Information Collection And Use

We collect several different types of information for various purposes to provide and improve our Service to you.

Types of Data Collected

Personal Data

While using our Service, we may ask you to provide us with certain personally identifiable information that can be used to contact or identify you (“Personal Data”). Personally identifiable information may include, but is not limited to:

  • Email address
  • First name and last name
  • Phone number
  • Address, State, Province, ZIP/Postal code, City
  • Cookies and Usage Data

Usage Data

We may also collect information on how the Service is accessed and used (“Usage Data”). This Usage Data may include information such as your computer’s Internet Protocol address (e.g. IP address), browser type, browser version, the pages of our Service that you visit, the time and date of your visit, the time spent on those pages, unique device identifiers and other diagnostic data.

Tracking & Cookies Data

We use cookies and similar tracking technologies to track the activity on our Service and hold certain information.

Cookies are files with small amount of data which may include an anonymous unique identifier. Cookies are sent to your browser from a website and stored on your device. Tracking technologies also used are beacons, tags, and scripts to collect and track information and to improve and analyze our Service.

You can instruct your browser to refuse all cookies or to indicate when a cookie is being sent. However, if you do not accept cookies, you may not be able to use some portions of our Service. You can learn more how to manage cookies in the Browser Cookies Guide.

Examples of Cookies we use:

  • Session Cookies. We use Session Cookies to operate our Service.
  • Preference Cookies. We use Preference Cookies to remember your preferences and various settings.
  • Security Cookies. We use Security Cookies for security purposes.

Use of Data

Force Science Institute, Ltd. uses the collected data for various purposes:

  • To provide and maintain the Service
  • To notify you about changes to our Service
  • To allow you to participate in interactive features of our Service when you choose to do so
  • To provide customer care and support
  • To provide analysis or valuable information so that we can improve the Service
  • To monitor the usage of the Service
  • To detect, prevent and address technical issues

Transfer Of Data

Your information, including Personal Data, may be transferred to — and maintained on — computers located outside of your state, province, country or other governmental jurisdiction where the data protection laws may differ than those from your jurisdiction.

If you are located outside United States and choose to provide information to us, please note that we transfer the data, including Personal Data, to United States and process it there.

Your consent to this Privacy Policy followed by your submission of such information represents your agreement to that transfer.

Force Science Institute, Ltd. will take all steps reasonably necessary to ensure that your data is treated securely and in accordance with this Privacy Policy and no transfer of your Personal Data will take place to an organization or a country unless there are adequate controls in place including the security of your data and other personal information.

Disclosure Of Data

Legal Requirements

Force Science Institute, Ltd. may disclose your Personal Data in the good faith belief that such action is necessary to:

  • To comply with a legal obligation
  • To protect and defend the rights or property of Force Science Institute, Ltd.
  • To prevent or investigate possible wrongdoing in connection with the Service
  • To protect the personal safety of users of the Service or the public
  • To protect against legal liability

Security Of Data

The security of your data is important to us, but remember that no method of transmission over the Internet, or method of electronic storage is 100% secure. While we strive to use commercially acceptable means to protect your Personal Data, we cannot guarantee its absolute security.

Service Providers

We may employ third party companies and individuals to facilitate our Service (“Service Providers”), to provide the Service on our behalf, to perform Service-related services or to assist us in analyzing how our Service is used.

These third parties have access to your Personal Data only to perform these tasks on our behalf and are obligated not to disclose or use it for any other purpose.


We may use third-party Service Providers to monitor and analyze the use of our Service.

  • Google AnalyticsGoogle Analytics is a web analytics service offered by Google that tracks and reports website traffic. Google uses the data collected to track and monitor the use of our Service. This data is shared with other Google services. Google may use the collected data to contextualize and personalize the ads of its own advertising network.You can opt-out of having made your activity on the Service available to Google Analytics by installing the Google Analytics opt-out browser add-on. The add-on prevents the Google Analytics JavaScript (ga.js, analytics.js, and dc.js) from sharing information with Google Analytics about visits activity.For more information on the privacy practices of Google, please visit the Google Privacy & Terms web page: https://policies.google.com/privacy?hl=en

Links To Other Sites

Our Service may contain links to other sites that are not operated by us. If you click on a third party link, you will be directed to that third party’s site. We strongly advise you to review the Privacy Policy of every site you visit.

We have no control over and assume no responsibility for the content, privacy policies or practices of any third party sites or services.

Children’s Privacy

Our Service does not address anyone under the age of 18 (“Children”).

We do not knowingly collect personally identifiable information from anyone under the age of 18. If you are a parent or guardian and you are aware that your Children has provided us with Personal Data, please contact us. If we become aware that we have collected Personal Data from children without verification of parental consent, we take steps to remove that information from our servers.

Changes To This Privacy Policy

We may update our Privacy Policy from time to time. We will notify you of any changes by posting the new Privacy Policy on this page.

We will let you know via email and/or a prominent notice on our Service, prior to the change becoming effective and update the “effective date” at the top of this Privacy Policy.

You are advised to review this Privacy Policy periodically for any changes. Changes to this Privacy Policy are effective when they are posted on this page.

Contact Us

If you have any questions about this Privacy Policy, please contact us:

  • By email: support@forcescience.org
  • By visiting this page on our website: https://www.forcescience.org/contact
  • By phone number: 866-683-1944
  • By mail: Force Science Institute, Ltd.