Study questions first drug dose in executions

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | April 24, 2007 | Sabin Russell

[KingofZion]

Inmates executed by lethal injection may in some cases die by "chemical asphyxiation" while conscious but unable to move, according to a new analysis of California and North Carolina executions released Monday.

The study appearing in the online edition of PLoS Medicine -- a San Francisco-based medical journal -- was authored by the same team of doctors and death penalty opponents who raised similar concerns about the procedure in the British medical journal The Lancet in 2005.

That earlier study, which said sub-potent amounts of the anesthetic sodium pentothal were found in the corpses of executed inmates, helped to propel the current debate as to whether lethal injection is more humane or another form of "cruel and unusual punishment." ***

Dr. Leonidas Koniaris, a surgeon at the University of Miami in Florida and lead author of both papers, said the amount of sodium pentothal used in executions -- particularly the 3 grams employed in North Carolina -- may not be sufficient to knock out the condemned inmates while the two other chemicals do their lethal work. California's protocol required 5 grams.

Either "dose may not be associated with the induction of anesthesia, particularly in bigger men,'' he said.

As a consequence, during the course of the execution, the condemned man or woman may experience severe pain when the second dose of chemicals -- potassium chloride -- is infused to stop the heart. "It would cause a burning sensation that would be extremely painful,'' Koniaris said.

Data from California suggest, he said, that inmates died two to nine minutes after potassium chloride was administered ***

"In such cases, death by suffocation would occur in a paralyzed inmate fully aware of the progressive suffocation and the potassium-induced sensation of burning,'' the authors concluded.

[KingofZion]

Fantastic. Do the libs that whine about the death penalty understand that 99% of us are glad they suffer? (A little taste of hell before they get there!)

If the ACLU types don't think lethal injection is permissible, we should just adopt the Chinese method - bullet to the head. Simple, quick, and no need for medical techs.

[Red Badger]

Then we should go back to the beheading of murderers. Libs don’t seem to have a problem with that............

[Robe]

I think we should go back to Hanging...The Libs can’t ever claim that it comes under the cruel and unusual clause ,because it was the method of execution during the time of the Founding fathers(that and a firing squad)

[EagleUSA]

Personally, I prefer public hangings. Screw the ACLU and the San Freakcisco radical liberal establishment.

[curiosity]

I always found lethal injection disturbing. The whole premise makes no sense. If we're killing in order to deter crime, why on earth should we take so much trouble to make it painless? Doesn't pain deter? Now that it turns out it's not so painless, the point is completely lost.

If we're going to kill people to deter crime, then the killing should involve some physical violence. I say bring back hanging. Cheaper, easier, less trouble, it involves some pain, and it's much more realiable.

Even more important, it doesn't sanitize death. The physical reality of the killing is made abundantly clear, unlike with a lethal injection. If we are going to kill people as punishment, we shouldn't be squeemish about it.

[PAR35]

Personally, I prefer public hangings.

Yes, but charge admission or run it as PPV. Let's recover some of the taxpayer costs.

[ClearCase_guy]

The people who worry about stuff like this are not trying to find a "better" method of execution. They just want all executions to stop.

It's not a plea for humane methods, it's anti-capital punishment propaganda.

[WesternPacific]

I must be a conservative, because I don’t care if the condemned can feel death’s pain or not.

[Gay State Conservative]

Having had several invasive procedures meant to diagnose a gastrointestinal problem I can personally attest to the fact that there's at least one drug that's capable of putting you out to the point where they can stick big things into certain parts of you and yet you don't feel a thing while it's happening and you don't remember a thing when you wake up.

So,at worst,adjustments need to be made in execution routines so that they pass the "cruel and unusual" test.

[wafflehouse]

i dont get the problem here.. how hard is it to kill someone by injecting drugs into them? quite a few drug addicts manage to do it all by themselves.. AND they volunteer. maybe we should just load these guys up with a big slug of heroin?

[Carry_Okie]

I just can't understand why they wouldn't use an OD of heroin? People do that one voluntarily with great frequency.

[Captain Rhino]

Agree. They just want to make the case that the most humane form of execution ever invented is still somehow too inhumane for their exquisite sensibilities.

However...

If painlessness or as little pain as possible is their standard, then a lot of pain for a very, very, very short period of time is preferable to much lower pain (if there really is any) over a much, much longer period.

By that logic, I can guarantee you that a .50 caliber HE round traveling in excess of 2000 fps fired into the back of the condemned person’s head is arguably less painful (because, nearly instantaneously, they will be absolutely, positively, certifiably, and reliably dead) than the slow death by drug injection they are objecting to. Heck, the thought of dying in such a ...err...messy manner might even have some deterrent effect on the living. (As for the mess, enclose the head in a armored steel enclosure to capture the bullet and the “bits and pieces.” Obviously, a closed casket funeral.)

If they have any doubts about the capability of the weapon system to deliver on this promise, show them all those great head shot pictures from Afghanistan and Iraq or offer to run a test program for them using condemned prisoners.

They will change their tune fast enough then.

[krb]

if we're killing in order to deter crime

Who said we are killing to deter crime? Most people I know who support it don't care if it's a deterrent. It's a matter of right and wrong to them (i.e. it's merely right to execute murderers, period).

[Vinnie]

....was authored by the same team of doctors and death penalty opponents who raised similar concerns about the procedure in the British medical journal The Lancet in 2005.

Agenda driven? DUH!

[Little Bill]

I believe in public executions, justice should be open and seen. One of the reason our courts are open to any citizen that cares to attend is to see justice done, LOL.

Next time you elect a Judge, for those of you that can, is he going to be just and follow the law.

[whd23]

Having had several invasive procedures meant to diagnose a gastrointestinal problem I can personally attest to the fact that there's at least one drug that's capable of putting you out to the point where they can stick big things into certain parts of you and yet you don't feel a thing while it's happening and you don't remember a thing when you wake up.

I know what you're talking about, and the "not remembering" part is a welcome side-effect!

[JewishRighter]

"PLoS Medicine -- a San Francisco-based medical journal"

This was as far as I had to read to know this "study" was stupid.

[Fire_on_High]

They have the method down-pat for putting animals down. Ask any vet...most will tell you it’s rare that a day goes by they don’t have to euthanize at least one pet. How much harder can it be?

Besides, why worry...let em suffer some. They deserve a lot worse than the gentle end a beloved pet gets.

[newzjunkey]

Agenda driven? DUH!

There you go getting technical!