The Drugs used in America’s Lethal Injections wouldn’t even be used on a Dog
42 States have banned the drug Pancuronium bromide used to Paralyze a criminal receiving the death penalty in animal euthanasa.
WASHINGTON (AP) – Nearly all lethal injection executions have occurred in states where veterinarians are not allowed to use the same method to euthanize animals, according to a new study.
One of the three drugs used in executions, the one that paralyzes the condemned inmate, has been banned from use in animal euthanasia by at least 42 states, said the study author Ty Alper, a death penalty opponent and associate director of the Death Penalty Clinic at the University of California-Berkeley School of Law.
Those states include the five leaders in lethal injections – Texas, Oklahoma, Virginia, Missouri and North Carolina – and account for 907 of the 929 executions that have been carried out by that method since 1982.
Executions have been on hold while the Supreme Court considers a challenge to lethal injections in a case from Kentucky, among the roughly three dozen states that administer three drugs in succession to knock out, paralyze and kill prisoners.
Source: apnews.myway.com via politisite
Related Research
Anesthetizing the Public Conscience: Lethal Injection and Animal Euthanasia
TY ALPER
Death Penalty Clinic
Fordham Urban Law Journal, Vol. 35, May 2008
Abstract:
Lawyers challenging lethal injection on behalf of death row inmates have frequently argued that lethal injection protocols do not comport with standard practices for the euthanasia of animals. This article studies state laws governing animal euthanasia and concludes that many more states than have previously been recognized ban the use of paralyzing agents in animal euthanasia. In fact, 97.6% of lethal injection executions in this country have taken place in states that have banned, for use in animal euthanasia, the same drugs that are used in those states during executions. Moreover, a study of the legislative history of state euthanasia laws reveals that the concerns raised about paralyzing drugs in the animal euthanasia context are identical in many ways to the concerns that lawyers for death row inmates are currently raising about the use of those drugs in the lethal injection executions of human beings. This article takes an in depth look at animal euthanasia and its relationship to lethal injection by examining in Part I the history and origins of the paralyzing drugs that veterinarians and animal welfare experts refuse to allow in animal euthanasia; in Part II the standards of professional conduct for veterinary and animal shelter professionals; in Part III, the state laws and regulations governing animal euthanasia; and finally in Part IV, the legislative history that led to the enactment of the various states’ animal euthanasia laws and regulations.
Source: papers.ssrn.com via politisite
Tags: California | Carolina | Kentucky | Missouri | Oklahoma | School | Texas | animal | condemned | Crime | death | Director | drug | euthanasia | euthanize | execution | injection | INMATE | lethal | occurred | OPPONENT | Paralyze | PENALTY | Politics | states | universit | World
Veterinary Claims a Distortion of Reality: Human Lethal Injection
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters, contact info, below
Within the death penalty debate, there is an allegation that veterinarians are prohibited from using pancuronium bromide or Pavulon, the paralyzing agent used in human lethal injection, because it may cause and/or mask pain to the animals, within the euthanasia process.
It is also stated that vets are prohibited from using potassium chloride, the heart stooping drug, used thirdly, in the three drug human lethal injection protocol.
In turn, this is used as a new anti death penalty sound bite – “It is too cruel for animals, but we use it on people.”
First, the The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) recommendations of 2000 (1) , inadvertently, support the human lethal injection protocol — the opposite of what the detractors have been claiming.
AVMA: “When used alone, these drugs (paralytics) all cause respiratory arrest before loss of consciousness, so the animal may perceive pain and distress after it is immobilized.” (2)
Obviously, no state, which practices human lethal injection, uses a paralytic without an anaesthetic — EVER. The anesthesia is always used first. It appears that these absurd claims, falsely attributed to veterinary literature, have been a bald faced lie by anti death penalty activists.
To claim that paralytics are condemned in veterinary euthanasia, without mentioning the specific context, is an intentional deception. (The AVMA does not mention the specific paralytic used in lethal injection for humans).
Secondly, if properly anesthetized, as in human lethal injection, there would be no pain experienced when using Pavulon. That is also well known.
Thirdly, the AVMA, similarly, prohibits the use of potassium chloride, “WHEN USED ALONE”. (3) (my capitalization for emphasis). Of course, human lethal injection uses the two previously mentioned drugs, prior to injection of the potassium chloride. This is well known, as well, thereby revealing more deceptions by the anti death penalty cabal.
Fourth,, the AVMA, specifically, cautions (4):
“1. The guidelines in this report are in no way intended to be used for human lethal injection.
2. The application of a barbiturate, paralyzing agent, and potassium chloride delivered in separate
syringes or stages (the common method used for human lethal injection) is not cited in the report.
3. The report never mentions pancuronium bromide or Pavulon, the paralyzing agent used in human
lethal injection.”
Obviously, the AVMA is saying DON’T use our report to draw any inferences with regard to the human lethal injection protocol. Of course, death penalty opponents decided to ignore that responsible request.
The AVMA continues:
“Before referring to the 2000 Report of the AVMA Panel on Euthanasia, please contact the AVMA to ensure the association’s position is stated correctly. Please contact Michael San Filippo, media relations assistant at the AVMA, at 847-285-6687 (office), 847-732-6194 (cell) or msanfilippo(at)avma.org for more information or to set up an interview with a veterinary expert.” (4)
Death penalty opponents ignored that request, as well.
Based upon this literature, it is clear that this veterinary nonsense was another anti death penalty fraud, which, sadly and often, escaped media fact checking, but not media repetition.
The AVMA approves of “potassium chloride in conjunction with prior general anesthesia” (5) for animals — this is the drug protocol used within most lethal injection protocols, with the exception of the paralytic used in between.
This actually shows support for the human lethal injection protocol, however unintended.
First, this two drug protocol is approved by AVMA, for animals.
Secondly, a disadvantage listed by AVMA for potassium chloride is “clonic spams” (6) — rapid and violent jerking of muscles soon after injection of the potassium. The paralytic drug, used second, within the human lethal injection protocol, helps to reduce, or eliminate, this effect.
In other words, a review of the AVMA literature finds much support, however inadvertent, for the human lethal injection protocol and nothing that conflicts with or condemns it.
Hopefully, this newest, blatant distortion by the anti death penalty crowd will soon fade.
———————-
Veterinary use of sodium pentobarbital
“Pentobarbital is a barbiturate that is available as both a free acid and a sodium salt, the former of which is only slightly soluble in water and ethanol.” (7) (NOTE — I don’t believe this is used for human lethal injection).
“Veterinary medicine
In veterinary medicine sodium pentobarbital—traded under names such as Sagatal—is used as an anaesthetic.UBC Committee on Animal Care (2005). Euthanasia. SOP 009E1 – euthanasia – overdose with pentobarbital. The University of British Columbia. URL accessed on 4 October, 2005. Pentobarbital is an ingredient in Equithesin.” (7)
“Veterinary Euthanasia
It is used by itself, or more often in combination with complementary agents such as phenytoin, in commercial animal euthanasia (2003). ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA. Animal Use Protocols. University of Virginia. URL accessed on 4 October, 2005. injectable solutions. Trade names include Euthasol, Euthatal, Beuthanasia-D and Fatal Plus. “(7)
1) www(dot)avma.org/issues/animal_welfare/euthanasia.pdf
Appendix 1, page 693
2) www(dot)avma.org/issues/animal_welfare/euthanasia.pdf
Appendix 4, page 696
3) www(dot)avma.org/issues/animal_welfare/euthanasia.pdf
Page 681
4) www(dot)avma.org/issues/animal_welfare/euthanasia.pdf
Cover Page
5) www(dot)avma.org/issues/animal_welfare/euthanasia.pdf
Page 680
6) www(dot)avma.org/issues/animal_welfare/euthanasia.pdf
Page 681
7) http://psychcentral.com/psypsych/Pentobarbital
copyright 2005-2007 Dudley Sharp
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters
e-mail [email protected], 713-622-5491,
Houston, Texas
Mr. Sharp has appeared on ABC, BBC, CBS, CNN, C-SPAN, FOX, NBC, NPR, PBS and many other TV and radio networks, on such programs as Nightline, The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, The O’Reilly Factor, etc., has been quoted in newspapers throughout the world and is a published author.
A former opponent of capital punishment, he has written and granted interviews about, testified on and debated the subject of the death penalty, extensively and internationally.
Pro death penalty sites
homicidesurvivors(dot)com/categories/Dudley%20Sharp%20-%20Justice%20Matters.aspx
www(dot)dpinfo.com
www(dot)cjlf.org/deathpenalty/DPinformation.htm
www(dot)clarkprosecutor.org/html/links/dplinks.htm
joshmarquis(dot)blogspot.com/
www(dot)lexingtonprosecutor.com/death_penalty_debate.htm
www(dot)prodeathpenalty.com
www(dot)yesdeathpenalty.com/deathpenalty_contents.htm (Sweden)
Permission for distribution of this document, in whole or part, is approved, with proper attribution.