About the SA Blog Network

Guest Blog

Guest Blog

Commentary invited by editors of Scientific American
Guest Blog HomeAboutContact

Molecules to Medicine: Should pepper spray be put on (clinical) trial?

The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

Email   PrintPrint

Pepper spray is all over the news, following the Occupy Wall Street protests, particularly following the widely disseminated images and videos of protestors being sprayed in NY, Portland, and UCDavis.

Before that, I knew and occasionally used its main ingredient, capsaicin, as a treatment for my patients with shingles, an extremely painful Herpes zoster infection. And I knew about the many of the serious side effects of pepper spray, well-described by Deborah Blum.

Recently though, other questions arose, like “How was this learned?”. So off I went, looking for clinical trials to see what, if anything, had been studied, beyond the individual patient, poison control, and toxicology reports. Here’s what I learned:

There are reports of the efficacy of capsaicin in crowd control, but little regarding trials of exposures. Perhaps this is because pepper spray is regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency, as a pesticide and not by the FDA.

The concentration of capsaicin in bear spray is 1-2%; it is 10-30% in “personal defense sprays.”

While the police might feel reassured by the study, “The effect of oleoresin capsicum “pepper” spray inhalation on respiratory function,” I was not. This study met the “gold standard” of clinical trials, in that it was a “randomized, cross-over controlled trial to assess the effect of Oleoresin capsicum (OC) spray inhalation on respiratory function by itself and combined with restraint.” However, while the OC exposure showed no ill effect, only 34 volunteers were exposed to only 1 sec of Cap-Stun 5.5% OC spray by inhalation “from 5 ft away as they might in the field setting (as recommended by both manufacturer and local police policies).”

By contrast, an ACLU report, “Pepper Spray Update: More Fatalities, More Questions” found, in just two years, 26 deaths after OC spraying, noting that death was more likely if the victim was also restrained. This translated to 1 death per 600 times police used spray. (The cause of death was not firmly linked to the OC). According to the ACLU, “an internal memorandum produced by the largest supplier of pepper spray to the California police and civilian markets” concludes that there may be serious risks with more than a 1 sec spray. A subsequent Department of Justice study examined another 63 deaths after pepper spray during arrests; the spray was felt to be a “contributing factor” in several.

A review in 1996 by the Division of Epidemiology of the NC DHHS and OSHA concluded that exposure to OC spray during police training constituted an unacceptable health risk.

Surveillance into crowd control agents examined reports to the British National Poisons Information Service, finding more late (>6 hour) adverse events than had been previously noted, especially skin reactions (blistering, rashes).

Studies have, understandably, more looked at treatment than at systematically exploring toxic effects of pepper spray. An uncontrolled California Poison Control study of 64 patients with exposure to capsaicin (as spray or topically as a cream) showed benefit with topically applied antacids, especially if applied soon after exposure.

In a randomized clinical trial, 47 subjects were assigned to a placebo, a topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agent, or a topical anesthetic. The only group with significant symptomatic improvement in pain received proparacaine hydrochloride 0.5%–and only 55% had decreased pain with treatment.

Another randomized controlled trial looked at 49 volunteers who were treated with one of five treatment groups (aluminum hydroxide–magnesium hydroxide [Maalox], 2% lidocaine gel, baby shampoo, milk, or water). There was a significant difference in pain with more rapid treatment, but not between the groups.

I was most impressed with the efforts of the Black Cross Health Collective in Portland, Oregon. These activists have been thoughtfully approaching studying treatments for pepper spray exposures with published clinical trial protocols, where each volunteer also serves as their own control. Capsaicin is applied to each arm; a “subject-blinded” treatment is applied to one arm, and differences in pain responses are recorded. I love that they are looking for evidenced based solutions.

So far, antacids have been the most effective.

Suggestions for further study

Pepper spray causes inflammation and swelling—particularly a danger for those with underlying asthma or emphysema. In fact, the Department of Justice report notes that in two of 63 clearly documented deaths, the subjects were asthmatic. If they don’t already, police need to have protocols in place to identify and treat “sprayees” who have these pre-existing conditions that predispose them to serious harm from the spray. This particularly holds true for people also at risk for respiratory compromise from being restrained, on other drugs, or with obesity. The study of restrained healthy volunteers exposed to small amounts of capsaicin is simply not applicable to the general population. Also, given that these compounds appear to have delayed effects, there should be legally required medical monitoring of “sprayees” at regular and frequent intervals for at least 24 hours—by someone competent. (Iraq war veteran Kayvan Sabehgi could easily have died from the lacerated spleen sustained in his beating by police. It was 18 hours before he was taken to the hospital, after the jail’s nurse reportedly only offered him a suppository for his abdominal pain. There is also an, as yet unconfirmed report, of a miscarriage after the Portland, Oregon OWS protest last week).

Unfortunately, there is an urgent need for clinical trials in this area—both retrospective assessments of “sprayees” health outcomes, and prospective randomized trials [like the trial done on subjects' arms] to elucidate the effects of various capsaicin concentrations, carrier solvents and propellents and to identify the most effective treatments for each mixture. Until those can be done, there should be a thorough outcomes registry kept, with standardized data being obtained on all those subsequent to being pepper-sprayed.

Sadly, I’m sure the Black Cross and others in the Occupy Wall Street movement will have too many opportunities to test therapies against painful crowd-control chemicals. Studies will be difficult because the settings are largely uncontrolled and because the sprays have different concentrations of capsaicin, carrier solvents, and propellants.

Until then, there should be a moratorium on the use of pepper spray or other “non-lethal” chemicals by police, except in clearly life-threatening confrontations, due to the high number of associated deaths until the risks are better understood?

Perhaps Kamran Loghman, who helped the FBI weaponize pepper spray, will be dismayed enough at the “inappropriate and improper use of chemical agents” to help the Black Cross develop effective antidotes…One can only hope.

Image credits: Image 1 by Brian Nguyen from The California Aggie via BoingBoing (CC with attribution); Image 2 from FreakOutNation; Image 3 from mellowed blues.

Previously in this series:

Molecules to Medicine: Clinical Trials for Beginners
Molecules to Medicine: From Test-Tube to Medicine Chest
Lilly’s Shocker, or the Post-Marketing Blues
Molecules to Medicine: Pharma Trumps HIPAA?

Related at Scientific American:

About Pepper Spray
Why One Pepper-Spraying Cop Image Dominates
Protest Infrastructure: How Much Trouble Are Protesters, Really?
How Valid Are Health Concerns for the Occupy Wall Street Camps?
Dear Occupy Wall Street: Read Jeffrey Sachs!
“Occupy Wall Street” Passes Near Scientific American‘s Office in New York City
The “Last Place Aversion” Paradox: The surprising psychology of the Occupy Wall Street protests

Judy Stone About the Author: Judy Stone, MD is an infectious disease specialist, experienced in conducting clinical research. She is the author of Conducting Clinical Research, the essential guide to the topic. She survived 25 years in solo practice in rural Cumberland, Maryland, and is now broadening her horizons. She particularly loves writing about ethical issues, and tilting at windmills in her advocacy for social justice. As part of her overall desire to save the world when she grows up, she has become especially interested in neglected tropical diseases. When not slaving over hot patients, she can be found playing with photography, friends’ dogs, or in her garden. Follow on Twitter @drjudystone or on her website. Follow on Twitter @drjudystone.

The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

Comments 24 Comments

Add Comment
  1. 1. dregstudios 2:56 pm 11/23/2011

    Is this the country we were raised in, were men and women are beaten, gassed, pepper-sprayed and arrested for their disapproval of the government? We have to be careful to protect our Constitutional Rights! Raise awareness and do your part with these free posters I designed for the movement on my artist’s blog at

    Link to this
  2. 2. CaNO3 3:14 pm 11/23/2011

    Why pretty it up? They have been known to restrain, spray, toss into cruiser, turn heat to max, laugh…

    Link to this
  3. 3. mark352 8:36 pm 11/23/2011

    I am a practicing ophthalmologist. Last year I cared for a young man who was pepper-sprayed at close range. It took several months for his eyes to heal and for his vision to return to normal. The surface of his corneas remained almost completely anesthetic. Law enforcement officials are not aware of this problem, regarding pepper spray as a temporary expedient to subdue an unruly or violent person.

    Link to this
  4. 4. Chris99 4:14 am 11/24/2011

    Forget the pepper spray, bring back the halcyon days of choke holds, police dogs and wooden batons.

    It’s difficult to find a problem with pepper spray when you compare it to CR gas in Egypt.

    dregstudios: Before you jump to conclusions on how repressive the US has become pleae review the picutres of this incident and count the number of police on scene with any similiar story from the EU. As you will see there are significantly more police in the EU when compared to just about any protest in the US.

    mark352: One case isn’t much evidence considering the alternative of a choke hold.

    No question that the police overuse nonlethal force, but this is one of the inherent hazards of promoting their use.

    Link to this
  5. 5. geojellyroll 11:41 am 11/24/2011

    Clinical trials….ANIMAL ABUSE!!!!!

    Link to this
  6. 6. scimus 1:35 pm 11/24/2011

    I still have bitter memories of being exposed to CS when I was in the Army and I am dismayed to see it used on civilian personnel who offer no threat to police or to others as a means of repressing their right to free speech.

    Link to this
  7. 7. genevehicle 5:33 pm 11/24/2011

    @ chris99

    This article, and other recent articles addressing the use of pepper spray, have been written, in large part, in response to pepper spray being used against groups of people engaged in non-violent civil disobedience. In these cases pepper spray has been used as a crowd “dispersant” and not as a method to subdue or curtail violent behavior. It is these uses that have sparked the recent debate. Therefore, any arguments that promote the use of pepper spray as a preferable alternative to police dogs, night sticks, choke holds and other methods of controlling a violent behavior are irrelevant.

    Furthermore, the available information tends to indicate that there are increased risks of serious harm, or even death, involved in the use of OC sprays on people that have underlying cardiovascular disorders. Since police don’t have the time or the resources to assess the underlying medical condition of every member of crowd of non-violent protesters, the use of OC as a crowd dispersant is, at best, irresponsible and unethical.

    2 out of 63 in-custody deaths in the DOJ study were attributed to pepper spray used on people with asthma. How many dead people would you consider unacceptable?

    5 ?

    10 ?

    Link to this
  8. 8. Chris99 9:57 pm 11/24/2011

    genevehicle: You have to ask several questions:
    Were the protest legal? No, then the fact they were non-violent reduces the amount of force than can reasonably be used, BUT, it doesn not mean that police are prohibited from using force.
    Did they fail to obey a lawful order? Yes, then the police can use reasonable means / force to enforce the order. Force starts at giving an order and can be increased.

    Regarding the number of deaths attributed to pepper spray and whether is shoud be banned or not. Everyone should be careful what they ask for because if deaths is the only test for what is reasonable force then what happens if baton strikes are shown to cause fewer deaths?

    Better yet we could put the OWS protesters into Free Speech Zones that have become increasely popular.

    Link to this
  9. 9. genevehicle 11:37 pm 11/24/2011


    I think we’re getting a little closer to the heart of the matter, and we may have to agree to disagree.

    Let me explain.

    “Were the protests legal?” That’s a very good question. One that should be answered by lawyers, and I’m sure we could find lawyers willing to argue both sides of that argument. However, even if a protest was found to be in violation of a city ordinance ie; protesting without a permit, is that “illegal” enough to merit a possible death sentence? Is that “illegal” enough to warrant any application of force by the police at all? We should be very wary of allowing the police any use of force where a law or ordinance begins to approach our right to free assembly or our freedom of expression. What happens when some city council decides to disallow all protests. What happens if a time arrives when a small group of people make decisions that repeatedly defy the opinions of a majority of the population. In short, people don’t protest in a vacuum. When making decisions such as these, I believe we should err on the side of public safety and not on the side of our authority, in any of its’ forms.

    I’m not advocating that it’s not “legal” for a police officer to spray a non-violent, protesting, asthmatic in the face, thereby killing him. I’m just saying that it’s wrong.

    As for “free speech zones” ? I’d be the first person out there protesting against anything like that. It was my impression that the United States was already a free speech zone.(?) Non-violent civil disobedience has a long history and has met with some great successes. Would Gandhi have been able to lead India to independence if he had been stuck in “free speech zones”? Nuf said.

    Link to this
  10. 10. Chris99 1:46 am 11/25/2011

    genevehicle: You’re last comment addresses many of the most difficut issues with free speech. It’s impossible to make a blanket statment as to each protest because they each happen in different jursidictions and while they will be similiar there will be differences, so I’ll address each issue in general terms.

    Whether the protest is legal or not plays a large part because if they are illegal the police can remove them suing reasonable force. However, even if the event is non-violent protest the police still have to do their jobs and if the protesters resist then the police can escalate. Most importantly, once the resistance starts that starts a new crime and requires a different set of actions.

    An important note to this is that even if the protest are legal and the police incorrectly believe the protest to be illegal the protesters must obey the order and if they resist they can be charged / convicted even they had a legal right to protest.

    A false assumption about civil disobedience is that it gives you a right to protest and that there will be no legal actions. Civil disobedience accepts that they are violating the law and that they will be prosecuted but that because they are right they will eventually win, albeit with a criminal conviciton to hold up a badge of honor.

    The free speech zones came into vogue primarly with anit-abortion protesters in that it removed protesters from the area of where they could be heard or in front of the clinic, but has been applied most recently by both Democrats and Republicans to remove protest around their conventions.

    Free speech is governed by time and place regulatins just like everything else and the right to free speech is not absolute. Best example is go to work and tell your boss that she is stupid and should be fired. Personally I disagree with free speech zones and lean towards the classical “fire in a movie theatre” but I’m in the minority.

    Link to this
  11. 11. aidel 12:17 pm 11/25/2011

    As far as I understand, many deaths have been linked to pepper spray. Even big-pharma wouldn’t get that far into a study. Why do we allow it as a normal part of law enforcement? (I have seen deaths caused by tasers, too.)

    Link to this
  12. 12. timbo555 2:39 pm 11/25/2011

    Cheers for Chris 99!!!!

    This is the “money shot” For Community organizers. Nothing gets the masses on your side faster than a few photos of “non-violent” protesters getting pepper-sprayed by the big bad policeman. Community organizers are happiest when there are injuries to point to as a sign of a corrupt police state, or oligarchy, or “corrupt, warmongering, imperialist oligarchic, Capitalist, colonialist police state”, just to cover all the bases.

    If the masses could watch even ten minutes of how these children behave OFF camera, if they could understand that these children are encouraged by their “community organizers” to take “direct action” against the power structure (IE: breaking windows, verbally harassing pedestrians and police, blocking traffic, defecating in public, etc,), The masses would cheer the police onward in their attempts to disperse the crowd.

    The police did not simply walk up and begin to spray; they told the protesters that they were illegally blocking a public thoroughfare, and if they did not leave they would be dispersed with pepper spray. They told them this several times, and the cameras started to roll only when the spray started flowing. That the children were discomfited for a few hours or days or weeks (in deference to our ophthalmologist friend above) is their own damn fault.

    The Community organizer of course is in make up and wardrobe getting ready for his/her round of spots on MSNBC, NPR, et cetera. Who knows, with enough exposure, maybe the community organizer could become senator or even President one day!!!! Naaaah!

    Link to this
  13. 13. timbo555 5:10 pm 11/25/2011


    “2 out of 63 in-custody deaths in the DOJ study were attributed to pepper spray used on people with asthma. How many dead people would you consider unacceptable?
    5 ?…..10″?

    RE: This question is utterly fatuous. The question SHOULD be posed to any asthmatic willing to break the law. You force me or Chris99 or any one or all of this country’s 380,000,000 citizens to make a decision that is ultimately this miscreant criminal’s ALONE to make. To wit:

    Am I willing to risk several months of blindness just for a few days of Peace love and radicalism? (Jesus! at least Woodstock had some good tunes!!….)

    Do I want to risk my life for a cause I can’t understand myself or even elucidate in any cogent, rational way?

    Is this a cause worth defecating on a Police car for? Worth breaking a bank window for? Worth living like a pig in the park for?

    Is this a cause worth obstructing the traffic of average American people who are doing nothing more than trying to get to work?

    Are the actions I am taking going create even the tiniest positive change in this country?

    No, no, no,no,no,no and most decidedly, NO!!!!!

    A great mind once said: “You cannot break the law, you can only break yourself against the law”. The law merely facilitates the wishes of the criminal.

    In this case, when clearly asked to leave the area for the THIRD time or risked getting sprayed with pepper spray, the Children who stay are clearly ASKING FOR PEPPER SPRAY!!!!

    And at this point, even if they go BLIND, it is their decision. Don’t go blaming N.Y.P.D. or “we as a nation” or “we as a people” for the decisions of individuals who choose to break the law.

    It’s kind of like throwing oneself off the Empire State building and then complaining about gravity on the way down.

    Link to this
  14. 14. genevehicle 7:59 pm 11/25/2011


    I just spent about thirty minutes crafting a subtle and effective response to the excellent points you raised. Then, as I was finishing the last few sentences, my cat walked across my keyboard, somehow erasing everything I had typed.

    Let me just say this.
    Pepper spray is just too easy to deploy. Using it as tool for crowd control is a dangerous precedent to set. It inevitably becomes a very dangerous, and slippery, slope.
    I would call your attention to an article that came out a few hours ago, which describes an event where a police officer used pepper spray in its’ crowd control capacity on a crowd of shoppers at Walmart.
    Here’s the link.

    Updated 4:55 p.m. ET: “Kinston police are disputing accounts of the incident, telling NBC News that they fired a single “puff” of pepper spray when a large group of people tried to grab products before Walmart employees were finished putting the items on display.

    “An officer sprayed “a puff” of pepper spray in the air to have the crowd “regain composure,” police said. They told NBC News that none of the substance was sprayed into anyone’s eyes or face and that no one requested medical attention.”

    This is what I’m talking about. We can debate terms like “reasonable force” and we can debate whether or not “linking arms” constitutes a violent act until we’re blue in the face. Meanwhile, police are using pepper spray on overly eager shoppers, “to have the crowd regain composure”, police said…. LOL

    game, set, match.

    Link to this
  15. 15. Martin Wirth 1:38 pm 11/26/2011

    Nonviolent crowds need no controlling. Those who say so must be cattle if they have so much trouble with that idea. Go be controlled if you need it. Leave the rest of us to go about our business.

    Of course, no one dares to point out that shooting people in the face with military-grade pepper spray is violent, injurious, cruel, and unusual punishment rendered without so much as a nod to due process.

    John Pike committed a malicious and criminal act of assault against nonviolent demonstrators. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

    Link to this
  16. 16. timbo555 2:50 pm 11/26/2011

    Martin Wirth:

    It is the express purpose of these “non-violent” protestors to get arrested, beaten up pepper sprayed
    et cetera, in order to draw attention to their “cause.”

    They are told by their “organizers” what to expect; that gas and batons and arrest and pepper spray are not just possiblities, but eventualities to be expected.

    Still, they plunk their criminal asses down on public property to impede traffic intentionally. The police cannot remove them because they have linked their arms in such a way so as to incur much more serious physical harm than pepper spray would ever do.

    Enough is enough. The police order them to disperse. They do not. The police order them to dispers a second time telling them that they will be spayed if they do not. They do not. The police warn them one last time, and they stay put, knowing what’s coming; knowing full well that while this may hurt a little, it will definitely get them and their cause on the six o’clock news.

    The Cops are heroes for their forbearance throughout all of this foolishness. The criminal children are now merely criminal children with arrest records and visine eyes.

    And all of the forgoing has had the practical impact of a whipped cream pie falling face first off a footstool.

    It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

    P.S. MOO, MOFO

    Link to this
  17. 17. genevehicle 5:09 pm 11/26/2011

    Ok timbo,

    “Enough is enough” is right.

    “criminal asses” ?
    “criminal children” ?
    “organizers” ? (who?)
    “defecating on a police car” ?
    “living like a pig in a park” ?
    Where do you get this crap, and how does it contribute to this conversation ?
    Your posts are far more vitriolic than substantive. For examples of well thought-out arguments that would support your assertion that the use of pepper spray is justified in these cases, I would refer you to the earlier posts made by Chris99.
    If all you can do is repeat the right-wing company line fed to you by your fox-news, political-babble-priesthood, then go to a site dedicated to political commentary and leave this very serious discussion to the grown-ups.

    Link to this
  18. 18. timbo555 6:15 pm 11/26/2011

    “criminal asses” ?
    “criminal children” ?
    “organizers” ? (who?)
    “living like a pig in a park” ?

    Pardon my vitriol. Perhaps I should behave more like the children occupying wall Street.

    Children because they have yet to advance any cogent argument for why they are demonstrating, beyond the usual prepubescent, Marxist drivel about how all poor people are poor BECAUSE all rich people are rich. And that this nation is an oligarchy run by the wealthy whose sole aim is to enslave the masses yadayadayda….

    And I don’t take my marching orders from Fox, I get this crappola from interviews on “Democracy Now” with Amy Goodman.

    Criminal asses?
    Occupying a public park illegally makes the occupiers criminals, no matter how heroic the enterprise. When they sit down illegally, they are sitting on their criminal asses.

    Criminal children?
    From what I’ve heard coming from their spokespeople there isn’t a single mature human being among them.

    Are you saying there weren’t any? No, as disorganized as it seems, there are the usual “community activists” trying to lead from behind the lines. If you want to assert that there are none, fine. I myself couldn’t name a single person either. But to say this developmentally disabled soap opera simply arose organically from nothing defies credulity.

    “defecating on a police car”?
    A man dropped trou. and defecated on a police car during “Occupy Wall Street”. Why would that surprise you? Do you not believe it?

    “living like a pig in a park”?
    Like I said, At least Woodstock had good tunes. They lived in squalor of their own making. They didn’t bathe and thus were unclean, like pigs. Sorry that offends your apparently refined sensibilities but there it is.

    As to vitriol; I watched as this fiasco unfolded and said nothing as the media gave thoughtful, almost meditative interviews, to these childish, unwashed children, and I got mad. None of the descriptions I applied to these hooligans was in any way inaccurate.

    I am angry because these people are an affront to nearly everything I believe in as an American, and way too much time has been wasted paying attention to them. Just pepper spray the everlovin’ BeJesus out of them and clear them the hell out of my park. Of course that’s just my opinion.

    Link to this
  19. 19. genevehicle 8:08 pm 11/26/2011

    hey there timbo

    ok, I understand that you’re angry and, in many ways, I understand your anger, as I too am quite frustrated with the way our country seems to be heading. However, if we let our frustrations lead us by the nose, I think we might fall prey to the dangers of ignoring valid points of view that happen to be in opposition to our own. Don’t ya think?
    I find it’s helpful to use a “wide angle lens” approach when getting my information from the media. I try to expose myself to as many different sources of information as possible in an effort to form an accurate view of the events unfolding before us, as seen through the ever-quickening kaleidoscope that is our modern media. By doing so, I’ve found that this OWS movement is clearly composed of a wider segment of our population than you would propose.
    However, regardless of our views on the OWS movement, the article that gave birth to this comment thread asked a different question ie; whether or not there’s been enough clinical data amassed to accurately asses the effects of OC spray (capsaicin, the propellents, and the solvents) on people. And, by implication, the ethical questions about its’ ongoing use necessarily follow.
    Of course, the recent debate about the use of pepper spray on protesters is just a small part of a much larger, and ongoing, debate centered around where we, as the American people, are willing to draw the line between the rights of our citizens to express themselves and the amount of force exercised by our government as it fulfills its’ obligation to maintain order. This has always been a particularly sticky question and certainly deserves more attention than “..just pepper spray the ever-lovin’ beJesus out of them..”. While I can certainly appreciate the humorous aspects of this statement, and understand the sentiment behind it, when such statements are made in anger they tend to degrade the quality of the debate. In essence, it’s like you pooping on our police car.
    I don’t think we’re going resolve these issue here today, so I’m going to move along. But before I do, please allow me to wish you luck in your advocacy of “protester pepper spraying”, as I’m sure you’d wish me luck in my advocacy of pepper spraying people like you….(just kidding :)

    Link to this
  20. 20. timbo555 10:06 pm 11/26/2011


    Sorry Gene, but your feint at open minded bonhomie falls a little short when you condescendingly imply that I am a kind of brainless sycophant, incapable of anything more than to:

    “….repeat the right-wing company line fed to (me) by my fox-news, political-babble-priesthood.”

    And then you have the solid brass, diamond encrusted nuts to say;

    “I find it’s helpful to use a “wide angle lens” approach when getting my information from the media. I try to expose myself to as many different sources of information as possible in an effort to form an accurate view of the events unfolding before us, as seen through the ever-quickening kaleidoscope that is our modern media. How so very High minded of you.

    How unutterably supercilious and self congratulatory can one person get?

    “NPR? of course, every day. MSNBC? Certainly! Mother Jones? Current? with that wonderfully, even tempered Mr. Olberman? Why, I get warm and runny just thinking about him! The daily Kos? Media matters? all perfectly fair and balanced sources of of information!”

    Fox? No way! their all a bunch of God-damned liars!

    Look, we both have specific, probably diametrically opposed world views; the difference between us is that I don’t pretend otherwise. The question that started this thread was lost long ago by others who made it political. I just jumped in for reasons already stated.

    And now that we’ve gotten to know each other a little better,why don’t YOU do EVERYBODY a favor and go pepper spray your self. (Not Kidding)

    Link to this
  21. 21. genevehicle 3:17 am 11/27/2011

    Sheesh, you’re grumpy

    OK, I give up. You win.
    But for the record
    -I have tabs on my tool bar for Fox, CNN, and MSNBC and visit each site regularly.
    -I listen to NPR on a regular basis. (mostly on Fridays when they air the show “Science Friday”)
    -I catch the “Newshour” on PBS as often as I can.
    -I even listen to Rush occasionally, but just for entertainment purposes only.
    -As for Mother Jones? I’ve heard the term and assume it’s a lefty rag but I have never seen a copy or visited a web site if there is one.
    -Current, Mr Olberman, the daily Kos, Media Matters….
    I honestly have never heard of any of those.
    From you’re reaction to them, I’m going to assume that they are part of the “liberal propaganda machine”.
    Maybe I need to broaden my “wide angle lens” to include them.
    I’m sorry you refuse to believe that I am in fact open minded. I can’t help it, it’s part of being an idealistic liberal-minded fool. I have faith in the fundamental goodness of my fellow American, even when confronted with people as mean spirited as you seem to be.
    I’m sure you’re a good man to those you care about, and I’m equally sure that it’s only the super-charged, highly polarized, political climate that has caused you to believe that I am not.

    PS sorry for the “….fox news, political-babble priesthood” jab, but at the time the tone of your posts seemed to indicate that particular shoe…fit.
    Prove me wrong. Go hug a liberal tomorrow.

    Link to this
  22. 22. timbo555 10:18 am 11/27/2011


    Link to this
  23. 23. mbrysonb 12:28 pm 11/28/2011

    Genevehicle,it seems to me you’re wasting your time with Timbo. Anyone prepared to endorse pepper-spraying non-violent protestors on the grounds that other protesters have behaved offensively or even (slightly) aggressively is just looking for excuses to attack anyone s/he disagrees with. We have lost a lot of ground here– the right to protest peacefully and to engage in non-violent civil disobedience without being subject to extra-judicial (not to mention cruel and–at least once-upon-a-time unusual) punishment will take a lot of work and a lot of moral outrage to re-establish. So go ahead– take a rhetorical jab at Timbo– he and his like are only too eager to put a real stick in your eye.

    Link to this
  24. 24. carlitososajr 2:07 pm 01/5/2012

    There are cops that were hurt by pepperspray. I found this on law officer blog.

    Or look in forums under detention/corrections then go to pepperspray.

    This new stuff is marketed as the hottest out there. I have been around when this stuff is sprayed and have been jacked up for days. You get immidiately weak and just want to go to sleep but cant because you are in so much pain.

    Also google Joann Haney who was brain damaged after being peppersprayed.

    Link to this

Add a Comment
You must sign in or register as a member to submit a comment.

More from Scientific American

Email this Article