Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
U of M researchers elaborate on their study of 'less-lethal' weapons' use in crowd control
https://www.minnpost.com/health/2021/02/u-of-m-researchers-elaborate-on-their-study-of-less-lethal-weapons-use-in-crowd-control/A peer-reviewed study of injuries sustained by participants and bystanders in last spring’s protests following George Floyd’s killing by Minneapolis police has drawn widespread media attention. The study was published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
Conducted by an interdisciplinary team from the University of Minnesota, the study concludes that “less-lethal” projectile weapons commonly used to disperse participants during cases of civil unrest “are not appropriate for crowd control.”
To come to this conclusion, the research team scanned thousands of medical records dated between May 26 and June 25 for patients seen in clinics and emergency rooms in two Twin Cities medical systems. The study’s authors discovered 89 records containing the words “riot,” “tear gas,” or other crowd-control methods that they separated and closely examined. The data collected from these records ultimately led the researchers to their conclusion.
I wanted to learn more about why this team of researchers decided to conduct their study and how they came to their conclusions, so I spoke with three individuals who worked closely on the project, Erika Kaske, a student at the University of Minnesota Medical School; David Satin, assistant professor of family medicine and community health at the University of Minnesota Medical Center and a family medicine physician at M Health Fairview Clinic – Smiley’s; and Joel Wu, adjunct professor of clinical ethics at the University of Minnesota Center for Bioethics.
Conducted by an interdisciplinary team from the University of Minnesota, the study concludes that “less-lethal” projectile weapons commonly used to disperse participants during cases of civil unrest “are not appropriate for crowd control.”
To come to this conclusion, the research team scanned thousands of medical records dated between May 26 and June 25 for patients seen in clinics and emergency rooms in two Twin Cities medical systems. The study’s authors discovered 89 records containing the words “riot,” “tear gas,” or other crowd-control methods that they separated and closely examined. The data collected from these records ultimately led the researchers to their conclusion.
I wanted to learn more about why this team of researchers decided to conduct their study and how they came to their conclusions, so I spoke with three individuals who worked closely on the project, Erika Kaske, a student at the University of Minnesota Medical School; David Satin, assistant professor of family medicine and community health at the University of Minnesota Medical Center and a family medicine physician at M Health Fairview Clinic – Smiley’s; and Joel Wu, adjunct professor of clinical ethics at the University of Minnesota Center for Bioethics.
