Pfizer Blocks The Use Of Its Drugs In Executions

HughPickens.com writes: Erik Eckholm reports in the NYT that the pharmaceutical giant Pfizer has announced that it has imposed sweeping controls on the distribution of its products to ensure that none are used in lethal injections, a step that closes off the last remaining open-market source of drugs used in executions. "Pfizer makes its products to enhance and save the lives of the patients we serve," the company says, and "strongly objects to the use of its products as lethal injections for capital punishment." "With Pfizer's announcement, all F.D.A.-approved manufacturers of any potential execution drug have now blocked their sale for this purpose," says Maya Foa. "Executing states must now go underground if they want to get hold of medicines for use in lethal injection." The mounting difficulty in obtaining lethal drugs has already caused states to furtively scramble for supplies. Some states have used straw buyers or tried to import drugs from abroad that are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration, only to see them seized by federal agents. Other states have experimented with new drug combinations, sometimes with disastrous results, such as the prolonged execution of Joseph Wood in Arizona in 2014, using the sedative midazolam. A few states have adopted the electric chair, firing squad or gas chamber as an alternative if lethal drugs are not available. Since Utah chooses to have a death penalty, "we have to have a means of carrying it out," said State Representative Paul Ray as he argued last year for authorization of the firing squad.

Comments

Let me be the first to say

[Firethorn]

Just switch to nitrogen asphyxiation if you want a humane execution which isn't dependent upon strapping the condemned down to a table, having to have a non-professional put an IV in, trouble getting drugs, etc...

The supplies can be had at any welding shop for not much money.

Re:Let me be the first to say

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't want humane executions, they want the condemned to suffer and writhe around in pain.

Re:Let me be the first to say

[Vrallis]

Unfortunately that would never happen. I'm sure it would be the usual setup of a physician ensuring the location of the heart is marked as a target, multiple people firing, probably with a couple pointless blanks (shooters can tell the difference, hence pointless). A single shot to the head would be too reminiscent of executions by dictators and terrorists.

While I'm perfectly fine with execution when there is absolute proof of guilt there are too many people on death row under falsified evidence or just plain shit law enforcement or legal work. Right now incarceration for life is cheaper anyway.

Re:Let me be the first to say

[Anonymous Coward]

No.

See, in most people, the breathing reflex is triggered by the presence of carbon dioxide - not the absence of oxygen. You could walk into a room containing pure nitrogen, breathe away, and feel just fine - right up until you collapse because of a lack of oxygen (in fact, you'd stop breathing reflexively, because your carbon dioxide levels would fall too low for the reflex to kick in). The same thing would happen with pure helium, pure argon, pure sulphur hexafluoride, etc. Any gas that is inert to the human body will work for this purpose (which rules out chlorine, fluorine, and other reactive gases.)

This isn't about forcing nitrogen into the body at high pressure (which is what happens as a precursor to the bends). This is about displacing the oxygen in a way that the body doesn't pick up on - it'd be like the executed victim just falls asleep and never wakes up.

Re:Let me be the first to say

[NotSoHeavyD3]

You know there's a youtube video called how to kill a human being where the pro death penalty guy is against nitrogen asphyxiation because it literally isn't gruesome enough.

Re:Let me be the first to say

[ShanghaiBill]

It takes a minute or two at the least. And the suffoccee will gasp ferociously while tearing at their throat during before unconsciousness ensues. It is a horror show.

This is wrong. Inert gas asphyxiation is quick and painless. The victim usually does not even detect that anything is wrong before losing consciousness. There is no sensation of suffocation because there is no CO2 buildup in the blood.

Re:Let me be the first to say

[SuricouRaven]

This is one reason why advocates of the death penalty tend to reject the use of nitrogen. They want to see the condemned suffer at least a little - if the condemned dies happily, then people will feel justice has not been done.

Remember, people are basically bastards. Often 'justice' is just a polite veneer for 'collective revenge.' This person has made the group suffer, so the books can not be set straight until the same has been done to him.

Re:Let me be the first to say

[Solandri]

When completely deprived of oxygen, loss of consciousness occurs within about 12 seconds, and death after about a minute. This is why the safety briefing aboard airliners says in the event of cabin depressurization you should put your oxygen mask on first, then your child's. If you try to put your child's mask on first, you'll likely go unconscious before you can get around to putting yours on.

It really is the perfect way to painlessly kill someone. Which I suspect is why it's not covered more by the media (a huge majority of whom are against the death penalty). A large part of the opposition to the death penalty is based on potential suffering of the prisoner. Presented with a guaranteed way to avoid that suffering, that opposition evaporates.

Disclaimer: I don't have a moral problem with a death penalty in certain cases, but I do not believe our current legal system is accurate enough to justify the use of death as a punishment. IMHO its irreversible nature disqualifies it from use in a justice system which has been proven to be error-prone.

Re:Let me be the first to say

[jandersen]

You know there's a youtube video called how to kill a human being where the pro death penalty guy is against nitrogen asphyxiation because it literally isn't gruesome enough.

Exactly - to all appearances, the American penal system is not primarily about justice or rehabilitation, but revenge and control. I don't remember how many times I have heard that "jail isn't supposed to be a holiday, it is supposed to feel like punishment". This fails to take into account several things - firstly that punishment to effective as a means of correcting behaviour must be accepted by the person punished as being reasonable and fair. Vindictive punishment causes resentment, which counteract any beneficial effect it might have had.

Secondly, many offenders don't have a lot of education or self-esteem, and they may not realise that they could lead a much better life if they learned to do the right things. I think most young offenders fall into this category - they don't wat to be criminals, drug addicts, violent or anything like that, but all they have learned tells them that they are worthless. They haven't done well in school, perhaps because the teachers are crap, perhaps because their home environment doesn't support learning; what hope do they have? Crime can seem so easy in that situation. And then we punish them vindictively, which confirms that they are worthless to society, and that they might as well carry on - at least it feels a little like getting back at a smug and overbearing society.

America is supposed to be one of the most religiously devoted countries in the developed world, but there seems to be little evidence of a willingness to forgive and get the best out of people. Perhaps this is because "religious" means "believing in holy scriptures rather than havingreal faith"; whatever the case may be, it is shameful.

Re:Let me be the first to say

[Imrik]

I don't know that the death penalty significantly reduces recidivism when compared to life in prison.

An alternative to the death penalty

[ClickOnThis]

Put them in jail instead.

It's cheaper and a wrongful conviction can be reversed.

The majority of countries no longer have the death penalty.

Re:Corporation trumps government

[Harlequin80]

But all they are doing is exercising their right to not sell you a product. There is no requirement for Pfizer or any other corporation to sell something to you if they don't want to. Of course you have the right to refuse to buy anything else from them and encourage others to do the same. But nothing they are doing is implicitly wrong.

Re:This is nuts

[MightyMartian]

Except, of course, capital punishment isn't actually a deterrents.

It's vengeance, pure and simple, and while I understand why people want it, if it is going to continue, it shouldn't be wrapped up in the language of crime prevention, because it doesn't prevent crimes. Allowing capital punishment to be justified in this way is simply a way to make it more palatable, and state-sanctioned killings should be anything but palatable.

rest of world vs USA

[dr.Flake]

I don't want to be the one patronizing all you "helpful experts" suggesting wonderful alternative methods to get rid of (execute) your inmates. History has taught us endless options to end the life of fellow humans, there is no shortage at all, lest the need for more.

But a large part of the rest of this planet frowns upon this fixation and desire to implement the death penalty. I wouldn't hurt to look in your mirror critically and realize in what good company you guys are (think Saudi Arabia, Iran north Korea etc)

Please, use you're knowledge and good judgement, your academic independent view, to suggest options for the US to join the rest of the civilised world and to abolish the death penalty.
What you guys really need is a more humane society, not a more efficient way to kill humans. You already excel in that subject.