To: Editorial Board
The Austin American-Statesman:
You write:
“That leaves the door open for Texas and other states to continue executing inmates using at least one drug that isn’t fit for putting down dogs.” (EDITORIAL, “How the high court may have changed the death penalty”, EDITORIAL BOARD, Saturday, June 17, 2006).
Which drug is that?
I am very surprised that you persist in this manner, particularly in light of the two emails that I sent to you, below.
Did you find something which contradicted this?
Sincerely, Dudley Sharp
In a message dated 6/12/2006 10:53:59 A.M. Central America Standard , Sharpjfa writes:
Dear Austin-American Statesman:
As per the email I sent you on 6/4, I received clarification on this point, below:
In a message dated 6/4/2006 3:28:48 P.M. Central America Standard Ti, Sharpjfa writes:
“. . . a combination of pentobarbital with a neuromuscular blocking agent (a paralytic) is not an acceptable euthanasia agent.” (4)
The barbiturates used in human lethal injection is not pentobarbital. However, the above statement, at footnote (2), makes no exceptions, so this becomes a point of confusion within the AVMA statements.
I have sent them an email for some clarification.
By combination, the AVMA meant that the two drugs were administered in the same syringe, together, at the same time.
There is a clear reason not to do this and human lethal injection procedures do not allow it.
So, with that clarification, there is no statement, by AVMA than can be used, without distortion, that speaks against the human lethal injection drug protocol.
It was completely fabricated by death penalty opponents.
If you have something in conflict with this, please let me know.
Sincerely, Dudley Sharp
In a message dated 6/4/2006 3:28:48 P.M. Central America Standard Ti, Sharpjfa writes:
To: Austin American-Statesman
Based upon my discussions and exchanges with the AAS, I thought the following might be useful. This is a brief review and is by no means authoritative.
If you find any material which will assist in a better understanding of these issues or which calls into question my review, I would like to see it.
Thank you.
Sincerely, Dudley Sharp, 713-622-5491
Lethal Injection: Texas law and veterinary standards: A Preliminary Review
by Dudley Sharp
As adopted within Senate Bill 572, within Texas’s 78th legislature, and made into law, there are two specific methods for euthanasia of animals within Texas — the use of sodium pentobarbitol or carbon monoxide.
Those selections might have been, partially, influenced by The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) recommendations of 2000. (1)
There is some literature questioning the use (of) carbon monoxide on animals.
I find no condemnation of any other drugs or protocol within this Texas law, which would bring into question the Texas lethal injection protocol. I have not spoken to the sponsor of the SB 572 legislation.
Within the death penalty debate, there is a recent 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.
However, this appears to be contradicted within the literature.
First, the AVMA actually makes a statement which, inadvertently, supports the Texas (and other jurisdictions’) protocol — the opposite of what the detractors have been claiming.
“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 uses a paralytic without an anaesthetic — EVER. The anesthesia is always used first. It appears that these absurd claims, originated by anti death penalty activists and falsely attributed to veterinary literature, are a complete perversion of the literature.
To claim that paralytics are condemned in veterinary euthanasia, without mentioning the specific context, is an intentional deception. (The AVMA report does not mention the specific paralytic used in lethal injection for humans).
Secondly, with properly administered IVs, there would be no pain within the Texas lethal injection protocol – it is, chemically, impossible with the drugs and dosages administered.
Thirdly, the AVMA, specifically, cautions (3):
“The 2000 Report of the AVMA Panel on Euthanasia has been widely misinterpreted.
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.
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@avma.org for more
information or to set up an interview with a veterinary expert.” (3)
However, some confusion could arise with this statement from AVMA:
“. . . a combination of pentobarbital with a neuromuscular blocking agent (a paralytic) is not an acceptable euthanasia agent.” (4)
The barbiturates used in human lethal injection is not pentobarbital. However, the above statement, at footnote (2), makes no exceptions, so this becomes a point of confusion within the AVMA statements.
I have sent them an email for some clarification.
It must be noted, just as the AVMA did, that any transfer of their standards to human protocols may be inappropriate, unless and until some relevance is established, if it can be. Animals and people often react quite differently to the same substances.
Both speculation and assumption are unnecessary, when it is fairly easy to confirm the effects of these well known drugs on different subjects, IF they have even been used on the different subjects.
Based upon this literature, this veterinary nonsense was, likely, just another anti death penalty deception.
Furthermore, the AVMA approves of “potassium chloride in conjunction with prior general anesthesia” (5) — the drug protocol used within the Texas lethal injection, with the exception of the paralytic used in between.
We can see more support for Texas’s lethal injection within this review.
First, this two drug protocol is approved by AVMA, for animals. Secondly, the only disadvantage listed by AVMA for potassium chloride is “clonic spams” (6) — the involuntary rapid and violent jerking of muscles soon after injection of the potassium. The effect can be similar in humans.
The paralytic drug, used second, within the Texas lethal injection protocol, helps to reduce, or eliminate, this effect. This is an obvious benefit in human executions.
In other words, a review of the AVMA literature finds much support for the Texas 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 and will be replaced with science and reason.
———————-
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
Cover Page
4) www(dot)avma.org/issues/animal_welfare/euthanasia.pdf
page 680.
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
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters
e-mail sharpjfa@aol.com, 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.
e-mail sharpjfa@aol.com, 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.
Hi, I must say that you have made some good points in the post. I performed searches on the topic and found most people will agree with your blog. Thanks for sharing this information.
I’m really interested in this website layout. Where did you find this layout?
Yet, much remains unclear. If you do not complicate, shall describe in more detail.
Have you considered adding more videos to your posts to keep the readers entertained?