A Comprehensive Review of the January 2007 Chan et al ‘Aggressive Physical Restraint’ Study Report

and Questions That Will ‘Defeat’ Those Who Cite It

REVIEW CITATION:
Miller CD. A comprehensive review of the January 2007 Chan et al ‘aggressive physical
restraint’ study report and questions that will ‘defeat’ those who cite it. November 2007,
http://www.charlydmiller.com/LIB11/2007JanChanArticleReview.pdf

CITATION for the ARTICLE being REVIEWED:
Michalewicz BA, Chan TC, Vilke GM, Levy SS, Neuman TS, Kolkhorst FW.
Ventilatory and metabolic demands during aggressive physical restraint in healthy adults.
J Forensic Sci, January 2007, Vol. 52, No. 1; pgs 171-175.

Here They Go AGAIN!!!

ABSTRACT:
As with ALL of their previous studies, the study results identified by Chan et al in their January 2007, “Ventilatory and metabolic demands during aggressive physical restraint in healthy adults” study report, are

The SAME FACTS identified in my 2005 Comprehensive Review
of their earlier study reports REMAIN TRUE for Chan et al’s
January 2007 study report:

1. No one has ever performed a LEGITIMATE “clinical study” of the physical effects ACTUALLY experienced by individuals who are subjected to forceful-prone-restraint (with or without hogtie restraint) during real-life situations.

2. No one has ever performed a LEGITIMATE “clinical study” proving that no ill effects will occur when an individual is subjected to forceful-prone-restraint (with or without hogtie restraint) during real-life situations.

3. Unbiased medical and forensic professionals still universally agree that application of forceful-prone-restraint during real-life situations (with or without hogtie) is extremely dangerous; is accompanied by a very high risk of causing “wrongful death”; and should NOT be performed by emergency responders (of ANY kind).

4. Those who persist in promoting misinterpretation and/or misrepresentation of restraint-asphyxia-related research and review articles (individuals such as Chan et al) are acting in a “morally and ethically indefensible” manner, and are demonstrating the very strong likelihood that they have “personal agendas” entirely inconsistent with a concern for preventing death.

5. It is a FACT that, Theodore Chan et al CONTINUE to demonstrate that they are quite willing to unethically misrepresent (LIE about) the research they have performed related to HEALTHY individuals who were subjected to entirely unrealistic forms of restraint.

HAPPILY! Chan et al CAN be DEFEATED!
Use my suggested questions, and have at them!

A Comprehensive Review of the
January 2007 Chan et al
‘Aggressive Physical Restraint’ Study Report
and Questions That Will ‘Defeat’ Those Who Cite It

Ventilatory and Metabolic Demands
During Aggressive Physical Restraint in Healthy Adults.

USE YOUR BACK BUTTON
To Return To Wherever You Came From
OR Use the Following Links:

Return to the Restraint Asphyxia LIBRARY

Go to the Restraint Asphyxia Newz Directory

Go to CHAS’ HOME PAGE

Email Charly at: c-d-miller@neb.rr.com
(Those are hyphens/dashes between the “c” and “d” and “miller”)