
‘Excited delirium’, used by police to justify brutality, is junk science - 1as
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/chokehold-police-excited-delirium/2020/07/17/fe907ec8-c6bc-11ea-b037-f9711f89ee46_story.html
======
ve55
Excited delirium is a very well-known and documented phenomenon, primarily in
individuals that are on excessive doses of stimulants:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excited_delirium#Cause](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excited_delirium#Cause)

However, nothing about its existence implies anything about police brutality.
For some reason the article thinks it needs to deny the existence of something
that obviously exists in order to argue against police brutality. This is a
strange logical fallacy to commit, because you can easily argue brutality is
bad regardless of what substances an individual is on.

Responding to child comments, it's possible that this condition is not unique
enough to require its own name and label. But in that case, one can simply
refer to the effects of doses of the given stimulants themselves, e.g.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine#Adverse_effect...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine#Adverse_effects).

Please note I'm not making any claim that brutality is okay or ever justified,
just that there obviously does exist strong psychological and physical
conditions that occur when an individual is on doses of very strong
stimulants.

~~~
triceratops
From the Wikipedia article you linked: "The condition is not recognized by the
American Psychiatric Association, American Medical Association or the World
Health Organization." It's under the section titled
"Controversy_related_to_policing_techniques".[1]

Just because something is well-known and documented doesn't mean it's
recognized as a medical or psychological condition. Sometimes it can be that
medicine hasn't caught up, and sometimes it's BS.

1\.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excited_delirium#Controversy_r...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excited_delirium#Controversy_related_to_policing_techniques)

~~~
Simulacra
It is curious that the section you identified was added June 17th, 2020.

~~~
Volundr
That... doesn't appear to be true. It's Wikipedia, the whole history is
available. Heres the page as of early/mid April:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Excited_delirium&...](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Excited_delirium&oldid=950321179),
which as far back as I've bothered to go, and the cited paragraph is still
there.

~~~
drdeca
in addition, here is the link for covering all changes on June 17, which shows
that the section is question was not created or renamed on June 17, though it
was substantially modified on that day :
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Excited_delirium&...](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Excited_delirium&type=revision&diff=964425739&oldid=961849649)

I don't know why it being substantially modified on that day would be
important. Is there some significance to that date that I'm unaware of, other
than it being "1 month ago today"?

------
cwkoss
I heard someone claim that Excited Delirium idea is being spread by Axon
(Taser company) lobbyists as a way of justifying the deaths of victims of
improper taser use.

[https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=762231...](https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7622314)

"But according to civil-liberties groups and legal filings, Taser may have
financial reasons to support — and even encourage — the use of the excited
delirium diagnosis.

Take the case of Frederick Williams. On a grainy video, Williams is screaming,
'Don't kill me! I have a family to support. I've calmed down!" as several
officers carry him into the Gwinnett County Detention Center in a suburb of
Atlanta. One officer takes out his Taser and fires it directly onto Williams'
chest.

The officer yells, "Relax! Stop resisting!" But the shock keeps jerking
Williams' chest upward. As several officers hold Williams down, he is stunned
six more times. A few minutes later, the officers realize Williams is not
breathing. Williams died a few hours later.

Williams' family is now suing the county and Taser International. The company
has made it clear in proceedings so far that it intends to argue Williams died
of excited delirium — not because of the Taser or excessive force. The medical
examiner could not determine the exact cause of death."

~~~
GaryNumanVevo
Also, tasers regularly kill people with no underlying health conditions,
typically the autopsy will say "heart issue due to drug use" or something
along those lines. Whenever there's a taser involved death, Axon has a
"response team" which works with police to ensure "correct" death
classification.

[https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-taser-deaths-
insight/...](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-taser-deaths-insight/as-
death-toll-keeps-rising-u-s-communities-start-rethinking-taser-use-
idUSKCN1PT0YT)

------
rimjongun
One time when I lived in Hawaii, I had snuck into an apartment’s hot tub with
a girl. When leaving, I saw this massive tree of a Hawaiian man, and I’m 6’3”,
so this guy was huge. This man was screaming and hitting his wife, who was
trying to run away. I yelled out to distract him so she could get away. Before
I could even comprehend it, he had run across the street and was right in
front of me. I was a very well trained martial artist at the time and I was
scared for my life, this guy was clearly high or crazy. I jumped on a ledge
where he couldn’t reach me, and he ran off after the wife. I pounded on
people’s doors until the cops came and saw them try to talk him down. Three
cops tased him before he went down, but then he pulled them out, stood up, and
punched the window out of a nearby jeep. He was eventually subdued. A cop
later told me that this was fairly common in that area, because of PCP use.
I’m amazed this guy came out of it alive because of how easily he shrugged off
tasers.

------
_Nat_
If you want to say someone's toe hurts because they stubbed it, you can refer
to it as " _stubbed toe pain_ ". Even if " _stubbed toe pain_ " isn't an
official diagnosis in some health organizations, that doesn't mean it's junk
science.

I don't get why the article's attacking the term _" excited delirium_" in the
first place, though. I mean, do the authors think that the correctness of
police-brutality hinges on whether or not there's such a thing as " _excited
delirium_ "? Do the authors think that, if there's such a thing as " _excited
delirium_ ", it'd justify police-brutality?

~~~
in_cahoots
The question isn’t whether the authors think that, it’s whether the police
think that. If you thought a suspect had superhuman strength and was
impervious to pain, wouldn’t you use more lethal means to control them?

~~~
_Nat_
Did you read the article as critiquing the belief that some suspects have
superhuman strength and imperviousness to pain?

I mean, I Google'd " _drug-induced strength_ ". Among the first few hits were
[this video][1] and [this article][2], which seem like reasonable evidence of
those two symptoms existing together.

The article's logic was disjointed, but I read it as primarily focusing on
terminology. If it was instead an argument against the existence of those
symptoms, that'd be a tad confusing given stuff like the YouTube video.

[1]:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV6FnGeYUOE&t=24](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV6FnGeYUOE&t=24)

[2]: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-
mix/wp/2015/06/1...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-
mix/wp/2015/06/16/the-new-drug-that-causes-users-to-rip-off-their-clothes-and-
attack-with-super-human-strength/)

------
refurb
Science doesn’t have a great explanation for everything, but that doesn’t make
it junk science.

Suffice to say it’s not uncommon for people to die suddenly when they
encounter stressful situations, even not related to police interactions. I
remember reading about a case where a person fell through the ice on a lake,
the water never going over his head. He was pulled out immediately, but died
of cardiac arrest. What happened? Not unusual to label it vasovagal syncope
that resulted in sudden death. Is it a great explanation? No, but it’s the
best we have.

Similar to excited delirium, we have folks who exhibit similar symptoms and
some of them die. Do we know exactly why? Not always, but it doesn’t make
“excites delirium” junk science.

Not excusing police brutality at all, but it shouldn’t be surprising some of
these sudden deaths happen in police interactions too, especially when you’ve
got drugs involved and/or mental illness.

~~~
newacct583
> Science doesn’t have a great explanation for everything, but that doesn’t
> make it junk science.

The issue here is that some people (the police) are applying this idea _as if
it was a great explanation_. That's what makes it junk science.

~~~
refurb
No doubt cops use excessive for in some cases and blame it on excited
delirium.

I guess my point is - it’s probably true in some cases.

~~~
newacct583
Indeed. But "probably true in some cases" is sorta a giant red flag for "junk
science". Real medicine uses higher standards before basing policy on a model
like this.

------
Simulacra
I wouldn't call it junk science. I am not a scientist but I do know of times
I've gotten so emotional (and really, pick an emotion here) that I've lost
myself. IMO there is a breakpoint for most people when we either get too
depressed, or too manic, to fully appreciate and control our behavior. With
the fight or flight response kicking in, I think we can find ample evidence of
people under extreme stress or duress just...losing themselves and going on
autopilot.

~~~
mikkergp
The philosophy of this is interesting. As we start to understand more about
genetics and psychology, we'll probably be able to more closely pinpoint why
people do what they do. But that doesn't mean people shouldn't be held
accountable.
(Affluenza)[[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affluenza](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affluenza)]
may be a real "condition"? that impacts people, but even if we eventually
discover the genetic and neurological reasons behind it, it still shouldn't
excuse behavior.

I've had similar experiences where I "lose control" because I'm angry, or
excited, or "emotional", but I think it's my responsibility to work to make
that better. I don't know what this means in terms of consequences, but I know
it shouldn't mean letting cops off the hook for brutality.

------
mzs
It also works in practice almost half the time in states that allow the
defense to reduce a conviction from murder to manslaughter, and not only for
police, cause juries are made up of humans.

------
AnthonyMouse
Might save everyone some time with a generic template:

________, used by police to justify ________, is junk science.

------
cool_dude85
Shame on the University of Miami, which has peddled this cop-acquitting
bullshit for years.

