Surveillance into crowd control agents

Reevaluating tear gas toxicity and safety

Tear gases, or chemical demonstration control agents (DCA), were originally created as weapons that could severely disable or kill enemy troops. Though banned in war, these chemicals are still used in domestic policing. Here we review the available scientific literature on tear gas, summarizing findings from animal and environmental studies as well describing data from new human studies. We find a lack of scientific evidence supporting the safety of tear gas, especially regarding its long-term impacts on human health and the environment. Many of the available studies were published decades ago, and do not parse data by variables such as chemical type and exposure time, nor do they account for the diversity of individuals who are exposed to tear gas in real-life situations. Due to the dearth of scientific research and the misinterpretation of some of the available studies, we conclude that a serious reevaluation of chemical DCA safety and more comprehensive exposure follow-up studies are necessary.

Extensive Exposure to Tear Gases in Ankara

OBJECTIVES

The most common chemical substances used as mass control agents are chloroacetophenone, chlorobenzylidene malononitrile, and oleoresin capsicum. These agents not only have local and rapid effects but also have systemic and long-term effects. The aim of the present study was to discuss the patterns of tear gas exposure and to investigate its effects on respiratory functions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A face-to-face survey was conducted in 86 individuals who had been exposed to tear gas indoor and outdoor during the public protests in June 2013.

RESULTS

The most frequently reported respiratory complaints included cough, dyspnea, phlegm, and chest pain. Spirometry measurements including forced vital capacity (FVC) and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) were also performed. Indoor exposers have lower mean % predicted FVC and FEV₁ values than outdoor exposers. All complaints and signs were more common in indoor exposure to tear gas than in outdoor exposure.

CONCLUSION

Safety of the chemicals used as mass control agents during protests is doubtful as these agents are associated with several health risks.

Exposure to the riot control agent CS and potential health effects: a systematic review of the evidence

o-Chlorobenzylidene malononitrile (CS) is one of the most extensively used riot control agents. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review of the potential health effects related to CS exposure. We searched for papers in English between 1991 and 2014. Thirty five (35) studies (25 case reports, seven descriptive studies and three analytical studies) were included in the review. In the twenty five case reports/series 90 cases of exposure to CS and their clinical effects are presented. Their mean age was 25.7 years and 62.0% were males. In addition, 61% of the cases described dermal, 40% respiratory, 57% ocular clinical effects. Life threatening situations as well as long-term health effects were found and were related with exposure to confined/enclosed space. Descriptive and analytical studies have shown attack rates ranging from 12% to 40%. Subjects who were sprayed by the police more often needed special treatment and reported adverse health effects. Apart from transient clinical effects, CS could have lasting and serious effects on human health. Better surveillance of the subjects exposed to CS and completion of cohort studies among exposed populations will illuminate the spectrum of the health effects of exposure to CS.

Cutaneous burns from CS incapacitant spray

A case of a superficial burn following exposure to CS incapacitant spray is reported. This is followed by a summary of the properties and effects of CS and the other agents which occur in the incapacitant spray. CS is relatively safe, but it does have unwanted effects, especially on skin exposure. Possible contributing factors to the production of a skin burn are discussed.

Medical hazards of the tear gas CS. A case of persistent, multisystem, hypersensitivity reaction and review of the literature

A 30-year-old incarcerated man was sprayed with the "tear gas" ortho-chlorobenzylidene malononitrile (CS). He was hospitalized 8 days later with erythroderma, wheezing, pneumonitis with hypoxemia, hepatitis with jaundice, and hypereosinophilia. During the subsequent months he continued to suffer from generalized dermatitis, recurrent cough and wheezing consistent with reactive airways dysfunction syndrome, and eosinophilia. These abnormalities responded to brief courses of systemic corticosteroid but recurred off therapy. The dermatitis resolved gradually over 6-7 months, but the patient still had asthma-like symptoms a year following exposure. Patch testing confirmed sensitization to CS. The mechanism of the patient's prolonged reaction is unknown but may involve cell-mediated hypersensitivity, perhaps to adducts of CS (or a metabolite) and tissue proteins. This is the first documented case in which CS apparently caused a severe, multisystem illness by hypersensitivity rather than direct tissue toxicity. Both the ethics and safety of CS use remain controversial, in part because of the difficulty documenting sporadic injuries received in the field, and also because the charged circumstances surrounding CS use may lead to both underreporting and exaggerated claims of medical harm. The medical literature on CS focuses mainly on its immediate irritant effects and on transient dermal and ocular injuries, with only 2 prior case reports of acute lung injury related to CS exposure. Given the paucity of documented lasting effects despite its widespread use for more than 3 decades, CS appears to be safe when deployed (outdoors) in a controlled manner, but it can cause important injuries if misused or if applied to a sensitized individual.