Zero for two?

Taser's Kroll has claimed two reasons why the 'magic bullet' waveform (actually, waveforms since the M26 'Advanced' - and the X26 'apparently not quite so advanced' - waveforms are completely different with respect to the critical parameters of frequency and duty cycle) are supposedly safe.

Those two stated reasons are anatomy and optimum timing.

Ref: [AAFS Kroll 2007] as well as (maybe) a comment war on a previous post.

Anatomy

He claims that the structure of the muscle fibers preferentially directs the electricity around the body avoiding the heart. This speculation is apparently based on crude computer modeling and is quite possibly wrong. But even if it is true, the human anatomy hasn't changed since the safety standards were created. So whatever safety factor might be provided by this supposed factor (if it exists) would have already been incorporated into the applicable standards. The safety standards are the safety standards and those standards already take human anatomy into account (duh!). Basically - when it comes to safety factors - double-dipping is not allowed.

Optimum timing

Kroll's 'chronaxie' is a time constant that he alleges preferentially protects the heart muscle as compared to the skeletal muscle. This theory might be applicable to the older 1999-era M26 taser with its high frequency, short duty cycle waveform. But since the X26 is low frequency 19 Hz and therefore continuous 100% duty cycle, the optimum timing theory need not apply. Perhaps nobody at Taser realized the implications of the long and low monophasic DC pulse.


Zero for two?