Blood pH - which direction would be good?

RCMP Commissioner said: "The RCMP's revised [Taser] policy underscores that there are risks associated with the deployment of the device and emphasizes that those risks include the risk of death, particularly for acutely agitated individuals." [LINK]

Now, I'm not a doctor. But there's nothing particularly complicated about the following.

In an 'acutely agitated individual', assuming that they've worked themselves into a state of over-exertion, and their blood pH is possibly at dangerous levels, then does it seem like a good idea to shoot them with a taser, that "can" (I guess, assuming it works at all) cause extreme levels of muscle lock-up - which is a form of massive physical exertion - which can only make things in the 'Blood pH' department much worse?

Which way do you want to go? One step closer to death?


And significantly, the taser totally bypasses any built-in survival mechanisms that might naturally keep the subject from actually (i.e. in the real world) killing themselves through over-exertion.

That's a key difference - between what the subject might be ALMOST doing to themselves (naturally limited by built-in survival mechanisms), and what boundary the taser can push them right through and beyond.

The taser lacks any such natural limiting feed-back signals. It just stupidly and blindly locks-up the muscles (a massive form of over-exertion).

The taser could probably lock-up the muscles on a fresh corpse.

The operator might have been "trained" (if you can call it that) to hold the trigger down until the victim stops "fighting" (i.e. stops moving).

The outcome, in the worst cases, is perfectly obvious.