Define "low"

...Taser International says the risk of a cardiac arrest in connection with Taser use is low... [LINK]

Taser International's use of the word "low" is ill-defined.

This blogger, looking at the reports of victims that were tasered-in-the-chest_and_died, and estimating the ball-park rate per full deployment into the chest, is getting figures in the low end of single digits (1 - 5%). It's a Rough Order of Magnitude guesstimate. And I strive to remove all external safety factors to guesstimate the magnitude of the inherent risk. And it is based on real-world figures.

Taser International likes, for obvious reasons, to include all sorts of muddling-the-issue external safety factors such as random dart placement, and they also have historically washed-out the datasets by including all sorts of extraneous garbage (such as FAKE training hits into the back). They quoted one pure garbage "study" that calculated one-in-millions risk. After having seen so many similar garbage "studies" being foisted, one builds up a certain degree of skepticism.

Anyway, what is meant by "low"? Do they consider 3% to be "low"?

Keep in mind that Taser International minion "Dr." (not a medical doctor) Kroll has made claims that essentially deny any risk what-so-ever.

An increased level of precision in the use of words would assist everyone, except Taser International and their liability-enhancing minions.