Jet Injectors = Jet Infectors
Edited: December 17, 2017
“Currently, there exists a steadily growing danger of epidemic diseases (AIDS, hepatitis, tuberculosis and other viral diseases transferred through blood) being transmitted between individuals through the use of needleless injectors,” wrote several Russian and American inventors in their 2004 patent (U.S. Patent 6802826).
The patent continued to state,
In the past, jet injectors such as Ped-O-Jet, Ammo-Jet, and similar mass campaign jet injectors were brought to health care systems. Such injectors had no provision for preventing the transfer of blood-borne pathogens except through the complicated disassembly and disinfecting process. In mass immunization campaigns these types of injector systems fell out of favor starting in the mid and late 1980’s when it was determined that bodily fluids are easily transmitted from one patient to another (U.S. Patent 6802826).
The inventors claimed to have resolved the risk of transmission via jet injectors by inventing a single-use protector cap to cover the external nozzle surface. This concept was supposed to eliminate the previous risks and hazards imposed by multi-use nozzle jet injectors.
Kelly and colleagues (2008) tested the safety of this protector cap needle-free injector (PCNFI) known as the Jet Injector for Mass Immunization (JIMI) or more technically known as the HSI-500. The protector cap consisted of four coaxial orifices that the jet stream had to penetrate before continuing unimpeded to the patient’s skin. “The series of four coaxial orifices is designed to reduce retrograde passage of infectious material from the injection site onto the nozzle.”
The following slides, provided by Felton International, demonstrate the theory behind this technology.
Jet injections were given to Hepatitis B carriers in Beijing, China. The photo below captured the injections.
Despite the cap’s design to prevent cross-contamination, “the study ended early because the PCNFI failed to prevent contamination in the first batch tested (8.2% failure rate).” Hepatitis B was cross-contaminated within 8.2 percent (17/208) of the injections. Bleeding was reported within 8.8 percent (50/570) of the injections.
Most shockingly, the published data demonstrates but the researchers failed to discuss, that cross-contamination of HBV occurred without any visible bleeding at the injection site. In 7 out of the 17 injections that tested positive for cross-contamination researchers observed no visible bleeding at the injection site (see Table 1 within the study). This indicates that cross-contamination of blood-borne viruses successfully occurred within microscopic levels of blood not visible to the human eye.
The study also demonstrated retrograde flow allowed blood-borne pathogens to permeate the single-use protector cap and enter the jet injectors internal fluid pathway.
Lastly, Kelly noted there was “no significant viral destruction from passing HBV through the injector.” This means that the virus, after undergoing retrograde flow from the human into the jet injector at a high velocity, through the four coaxial orifices that make-up the protector cap, and then being ejected again, was not destroyed but still alive and infectious. The implications were down-right scary.
Following this study, research on developing protector cap needle-free injectors for immunizations was abandoned.
Special thanks to PATH for supplying a paid copy of this study.
- (Kelly et al., 2008) Kelly K, Loskutov A, Zehrung D, Puaa K, LaBarre P, Muller N, Guiqiang W, Ding H, Hu D, Blackwelder WC. Preventing contamination between injections with multi-use nozzle needle-free injectors: a safety trial. Vaccine (2008) 26, 1344-1352.
- (U.S. Patent 6802826) Smoliarov BV, Rogatchev VT, Katov VN, Felton A, Leon N. “Universal Anti-infectious Protector For Needleless Injectors.” United States Patent 6,802,826. 12 October 2004.
This article was originally published on January 17, 2016 and can be viewed here.