How do tear gas and flash‑bang exposure affect infants and young children, medically and long term?
Executive summary
Tear gas causes intense irritation to the eyes, skin and airways that in most people subsides within 15–120 minutes but can provoke severe respiratory injury, chemical burns and systemic illness in infants and young children, while flash‑bangs are explosive stun devices that can cause burns, blast‑related trauma, hearing loss and psychological harm; both carry outsized risks for young bodies and developing brains [1] [2] [3]. The pediatric literature and public‑health authorities warn children are uniquely vulnerable due to size, breathing rate and physiology, but high‑quality data on long‑term outcomes—especially in infants—are limited and many experts call for reassessment of use near children [4] [5].
1. Immediate respiratory, ocular and skin injuries from tear gas
Exposure to riot‑control agents (commonly “CS” and OC/pepper spray) produces tearing, intense eye pain, conjunctivitis, coughing, bronchospasm and skin irritation; in most exposed people these acute effects ease after decontamination and removal from exposure (often 15–30 minutes, sometimes longer), but children and those with underlying lung disease are at higher risk of prolonged or severe respiratory compromise including pneumonitis and need for medical care [1] [2] [3].
2. Flash‑bangs: blast, burn and blunt‑force dangers to infants and toddlers
Flash‑bang (stun) devices are small explosive charges meant to disorient; medical reporting documents burns, penetrating or blunt trauma, and blast‑related injuries—including cases where devices struck vehicles or were used near children—leading to hospitalization, loss of consciousness, or ongoing disability in some incidents (news reports and clinical summaries cite child hospitalizations after flash‑bangs and combined munitions use) [6] [3].
3. Why infants and young children take a larger dose and suffer more
Children inhale more air per kilogram of body weight, have smaller airways and different cardiovascular stress responses, and sit closer to the ground where heavier particles settle, all of which increase delivered dose and physiologic stress compared with adults—factors emphasized by pediatric authorities such as the American Academy of Pediatrics [4] [7] [8].
4. Documented pediatric cases and epidemiology: concerning signals, scarce data
Published case reports include a 1972 infant pneumonitis after prolonged CS exposure and observational studies linking community exposure events to increases in pediatric respiratory emergencies, but systematic, long‑term pediatric cohorts are largely missing; reviewers note the evidence shows potential for serious harm yet is limited by study design and population gaps [9] [10] [5].
5. Possible long‑term medical and developmental consequences
Mechanistic work demonstrates tear‑gas compounds act on airway sensory ion channels and can trigger inflammatory cascades, supporting biological plausibility for chronic respiratory disease, ocular scarring and other delayed sequelae; case series and reviews therefore warn of risks for persistent lung injury, severe eye damage and even cardiovascular effects after high or enclosed exposures, but conclusive longitudinal pediatric data remain inadequate and experts call for reassessment and more research [5] [11] [8].
6. Non‑medical harms: neurodevelopmental and psychological impacts
Beyond direct tissue injury, exposure to energetic munitions and chemical agents in chaotic settings can cause hypoxic events, acute stress reactions, and post‑traumatic symptoms in young children; reports from families near deployments describe terror and sleep or behavioral changes, and clinicians caution that these psychosocial harms may compound physical injury—yet systematic measurement of developmental outcomes after such exposures is lacking [8] [3].
7. Treatment guidance, uncertainty and policy context
Immediate decontamination—removing contaminated clothing, flushing eyes with clean water or saline, and seeking medical care for breathing difficulty—is standard and can limit acute harm; public‑health agencies and pediatric groups urge that use of these agents near children violates evidence‑based recommendations, while some sources note most exposures are transient and resolve—highlighting a tension between rapid symptom resolution in many cases and documented severe outcomes in vulnerable infants that motivates calls for stricter limits and more research [12] [2] [13] [5].
Conclusion
Medical evidence demonstrates clear mechanisms and case‑level proof that tear gas and flash‑bangs can inflict serious acute injury on infants and young children and plausibly produce longer‑term respiratory, ocular and psychological harm; however, the literature lacks large, methodical pediatric longitudinal studies, and authoritative groups therefore recommend avoiding deployment near children while researchers and policymakers fill the evidentiary gaps [9] [5] [4].