Chris, HemCon and Celox are basically exactly the same product. They both use a type of polysaccharide (think caster sugar) impregnated into their products. The idea is that the sugar will act as a haemostatic agent by causing platelet aggregation at the wound site and any product absorbed into the wound will be broken down into theoretically harmless mono sugars and either be used or excreted. They are both far less harmful than QuikClot, no question. However, they are designed to promote fast clotting of a wound when the cas, or rather the medic is under duress. The last thing an army medic wants to be doing is spending 20 minutes applying pressure to a wound in the middle of a firefight. What we dont know, is how making a sugary goop out of the wound will affect the healing process. The human body is designed to heal itself and it does this exceptionally well with no powders or sugars added. I'll throw it back at you. Under normal civilian conditions, why would you add anything to a wound?
Best practice is always going to be minimalist - adding the absolute minimum of any drug, potion or product to a person in order to facilitate healing. Anything you add - anything at all - is basically going to interfere with the body's own natural clotting and healing mechanism - and should therefore be clinically justified. As I've said before, 99.9% of all bleeds can be stopped with the application of gauze, pressure and elevation if possible. It's easy, cheap and safe.
Genty's quote is spot on...
The army (and in some extreme cases such as mountain rescue perhaps), have overriding considerations. They have to get out of dodge fast, or get the cas back into the fight fast. Under those circumstances, tourniquets, Colox, HemCon, or even QuikClot are reasonable solutions and get the job done, but in almost all circumstances, they are not the best solutions, they are quick solutions.