Background = ex-forces, medic in Pathfinders (16th).
Also trained in SAR, worked in SAR for a number of years.
Worst case scenario
- Thread starter Madriverrob
- Start date
Background = ex-forces, medic in Pathfinders (16th).
Also trained in SAR, worked in SAR for a number of years.
Thanks.
I wonder if the difference in opinion is due to background. We are discussing a civilian situation while you have a different view as civvies?
I wonder if the difference in opinion is due to background. We are discussing a civilian situation while you have a different view as civvies?
Mountaingoat if you think a First Aid Kit isn't useful in a medical emergency then you are out there like Pluto mate.
Beginning to agree you are just trolling.
Hope you never encounter anything more serious than a paper cut or splinter!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Beginning to agree you are just trolling.
Hope you never encounter anything more serious than a paper cut or splinter!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited:
.
That's all it takes there? Wow! It takes 4 years of university work in a pre-med field just to become eligible to attend medical school here. Then another four years of medical school; then another 2 years of internship before being allowed to take the medical exam for a license to practice.
All that said, in an emergency (trauma) situation, I'd rather have a qualified paramedic over either a doctor or a 1st aider.
Last edited:
I hear it's nice there this time of year, you're guaranteed not to bleed out as it's 240°C below zero!
no takes longer not sure where OB gets his figures?
med school 5 years, 2 years post grad course, i.e house officer then specialise GP 3 years, most hospital consultants train for 5 years, if you want to get a decent hospital job you'll need a couple of years research too
but your right 1sr responder, paramedic, a&e nurse all trump a 1st aider
med school 5 years, 2 years post grad course, i.e house officer then specialise GP 3 years, most hospital consultants train for 5 years, if you want to get a decent hospital job you'll need a couple of years research too
but your right 1sr responder, paramedic, a&e nurse all trump a 1st aider
I enjoyed reading this thread for the most part.
I think everyone should do out their own risk assessments and then carry whatever they think is necessary and is doable for their own purposes.
First aid kit etc. vs £20 or both or neither. It's a personal choice.
I carry more 'gear' to go to the local shops than the OP. In fact, I have a keychain first aid kit, another small personal first aid kit in my pocket and a more general one in the car, plus another at home. But the point is I carry it, I don't expect anyone else to carry it for me. Also if I have it on me and you need it then in general I'm more than happy to share. If you don't want to carry anything you don't have to, but trying to tell people that all they need is some cash and some knowledge and that they're 'wrong' to try to prepare for a serious incident is just counter productive on a forum like this. Obviously your opinions are valid but when everyone else wants to actually discuss the OP and you don't it's maybe time to move on.
I also think that if everyone took some time to consider risks and then maybe made some slight precautions (like the OP) then in general we'd all be better off in an emergency. Personal safety should be something everyone thinks about and takes some responsibility for. Expecting that the emergency services will always be able to pick up the slack in an emergency is a little selfish IMHO. Being prepared to be able to help in an emergency is basically being ready to be a hero.
Lastly regarding the pros and cons of doctors and first aiders IMHO it really depends on the individual. I have met doctors who couldn't tell their posteriors from their elbow and first aiders who I wouldn't trust with a nasty splinter. In general though I'd prefer an up to date first aider than a GP in an emergency but either would be better than neither. In fact any responder in a first aid emergency would be better than no one. From personal experience, my Dad became my hero when I was about 10 when he saved a girls life when she was hit by a car. With minimal first aid training he kept her breathing until the ambulance arrived, she had suffered catastrophic head and spine injuries but survived. Also about 5 years ago I had my first full blown panic attack in public, I don't remember much except thinking I was having a heart attack. I do however have nothing but thanks for the young mum with a pushchair who came and sat next to me asked me what was wrong and told me I was going to be ok. Not sure what experience she had but just being the person who stepped forward to help me meant the world.
I have read the scare stories about people doing more harm than good in specific emergencies but sometimes someone doing something is better than nothing being done by no one.
I think everyone should do out their own risk assessments and then carry whatever they think is necessary and is doable for their own purposes.
First aid kit etc. vs £20 or both or neither. It's a personal choice.
I carry more 'gear' to go to the local shops than the OP. In fact, I have a keychain first aid kit, another small personal first aid kit in my pocket and a more general one in the car, plus another at home. But the point is I carry it, I don't expect anyone else to carry it for me. Also if I have it on me and you need it then in general I'm more than happy to share. If you don't want to carry anything you don't have to, but trying to tell people that all they need is some cash and some knowledge and that they're 'wrong' to try to prepare for a serious incident is just counter productive on a forum like this. Obviously your opinions are valid but when everyone else wants to actually discuss the OP and you don't it's maybe time to move on.
I also think that if everyone took some time to consider risks and then maybe made some slight precautions (like the OP) then in general we'd all be better off in an emergency. Personal safety should be something everyone thinks about and takes some responsibility for. Expecting that the emergency services will always be able to pick up the slack in an emergency is a little selfish IMHO. Being prepared to be able to help in an emergency is basically being ready to be a hero.
Lastly regarding the pros and cons of doctors and first aiders IMHO it really depends on the individual. I have met doctors who couldn't tell their posteriors from their elbow and first aiders who I wouldn't trust with a nasty splinter. In general though I'd prefer an up to date first aider than a GP in an emergency but either would be better than neither. In fact any responder in a first aid emergency would be better than no one. From personal experience, my Dad became my hero when I was about 10 when he saved a girls life when she was hit by a car. With minimal first aid training he kept her breathing until the ambulance arrived, she had suffered catastrophic head and spine injuries but survived. Also about 5 years ago I had my first full blown panic attack in public, I don't remember much except thinking I was having a heart attack. I do however have nothing but thanks for the young mum with a pushchair who came and sat next to me asked me what was wrong and told me I was going to be ok. Not sure what experience she had but just being the person who stepped forward to help me meant the world.
I have read the scare stories about people doing more harm than good in specific emergencies but sometimes someone doing something is better than nothing being done by no one.
You are misquoting me.
The situations the OP posted would likely require rapid evacuation. Hence a first-aid kit is relatively pointless.
If rapid evacuation wasn't required, having a FAK is not necessary as emergency services would be on-scene within minutes, and would conduct a thorough assessment & overview of all injured (& non-injured) parties.
Kit can be determined in terms of substitutable vs. non-substitutable.
Ambulances take time to arrive in situations where every second counts.
Sorry I disagree with your approach completely but I've listened to your points with interest.
I specialise in Wilderness First Aid and Ship Board First Aid. I'm trained in techniques that make me self reliant and frankly even where I live I can't count on Nanny State. It makes me perhaps a-typical in response to this kind of scenario. I'm not going to evacuate past a kid with their legs blown off. The police can order me out but until then I'd fight tooth and nail to keep them alive.
I think you place too much faith in the ability of our services to react.
1 Ambulance per casualty, 100 Ambulances required in Manchester. Tick Tock!
Boots was shut!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sorry I disagree with your approach completely but I've listened to your points with interest.
I specialise in Wilderness First Aid and Ship Board First Aid. I'm trained in techniques that make me self reliant and frankly even where I live I can't count on Nanny State. It makes me perhaps a-typical in response to this kind of scenario. I'm not going to evacuate past a kid with their legs blown off. The police can order me out but until then I'd fight tooth and nail to keep them alive.
I think you place too much faith in the ability of our services to react.
1 Ambulance per casualty, 100 Ambulances required in Manchester. Tick Tock!
Boots was shut!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited:
I trust you appreciate I'm not advocating my opinion for all scenarios, but rather, for the specific environment discussed here (i.e. urban)?
If our OP was heading up a mountain, the conversation would be very different.
PS preparation for a serious incident is the gaining of knowledge.
Of course. But in the specific scenario mentioned here (urban terrorism), emergency services will be on-scene very quickly.
Agreed RE being prepared to help. However, 'helping' without sufficient knowledge is very dangerous, and is oftentimes the antithesis of help.
As is not considering the efficacy of choosing to take no further action (in many instances this is the best option).
Sometimes.
Please elaborate if you could RE what type of scenario would create this situation.
I think you are, in your scenario, confusing landmines with bombs. Your example is poor.
Sorry but I'm with Countryman, I think you're trolling so I'm not going to play.
To be fair it is the knowledge which is most important. You can improvise. The counter argument is you shouldn't have to. For a few pound and a little bit of space in your bag you can carry a few basic items which will make you more effective a mass casualty event (even if it is being able to look after yourself and free up a paramedic to help someone in greater need.).
If I'm bleeding out on the floor I'll take help from anyone, regardless of their training or kit. Even if I have to tell them what to do a willing volunteer is of more use than an incompetent "professional".
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.mi.../homeless-man-cradled-woman-died-10481046.amp
I guess you were not paying attention earlier this year. All those dead kids? No?
Fragmentation caused a number of traumatic amputations.
Apologies it's the Mirror.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Similar threads
