aussiephil

I liked his comment on not having one, but dont u think the cop looks like he is ready to join the village people?

The Airport Solution: Here's a solution to all the controversy over full-body scanners at the airports. Have a booth that you can step into that will not X-ray you, but will detonate any explosive device you may have on you. It would be a win-win for everyone, there would be none of this hassle about racial profiling and this method would eliminate a long and expensive trial. Justice would be quick and swift. Case closed! This is so simple that it's brilliant. I can see it now: you're in the airport terminal and you hear a muffled explosion. Shortly thereafter an announcement comes over the PA system, "Attention standby passengers we now have a seat available on flight number..." Works for me!

The name is different & it is a different colour.

NURSE!!!!!!

Master Cardiology

I was really playing flick fishing on my iPhone......

Owley, I think you will find if we stop, then look at this whole issue from a different perspective you will find this is perceptually true. I do not agree with the former rulers of certain countries believed, but, they believe that America & its allies, the infidels,are the terrorists for sending their armed forces into their countries to force their beliefs onto them. Just a thought.

Lone, my quotes were to highlight that there are fundamental differences in beliefs. This is not the place for a theological debate. Suffice to say there are many different beliefs in the christian religions, why wouldnt Islam be the same?

Ruff, thats great to hear. Your daughter is a blessing to be cherished. With the issues you guys have had even more so. Give her an Aussie kiss from me. Phil

I have always found it interesting that we have to label people, by religion or the like. Many things have been done in the name of religion over the centuries. Christian religions are as guilty as muslims, just we now call them the Crusades. Can we call the likes of David Koresh a terrorist, dressed in religious clothing? Many of the teachings, regardless of the religion are targetet at those who are suseptable to suggestion. This is cultivated & they are groomed. Their beliefs are distorted. In many cases this is because many have poor education, with no real prospect for improvment in the future. Currently they are muslims, they could quite easily be radical Baptists, Extreemist Pentecostals, or fundamentalist Catholics. The debate here is over the construction of a building for religious purposes, not a hate tread for muslims. Regardless of who is responsible for recent terror attacks, the Crusades lasted nearly 200 years, with the sole purpose of recapturing Jerusalim & the holy land from the muslims. Does tht make ALL 'christians', regardless of denomination, as bad as ALL muslims are being made out to be?

daedalus, I am addressing you because of your comments, however this is for all who want to drag the bible into this. The Bible is a historical document. It was written partly from dreams, partly from eyewitness accounts, partly plagerised (generally accepted of the gospels). There are also more books of the bible that are not included. Many of the laws that were taught in the Old Testement are still enforced in some countries. An eye for an eye is the first that comes to mind. Many of our laws are based on the 10 Commandments. However, what you need to consider is that the bible, as a document, was written for the Israelite people 2000+ years ago. Fundamentalist christians believe, for example, that God created the world in 7 literal days. Are they right or wrong? The Bible says that when Noah built the Ark it rained for 40 days & 40 nights, but Noah lived to be hundreds of years old, so how long did it rain for? (At the time of Christ it is believed the average lifespan was 30-40 for a male). Literal interperitations are at your peril. In the New Testament Jesus endorsed many of the Old Testament laws, as well as explaining some & modifying others to suit. The problem we have now is that after 2000 years, there have been many 'scholars' who have added their twists & interperetations that have been accepted as fact. A Devils advocate question is to ask why is Christianity the right religion to follow. It is also right not to label all muslims as terrorists, as it is not right to say all christians are good, loving, wholesome people.(Jim & Tammy Bakker come to mind, although he loved prostitutes & was just trying to spread the gospel to them ) This proposal is a couple of blocks from the site. I don't see the problem. Would the same be said if it was a Pentecostal church that wanted to build right next door, how about a Hindu temple, or even the Church of Scientology? I am sure those religions had representatives who lost their lives that day as well. I believe there should be a non denominational chapel for people of all religions built on or near the site for those who survived & their families, as well as the families of those who lost loved ones to reflect of what happenned & to move forward. Quakefire to ban any religion will have the samme effect as trying to ban alcohol, ask the communists. Many of the churches had more sucess in increasing membership in those countries that banned their right to worship than anywhere else. Prohibition doesnt work. What happened on that fateful day was the result of extremists. Extreemists who had been brainwashed. What does not get reported is the fact that there are millions of muslims in the world who seek peace. They do not condone terrorism. The do not condone the actions of the extreemists. Acceptance is the key. Is this being built in the wrong place. Who knows. I will ask though, if you think it is, then how far away is an acceptable distance & should that apply to all churches?

I think I have detected yet another difference betweeen our countries. To transport a patient her, emergent if you will, does not involve lights & sirens. You can run emergent with a patient at 10 mph. It does not mean you travel at speed. Paramagic, when you said can i ask you to look at my comments in regards to this. I said further I have spent time discussing with doctors the MOI more than the exisiting, presenting injuries because they want to focus their radiological survey to specific areas, not waste time with whole body CT. They want to use a FAST scan now not wait to have the PT into X-Ray. Dwayne, i think our disagreement is over the definition of emergent transport. I agree we should be continnually monitoring our patients looking however, there is no reason why we cannot be expediante with out patients, based on the MOI, looking at the Potential for serious or severe injury, this does not mean we have to expidite!!

Define stable. I have seen patients with a decreased LOC that are stable. The MOI should indicate to you what potential injuries the patient may have. It is reason to transport to a Trauma Centre. Last time I looked, we were not carrying X-ray, CT & Ultrasound for FAST in the ambulances. (If you dont know what FAST is, click here.) Yes you need to look at your patient, but remember patients will compensate & in some cases deteriorate quickly if there is multi system trauma in place. The MOI is the single most important piece of info you have to indicate the injury that may present in time.

I still stand by the fact that if you, as an educated person source appropriate research, present it in an appropriate manner, then while it may take time to change, it will work. One only needs to sow the seed into the minds for it to come to fruition. Baby steps. But, regardless, it can still work.

I am curious Richard. There has been a number of threads discussing long back boards. None of them to my recollection call it a 'splint'. A long backboard is an extrication device. Nothing more, nothing less. They are uncomfortable, Dont splint effectivley as they leave to many anatomical spaces & by design (as an extrication device) are slipery so the patient will move around on them. I read today in a thread, i dont recall which one, about patient advocacy, standing up for the rights of the patient. I have also heard "Thats what our Protocols are' once too often. Protocols can get changed with good, factually based arguments. Be an advocate for your future patients & fight useing a long back board as anything other than an extrication device.

My thoughts and prayers are with the family of this great man. Retread, as we knew him here, was a friend, confidant & mentor to many. May he Rest in Peace May God bless his soul. Retread, we will miss you. your friend & mate Phil

I am still a shitbag.......

If the patient is that conversant, do they really need the IV, or are you putting it in for self serving 'because I could' reasons? From my experience, with 1 noteable exception, i have never had a patient argue about cutting off clothing etc. I did, with the 1 noteable exception give him a choice, cut it off or use the External Jugular. He saw my way of thinking.