paramedicmike

Paul, you and I have talked about this before. How about sharing with those who didn't get to eavesdrop on the conversation who Dr. O is, where he can be seen for quick reference, resus rates and why Dr O promotes such an agressive treatment. BTW, now that the autopulse study has been halted, can you talk about your experience with the device yet? Or is this still hush-hush? -be safe.

Don't die trying. That'll only create another patient, piss off your partner, wreack havoc with having to call in additional help not to mention all the paperwork your supervisor will have to fill out. Bad juju all around. -be safe.

Isn't this the same topic as this thread? http://www.emtcity.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3194 -be safe.

Police K9s *are* officers. They are referred to as the handler's "partner". They work for, and in conjunction with, the police. I'm glad to hear that the K9 should pull through. I agree that, at a minimum, the driver should be charged with a hit and run. He hit an officer and left the scene. There was a story floating around in my area about a medic who worked a dog pulled out of a house fire. Transported L&S to the emergency vet clinic. Dog still died but there was some good, and predictably humourous, publicity out of it. And yeah. I'd like to see him try and drive off after going head to head with a moose. Like running into a brick wall! -be safe.

"...by the very people he liberated." ungrateful bastards. -be safe.

That's "Mr. President" to you. Below me has no idea where the brake pedal is on their ambulance. :shock: -be safe.

When you say you were sworn in, what does this mean? I've worked municipal jobs in the past and have been sworn in in the sense of a government employee. But I've never been made to swear to anything similar to what you've just posted. Honest curiosity here. I don't think the condemned inmate is a patient regardless of what you're doing to them. Starting a line in this case doesn't really constitute medical treatment. Just like starting a line on me right here and now wouldn't constitute medical treatment. It would still be an invasive procedure...but it's not a treatment simply because there's nothing to treat. But you're going to argue against that and this particular discussion will go around and around. Next, you wouldn't be using your knowledge contrary to the laws of humanity. The current law of the land is that the death penalty is permissable. Further I would argue that there are circumstances where allowing or assisting in the death of another would show respect for the person. Gotta call...finish later.

And are they, in fact, patients? They have no complaint. They're not physically sick. I don't think they meet the requirements of being a "patient". They're simply inmates condemned to die. Just another thing to think about. -be safe.

Morgantown? What kind of transport time to the closest facility were you facing? That may have played a role in the decision to run everything in the residence. Sounds like it went as well as it could have, though. And as I'm sure you know there's only so much that could've been done. How do you propose the expanded CPR training? There are many others who would like to see this, too. -be safe.

How about this...you're not searching a patient at all. You are conducting an assessment. While you talk to them, you're assessing their mental status. While you are touching them, you are assessing their physical status while at the same time assessing (on a certain level) their ability to cause harm by use of a weapon. Don't use the word search. Don't even think about it. You are assessing your patient. However, there is no such thing as a hands off assessment. You cannot assess a patient without physically coming into contact with them. As such, conducting an appropriate assessment will result in a de-facto search of the patient. No assault. No battery. Assessment only. If they object, you stop and get the police involved. An EMT instructor is not necessarily the best source of information regarding legal matters. For legal advice, consult a lawyer. And just because an EMT instructor said it doesn't mean its true. And Kev is right regarding the possibility of you getting hurt on the job. If you operate on the street the same way you've been arguing here you're opening yourself up. Experience in a (unnamed) public safety capacity may or may not be beneficial to you. Things in EMS are done differently than in other places. As such, it requires a different mind set and way of thinking. One of the best ways to get it is through hands on in the field experience. While I'm glad you recognize that scene safety is important, I don't get the sense from your postings that you have a solid grasp on what it really means. Get some experience in the field as an EMS provider. I think, after some time on the streets, you'll think differently than from what you've been posting and future posts will reflect that change. -be safe...and don't get killed.

He didn't say he did L&S on all transports. He said that on all the transports he does the family doesn't follow the ambulance. Did you read the question he was asked before you replied? -be safe.

What state are you in and what is the reference to the law? What law would I be violating to search a patient? Do you even know what the law is in your state? Because you've just admitted you don't know the law. How is my saying, "You don't have anything on you that could hurt me or any one at the hospital, do you?" while I'm feeling their pockets, waist band etc a violation of the law? People keep saying it's a violation of the law but no one has provided any kind of verification. I'm not a cop. I don't work in a law enforcement capacity. Therefore, there is no unreasonable search taking place. Further, if it comes down to my safety versus the feelings of a psych patient regarding a pat down, my safety and the ability to go home at night will always, each and every time, come first. If you can't provide a reference, then please stop arguing the point. Because until you can provide that reference, you're just blowing hot air. -be safe.

How so? We're not law enforcement therefore it wouldn't constitute an unreasonable search. Unreasonable search and seizure accounts for situations regarding law enforcement. The worst they could do for us is try to get us charged with pickpocketing. I was going to say the same thing Dustdevil did but he beat me to it. All the places I've worked for have nothing to address this. -be safe.

Well, we have this thing called the Fifth amendment to the Constitution. It has this little clause regarding due process of law and how no one will be deprived of life, liberty or property without it. I will agree that the rights of criminals are many times greater than that of the victims (referencing all crimes here not just capital crimes). However, due process is what helps protect all of us from becoming a society of heathens who will to try, convict and carry out sentence simply on the word of another person (think Salem witch trials). There has to be due process of the law. The alternative would associate us with the likes of Saddam or Hitler (drastic associations, yes, but not as far fetched as your gut reaction to disagree would have you think). We fought to defeat that both on our own soil and overseas. And it's important that it remain as part of our judicial system. -be safe.

Do a search on the Illinois Death Penalty Moratorium Project. I think it was through Northwestern University. There's a lot of info out there. This will include info on how people were found to be wrongly convicted. As for cost, there's a lot of info out there on this, too. Generally, extra costs come in the form of extra appeals, time, personnel etc. It's a lengthy, in depth and costly process. There's been a lot of recent media attention paid to this, too, with the stories of the guy in Virginia who was sentenced to death after DNA evidence that could have proven or disproved his involvement was thrown out by a court clerk and the guy in California who was the founder of one of the big gangs out there (krypts?). There will be a lot of discussion on both sides of this story recently available and referenced. -be safe.

How would you reconcile that process with the group in Illinois (I'm pretty sure it was here...that or Indiana) that has determined that over 100 cases which they investigated (death row cases all) were found to have wrongly convicted the wrong person and sentenced them to death row? This is despite appeals processes and everthing. Thank you for noting, too, that the costs to execute a con is more than what it would take to lock them up for the rest of their natural life. -be safe.

So are you saying you don't have (at least some of) everything you might need in your first in bag? Or are you saying that you don't know where things are in your first in bag? I'm not being flippant or in your face about this. This is a serious question. I used to work with a woman who *NEVER* used the bag. Doesn't matter what the call was, she would put the patient on the stretcher, go to the truck and do everything there. Even codes. She had no idea what was even in the bag. I really didn't like working with her. -be safe.

That's all it took, dude. I'm not the only one who questioned your motives or reasons for posting. And when a simple question for clarification as to relevancy is raised you take it personally throw and tantrum. If you don't feel you need to justify yourself, which you are completely free to do, don't post. If you feel you must, be ready for questions. Pretty simple. Lastly, read because you want to. Not because you have to. It's usually much more enjoyable that way. I'm done with this and won't justify any further response in kind.

A well thought out and presented argument puts forward not only the findings you wish to support but also potential detractions and how to work around them in support of your point. So far, you've done nothing but cut and paste from pubmed.gov. Where's the original thought in that? That's great you have all this time on your hands to cite all these studies. But if you're not going to present any information to put your "argument" into context (and help solidify your point) then why bother? BTW, the thread deals with lights and sirens use. Your study makes no mention of L&S use. It only makes mention of accidents and where they have a higher frequency of occurance. The numbers used for comparison don't even jive. Further, the conclusion doesn't even address the topic at hand. So, aside from not backing up the claim with comparative figures, how is this relevant? And you rolled your eyes at me.

The link is in the first post to this thread.

You cited the study. How about some numbers in comparison instead of a bash against us? -be safe.

How does this compare to other emergency vehicles? Police cruisers? Fire pieces? -be safe.

There's a plant along the US/Mexico border that produces a latex that is completely hypo-allergenic. I think it's called guayule. The latex resulting from the harvest of this plant is completely and totally hypoallergenic. The hard part, however, is harvesting and processing the product. For some reason that escapes me at the moment it's a little more expensive to make the end product. Last I read people were working on this project simply due to the expanding number of latex allergic people out there. I have to agree with Rid, too, in that you do get a better feel with latex. The stretch associated with latex also allows for a better fit. With the nitrile you almost need to have custom gloves made just to ensure they fit. Don't get me wrong. I like the nitrile but there are a lot of advantages to the latex gloves. We carry both and I'll usually start with the nitrile gloves until I find out if the Pt is allergic or not. -be safe.

Hmmm...Seems that Boston EMS has an easily googled website. www.bostonems.com Looks like they're hiring, too. Don't know if it fits your time frame for moving. -be safe.

1) Snagging from the hospital? No. Not quite saying steal it. But do you honestly think they'll just hand it out to you? 2) As was previously mentioned, tampering with food, drink or intentionally slipping someone an unknown (to the recipient) substance can be, and has been held up in court as, assault. Even if it's supposed to be "harmless". How do you know that the person isn't allergic to it? Further, you're talking about administering a drug and you don't even know what it's called. Through your ignorance, you can't be sure of what it can do, side effects, etc.... Would you do this on your ambulance? Would you let it happen to you if you were a patient? And if you're going to stand by and defend those actions then you certainly don't belong in such a position of trust as is required by this job. -be safe.