emtannie

Your rant is still justified.... last year when I wanted to see the financials, I was informed that the only way I could get them was if I had attended the AGM.... Enough people must have complained that this year they are finally posting them. With all of the questions that the members have, I don't think you have to feel badly about your rant.

My thoughts and prayers go out to you, your family, and friends. No one can say "I know how you feel" because we truly can never know how another feels in this time of loss. Please just know that there are many here in your emtcity family that will have you in their thoughts and prayers, and that you know that there are friends here who will be there when you need to vent, or just talk, or just share some silence with you. Take care of yourself, Annie

Doc, I agree with your comments - AHS will not change protocols for one municipality. And Jonas, you make a very valid point. Where I work, the fire department responds to all calls L&S the entire way, day or night. I notice that this councillor did not mention the fire department, which would be under municipal regulations, but only ambulance... maybe that should be mentioned as well. I think I should email Edmonton city council and mention that...

This councillor obviously needs to be educated on when and why ambulances run with sirens.... I love the comment "the wee hours between midnight and six a.m."... obviously has never had to respond to the multi-vihicle mvc caused by the drunk after the bars close, after the playoff hockey game, when the streets are packed. I hope that whoever the PR people are for Edmonton EMS are, that they take this councillor for a day, so that the councillor can be educated about what we do. Part of that ride-along should be a night shift on Whyte Avenue, in the area of Cook County Saloon (is that still ther, or am I dating myself?) Sometimes you just wanna say "Here, I will hold out my hand, and you slam your forehead against it, so I don't have to hit you.."

"... a paramedic discovered the outage and restarted the system. But Hall had died." Like others have questioned, was this medic not monitoring this patient at all? No SpO2? No EtCO2? It sounds like the medic only noticed AFTER the patient was dead... If this is in fact true, I hope the investigation proves negligence. How did they explain this to the family of the deceased? "I'm sorry, the vent quit, we didn't notice, she died... "

Ashes, did they7 hand out a package which includes the year end financial statements? I asked for a copy last year, and was told that financial statements are only provided to members who show up at the AGM. Personally, I think that the financial statements should be available on the website - we should be able to see where our funds are going. I am assuming that the statements have to be audited, based on the dollar values alone. That whole CBT thing makes me mad... what a waste of money - they could have subcontracted it out to organizations who already use CBT, paid them, altered some of the questions to meet our scopes, and been done, rather than take the route they did. Was there any discussion on why there has been so much staff turnover at ACP? It isn't rocket science to add email addresses to a website.... I have it for my business... it took 10 minutes, cost me almost nothing, and I can have up to 200 email addresses, with 5 main emails having 5G storage, and the rest smaller amounts (when the day comes that I have 200 employees, I will be laying on a beach somewhere..) so if ACP says it can't be done or costs too much, I will call their bluff. I wish I could have gone, but I was working, and already covering for someone who had a family emergency, so I couldn't have made it. I do wish ACP would provide more information to those of us who can't make it to AGM. It isn't like we can just shut the province down for the day so we can all attend.

As one of my favorite medics says ... "abso-frickin-lutely!" (ok, he doesn't say it quite like that, but the site censor would just **** it out anyways..) So, then I wonder... the majority of posts on this thread follow the "we are here to try to make the world a better place." Are people in EMS alone in this, or does the general population think the same way? And, if the general population thinks the same way, why do we get into these "I am better than you" situations? What is it about us that always makes us want to be better than someone else, even though that contradicts the part of us that wants to make the world a better place? Then it makes my brain hurt, and then I like chbare's post, because then I don't have to think...

LOL AK, you are right - we will have to agree to disagree... sort of... I guess I was lucky - I was never threatened with damnation, as a child or otherwise. When I decided I wasn't going to go to church, my dad said that was my decision. He didn't pressure me, he didn't tell me I was going to hell, he said I was free to choose, he never banned me from his house or judged me. I guess where I have problems is the generalizations that get made... there is a danger in generalizing an entire group. For example, saying that religious people threaten their children with damnation is as general as saying that non-religious people don't raise their children to have values. Neither generalization is true. Although there are some in both groups that the comment applies to, you cannot blanket the entire group with the statement. I agree that the fundamentalist or extremist groups do themselves and their families a HUGE disservice by not exposing them to other people, other religions, and other cultures. I have always been interested in their version of theology - how can you know that your beliefs are right, when you don't even know what else is out there? I am also interested in your comment "time wasted in rituals, meetings, groups..." is it truly wasted? How is that more wasted than time sitting in a bar drinking with friends, or playing ball with some buddies? Different venue, but still a social gathering.. If that is what they want to do with their time, so be it... Now, if that time is spent and they don't get out during the rest of their day/week (life), and experience the rest of the world, then absolutely, I agree with you. They are not experiencing the rest of the world, and they are sheltering themselves too much. I think that there are two things that cause problems between religious and non-religious people... Each group thinking that they are somehow "better" than the other, and each group thinking in generalizations about the other. Instead of lumping people into "I have a problem with religious people" or "I have a problem with non-religious people" I think we all need to look at others as individuals. If they are religious, so what? If they aren't, so what? If they have a tattoo of goth barbie on their ass, so what? (I had to put that in, just for Dwayne) Do they treat you and others the way they want to be treated? Isn't that all that matters?

I like your post, AK... The last couple lines caught my eye. Although I think that most who believe in a form of religion spend time considering "the next life," I think most do not spend "too much time" planning it. I absolutely agree that you are right, in that those that do spend too much time planning for the next life, miss out on the here and now. I do think that those who believe in a next life are looking at our existance on a bigger scale than those who don't. Is it right? I dunno... Is it wrong? I dunno. If it makes them behave in a way where they are trying their best to do good, and make the world a better place, I am ok with it. If their religion makes them behave in a way where they do harm to others, and where they do not make the world a better place, then they should be ashamed of themselves, not just through the eyes of their religion, but through the eyes of the human race. Good for you for being able to raise your children to see the consequences of their actions, and teaching them that they can control the way they feel and act towards others - many parents, both religius and not religious, have been unable to do it. I do not think the fact that you have been able to do it has so much to do with your religious beliefs or lack thereof, but of a desire to raise your children to be useful members of society, and that you and your wife have spend uncountable hours working toward that goal. My dad was a very religious man. He used to say "if you spend your days counting your blessings, you won't have time to complain about your problems." He spent his life doing his best to raise his family to become useful members of society. He worked very hard to provide for us, and to show us that life is what you make of it, and that helping others is one of the greatest things you can do. If people see his actions as tarnished because he was religious, so be it - I prefer to think that he lived every day to its fullest, knowing that life is always too short, and that the kindness he showed others still has a positive benefit even now, after he has been dead for many years. I would also like to think that he taught me to try to do my best and make the world a better place. I would hope that people do good things because it makes them feel good, and makes others feel good, rather than out of a sense of duty where they get no joy from it. AK, you are teaching your children that selflessness brings more joy - that by coming back out of the bedroom with a more positive outlook is not only good for them, but for those around them. Too many parents, both religious and non, allow their kids to grow into selfish "me me me" people.

Dwayne, rather than derail this thread further, I will respond to you in PM. I think we are misinterpreting the others' position.

Having watched the argument/debate/stone-throwing between Dwayne and Ruffems, I am reminded why I sometimes get frustrated with some of the threads. Dwayne, I don’t always disagree with you, but in this case, I will. OK, Ruff’s post didn’t provide ALL the details; however, he did quote his source, and if we disagree, or have more questions, maybe we should look it up, and build a case as to why we disagree. You shot down his post as being crap without truly arguing the other side based on more than opinion. I expected you to come back with “the statistics you gave were inaccurate because on website _____ the federal/state/municipal statistics show that there is racial profiling,” not “offer my passionate, and contrary point of view.” (yes, this last quote was directed at Herbie, but it shows your focus throughout this thread so far). A point of view does not prove another’s wrong. I expect that when someone argues against my posts, that they do it with facts that show my post was in the wrong, not just in a “...lets not spew statistics that seem to make your point but we all know don't actually do so.” Actually, contrary to your statement “of posting irrelevant shit and pretending that it supports your argument,” the site Ruffems quoted has a pretty significant breakdown of the figures, which actually does support his argument. So, let’s take a look at the statistics provided on the Raymore police department: Statewide population over the age of 16 (based on 2007 census) : Whites 83.95% Blacks 10.72% Local population over the age of 16: Whites 90.79% Blacks 4.25% Now, we also have to take into account that Raymore is a trade centre for a large area, and a suburb of Kansas City, and that police stops will include those that don’t live within the limits of Raymore. If we turn the number of stops, searches, and arrests into percentages, we find the following: Percentage of stops: White 88.047% Blacks 9.85% - does this prove racial profiling? Based on the total population percentages, it appears that the police department is not targeting a specific group Percentage of Searches: White 80.94% Black 14.38% - does this prove racial profiling? Maybe – we have to consider if the search was based on plain sight evidence, which is also in the document provided by Ruff.. Percentage of Arrests: White 77.29% Black 17.13% - does this prove racial profiling? Maybe – we have to consider if the search was based on plain sight evidence, and if the arrest was based on scene findings or on a previous warrant, which is also in the document provided by Ruff.. I could go into more and more detail, which could take pages and pages…. The point I am trying to make is that too often I see someone’s post get shot down based on opinion more than fact, and when statistics and links are provided, rather than looking at them and studying them, they use the “stats can say anything” line. It is a shortcut, and a copout, rather than doing the research to effectively argue against the other poster. OK, I am done derailing this thread.

BoCat, I don't think anyone is directing their concerns at you - you are just telling us what you were told. Ashes is right - it is generating some interesting discussion though. If you get a chance to talk to the nurse who worked on this patient again, maybe ask some additional questions to get more clarification: - if you had a pulse without CPR, why did you do CPR? - what medications did you give to this patient? - what was the patient's GCS? Were they a GCS of 3? (I wonder, since previous informaiton had him sitting up between CPR cycles) - did the patient have any appliances (pacemaker, internal defibrillator, other) to assist with heartbeat? Even though there is no known medical hx, doesn't mean there isn't one. That's all I can think of off the top of my head for now. Keep digging!

I agree with other posters that this scenario is hard to believe… If a patient is truly asystole, they would be apneic and have no pulse. Since the patient had a BP and a pulse, why would you do CPR? If the patient had a BP and pulse, but wasn’t breathing effectively, you would assist ventilations, but you wouldn’t start CPR. Cyanosis from the nipple line up? I am curious – was patient truly cyanotic from that point, or was that as far as the medics opened his shirt? (and before anyone gets mad at me, you know and I know, crap like this happens when someone doesn’t do a complete assessment) Did the patient have any facial injuries? There have been cases of asystole or severe bradycardia upon stimulation of optic and trigeminal nerves, but this should have resolved with medications and compressions. Again, if the patient had a pulse, not sure why the hospital staff would “work him.” Treat the patient, not the monitor. I think I would like to know more about what the hospital staff did… were they doing CPR? If they were, someone needs to take them back through basic CPR criteria. His pulse was between 70 – 200… If his pulse was at 200, did they cardiovert? If his pulse slowed significantly, did they pace him? I seem to remember reading about something like this either on this site or on another site some time ago, but can’t find the link right now, where the discussion was on the remote possibility of the cyanosis being a dissecting aorta with complicating cardiac tamponade. If the aneurism ruptured into the pericardium, it could produce cardiac tamponade and the cyanosis from the nipple line up – very rare, supposedly. The patient should have the tamponade signs though – edema and JVD. I will keep looking for the link… D*** Google doesn’t find it when I want it to.

Ruff, That is a milestone worth celebrating - congrats! But why don't we see pictures??? Very few children are blessed to be in a home as full of love and caring as yours - I hope that someday she will realize how lucky she is to have parents like you.

Quote from LV article: "But on Friday, Righthaven agreed to settle a case against the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), based in Washington, D.C., for $2,185. That case involved an R-J story called "Marijuana as Medicine."" So, they took NORML to court, and got $2,185. NORML will incur huge costs, since later in the article, it says they had 3 lawyers working on their defense. What did it cost LVR-J to work on this case? Is this really worth it? Or it is a form of newspaper terrorism, where the goal is to disrupt the regular business of other websites by involving these other people and businesses in these lawsuits when there were other means to inform them of their breach? It seems like a petty tactic to me.

I think some of my scariest calls weren't even calls that endangered me personally. They were more emotional calls. Two stand out for me. Although I work for a city service, I also work for a rural service in the small town I live in, and most of my patients are people I know when I go on calls there. We were toned for a 7 month old female seizing. The address was one I recognised, as it was a couple who are two of my best friends. Their youngest daughter was having a generalized seizure. We arrived on scene, they were panicked, I took the infant, and carried her to our rig. Thinking it was just a febrile seizure as I knew she hadn't been feeling well the last few days, I left the back doors of the unit open while waiting for my partner, and pulled the baby's clothes off to cool her. Her seizure didn't stop (she was running a fever of 39C). I tried to cool her with cool towels... her seizure didn't stop... As I was in a BLS unit (and haven't finished my medic yet) I couldn't give her any medications, and we were 30 minutes from the closest hospital. I called for ALS backup, which was unavailable. We raced for the hospital, with the little one seizing the entire way. Several times she quit breathing and then went into cardiac arrest... I did CPR for a minute or two, and she would revive, and begin seizing again. We got her to hospital, and the ER doc gave her the maximum allowable dosage of ativan and phenobarb, and the seizures didn't stop. We transported the child to a higher level hospital, 40 more minutes away, with her still seizing, and the doc on the phone with a peds specialist, giving more meds. That little one seized for over 2 hours.... all I could think of was that the infant of some of my best friends was going to die, and there was nothing I could do to stop it. THAT was scary. (after many more seizures over the next few months, she was finally diagnosed with a rare seizure disorder called Dravet Syndrome). The second one was an mvc call. We were called to a 3 car mvc on a highway, poor winter road conditions. One of my best friends had told me that morning she was going to head to the city to run errands, and when we arrived on the scene, one of the vehicles looked EXACTLY like hers. I thought it was her van. I had a moment of panic as I thought she was one of our patients. I took a deep breath, and headed for the vehicle. It wasn't her van, but it was someone else I knew. Two of the 3 drivers involved died, and I knew all three people involved. I can generally deal with that, but I still remember the first few seconds when we got on scene, and I thought "OMG, it's her..."

I love you Phil... I was trying to come up with a response to daedalus that wouldn't sidetrack this thread into a discussion of Old vs New testament theology, and why Christians believe what they do. This thread isn't about that. One of the points I was trying to make, and have obviously done a very poor job, is that there is a difference between tolerance and being walked all over, and a difference between forgiving a wrong and just ignoring it and allowing it to continue. I don't know if there are other religious buildings on the Ground Zero site. I think it should be straight forward to zone all properties within a certain radios of the site to be commercial and non-denominational. How close is too close? I think any facilties within sight of Ground Zero should be non-denominational.

Ummm... turnip prefaced his post with "To play the devils advocate and not politically correct." He was disagreeing, not to run you down, but to generate discussion... which is why he started his post with that comment. I agree - Old Testament is filled with extreme characters; however, New Testament writings are focused more on grace, strength, love, and forgiveness, based on the life and teachings of Jesus, as written by his disciples. Like any religious beliefs, there are extremists within Christianity as well.

JPINFV quote “I'm sorry... you lost me here. Are you saying that Christian religions aren't homophobic or contain scriptures that consider any non-Christian religion as being sinful? Also, there's a very large difference between not ignoring a child who hits other people and blaming an entire religion for the acts of a few, regardless of what that few claim that their actions are for.” Sorry, JP, I fear I may not have explained myself very well. I am not saying that Christian religions aren’t homophobic. I am also not saying that non-Christian religions are sinful. I am saying true Christianity (regardless of denomination) focuses on living a life of love and forgiveness, and trying not to sin. I am not blaming an entire religion for the acts of a few; however, I do feel that that religion has an obligation to curb the activities of those few, just like a parent is obligated to curb the tantrum of their child. JPIFNV quote: "Any response to this conversation being turned around? ..and, for the record, child molestation is not an issue unique to the Catholic Church. Example, those crazy Baptists who blamed a girl for getting pregnant after being raped. No more Baptist churches with in 1000 feet of a playground or school? http://www.concordmo...-then-relocated “ It doesn’t matter if the conversation is turned around. If a group of people within a specified group have intentionally caused harm, it is up to the members of that group to curb their activities. Other groups do not have to tolerate those activities. I feel it is up to the Muslim community to curb the terrorist actions of the few; I believe it is up to the Catholic church to curb the child abuse actions of certain priests; I believe it is up to the Baptist community to step in and help the girl who was raped. If these groups do not, it is up to the surrounding community to protect themselves from these actions, and if that means that a certain group is not allowed to build a building to gather in, regardless of name (church, mosque, meeting hall), then they should not be allowed to. The Catholic Church has been attempting to stop the actions of those priests who abused children. There have been numerous cases which have been investigated internally, and with the help of law enforcement to bring those perpetrators to justice. I am not sure about the Baptist one - I will have to look into that more. I am curious - what has the Muslim community done to help bring those who attacked the World Trade Centre to justice? I am not just asking this to be obtuse - I am asking because I truly haven't seen any news articles, documentaries, or other information showing that the Muslim community truly has put significant effort into catching those responsible, and working to ensure further terrorist attacks don't occur.

Herbie, that is an excellent analogy! I do think that there are times when political correctness goes too far, and the wishes of a few outweigh the wishes of the many. This mosque is going to be offensive to many who travel to Ground Zero. Although Christianity has its bizarre splinter groups, overall, Christianity focuses on leading a life free of sin, including avoiding sinning against others. Leading a sin free life includes treating others well, and forgiving those who do ill to you, and loving all people. Forgiving sins is not the same as ignoring sins. Christianity does not tell people to ignore the sins of others. The Bible says to “turn the other cheek” but it does not tell its followers to ignore abuse. We do not ignore a child who continually hits others. We do not ignore a person who abuses others. We do not say “oh, it is their belief and so we must tolerate their behaviors.” Some religions teach their followers to actively discriminate on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, or nationality. So why then, do we ignore the beliefs of certain religious groups, who teach racism, sexism, homophobia, hatred of other religions, etc., in the name of tolerance? Yes, there are members of the Muslim community who are not terrorists, and are kind, compassionate members of society. Perhaps we should expect them to control their own members, much as we expect a parent to control their screaming child. By not allowing this mosque to be built, we are sending the message “we will not accept your religion in this area, due to the damage, pain and suffering some members of your religion have caused to those in this area.” Why is that a bad thing? By showing members of the Muslim community that they have to control their own members in order to be welcome in America, we are not being intolerant – we are protecting our own innocent members of our society.

Dwayne, as usual, you have effectively already voiced what I am sure many of us are thinking. I tried to go to the Denver Fire Department site, but I kept getting a “Server is too busy” message. I wanted to see if there was any budgetary information to see where they are spending their money. I like the part of the article that states that insurance companies feel this is a hidden, backdoor tax. All this will do is cause higher premiums for consumers to cover the cost of this fee. Unfortunately, firefighting seems to be one of those sacred cows that municipalities are all too often willing to throw money at, regardless of fiscal responsibility.