Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Yes, totally inadequate.

The problem, though, is that ~nobody would bother doing what it would take. And so there's the argument that recommending bandages is the most effective strategy.

It would be cool to see this acknowledged. Even if in tiny print somewhere.



sort by: page size:

Well yes, when I said they have to help I meant more like an emergency, not a papercut - but I guess most people would be happy to give you a plaster(bandaid) anyway.

I guess you could call it a bandage? The point wasn't to bad-mouth it or undersell it - bandaids are awesome. The point is that we need some external thing to patch holes in the underlying system.

Black Hawk Down has a scene where the difficulty of containing such injuries is illustrated very graphically: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gixRgsPFR7g

It's incredibly difficult to stop such bleeding and having such device will undoubtedly save lives on and off battle fields. For example in bad car wrecks.


That wouldn't reduce the number of accidents, but it'd be an excellent method to reduce the number of handicapped (and the inconvenience of accommodating them.) The US military has been suffering from this very real problem due to advences in medical technology over the past few decades. Not treating the wounded (or at least waiting a day or two) should significantly reduce the military budget.

I think "covering up gangrene" works well with the band-aid analogy

Do people these days really need assistance from an app for that:

"Woolley used his shirt to tie off the three-inch gash that was opened on his leg and a sock to bandage the back of his head."


A band-aid? It's more like a tourniquet.

The problem is you can't know how healing somebody will turn out. The time and resource require to heal somebody are not fixed.

If your leg gets blown off, and the only help you're getting is from Gary, who claims a strong stomach and has used a needle kit before, for sewing closed your femoral artery, I reckon you're taking a swing.

Are you sure the desperate don't deserve this attempt to help them? I can't imagine what it must be like to have such issues and have zero professional options to turn to, and you know what the solution for many is.


But that doesn't prove anything about how effective they are at preventing injury.

These kind of moves are band-aids that don't provide a viable long term solution. But sometimes the hospital is really far away and using a band-aid allows you to temporarily protect yourself from excessive blood loss or infection while you wait to get proper medical attention.

Why is healing wounds limited purpose?

Preferably not with large soft tissue wounds due to sharp edges in addition to the blunt force trauma.

Sometimes, putting a bandage on it yourself is the correct answer. Imagine a world in which we could do nothing medical for ourselves at all and could ONLY call an ambulance any time we had a problem.

I am fine with the courts and legal system trying to come up with solutions that say, in essence, "for little things, you are allowed to bandage it yourself and here is the list of approved remedies."


Maybe it calculates the fractures and other injuries, but if the goal is realism, as a wounded figther is likely to be less efficient, they should also find a way of hampering movement for the wounded parts.

But the complete understanding isn't essential. Sure, surgens may be vital, doesn't mean everyone may cut up people.

I have a better solution that is quicker and less costly:

Amputation


It's pretty much always that easy. Even for big long wounds. You can apply pressure to the wound, or to the artery proximal to the wound. If one doctor needs his hands then a nurse/junior doctor/medical student is recruited to stand there for up to hours

Yes, but don't tear off the band-aid until the wound has healed.
next

Legal | privacy