The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

I'm still not sure that it is 'better than nothing' - I know it's picky, but also when Vinnie is talking about putting your palms 'on the sovriegn' ... this could make people put their hands way too high.

Details aside; I'm all for educating the public about first aid and CPR, but not in 30 second TV ads - promote, yes, but not demonstrate.

Good evening,

I've done first aid and CPR courses since my bronze medallion ( many moons past) and have refreshers every 3 years for work. About the only thing these courses have had in common is that they continually change.
A friend in the ambulance service has the following views,

1- resuscitation is beneficial, but these days many people are reluctant to do it for real ( who realistically carries a barrier) and will often do nothing, hence a lean towards cardiac massage.

2- the best first aid, if the casualty is conscious and breathing, unless necessary on safety grounds , do nothing but try to stop any bleeding ,talk to them and observe until help arrives. A patient most usually makes themselves as comfortable as possible.

3- if a fully equipped ambulance crew see someone collapse in front of them at a pedestrian crossing, and on reaching the casualty find they are neither breathing or have a pulse, there is still less than a 10% chance of bringing them back.

4- CPR by the public, although always worth trying , is as much a psychological help to someone who witnesses a collapse, in that they were not left feeling helpless after.

Interesting views.

Regards phil

Firstly, that it is highly unlikely that CPR will restart the heart on it's own - the purpose is to keep oxygen circulating around the body until the person can be defibrillated (usually by shock). If you don't also give breaths (as they are suggesting), then while you will be circulating the blood around, it won't be taking on new oxygen (or less than it needs), so after 4/6 minutes there may not be much point.

Even if you're not giving breaths, as long as the airway is open the compressions will cause some inhalation of air to the lungs and exhale some air. The percentage difference in oxygen composition between inhaled and exhaled air is about 21% to 16%, so even if the airway was not open the casaulty will still benefit from compressions alone.

Years ago, when I was in the Scottish Ambulance Service as an Ambulance Care Assistant there was talk about removing the requirement to give breaths with CPR. Now, it seems that with every First Aid course I do, the ratio of breaths to compressions is reducing.

Yes, exhaled breath is about 16% O2, but it has to be put into the victim - the movement of the CPR on it's own will not put sufficient O2 into the lungs to keep the victim in a state where they may be successfully recucitated by professionals after more than a few minutes.

There are various oppinions on the subject - I only taught CPR for about 5 years, and we had at least 2 major changes to the matierials being taught (EFR) ...including stopping checking for a pulse ( :G :roll: )

Dougan wrote:Yes, exhaled breath is about 16% O2, but it has to be put into the victim - the movement of the CPR on it's own will not put sufficient O2 into the lungs to keep the victim in a state where they may be successfully recucitated by professionals after more than a few minutes.

There are various oppinions on the subject - I only taught CPR for about 5 years, and we had at least 2 major changes to the matierials being taught (EFR) ...including stopping checking for a pulse ( :G :roll: )

My mistake, I wasn't clear enough. I meant that the air remaining in the lungs would still be about 16% oxygen the same as exhaled air and would be of some benefit.

Hands only CPR seems to be working in the US.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23884566/ns ... wS9eIH8mdk

Dr. Gordon Ewy, who’s been pushing for hands-only CPR for 15 years, said he was “dancing in the streets” over the heart association’s change even though he doesn’t think it goes far enough. Ewy (pronounced AY-vee) is director of the University of Arizona Sarver Heart Center in Tucson, where the compression-only technique was pioneered.

Ewy said there’s no point to giving early breaths in the case of sudden cardiac arrest, and it takes too long to stop compressions to give two breaths — 16 seconds for the average person. He noted that victims often gasp periodically anyway, drawing in a little air on their own.

http://firstaid.about.com/od/cprbasics/ ... athcpr.htm

On one the courses I went on the instructor told us that in many cases of CPR all you were really doing was giving the transplant teams a chance of getting some viable organs as not many people survive.

Sandgroper wrote:My mistake, I wasn't clear enough. I meant that the air remaining in the lungs would still be about 16% oxygen the same as exhaled air and would be of some benefit.

But for how long?...CPR including breaths can, if done properly (easier with 2), keep someone in a condition fit for when the ambulance crew arrives....

Fun fact: Vinnie Jones had his SGC revoked after he was convicted of threatening passengers and staff on a flight to Tokyo. Specifically he claimed he could have everyone on the plane murdered for £3,000 - a bargain at around £6 per person :lol:

Who is vinnie jones?

Another "celebrity" I assume.

He sounds a real numpty.

Any relation of that car progamme idiot?

Porcupine wrote:Fun fact: Vinnie Jones had his SGC revoked after he was convicted of threatening passengers and staff on a flight to Tokyo. Specifically he claimed he could have everyone on the plane murdered for £3,000 - a bargain at around £6 per person :lol:

His dad was a gamekeeper. He also has a son serving in the Household Cavalry . http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/ar ... er-is.html