- This topic has 235 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
well i am not a doctor, but i play one on tv
Yes something is still bothering me.
I’ll rephrase my question as you demanded:
QUESTION FOR HEALTH TO ANSWER: What is the source of your statement that proper EMS protocol is to approach the evaluation of the victims differently when dealing with a single vehicle accident as opposed to a multi vehicle accident?
If I mischaracterized your statement, then please restate it and then tell us where we can find an authoritative reference that contains your contention.
health – even for you that response was lame
Yes you have to consider medical causes. Everyone here agrees to this and we don’t need a source.
Now if you will please answer the question we all keep asking you.
WHAT IS YOUR SOURCE FOR DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN SINGLE AND MULTIPLE VEHICULAR ACCIDENTS?
How many times do we have to ask?
Health
what book is that in? (for the third time)
to the crux of the issue:
“”There isn’t time to do it at every MVA, but it’s imperative at least to do it at a 1 car MVA!” “
Is this what the book said (what book?) or is this your own chiddush? (for the fifth time)
There would be a huge difference, between a one car MVA with just one pt than with multiple cars.
If there are a lot of pts, it would be an MCI, assessment and treatment are much different, the unresponsive traumatic arrest pt in a one pt MVA would get treated, in an MCI that pt would be tagged Black and not be treated as well.
I’m not sure what is so hard for you all to understand. He said it 16 times.
Claiming that you are in medicine, you should know that we do not follow anecdotal evidence rather evidenced based medicine.
Not sure why it took you so long to just respond and say that its your own thought especially when your initial response was go research it..
Lol health
I dont think you know what copy infringment is but at any rate. thanks for admitting that you made this all up.
Nobody was doubting that there can and often are medical causes that can lead to an MVA and should be considered.
The discussion was over this:
“But you’re wrong. It is different than
a multi-car crash!”
and this:
“2scents -“There is no difference in treating a pt that was involved in a one car accident vs a multi car accident, unless it becomes an MCI”
Ah, but there is a difference! Nothing to do with a MCI. This was the purpose of this thread.
Go research it & then come back and let us know what you found out.”
Kudos for admiting that it was your own chidush, though I’m not sure why it took you so long to admit that, and I’m not sure how you expected 2scents to research a factoid that only exists in your mind.
I think your solution is very intriguing (although in my opinion it is not correct). But your evasiveness and strong repeated implications that it is already standard EMS practice left your credibility in serious doubt.
Your transparent attempt to maintain credibility by innapropriate ubiquitous exclamation marks was not successful.
I often think highly of your opinions. I hope you will be able to restore your credibility here to some extent.
OK.. Fight over. Now it’s time for fun.
Actually about a month ago I was driving alone on a highway when suddenly, with no warning, I started to pass out. The roadway was flipping around, my car was doing somersaults, cars were driving all around me with no inkling about me, and I was just holding on to the wheel for dear life. As carefully as I was able to, I managed to pull over and exit at the next stop. There was NO WHERE to stop or pull over in that piece of roadway, (I didn’t want to get into a MVA and have people misdiagnose!!) End of the story, when I pulled out, almost immediately, everything came back to normal. Apparently those loose screws got back…
???? ??’ ?? ???!!
So its about believing you?! your own anecdotal results?
EMS responds to MVAs on a regular basis I hope they dont use this blog for medical practices. You posed a question tried to appear superior and push everyone down. your response was go research it.
In medicine they say not always is more better, same here the more you post the more it shows that your not what you say you are.
No I don’t have a better solution!
I don’t see the problem in the existing protocols that would require a solution!
Actually I’ve personally videotaped hundreds of thousands of MVA’s!
You can tell I’m telling the truth because of all my exclamation marks!!!!!!!
“Excuse me. The only things that I ever put in exclamation marks was something quoted from elsewhere or that me or others have already posted on YWN!”
Being in the grammar field (I won’t tell you in what capacity) you are speaking about quotation marks, not exclamation marks!!!
And that last sentence.
Health
“I didn’t make this up “
um you did.
This wasnt about medical causes leading to trauma.
This was about a difference between managing 1 vs multiple car accidents.
see this quote of yours
“”But you’re wrong. It is different than
a multi-car crash!””
or this one
“Ah, but there is a difference! Nothing to do with a MCI. This was the purpose of this thread.
Go research it & then come back and let us know what you found out.””
THAT is what we are discussing you said MULTIPLE TIMES that there is a difference between 1 car and multiple cars.
You claimed you read this in a book but cannot supply name of the book.
You finnaly admited when asked
“”Is this what the book said (what book?) or is this your own chiddush? “
That it is in fact:
“My own. “
In other words like many here suspected, the idea that a medical cuase is more likely when one car is involved, and MORE TO THE POINT only needs to be considered with one car and not with multiple cars. Or that – and i quote- “It is different than
a multi-car crash!” (with an exclamation supplied by you btw) is something that you made up.
I am confused. Wnow you say it is in the book-that-must not be named?
“Did you ever look in an EMS book?!?”
no but I always like learning new things. Please tell me which book mentions the distiction between number of cars involved in an accident.
Do you know of one whose “copy infringment” doesnt prevent you from repeating the book’s title?
Health
“This quote I did Not make up -“Trauma – Are there medical causes? (e.g. diabetes, CVA, MI, etc.)””
I never claimed you did, nor did I say anything different than that quote
“”MORE TO THE POINT only needs to be considered with one car and not with multiple cars.”
I never said that – you’re lying!”
fair enough. I misspoke, that isnt quite what you said. My apologies for that.
“”the idea that a medical cause is more likely when one car is involved,”
This is true.”
Though you admit it is your chidush and not currently in any EMS book,guideline or protocol.
Correct?
I’m not sure what your statistic is supposed to show? That single MVA’s are more common? That isnt what we are discussing.
the discussion is whether the EMS DOES (this is how it was first presented) or should (it kind of shifted to this) take a different approach with regard to managment, based on the number of cars involved
I think you could possibly have a good idea.
What though makes you think an impaired driver in traffic is more likely to veer off the road and hit a pole or something rather than hit another car or cause another car to hit him?
If there is a reasonable explanation for that hypothesis then maybe you’re on to something.
Healt
good luck in your quest.
howevet that is NOT what you said at first. And is NOT what you said when challenged initally:
From the OP “how do you treat a patient from a 1 car accident? “
Note: as opposed to a 2 car accident, and you imply this is currently the standard. You were clearly not asking what should the new protocol be according to my chidush that I have no data for
“It’s a question to refresh people’s memories – how do you treat a patient from a 1 car accident?”
Same implication but stronger. how cna you refresh memoried about your own chidush that you havent shared yet?
“But you’re wrong. It is different than a multi-car crash!”
you meant you believe it should be treated different
“Ah, but there is a difference! Nothing to do with a MCI. This was the purpose of this thread.
Go research it & then come back and let us know what you found out.”
again how can he research a chidush that only exists in your head?
“Look there is a difference in the assessment between a 1 car accident and a multi- car crash. And I thought you were getting close. Go research it!”
ditto
“There is a difference. I’m not Mechuav to teach you medicine. I was nice enough to get you started. If you show me that you’re trying, I’ll help you out. Even if I don’t get any money from you!”
!?!?!?
“That’s not what I want. Look there is a difference in the assessment between a 1 car accident and a multi- car crash. How do you assess a pt. who’s a victim with no other cars around?”
“In any car crash, even though there’s the possibility of a medical cause, it’s Not probable! But in 1 car crash, it has to be treated as a medical call, along with trauma.”
No mention that this is your own chiddush
“The point I was making is that you evaluate for both medical & trauma at the same time. This is only for a single car accident”
Strongly Implying that with a multiple car accident you dont need to evaluate for medical and trauma(you said I was lying when I pointed this out)
“But let’s say the pt. is unconscious, in a single car situation – you’d follow the AMS protocol, but not with a multi-car crash!”
Same strong implication as above (actually I dont think this is an implication in this quote you outright said it)
“Look I have an EMS book that states -“Trauma – Are there medical causes? (e.g. diabetes, CVA, MI, etc.)””
That wasnt the discussion
Finnaly after a lot of back and forth (in reply to “” is this [ie distinguishing between number of cars] your own chiddush?:)
“My own.” ie you made it up
Then you changed your mind
here “I didn’t make this up”
and bizarrely asserted what you said you made up as fact
“”the idea that a medical cause is more likely when one car is involved,” – This is true.”
and ended with
“I’m not trying to change the protocol that EMS shouldn’t seek for medical causes at every trauma, but I’m trying to find a solution that can be feasible! The reality is that they don’t seek for medical causes at every trauma.”
that is NOt what you opened with at all!
Well that’s a drunk who got drunk in a bar. What about the guy who gets drunk at a party at home at work etc. and someone drunk isn’t the one most likely to need particular medical attention.
What about a heart attack, stroke, syncope, seizure, suicide, psychosis. All not necessarily time of day related.
I don’t think it is reasonable to modify EMS protocol for the consideration that the driver is a drunk. And to only apply the protocol late at night.
Why not modify the protocol according to the time of day. Not the number of vehicles? Maybe but this is beginning to seem ridiculous already. You need a reasonable general protocol not a 500 page volume which modifies the approach depending on the various combinations of numerous factors A responder has to have some seichel and experience And training in addition to a generalized protocol to follow
!
Health
“What you don’t understand or want to understand is that there should be no difference in treatment.”
What?
“You claim that you’re into internal medicine. This post was for s/o in emergency medicine.”
More change! This is how YOU opened : “For the health professionals on YWN – “
“I really think that you have an agenda? What is it?”
to expose your dishonesty. You posed a question were condescending when people asked for the answer and it turns out you made it up.
“The fact is no one that I’ve seen or know about follows this as medical call.”
so why did you pretned this was the protocol?
“I was pointing out that at least it should be treated as such when it’s a single MVA!”
you were not! you outright said (several times) that there IS a difference between the two., and people who didnt know it werent doing enpough research.
“You definitely have an agenda, probably just to put me down!”
Partly that, plus honesty. A simple “im sorry I wasnt clear and I’m sorry 2scents for being condescending when I told you to reserch something that doesnt yet exist on paper”
“I don’t think you care about pts, so why are you in the medical field?!?”
Its for the big bucks and lavish lifestyle!
“And for the umpteen time, all trauma calls have to be evaluated as if the’re a medical issue also!!! “
This is the FIRST time youve said this. So there is no difference in mangament between the two?
So for example This quote “”But you’re wrong. It is different than a multi-car crash!”” of yours is wrong?
Health,
From your posts its noticeable that you are not experienced in emergency medicine.
The fact that you found a sentence in some EMT book stating, Trauma are there medical causes, has nothing to do with an MVA and of course not with a single car MVA vs multi car.
One last thing, when responding to a post, dont send me to a previous post or other page, if you take the time and energy to respond to every little post questioning your credentials or statements, please respond with actual substance.
Health
“I never said which “health professionals”!”
fair enough though the implication was all.
“You’re the one who’s dishonest”
Care to elaborate?
“Stop with the lying! I never pretended that this was protocol!”
Everybody understood it that way.
and what did you mean by this “Ah, but there is a difference! Nothing to do with a MCI. This was the purpose of this thread.
Go research it & then come back and let us know what you found out.”
research what? and where?
“This I believe!”
Lol! then you know less about medicine than I thought
“And I still say that!”
How so
and for the dozens time why and what is your source? if you have no source just say so. and apolagize to 2scents for demanding he research something you made up.
“Stop with your lying! I already said it on page 2 and I quote -“Trauma – Are there medical causes? (e.g. diabetes, CVA, MI, etc.)” “
You pretended that that source spoke about a difference between numbe rof cars. It seems that in addition to making up the fact at first you made up a source.
I am not nor have I ever denied that medical causes are an important consideration when evaluating trauma victims. This is regardless of numbe rof acrs involved
Ubiquitin, 2scents: you do realize you are without a doubt wasting your time responding to “health”. I would recommend throwing in the towel here. And just remembering for future threads what has become crystal clear about “health’s” integrity and honesty.
Before I throw in the towel I will post this very last response.
Mr Health, you are a big fool! since you are using personal insults as a response, you have no clue who I am or if I have any degree in medicine. So to answer your question, Why I think that you have no experience in emergency medicine, that is because you have established a fact, pushed everyone to the ground and resorted to personal insults YET ARE UNABLE TO SIMPLY POINT TO THE SOURCE!!
Just in case you are interested, MVAs (single and Multi car MVAs) are all included in the Trauma category, as with all trauma Pts the providers should (if appropriate) rule out any possible medical causes. this has nothing to do with your statement of a single car accident.
In no way does a single car accident require one to do more of a medical assessment than a multi car accident would. Trauma is trauma, every trauma has something that caused it as the trauma itself is not an illness (with rare exceptions), therefore all providers should look for possible medical causes, regardless of the type of MVA. The argument that with multi car accidents one patient might have the medical problem and the other one is the one that got hit, changes nothing in assessment.
One last thing, since you seem to have missed it from my previous post, please stop sending people to previous posts, if you have something to respond just write it.
Have a happy Chanukah.
Health
you posted that “difference” and i replied how it isnt relevent to the subject at hand.
How on earth does the fact that more deaths from single MVA’s prove that a medical issue is the most likely cause?
Maybe more accidents occur with one car, maybe with multiple cars there are more poeple available so odds are one of them may remain concious enough to call for help, There are several other possibilities.
How doe sit show that medical casues need to be considred more with one car . THAT is the subject at hand.
Feivel
I know but I have a problem with letting things go. and I find it fascinating when people can be so wrong yet wont admit it. (this is my draw to arguments over things like vaccines where people can be proven wrong yet remain in denial)
Lol Health
“Here from Avram -“research what? and where””
If that is what you now claim you meant when you told 2scents to “research it” i.e. that he should look up an anonymous poster’s theory, not based on any real facts or data that was posted AFTER you insisted (twice) that this distinction was one that can be researched.
Well, I guess that is the closest youll get to manning up and admitting you were wrong and dishonest. But I’ll take it
Health
“Do you know the purpose of this thread?”
Yes you said it pretty early
“Ah, but there is a difference! [between number of cars involved] Nothing to do with a MCI. This was the purpose of this thread.”
Youve repeated it several times:
“”The point I was making is that you evaluate for both medical & trauma at the same time. This is only for a single car accident””
These are YOUR quotes.
You were not “dealing with the reality that they dont” at least that isnt what you said.
You also said that it was something that could be “researched” i.e. that it wasnt your own chiddush – turns out that too is a lie
“Go research it & then come back and let us know what you found out.”
“When are you gonna Man up & admit that you’re Wrong?!?”
About which part was I wrong?
If I’m wrong I admit it see here:
“fair enough. I misspoke, that isnt quite what you said. My apologies for that.” (though it was in fact what you said, I grant that it wasnt what you meant. ( regarding this: “”MORE TO THE POINT only needs to be considered with one car and not with multiple cars.”
I never said that – you’re lying!”, here is where you said it “”But let’s say the pt. is unconscious, in a single car situation – you’d follow the AMS protocol, but not with a multi-car crash!””)
ubiquitin, you already made your point, you really think Mr Health will admit that he was incorrect?
It’s apparent from his posting that he will never retract, defend his so called degree in medicine and make sure to have the last word.
2scents
“you really think Mr Health will admit that he was incorrect?”
I dont. But I find it fascinating when a person can be shown to be wrong in black and white using his own words agaisnt him. over and over and over (and on several different points) and still inist he is right.
It truly amazes me. Discussions thta are merely a difference of opininon dont interest me as much, since we can agree to disagree.
- The topic ‘Treatment’ is closed to new replies.