I’m still curious about the 80% effective number that was pulled out of thin air. From the same links.

Why Is Continuous- Chest-Compression CPR Better for Cardiac Arrest?

Presently, only 1 in 4 patients in cardiac arrest receives bystander CPR. Studies have found that bystanders are more willing to start resuscitation efforts if mouth-to-mouth ventilations are not required. In addition, continuous-chest-compression CPR is less complex and therefore easier to learn and remember. It is important to realize that, even when chest compressions are performed continuously and properly on a person in cardiac arrest, the blood flow they generate is so weak that any interruption in chest compressions, even for breathing, lowers the chances of survival.

 

The key here is understand the context of what you read and being able to critically analyze it. paddleplacid, I fear you don’t have that skill.

The best thing is to take a WFA, WAFA, WFR, or WEMT course.

Bryan Hansel – 2 hours ago  »  I’m still curious about the 80% effective number that was pulled out of thin air. From the same links.

Why Is Continuous- Chest-Compression CPR Better for Cardiac Arrest? Presently, only 1 in 4 patients in cardiac arrest receives bystander CPR. Studies have found that bystanders are more willing to start resuscitation efforts if mouth-to-mouth ventilations are not required. In addition, continuous-chest-compression CPR is less complex and therefore easier to learn and remember. It is important to realize that, even when chest compressions are performed continuously and properly on a person in cardiac arrest, the blood flow they generate is so weak that any interruption in chest compressions, even for breathing, lowers the chances of survival.  

The key here is understand the context of what you read and being able to critically analyze it. paddleplacid, I fear you don’t have that skill. The best thing is to take a WFA, WAFA, WFR, or WEMT course.

The 80% number was pulled from the same book I learned the new procedures from, a public library book on various new medical techniques published one year ago.  Unfortunately I can’t remember the title or editor.  I fully understand the concept of context, Bryan, and my Mensa IQ tells me to ignore your insult which is obviously thrown up to instigate a brawl.  Continuous chest compression, as it says in the urls, is better for cardiac arrest because the lungs and blood already contain oxygen, so there is no need to add it.  In cases of Arrested Breathing like drownings and chokings, the lungs are normally empty or near empty of air, and the oxygen in the blood has been used up which leads to the passing out or death.  These things are detailed in the two urls I included in my post.   By the way, have you learned that linguists recognize that context is not a necessary part of language?  Some people speak and write clearly enough that context is not needed as everything is self evident.  I learned about this when researching a response to a bible study question.  Please search Wikipedia for the word context, and read the whole article .. it’s abig one. 

paddle placid- For the record- I am certified in both types of CPR, and am certified to teach either (compression only or Community CPR). I have no vested interest in either technique….

WMA (wilderness medicine assoc) and American Red Cross have both updated their instructors this year to not teach compression only CPR as a wilderness protocol. Both of those organizations teach 30 compressions to 2 breaths for CPR.  Compression only CPR was thought to be the acceptable 2 years ago and the American Heart Assoc made a big move to get lots of people certified with it.  But, it is considered bare bones- bare minimum CPR- in any higher course- compression and breathing is the most recent thing being taught. American Red Cross just re-instated that in March.  I just took my current American Red Cross CPR instructor course last month- I am as up-to-date on this as a person can be.  the red cross completly revamped their courses this year and their books to reflect the most current information.

Why dont you call the Red Cross or any of the organizations that train people in CPR in your area and ask them about wilderness protocol for CPR?  Also, since your concerned about the cost of classes please contact your local Red Cross- sign up for a class and then call me with their phone number- i will call them and pay for your class with a credit card (I’ll sponsor you) so you will be up-to-date. 

Dog_paddle – 16 hours ago  »  paddle placid- For the record- I am certified in both types of CPR, and am certified to teach either (compression only or Community CPR). I have no vested interest in either technique…. WMA (wilderness medicine assoc) and American Red Cross have both updated their instructors this year to not teach compression only CPR as a wilderness protocol. Both of those organizations teach 30 compressions to 2 breaths for CPR.  Compression only CPR was thought to be the acceptable 2 years ago and the American Heart Assoc made a big move to get lots of people certified with it.  But, it is considered bare bones- bare minimum CPR- in any higher course- compression and breathing is the most recent thing being taught. American Red Cross just re-instated that in March.  I just took my current American Red Cross CPR instructor course last month- I am as up-to-date on this as a person can be.  the red cross completly revamped their courses this year and their books to reflect the most current information. Why dont you call the Red Cross or any of the organizations that train people in CPR in your area and ask them about wilderness protocol for CPR?  Also, since your concerned about the cost of classes please contact your local Red Cross- sign up for a class and then call me with their phone number- i will call them and pay for your class with a credit card (I’ll sponsor you) so you will be up-to-date. 

This latest post shows who I think the real down deep Dog Paddle is, a thoughtful, intelligent, considerate, educated person.  I don’t understand why you started off with me as being rude and obnoxious, except I get the same way as we’re all human, and you seem to have misunderstood my intentions, so it’s understandable that way.  Thanks for your generous offer, I appreciate it as I’m on a medical disability income for a life-threatening illness which I combat through outdoor recreation and healthy living, but Ill pass on your offer for now as this summer I’m employed as ed as a maintenance man at a kid’s camp where all the counsellors and staff have CPR, so I won’t need it there.  I will try to get the latest information from our local Red Cross, and if it’s up to date I’ll consider it next winter.  Now that we got through our rough spot I’m enjoying talking with you .. and I really appreciate your suggestions as I generally avoid ogranizations and associations, and it’s good to be guided towards the value in them.

From the Horses’s Mouth:

NEWS RELEASE

 Compression-only CPR means more Canadians can save lives
Compression-only CPR offers simple approach for untrained members of public that witness an adult suddenly collapse

October 18, 2010 (Ottawa) – The Canadian Red Cross supports the use of compression-only CPR as an acceptable alternative to full CPR with rescue breaths. Compression-only CPR is sometimes the preferred method for members of the public who witness an adult suddenly collapse and are unable to perform full CPR.

Compression-only CPR uses chest compressions to pump the heart, circulating oxygen already in the person’s body. This makes compression-only CPR suitable when:

•                     An adult suddenly collapses.

•                     A responder is unwilling, unable, untrained or unsure how to perform full CPR (cycles of 30 chest compressions and 2 rescue breaths).

•                     A bystander does not have a breathing barrier and does not want to perform unprotected rescue breaths.

Compression-only CPR should not be used when the oxygen in the victim’s body has likely been used up, such as with a drowning victim or when a respiratory emergency may have caused the cardiac arrest. Performing CPR on an infant or child requires rescue breaths. When an infant or child’s heart stops, it’s usually because of a respiratory emergency, such as choking or asthma, which uses up their body’s oxygen.

The most important thing for Canadians to know right now is that the CPR they’ve been trained to perform is still right. All Canadian Red Cross CPR courses will continue to teach full CPR. Performing full CPR in conjunction with an automated external defibrillator (AED) immediately following cardiac arrest can double a person’s chance of survival.

Canadians are most likely to perform CPR on someone they know. Seventy per cent of cardiac arrests happen at home, yet only one in seven people knows how to perform CPR.

      (I have also emailed St. John’s Ambulance for details of their CPR styles.)

Dog_paddle – 23 hours ago  »  Thanks for proving all of our points Paddleplacid- its a big man to admit when they are wrong, I admire you for admitting your mistake…as you said- From the horses mouth, “Compression-only CPR should not be used when the oxygen in the victim’s body has likely been used up, such as with a drowning victim”…and then later, “The most important thing for Canadians to know right now is that the CPR they’ve been trained to perform is still right. All Canadian Red Cross CPR courses will continue to teach full CPR. ” That is what we are getting at- especially in a wilderness (delayed ALS)context, and especially as this relates to an Adventure Canoe forum were most likely we would be doing CPR to a drowning victim then compression and breaths is the proper procedure- not compression only CPR thanks for sharing

I’m not admitting I was wrong Dog Paddle, because by reading all that is recommended compression only CPR is actually recommended in the great majority of cases, such as bystander-involved because bystanders don’t normally have CPR training and are often unwilling to do mouth-tomouth; and when you consider that heart failure is the cause for CPR 20 to 1 over breathing-ceased cases such as drownings and chokings, then we’ll see that compression only CPR will be not only used but recommended in the great majority of cases.  Also, in my second post on the topic I included paragraphs from two urls which told all of this.  Another thing, there is sufficient oxygen in the lungs and blood to sustain compression-only CPR for “several” minmutes (the word ‘several’ being three or more) according to what I have read in the professionally written literature, so there is no point at all in doing breaths for at least the first three minutes or until the heart begins to beat on its own, which is what the doctor who initiated the methods said was the proper way.   Institutions, trainign staff and practices become too ingrained in convention for the good of the people new procedures can bennefit, so ‘allowances’ are made for convention’s sake, for instance, giving breaths in the new standard after 30 compressions instead of 15.  To stop compressions in a heart-failed person stops oxygenated blood flowing through the lungs and brain, as we know that the blood already has oxygen in it, so to breathe into the lungs air which is heavy with carbon dioxide exhaled from the first aider makes no sense at all, except to ease resistance to acceptance among the institutionalized who demand compromise.  Once the heart is beating, it then makes sense to add new air for the heart to allow the blood pick up and circulate.  Of course, the brain begins dying after, it is said, about three minutes of lack of oxygen, so there comes a time when breaths will be necessary, but by then it’s probably too late in the majority of cases anyway.  So, it is my choice at this time to remain uninstiutionalized .. and I expect some jokes to be made about that, so I’ll make it first.