Slashdot Mirror
Battlefield Medkits Improve
ApharmdB writes "CNN has an article on the US military's fielding of a bandage containing clotting agents that can stop blood flow within two minutes. Obviously, the hope is that they will save a lot of lives. What's next straight from your favorite FPS? Who has an estimate on how long it will take for the Army to outfit its troops with anti-personnel rocket launchers?" Those have been around for quite a while.
that's what I want to see on CNN!
those who are camping next to those medkits. Damnit! Why someone would put a rocket launcher and a mega-health in the same room is beyond me...
...these bandages would make effective tampons?
Who has an estimate on how long it will take for the Army to outfit its troops with anti-personnel rocket launchers?
We don't really need more anti-personnel equipment
War nowadays is more about accuretley knocking out specific enemy targets. Communications and flight and aircraft and the like
Not just killing everybody
America had developed small antipersonnel nukes during the cold war. These are well known of, but they don't see the light of day
Some things are better left unbuilt.
About those anti-personel rocket launchers, we're closer than you may think. The OICW (the next-generation combat weapon being tested for deployment throughout the armed services) includes a computer-aimed grenade launcher which is smart enough to compute a perfect air-burst over a designated target, and which can handle a range of ammunition types.
The Davy Crockett
If you work out, you might be able to carry one on each shoulder!
Is this the promised end? Or image of that horror? KING LEAR
I can't believe we're still using soldiers with blood in them.
Operator, give me the number for 911!
They've been working on railguns for awhile. They have them working, and can electromagnetically accellerate aluminum rings at insane speeds (like twice that of the average bullet).
They just can't get the thing down to a portable size, nor figure out how to supply it with the jiggawatts(TM) of juice it needs to fire.
But they do exist.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
What I want is an orange suit that dispenses morphine whenever I take damage and lets me run around with a broken leg.
"Whaddaya mean you stapled yourself 127 times?!"
"Lawyers are for sucks."
- Doug McKenzie
No, it goes against the Geneva Convention to use rocket launchers specifically for the use of attacking people.
You can use them on materiel, like bunkers, tanks, buildings, clothing. The Geneva convention doesn't specifically rule out the use of rocket propelled weaponry against clothing that is currently occupied either.
So, as long as you don't hit the skin, you're fine.
Black and grey are both shades of white.
Why is this apparently a lost technology? I couldn't even find mention of it in a google search.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
A lot of medical innovations have come out of the military in the past, much like innovations in other industries (computers, aviation)
Blood plasma comes to mind. Way back some army docs realized that if you lose a huge amount of blood, you're more likely to die of shock simply because your heart has nothing to pump around.
They realized you can use a centrifuge to take out all the red blood cells, dehydrate what's left, and all you need to do is add distilled water and get it into the body of an exsanguinated soldier. Just the fact that theres some fluid in the system for the heart to pump is enough to keep you alive until you can replace the red blood cells, and other gook in there..
It works regardless of blood type, takes less space, and doesn't require refrigeration (keeps longer).
Science has long been at it's best when its at war. Make of that what you will, but it's always been so.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
It's like the myth about how .50 cal can only be used against material, and not combatants. Even people in the military to this day think that it's not okay to engage humans with the .50, but instead to "shoot their canteens or weapons out of their hands..oops I accidently killed him!" This is a myth, we can engage any combatant with a .50.
.50 cal myth came from when the brass in Vietnam said told Marines and/or soldiers in a particular AO (area of operations) not to engage VC or NVA with the .50 due to ammo resupply issues, and to engage them with M16s, etc.
;)
A Capt of Marines recently told me that the
This was purely to save ammo in one instance. Not due to any international law.
Also, in the Hague convention is where you'd find anything close to regulating ammo used on combatants. Such as "weapons that cause unneeded suffering" such as "exploding bullets."
You've probably seen movies where they use rockets to clear out bunkers. What's the difference in bombing a bunker with an A-10 and firing a rocket in it? Does this make any sense to regulate the use of rockets on personal?
I'd also like to mention that I'd like snopes.com to investigate this
rm -rf ~/.signature
The anti-hemorrhagic bandage was developed by Dr. Kenton Gregory at the Oregon Medical Laser Center, and there is much more material about it at the website of the company formed to commercialize the technology, HemCon.
The secret to the patch is a particular formulation of chitin, which is to stay, crabshells. The pro-clotting properties of chitin have been well-known for some time, but Dr. Gregory and his researchers were able to figure out how to make a viable bandage out of it, which hadn't been done before.
The OMLC is working on lots of other cool stuff as well, such as laser suturing (very good for your liver, which won't take thread sutures).
Full disclosure: I'm on their Board of Directors.
gnetwerker
Well, as a former medic (1989-1997) I can say, with authority, that I know nothing about any such stuff. ;) A few posts back, someone was talking some spray called "Tropostat," which was apparently something along those lines, but it sounds like it may have been pulled from the market. Probably caused cancer in rats that would otherwise have bled to death, or something ...
Some userful things never get approved by the FDA for "NIH" (Not Invented Here) reasons. When I was stationed in England, we worked with the British hospitals a lot, and they had some cool epoxy-like bandaging stuff -- basically, you'd pour it into thw wound, and it would form perfectly to the shape of the wound, and then get slowly absorbed by the patient's body as the wound healed. Now, British medicine is just as good as US; I see no reason why we couldn't have trusted the stuff for our patients. But we couldn't use it because it hadn't been approved by the FDA yet -- and since that was over ten years ago, I suppose it probably never has been or will be.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
I wonder if there are any allergies associated with it, or if you have to use a patch that corresponds to your blood type...