Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Blood Vessel Shunt May Save Limbs In War

Posted by kdawson on from the leg-to-stand-on dept.

The FDA has just approved for military use a shunt that allows partially-severed limbs to continue to get circulation. The FDA approved the device in a fast-track process lasting only a week. The article notes: "For most, it won't be a matter of saving a limb outright but rather salvaging the quality of a wounded leg or arm... The shunt may save injured limbs from amputation, since it can be implanted on the battlefield to maintain blood flow until a wounded soldier undergoes surgery, FDA officials said. Since the start of the Iraq war, more than 500 soldiers have lost limbs, many to injuries suffered in roadside bombings."

8 of 157 comments (clear)

  1. Even better by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Peace may save limbs lost in war.

    In short: stop warmongering, and soldiers will stay in one piece.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:Even better by Sinryc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If that is the case, you would have to tell it to every Democrat that voted for the war as well.

      --
      Yay, I have a sig.
    2. Re:Even better by LionKimbro · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How does that make sense?

      The original poster said: tell it to bush and the republicans, we wouldn't be in there if it weren't for them

      You reply with: If that is the case, you would have to tell it to every Democrat that voted for the war as well.

      Democrat congresspeople voted for the war, it is true. But most of the Democrats that I know were against the war from the beginning. It was the Republican population that was supporting the war.

      Do you remember that neat little debate, within the population? Do you remember how divided everyone was, and how the newspapers were writing about it? The "misinformed" + "watching Fox News" numbers going around? Remember?

      Now, if the Republican population had been against the war, none of this would have happened.

      Us non-Congressperson Democrats were firmly against the war in Iraq. We said things like, "We don't believe that there are WMD there," we said things like, "Let's listen to the inspectors," we said things like, "This evidence is really shoddy," and we said "This is going to be a disaster. You can't spread Democracy like this." We said all sorts of things. And you know what? We were right on just about every damn single one of them!

      It was the Republican-voting population that allowed for this present reality to exist.

      Not the Democrats' population.

      So, tell it to the Republicans: Stop warmongering, and soldiers will stay in one piece.

  2. Only 500? by Weston+O'Reilly · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Only 500 soldiers have lost limbs since the start of the war? Why does that sound so unlikely? We've been hearing all along that the death toll is so much lower than previous US wars because of advances in trauma care that allow soldiers to survive injuries that were once not survivable, but we're seeing a huge increase in limb loss in the trade off.

    Does anyone know if this statistic is accurate?

    1. Re:Only 500? by dave420 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Time says the 500th amputee was a Corporal, injured on January 12th 2007.

    2. Re:Only 500? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      So, back in early 2004, I was still working for Uncle sam & wearing a cute little uniform. I got into a (relatively minor, compared to what they went through) accident, and spent a bit of time at Bethesda. While I was in surgery & the ICU, my wife talked to four wives of Marines who had been shipped back to the US in the last week, all of whom were expected to survive. One of them had already lost about half his leg, and two of the remaining were expected to be paralyzed. So that makes me think that this "five hundred" figure is complete limb amputations - the guys who just lost a hand or a foot probably aren't counted in there. Nor are the guys (and some girls) who might be partially paralyzed for the rest of their lives.

  3. What the hell is wrong with all of you? by TheFlyingGoat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sure, it would be nice to not be in Iraq, but the fact remains that we're there and we're not pulling out anytime soon. Even if we were pulling out of Iraq immediately, there will be other wars in the world. This technology has nothing to do with politics, so knock it off.

    I'm not that familiar with battlefield medicine, but this seems like a big step forward for it. Anything that helps soldiers (American or otherwise) do their jobs better, protects them, or helps them live better lives after conflict is a good thing.

    --
    You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. --Winston Churchill
  4. Re:Interesting statistics there. by lav-chan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Uh. The same reason football players can't keep playing professionally after they've fucked up their knees?

    Just because it's still connected doesn't mean it's still functional.