Slashdot Mirror
Material Made From Crustaceans Could Combat Battlefield Blood Loss
MTorrice writes: A foam composed of a polymer derived from crustacean shells may prevent more soldiers from falling victim to the most prolific killer on the battlefield: blood loss. Pressure is one of the best tools that medics have to fight bleeding, but they can't use it on severe wounds near organs. Here, compression could do more harm than good. First responders have no way to effectively dam blood flows from these non-compressible injuries, which account for the majority of hemorrhagic deaths. The new foam could help stop bleeding in these types of injuries. It relies on chitosan, a biopolymer that comes from processed crustacean shells. By modifying the chitosan, the developers gave the material the ability to anchor blood cells into gel-like networks, essentially forming blood clots. The researchers dispersed the modified chitosan in water to create a fluid they could spray directly onto noncompressible wounds.
already do this...with the same ingredients. just don't be allergic to shellfish.
I remember seeing something like this as a coating to a wound dressing
Correct. We (Israel) used this to terrific effect in last year's operation in Gaza. It saved lives on both sides.
It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
lol. Wow. This is *OLD* news. The military has been using this technology for over 20 years now.
And you can even buy it from Amazon.com
Yes, shellfish based bandages have been around for the last decade, yes. No, this isnt the same as that. This is a spray, not a bandage. No pressure necessary, just spray the wound like windex and you're good. This is a major advance and you lot are "lol omg seen this 10 years ago lolslashdot",
Peace would be much more efficient.
I agree. How do you suggest we create peace with ISIL/ISIS?
Perhaps we should not have created ISIS in the first place. Blame Obama.
Or perhaps since the local area had already mostly found an equilibrium, we should not have toppled that evil-bastard Saddam Hussein. Yes, he was evil. Yes, I would not want him for my president. But he was reasonably well contained and provided a counter balance to the other powers in the region. Blame Bush II.
We can walk our way back in time and blame [nearly?] every U.S. president regardless of party back to the fall of the Ottoman Empire. We can then start blaming the Europeans for carving up the Mid-East in such a way that it was a breeding ground for future wars.
But peace? Do you have any concrete mechanisms that would actually improve the situation?
Is it kosher then? Or does reality temporarily take precedence over mythology when someone is wounded?
Bert
Nice veiled insult. Saving a human life is considered, as per our mythology, more important than any other commandment. We drive ambulances on the sabbath and use pig implants when that is needed to save a life. There is no "temporary" about that, it is our custom.
Some religions value the afterlife more than human life. Some religions value vague interpretations of scripture more than human life. Some politicians value religion more than human life. Jews believe in human life first, all else second.
It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
Actually the main purpose is to wound as many enemies as you can. Each wounded soldier takes 2-3 support people to care for them. The purpose of engaging in battle is to gain the specific objective (hill, town, city) as described by the mission objectives. A lot of killing takes place, yes, but it's actually the wounded that count the most from a tactical standpoint.
Thanks for the reply and the elucidation. I think it is a very good custom that saving a human life takes precedence.
Yes, I had a blunt way of posing the question. I'm not really sorry about that. Being without any factual basis, religion is a personal hobby and should not affect other people's lives. These days, the news is rather filled with items that are at odds with that.
It is rather sad that science is brought to the battle field (both for killing and surviving). If only soldiers limited themselves to taking their holy book with them and praying the enemy to death. There are no theists in foxholes, I guess.
Bert
We've been using this stuff for 10 years already in the military. You can buy it on Amazon.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001BCNTHC/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o03_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
NOT the same thing, however in your defense the article does not make this distinction very clear without already knowing the definitions.. Quick clot and related technologies are for "compressible wounds" that are bleeding to the outside. If you can see the source of bleeding, you can usually compress it. TFA references "Non-compressible bleeding". These are typically truncal wounds that require an operation to fix.
This product is more in line to what TFA is referring to: and this product already exists. I know it has been tested on animal models, and I believe is close to, or in human testing. As a side note, this was developed by a trauma surgeon, not a chemist, so I'll give the nod to David King as he has already take into account several aspects of the foam that TFA authors probably have yet to discover along with being much farther ahead in the testing.
For those who didn't follow the links, the bleeding around organs is far from incompressible. In the OR we frequently compress organs or their blood supply to stop bleeding (liver and spleen being _very_ common), (the problem is that they are incompressible from the outside, hence the thought of using a biocompatable foam internally). The problem with internal foam (as anticipated by DK) is that while this pressure may do a good job of stopping the hemorrhage, it may cause too much pressure resulting in abdominal compartment syndrome. There are literally dozen of issues like this that are related to the foam and the consequences of its use, just stopping the bleeding is not enough, you have to deliver a viable patient to definitive care.
Thanks, Bert. I agree with you on all accounts.
I've been on both ends of the assault rifle, and my children have been through one rocket damaging our home and dozens more landing nearby. The more we "advance" technology the more we enable any particular human to hurt more and more people around them. I long for the day when we forget how to forge rifles and pack blackpowder. Let the warriors (and I say this as a reserve soldier) fight with their fists. There is no way for either side to "leave the civilians out of it" when we are fighting with weapons with a ranges measured in kilometers. If you can't look the other side in the eye, don't pull the trigger / don't throw the punch / don't push the button.
And don't be afraid to call someone a false cleric if they are using holy texts / mythology / out-of-context quotes in order to convince you to hurt somebody.
It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
The U.S. has had hemostatic dressings since at least World War II. Soldiers carried a mix of sulfanilamide, aluminum sulfate and titanium dioxide, the use of which is still taught at the US Army Combat Medic school and the USAF Pararescue School. Although in practice, the military now uses modern Combat Gauzes like Quik Clot, Celox Gauze and ChitoGauze on the battlefield.