From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Newsgroups: alt.airports,alt.travel,alt.travel.uk.air,alt.religion.kibology,
	sci.physics
Subject: Re: Fibbulators in airports
Date: 2 Jun 1999 10:32:37 GMT

In <375375DC.BB607B3@goesbluelab.com> CICROPS
<counterintelligencecrops@goesbluelab.com> writes:

>The airline industry has finally done it.Chicago has installed those
>little automated heart starting machines so that the average traveler
>has access to dangerous electrical technology. What you have basically
>is a stun gun for people who are already ambulatory.


   If you knew how these things worked, you'd know that they contain a
resistance meter and EKG reader with intelligent software, and all this
does not allow anyone to deliver a charge except though the properly
connected naked chest of somebody who already doesn't have a "perfusing
rhythm" coming from his heart (and who is therefore more than likely
clinically dead already).  So it's not exactly a dangerous device.

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nursing,sci.med.cardiology,alt.travel,alt.lawyers,
	sci.physics
Subject: Re: Heart machines at the airport
Date: 3 Jun 1999 09:18:40 GMT

In <CNc53.250$tp5.7587@newse2.tampabay.rr.com> "Leo Sgouros"


>>Well if there available like that than whats to keep people from
>>grabbing them and using them like on dogs and stuff. This seems like a
>>very dangerous thing to be leave laying around!!!


   One more time: unless your dog is in cardiac arrest from ventricular
fibrillation, the machine will not work on it.  You can push the button
all you like, and unless the computer inside sees its two electrodes
connected to a good approximation of a large piece of meat with a good
approximation of the electrical signature of a dying, nonworking heart
inside, nothing will happen.  Got it?  If you can whip up that kind of
fake conductor with that kind of fake generator, then you can probably
get your jollies by successfullly using the airport machine on it.  I
recommend you see a psychiatrist in that case, of course, but don't
worry about hurting your dog, or any person, this way.  You couldn't if
you wanted to.

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nursing,sci.med.cardiology,alt.travel,alt.lawyers,
	sci.physics
Subject: Re: Heart machines at the airport
Date: 7 Jun 1999 03:48:42 GMT

In <L8D63.222$W4.7481@newse3.tampabay.rr.com> "Leo Sgouros"
<lsgouro1@tampabay.rr.com> writes:

>What sort of electrical response will be satisfactory to the machine?
>No games here-it looks for any electrical activity and then renders
>itself unusable?

   Right.


>In other words, a guy has to be shocked, and the machine has a memory
>of acceptable rythyms?


   That's right.  It also measures the resistance across the chest to
make sure it's hooked up right.

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nursing,sci.med.cardiology,alt.travel,alt.lawyers,
	sci.physics
Subject: Re: Heart machines at the airport
Date: 7 Jun 1999 03:50:46 GMT

In <7jf0rg$2je@news-central.tiac.net> conover@tiac.net (Harry H
Conover) writes:

>Leo Sgouros (lsgouro1@tampabay.rr.com) wrote:
>:
>: >specific bad rhtyhm before it will trigger. Someone hooks it up wrong, they
>: >won't get the rhythm and nothing will happen.
>
>Leo, I'm curious about that too. What if the victim is totally flat-line
>with respect to cardiac activity. Isn't this one of the situations for
>which the device would be most needed? (Or have I simply been watching
>too many movies?)
>
>Perhaps it is for conditions like this that the "override" exists?


   Flatline is fine, so long as the paddles see a resistance that looks
like a chest.  Stick those things anywhere else on the body where's
there's that much resistance between them, and it's going to see an EKG
(ECG) on a living person.  So you can't goof around with it.  Unless
shocking long dead corpses or sides of beef is your idea of fun.

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nursing,sci.med.cardiology,alt.travel,alt.lawyers,
	sci.physics
Subject: Re: Heart machines at the airport
Date: 7 Jun 1999 04:12:35 GMT

In <375B1127.7A8D25A@dlcwest.com> Sue /ccrn <sueannRN@dlcwest.com>
writes:

>Yup - too many movies! If someone is 'flatlining' or asystole - then a
>shock will not do them any good - that is when they need drugs.


   A shock may do good-- the "asystole" may simply be V-fib too fine to
see.


>  A shock is only
>administered when the rhythm is ventricular fibrillation or ventricular
>tachycardia (pulseless). The only thing a 'user' would have to do is
>determine if there was a pulse or not. Even if the pads (paddles) were
>applied during asystole nothing would happen.

   I hope not.  If this is true they screwed up the design.  I've
shocked many a person in "asystole" back into some kind of rhythm.  I
don't think I've ever done it with chest compression and drugs (epi,
calcium, whatever the brew will be in the future-- I don't think it
makes a difference).  A shock gets things in synch-- that's ALL it
does.  If a shock is going to do any good, there must be some
electrical activity already there somewhere to corrordinate, even if
you can't see it.  Don't fear to zap flatline in an unconscious person.
The worst you can do is puzzle the undertaker with those funny marks.

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nursing,sci.med.cardiology,alt.travel,alt.lawyers,
	sci.physics
Subject: Re: Heart machines at the airport
Date: 8 Jun 1999 09:16:40 GMT

In <375BD084.E99972E5@dlcwest.com> Sue /ccrn <sueannRN@dlcwest.com>
writes:

>I might be wrong here - but I think you are missing the point here -
>we are talking about the AED's in airports or where ever.


   That is correct.  Which means YOU are missing the point.  There are
no drugs.  All you have is a person who looks like they are flatline,
and a machine.  Do you use it if you can?  You bet.  What have you got
to lose?

>  They would not deliver
>a shock if they sensed a 'flatline'.


   If it was an airport defibrillator it certainly should.  If not,
it's has been improperly designed.  As I said.


> Just for the sake of your argument -
>are you ACLS (advanced cardiac life support) certified?

    Yes, I am.  Are you?


> If you are then
>you would know that the algorithm for asystole is first drugs.

    Algorithms don't help you with a person in cardiac arrest in an
airport.  You have one defib treatment available, and that is the (two
if you count a precordial thump-- no longer a part of the protocol, but
that's the AHA's problem-- it doesn't occasionally work).  You have no
drugs, no cath lab, no electrophysiologic mapping suite, no heart lung
machine.  No scalpels for open chest massage.  Just a box and a
clinically dead guy with no electrical activity you can see for sure.
And probably 3 lawyers taking notes.  Your call.


>  I have to
>disagree with you on your comment on the "worst you can do is puzzle
>the undertaker..." - the worst you can do by "zapping flatline is
>waste precious moments 'zapping' when it is epi that should be given.

    What epi is that?   This is an airport with someone down.  The
1:10,000 IV amp of ACLS epi you carry all the time in your purse?
Along with that IV setup?  Or were you going to do the intraventricular
injection? If you have all that stuff, what are you doing worrying
about what the airport defib machine will or will not do?  The
paramedics are already there doing all that for you, and they have
their own defib machine.  You're just standing to one side, explaining
what's happening to the lawyers.


> Regardless
>- we are talking about the AED's, in which case applying the pads to
>someone who you suspect is flatlined - won't hurt.
>Sue


   That is correct.  It won't hurt.  If you could get the machine to
trigger, it might even help.  Whether the thing will or not in those
circumstances, I do not know.  It would if I had designed it.

                                     Steve

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nursing,sci.med.cardiology,alt.travel,alt.lawyers,
	sci.physics
Subject: Re: Heart machines at the airport
Date: 9 Jun 1999 10:55:35 GMT

In <375dd7f9.208598717@news-server> ltorreyXX@maine.rr.com (Larry
Torrey) writes:

>On 8 Jun 1999 09:16:40 GMT, sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
>wrote:
>
>>In <375BD084.E99972E5@dlcwest.com> Sue /ccrn <sueannRN@dlcwest.com>
>>writes:
>   [snip]
>>>  They would not deliver
>>>a shock if they sensed a 'flatline'.
>>
>>   If it was an airport defibrillator it certainly should.  If not,
>>it's has been improperly designed.  As I said.
>
>I'm very familiar with several brands of AED, and none of them will
>defib asystole.


   Too bad.  I see by Ed's post that the AHA doesn't even recommend you
shock asystole that you're sure is asystole.  Why not is more than I
can see.  If you have no drugs, or your drugs haven't worked, what
exactly do you have to lose?  It's not as though a guy with no blood
pressure is going to haunt you if you zap him one more time when it
turns out not to do any good.  And it's not as though people with
flatlines and no BP sometimes spontaneously recover if you leave them
alone, so that shocking them causes some interuption of THAT.  No, they
are not going to get better.  Really, the whole AHA position sounds
rather daft.  I've shocked at least one person out of "flatline" who
left the hospital alive and well.  What, I suppose I committed
malpractice?  Should have left him alone and in peace?

   Now, it is true that sometimes what appears to be a flatline is
really 3rd degree AV block, and you can see some P waves.  In a
hypothermic person or animal, as you do CPR and rewarm, sometimes these
DO actually start to conduct and you get capture and sinus rhythm (same
happens as atropine or sympathomimetics kick in).  I see this all the
time in hypothermic dogs.  But that's NOT a true flatline.  You have to
know what you're doing, of course.

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nursing,sci.med.cardiology,alt.travel,alt.lawyers,
	sci.physics
Subject: Re: Heart machines at the airport
Date: 9 Jun 1999 17:44:08 GMT

In <375E83D5.D1583E2A@pottsville.infi.net> jeri
<jeri@pottsville.infi.net> writes:

>But, we all do realize that there is a huge difference in protocol
>outside of the ER and inside. And, a huge difference between 'lay'
>rescuers and those professionals or technicians who earn their living in
>some type of health care setting. I really believe you are mixing apples
>and oranges here. Look a little further into AHA's research, Steve, and I
>think you would agree, that adapting that kind of sophistication to AED's
>or any "lay" type of equipment would be quite dangerous. I think your
>last sentence really shows your line of thinking; "of course you have to
>know what you are doing." AHA's research and algorithm regarding AED's
>are for the truly clueless...because that's who is usually there
>first...the basic CPR type..thank God people out there are willing to
>learn basic, now let's provide them with the next missing ingredient that
>they CAN handle. As pros we can all tell stories of successful saves.
>Fine VF, EMD, gremlins! Please, before you call AHA "daft", orient
>yourself to person, place, & time in terms of purpose, function and use
>of AED's. Jeri


    You missed the point.  It isn't only that the AHA recommends that
AEDs shouldn't shock asystole.  Apparently they recommend that nobody do
it, anywhere.  The first I can understand, though it makes me grumble.
The second I just don't get.

From: "Steve Harris" <sbharris@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com>
Newsgroups: uk.legal,uk.politics.crime,uk.politics.misc,alt.conspiracy,sci.med
Subject: Re: Dr Kelly - Hutton Bombshell!
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2003 10:41:50 -0700
Message-ID: <bggt4u$4cp$1@slb9.atl.mindspring.net>

"Francis Burton" <fburton@nyx10.nyx.net> wrote in message
news:1059835705.957536@irys.nyx.net...
> In article <9khniv04uldcdgbmo6r1ksn6i2jshfuskq@4ax.com>,
> James Teo  <james@teoth.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> >>The point is that those pads ensure a low contact resistance with the
> >>skin. That means you can pump in lethal currents without leaving a
> >>burn mark, and at quite low voltages.
> >
> >Not entirely true. The energies we are talking about here is about 100J
> >DC or 50J AC. You do leave signs of burns in the subcutaneous tissue
> >always even though there may not be outward signs. I have done several
> >cardioversions before (ie. electrical shocks to the heart to revert
> >heart rhythms), and even then they often leave electrical burn marks
> >when the pads are used. Not the charcoal-black kind, just a redness
> >patch which would be discernable as a burn if you examined the chest
> >wall on post-mortem.
>
> So skin electrical resistance is not an issue with defibrillators? If it
> were, I suppose one could squirt electrolyte gel on first.
>
> Francis


Indeed, you always have to have some kind of gel or moisture
first.

Also, it's much more difficult to stop a heart with DC than
AC. With a defibrillator you'd have to shock right on top of
the T wave, and even then with a healthy heart you probably
most of the time would get nothing.

With AC you need at least 100 milliamps for a few tenths of
a second through the heart, and to be sure of the effects,
more like 1000 milliamps for a second. That would require
skin resistance down in the 10's of ohms with the voltages
you're talking about, and that would certainly require
salt-water or similar electrolyte contact.



SBH

From: "Steve Harris" <sbharris@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com>
Newsgroups: uk.legal,uk.politics.crime,uk.politics.misc,alt.conspiracy,sci.med
Subject: Re: Dr Kelly - Hutton Bombshell!
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2003 16:30:30 -0700
Message-ID: <bghhim$sqk$1@slb6.atl.mindspring.net>

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax" <dirk@neopax.com> wrote in message
news:bghgv2$p3229$1@ID-120108.news.uni-berlin.de...
>
> "Francis Burton" <fburton@nyx10.nyx.net> wrote in message
> news:1059847471.839794@irys.nyx.net...
> > In article <bggt4u$4cp$1@slb9.atl.mindspring.net>,
> > Steve Harris <sbharris@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com> wrote:
> > >Also, it's much more difficult to stop a heart with DC than AC. With
> > >a defibrillator you'd have to shock right on top of the T wave, and
> > >even then with a healthy heart you probably most of the time would
> > >get nothing.
> >
> > Hence my previous comment. (Arguably modern defibrillators are AC
> > because they employ a biphasic waveform, so current flows one way then
> > the other. But your point is taken - the pulses have to be timed to
> > lie within a narrow vulnerable window - unlike the more usual
> > mains-type AC which alternates continuously.)
> > 
> > With AC you need at least 100 milliamps for a few tenths of a second
> > through the heart, and to be sure of the effects, more like 1000
> > milliamps for a second. That would require skin resistance down in the
> > 10's of ohms with the voltages you're talking about, and that would
> > certainly require salt-water or similar electrolyte contact.
> > 
> > Or open up the chest and apply electrodes directly to the heart. :-)
>
>
> No.
> A couple of needles as electrodes would be enough.
> People have been killed with less than 12V when this occurs.

For how long-- enough time that they couldn't breathe for
some minutes?

12 AC maybe. 12 V DC I don't believe. I have seen
anesthetized dogs reliably fibrillated with two chest
needles and 60 or 120 volts AC for one second, but it's not
reliable with 30 volts, even AC.

SBH

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com (Steve Harris  sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: defibrillator question
Date: 4 Nov 2003 16:02:44 -0800
Message-ID: <79cf0a8.0311041602.66250b7a@posting.google.com>

KATHYjspa@aol.com (KATHY) wrote in message
news:<bd0e751a.0311031841.9a9c290@posting.google.com>...

> defibrillator question
>
>
>
>
> 2003/Nov/03
>  alison_nipar@hotmail.com (alison)  wrote
>
> I need a paramedic's expertise:
> I am a television writer.
> I came up with a scene where, during sex, a woman (on top) introduces
> a portable defibrillator and as climax approaches, holds one paddle
> above groin of the guy, the other above her groin. Guy grasps her arm
> and she--with the defib on lowest power--hits the button(s).
> Would they be able to withstand the shock?


What do you mean by "withstand?"  It wouldn't kill anybody, but this
energy of DC shock hurts like HELL. It hurts when it's not through
your most sensitive parts (like your arms), and I can only imagine how
much it would hurt if it was.


> What kind of shock can a 9V lithium battery deliver?


The kind of battery is irrelevent. Only the voltage counts. 9V you can
feel across a tongue or any wet mucosa. And it stings. It doesn't
tingle (that takes AC) but it does sting. Raise the voltage and
muscles contract involuntarily and now there's pain. Nobody would ever
use DC in conjunction with pleasurable stimulation, and batteries and
defibrillators all deliver DC.

In a defibrillator, of course, the voltage is much higher. A battery
is used to provide power to an inverter which changes it to AC, runs
up the voltage through a transformer, rectifies it again to DC, and
charges a high voltage capacitor.

> Comments welcome. Thanks in advance. www.alison_nipar@hotmail.com
>
> A