Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dr Heimlich saves choking woman with manoeuvre he invented

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 82 posts

Re: Dr Heimlich saves choking woman with manoeuvre he invented

#61

Post by benjohnson »

gnaritas wrote: post #50
lomnakkus wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I might agree if you changed "belief" to "faith"[1]. "Belief" can be informed by evidence (flawed or not), but "faith" is explicit belief-without-evidence. The latter -- I agree -- is a terrible idea, but presumably some of the people who have a "belief" in a higher being have some sort of evidence[2]. That doesn't mean that I would automatically dismiss them, but I would argue that they perhaps haven't learn…

> but presumably some of the people who have a "belief" in a higher being have some sort of evidence[2] As you've noted, their evidence isn't the kind worth considering and is thus not good evidence and thus is not rational to conclude a belief with. I stand by my statement, there is not a rational reason to believe in any gods of any sort. That doesn't mean people don't believe, or don't claim they have evidence, it…

As a Christian, I would agree - God's revelation stands in opposition to human rationality. Examples: He demands that we love our enemies. Give away our possessions. Have faith where there is absolutely no hope in anything after our minds disintegrate after death.

The Bible addresses this: "We are fools for Christ [...] We are weak, but you are strong! You are honored, we are dishonored!" 1 Corinthians 4:10

Re: Dr Heimlich saves choking woman with manoeuvre he invented

#62

Post by jazoom »

anotherevan wrote: post #57
alejohausner wrote: post #33

Heimlich means well, but the popularity of his maneuver is due more to his relentless promotional skills, and not to sound research. If someone is choking, it's best to slap them hard on the back a few times. http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/01.05.05/heimlich-05...

Last time I did my first aide certificate here in Australia (late 90s), if the back slapping is unsuccessful, the preferred technique was to lay them down on their side, place your hands under their armpit, flat over their ribs and try short, sharp compressions, squeezing the lungs. Because the Heimlich technique is so well known, I remember the instructor citing the above as superior because it was less likely to br…

I'm a doctor in Australia. The current recommendation is 5 blows to the back between the scapulae followed by 5 pushes on the sternum. Alternate until they either can breathe again or pass out.

Heimlich doesn't feature, but I can't say I wouldn't try it if nothing else was working.

Re: Dr Heimlich saves choking woman with manoeuvre he invented

#63

Post by anotherevan »

jazoom wrote: post #62
anotherevan wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last time I did my first aide certificate here in Australia (late 90s), if the back slapping is unsuccessful, the preferred technique was to lay them down on their side, place your hands under their armpit, flat over their ribs and try short, sharp compressions, squeezing the lungs. Because the Heimlich technique is so well known, I remember the instructor citing the above as superior because it was less likely to br…

I'm a doctor in Australia. The current recommendation is 5 blows to the back between the scapulae followed by 5 pushes on the sternum. Alternate until they either can breathe again or pass out. Heimlich doesn't feature, but I can't say I wouldn't try it if nothing else was working.

> Alternate until they either can breathe again or pass out.

What do you do once they pass out?

Yes, I agree doing the Heimlich would be better than doing nothing. Just that other there seems to be other techniques that are better than Heimlich. I'll defer to your judgement though.

Re: Dr Heimlich saves choking woman with manoeuvre he invented

#64

Post by MustardTiger »

Aelinsaar wrote: post #60
MustardTiger wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"According to Roger White MD of the Mayo Clinic and American Heart Association (AHA), "There was never any science here. Heimlich overpowered science all along the way with his slick tactics and intimidation, and everyone, including us at the AHA, caved in."" Seriously, try reading.

This Mayo Clinic? The one that does recommend it? http://www.mayoclinic.org/first-aid/first-aid-choking/basics... Now go invent a 'perpetual motion machine' or sight a UFO and leave me alone.

Yes, that one. Seriously, read what you respond to.

Re: Dr Heimlich saves choking woman with manoeuvre he invented

#65

Post by visakanv »

benjohnson wrote: post #55
visakanv wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about aggressive childhood leukaemia? Why does God do that? Genuinely curious to understand.

Let's make the question as hard as possible: The child dies a lingering, painful death and the child despairs. The annoying bit is that the Christian answer to this question sucks from a rational viewpoint - we humans cry out for our own justice against this God that allows such suffering. Just be mindful before you assume that Christians are completely crazy, that for from our viewpoint God suffers as well - not onl…

So does that... God is some sort of... sadomasochist? (I'm sorry if that sounds insensitive, I'm really just trying to understand.)

Re: Dr Heimlich saves choking woman with manoeuvre he invented

#66

Post by lomnakkus »

benjohnson wrote: post #61
gnaritas wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but presumably some of the people who have a "belief" in a higher being have some sort of evidence[2] As you've noted, their evidence isn't the kind worth considering and is thus not good evidence and thus is not rational to conclude a belief with. I stand by my statement, there is not a rational reason to believe in any gods of any sort. That doesn't mean people don't believe, or don't claim they have evidence, it…

As a Christian, I would agree - God's revelation stands in opposition to human rationality. Examples: He demands that we love our enemies. Give away our possessions. Have faith where there is absolutely no hope in anything after our minds disintegrate after death. The Bible addresses this: "We are fools for Christ [...] We are weak, but you are strong! You are honored, we are dishonored!" 1 Corinthians 4:10

> As a Christian, I would agree - God's revelation stands in opposition to human rationality.

But then... how do you know anything if you can just "faith it!" instead? I mean, if I could choose to just believe things "because" then that's obviously a lot easier (cognitively) than reasoning my way through it[1], but it's not very satisfactory, philosophically.

[1] Obviously that process could still lead to a lot of wrong, so it's not perfect. The point is that it's adaptive.

Re: Dr Heimlich saves choking woman with manoeuvre he invented

#67

Post by lomnakkus »

montecarl wrote: post #29
lomnakkus wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... but then God surely can't be omnibenevolent!? (But perhaps that doctrine's been abandoned?) I'm just pointing out the contradictions in "classic" Christianity. Regardless of all that, unless we somehow come up with a coherent and agreed-upon definition of God, I don't suspect anyone's mind will be changed by logical argument. And, thus, I defeat my own argument. EDIT: I mean, it was Epicurus (~2000 years ago!) wh…

I'm not a Christian, but I've thought about this from time to time. God could be omnibenevolent, but just not on terms that humans can understand. Humans only know about what happens during life and do not understand what happens after death. There is a pretty cool short story The Egg that relates to this. I won't ruin it by trying to describe it myself. You can read it here: http://www.galactanet.com/oneoff/theegg_m…

> I'm not a Christian, but I've thought about this from time to time. God could be omnibenevolent, but just not on terms that humans can understand

I thought that was the whole mandate? I mean, if $DEITY didn't have our best (human-centered) interests at heart, then was does $DEITY actually do?

(EDIT: I'm not being argumentative for the sake of it. I just really don't understand the reasoning behind this and how anyone can accept the reasoning.)

Re: Dr Heimlich saves choking woman with manoeuvre he invented

#68

Post by Aelinsaar »

MustardTiger wrote: post #64
Aelinsaar wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This Mayo Clinic? The one that does recommend it? http://www.mayoclinic.org/first-aid/first-aid-choking/basics... Now go invent a 'perpetual motion machine' or sight a UFO and leave me alone.

Yes, that one. Seriously, read what you respond to.

I did, they recommend the Heimlich Maneuver. Edit: Don't keep quoting your crazy crackpot site, we're talking about Wikipedia and the Mayo site here. Focus

Re: Dr Heimlich saves choking woman with manoeuvre he invented

#69

Post by MustardTiger »

Aelinsaar wrote: post #68
MustardTiger wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that one. Seriously, read what you respond to.

I did, they recommend the Heimlich Maneuver. Edit: Don't keep quoting your crazy crackpot site, we're talking about Wikipedia and the Mayo site here. Focus

Yes, because of "Heimlich overpowered science all along the way with his slick tactics and intimidation, and everyone, including us at the AHA, caved in." Seriously, read what you reply to.

Re: Dr Heimlich saves choking woman with manoeuvre he invented

#70

Post by Aelinsaar »

MustardTiger wrote: post #69
Aelinsaar wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did, they recommend the Heimlich Maneuver. Edit: Don't keep quoting your crazy crackpot site, we're talking about Wikipedia and the Mayo site here. Focus

Yes, because of "Heimlich overpowered science all along the way with his slick tactics and intimidation, and everyone, including us at the AHA, caved in." Seriously, read what you reply to.

Not your silly little crackpot site, the Mayo clinic site. Now take your meds.
Post reply on HN