Live data from Hacker News

IV Bags May Not Be Necessary to Rehydrate Patients

slate.com

41–50 of 145 posts

Re: IV Bags May Not Be Necessary to Rehydrate Patients

#41

IV bags are there to get you out of the shit. In the UK its pretty rare to get an IV bag, unless you are a celebrity.

EMT here. Venous access is mandatory protocol in many emergent cases, such as trauma and cardiac. If they already have hypovolemia, eg bleeding, it's not going to get better by itself. Reduced BP, impaired perfusion, or anemia will all end up shorting the brain and heart muscle eventually, so they want to stay ahead of that. Also, if a surgery is expected later, they want an empty stomach because vomiting is not good when inhaled. Another reason is for drug delivery, even if it's just an "saline lock" (no bag, just a port for later) to insert meds. I think oral fluids are great, but only when indicated.

Re: IV Bags May Not Be Necessary to Rehydrate Patients

#42
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And babies.

And hung-over medical personnel..

Which makes me always wonder: IV carries always the risk of thrombosis so I'd expect especially medical personnel staying away from it. But maybe they take also good dose of Warfarin with it...

Re: IV Bags May Not Be Necessary to Rehydrate Patients

#43
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And hung-over medical personnel..

> And hung-over medical personnel You're being down-voted, but I know a number of military medics and hospital employees who do this after heavy drinking. Seems to work like a charm.

Wasn't there a scene in Hangover (the movie) where this was offered as service in Las Vegas?

Re: IV Bags May Not Be Necessary to Rehydrate Patients

#44
post #21

So that time back in my Army days when I collapsed from dehydration, I'm guessing the solution that was forced on me -- sit on this rock and chug two full canteens of plain water (no salt/sugar/electrolytes) -- was probably not the best idea?

> I'm guessing the solution that was forced on me [...] was probably not the best idea?

Indeed, it wasn't a solution!

Re: IV Bags May Not Be Necessary to Rehydrate Patients

#45
post #42
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And hung-over medical personnel..

Which makes me always wonder: IV carries always the risk of thrombosis so I'd expect especially medical personnel staying away from it. But maybe they take also good dose of Warfarin with it...

IVs don't really carry a meaningful risk of systemic thrombosis, so taking warfarin would not put you in a good place on the cost/benefit axis.

Re: IV Bags May Not Be Necessary to Rehydrate Patients

#46
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And hung-over medical personnel You're being down-voted, but I know a number of military medics and hospital employees who do this after heavy drinking. Seems to work like a charm.

Wasn't there a scene in Hangover (the movie) where this was offered as service in Las Vegas?

There appears to be a scene in reality where someone is doing this, too: https://www.theivdoc.com/ ("Food Poisoning Relief")

Re: IV Bags May Not Be Necessary to Rehydrate Patients

#49
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is just salt enough? Or do we need to replenish any other minerals other than Na and Cl (K comes to mind)?

The salt isn't there because you need salt, it's there to optimise absorption of water. This is treatment for H2O deficiency, not anything else.

Huh, interesting, anything i can read on this point? Aka citation please.

Re: IV Bags May Not Be Necessary to Rehydrate Patients

#50
post #44
post #21

So that time back in my Army days when I collapsed from dehydration, I'm guessing the solution that was forced on me -- sit on this rock and chug two full canteens of plain water (no salt/sugar/electrolytes) -- was probably not the best idea?

> I'm guessing the solution that was forced on me [...] was probably not the best idea? Indeed, it wasn't a solution!

[deleted]
Post reply on HN