Is this method used, or just invented by hollywood?

R

Russ538

New member
Some of the replies to this thread: http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=190164 got me wondering about something I see now and then in the older movies. It's the part where someone is injured (shot, cut, etc) and pulls a bullet out of its case and pours the gunpowder on the wound. Then the gunpowder is lit, and after it's done burning the wound is sealed up.

Are there any instances of this method being used outside of hollywood? Would that work, or would one just be left with 3rd degree burns and a wound that is still bleeding?
 
I don't know. It would seem to me that the burn would be over so quickly that it would not have time for a cauterization, plus there might be a danger of contaminating the wound. But then again, this is an uninformed opinon and worth as much as you paid for it.
 
Rambo did it, why can't I? Rambo also shot an M60 one handed from the hip. Again a bullet wound is not a shallow wound. Pouring gunpower in a deep wound and burning it off to stop the bleeding will damage layers of skin, muscle, various blood vessels and internal organs, your throwing away any chance of healing or repair. Blood actually pushes out germs that cause infection, burns are more prone to infection. Also the powder may burn more than expected causing more damage than the bullet wound
 
i dont think i would try it. my first aid instructor told us that ppl who try that should be destined to "special institutes".
 
Outdated treatment

I believe the method was used in the 19th Century as a first aid technique. The idea was the heat both killed germs and cauterized the wound.

This may have been superceded by later developments... I cannot see any reason for doing it now; first aid is too close.
 
After a short while of searching, I was only able to come up with one instance where doing such a thing was mentioned in the past.


"RATTLESNAKE BITE: {In the Handbook For Boys, first aid instructions by Major Charles Lynch of the American National Red Cross, 1926 edition, it was recommended to cauterize the wound as found particularly efficacious by hunters, to remove the bullet from a cartridge, pour the gunpowder into the wound, and set it alight.}"

Source: http://www.enw.org/Oldaid.htm


So, at one time I guess this was reasonable treatment in some instances, according to the American National Red Cross.

Say you were out in the wilderness, miles away from any first aid kits (with a cut, snake bite, bullet wound, etc). Would this even be something to consider? Or would it just make much more sense to try to stop the bleeding with cloth from a shirt?

I guess what I'm trying to ask is, does anyone think this method would still be used nowadays at all, in any situation?
 
with the cut or gsw i would use a pressure dressing and with the snake bite i would tie a piece of cloth around the limb above the bite to prevent the venom from getting to my hear/lungs until i could get to a hospital
 
Well, I would think the burning flesh would present a wonderful culture media for bacteria growth...basically I was told for wounds to place the "large" bandage against the bleeding wound, apply direct pressure and wait until the blood/bandage formed a clot...do not remove the bandage as this is what keeps the clot in place.

Of course if you have massive internal bleeding, it isn't looking to hopeful.

As for the snake bite, some snakes have neurotoxic properties, which means the toxin is carried via the nerves, so cutting off the blood to try and control the toxin going through the system isn't going to work. The mohave green contains both the hemotoxic and neurotoxic poisons...try and keep calm, kill the snake, and get to a hospital...they will need the snake to idenify which anti-toxin to administer...in the mean time you are gonna be one hurting SOB!

Of course if its a coral snake, well, your buddies will be trying to console your widow in a manner which if you were still alive would tend to upset you!
 
Can we also remember that Rambo fired a 66mm M72 LAW from the cockpit of a helicopter!
This one sounds like it was something soldiers may have done in wars far in the past to cauterize wounds; yet don't forget in those days they cut your leg off with a swig of brandy to numb the pain.
If anyone feels like trying it, just go right ahead and post how it feels...only kiddin!
 
I'd say Hollywood...

Or in the old days, maybe

But now we are smart enough to know that there the vessels do the bleeding, and burning the skin may only cause external bleeding to become internal bleeding


.
 
Reading this a question pops to mind.....Would the gun powder I just dumped down this wound even ignite being soaked in blood??:confused:

Just curious (I didn't really just dump gun powder down a wound):p
 
150 years ago it was OK

But not in todays standards of medical practice. Most of the stuff movies are made of was probably done somewhere, sometime.

It is pretty interesting how it gets so skewed. If it was a Rambo movie it had to be guano. :barf:

Harley
 
Can we also remember that Rambo fired a 66mm M72 LAW from the cockpit of a helicopter!
Click to expand...

It is pretty interesting how it gets so skewed. If it was a Rambo movie it had to be guano.
Click to expand...

We should leave poor Rambo alone. The US military had to send him in with only a compound deer hunting bow and a knife to take out a whole Vietnamese prison camp (was that Rambo II or Rambo III?). Talk about defense spending cutbacks. I loved the 3 inch cone shaped arrow tips that exploded like an artillery shell. Open one of those puppies up and cauterize your wound with that stuff.
 
Mikeyboy said:
We should leave poor Rambo alone. The US military had to send him in with only a compound deer hunting bow and a knife to take out a whole Vietnamese prison camp (was that Rambo II or Rambo III?). Talk about defense spending cutbacks. I loved the 3 inch cone shaped arrow tips that exploded like an artillery shell. Open one of those puppies up and cauterize your wound with that stuff.
Click to expand...


What amazed me was the fact that he ran around without a shirt on, in the jungle, and didn't seem to get a single mosquito bite...


:D
 
movie stuff

All i can say is thank god for modern medicine!, but those blood-clotting bandages that the military has got now-a-days is a real life saver, it immediatly sucks all of the water from your blood, thus allowing it to start clotting-up and stop bleeding. They say its almost miraculas, it even works, of course depending, on severe neck wounds. see ya
 
Say you were out in the wilderness, miles away from any first aid kits (with a cut, snake bite, bullet wound, etc). Would this even be something to consider? Or would it just make much more sense to try to stop the bleeding with cloth from a shirt?
Click to expand...
For snakebite? Naw! You'd just seal the venom in the wound. What you'd really want to do is down a fifth of Jack Daniels. Of course, you're still going to die, but you'll die happy! :D :D
 
It is real. It has been battle proven and it works. Anti-gun views of liberal EMS instructors is the main reason for it not being current groupthink. The use of exothermic agents to instantly remove moisture/cauterize by heat is still used today. Quiclot and other brandnames. www.galls.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top