I've been an ARNP (nurse practitioner) for over 28 years and a nurse longer than that. As an avid outdoorsperson, I've always functioned as the wilderness medical provider for the group. I lived in the Rockies for a couple years, seen plenty of hypothermia cases in the hospital I worked in. Currently, two of the clients I teach EMS infection control to are, the Mountain View Fire and Rescue Service (also known as KCFD #44) and the ski patrol at the local ski area. While that's IC and not rescue, I still have to be very familiar with other areas of medicine to know what the EMS personnel will be doing that the infection control measures will apply to. And I'll repeat, I don't doubt your expertise.
I think the story the OP is writing has all the leeway in the world. The reason I'm being so picky in the thread is seeing people giving advice like keeping wet clothes on is dangerous. I think Jack pointing out the exceptions was a good call.
I think we can sum up for the OP: If they are wearing all cotton clothing (which is stupid of them) getting it off is a priority and may even be a matter of life and death. Whether they should be in a shelter or not before they strip is a matter of contention. Huddling together for warmth would be a very good idea. Almost certainly a fire alone would not be enough to keep them alive, no matter how big it is, without some kind of shelter. It hasn't been discussed much, but a shelter is actually pretty easy. Spruce branches, a cave, a tarp spread like a wall with string are all enough, so long as the keep the wind out and allow some insulation. If all their gear is soaked, the have no dry clothing, sleeping bags, or blankets, their odds of survival are pitifully low, fire or not. Keep in mind that hypothermia would have onset as soon as they were submersed, and it is hugely detrimental to a faculties. These men are going to be disoriented, sluggish, and have difficulty performing pretty much any task. In it's final stages hypothermia can even cause hallucinations. But you should be congratulated for even acknowledging that hypothermia exists! Movies and books act as if getting wet in the cold is nothing more than an inconvenience.
umm it was a little more then just from some person . it came from first my Sargent who told us to seek cover (Fm3-05.70 4-114), then a Maine Game warden during a safety briefing about getting of the lake to shelter first, then a EMS training officer about getting them to shelter first. living in NYC is more of a new thing too me
Regardless of the source of your information, the fact is you were wrong. I don't see the problem. We're all wrong about many things we believe. Perfect knowledge is so unlikely as to be an impossible goal. I merely pointed out a critical thinking skill, to think about the source of our knowledge/beliefs. Learning something new is not something that needs to be defended.
Not all academics (who, in this thread, is claiming their knowledge is "academic"?) are "dumb ass" and no sensible person would discount experience and training. Nobody except you is suggesting anyone has expertise because they have no real world experience. That's my experience, too, but it doesn't make me an expert.
hey if you want to strip the guy down before you move him to cover that's your choice. me i fallow protocols to protect my self and think you would just contribute to a demise.
Hey, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you here. I actually don't know the answer. But you are claiming some expertise without having told us where and how you acquired it. What is this training you spoke of? I've been soaked to the skin in below-freezing temperatures with pretty strong winds blowing. It's not fun. My first instinct (and this is instinct, not training or book-larnin') is FIRST get out of the wind, THEN start a fire, THEN get dry. If there's no wind, and you don't move around much, the wetness of the clothing will absorb body heat and not leak it out as fast as it will if there's a wind. This is sort of like the principle that makes wetsuits warm under cold water. I could easily be wrong about this, and I can see how it would depend on exactly what kind of clothing you're wearing. What about stripping your clothing off, wringing most of the water out, and putting it back on again? What kind of shelter are we talking about? I would think a cave, while attractive because it doesn't take any work to build, might not be optimal because it's stone and therefore has a large heat capacity - it'll take a while even for a fire to warm it up. A tepee kind of thing might warm up a lot faster.
Protocols? I have asked repeatedly for evidence said protocol to not remove wet clothes exists. With the exception of wool and a couple of magical modern materials, evidence has not been produced. Why is that given the are hundreds of wilderness survival information web sites? You'd think there'd be at least one.
my experience with it is: mandatory wilderness survival training to graduate high school, CFR 6 years, EMT 5 years. also was covered a few times in the wilderness survival or medicine courses i took. personal experience is going trough the ice twice and treating a variety of hypodermics.
lets start with Fm3-05.70 4-114 Ginger Coffee, get the person to shelter, first concern, not removing someones cloths
I have an anecdote. Maybe it can help us break out of this odd rut. First time I ever went cross country skiing, my friends said repeatedly, wear 3 pair of socks. When the time came to put on the skis, the shoes wouldn't fit with 3 pair on so I put the third pair in my pocket. As luck would have it, we (my girlfriend and I) tried skiing across a frozen lake. It was 22F outside and there were snow mobile tracks across the lake. But I didn't know there was a hot springs in the lake. I fell through the ice. Just one leg at first. It was only knee deep. Being young and knowing very little at the time, I reached into the water to pull my ski out (since the ski came off right away) with my glove still on. That made the glove useless. I got the ski, but then I had the problem that without my weight distributed over a ski, it was all in one spot. I made my way out of the lake with each step breaking the ice anew. I was petrified I'd hit a deep pocket, the shore was a ways off. But I made it out. I couldn't feel my feet at all. And now the skis having both found their way into the water, instantly collected an uneven but very thick coating of ice on them. We were a good 2 hours from the car. I peeled off the wet socks and warmed my feet on my friends abdomen until I could feel them again. Fortunately, while the ice was about knee level, the water was lower and only the bottoms of my pants were wet, (and now ice cubed). We scraped the ice off the skis (always carry that Swiss Army knife) and the dry socks in my pocket ended up being the total life (foot?) saver of the day. They insulated my feet from the wet ski shoes. I used my pocket for my hand as one glove was now useless. Back at the car we busted out laughing. Adrenalin will do that to you. @DPVP, post a source or stop digging. Without a source you are not making your case.
Wow, I certainly wasn't expecting as many replies as this! We have some divided opinions I see (though most people seem to think off with the clothes), but let's try not to make this discussion too heated (pun intended). Not knowing how much discussion there'd be, I didn't really give much info, so let's try and clear a few things up about the situation: - The "fire" is magical (this is a Fantasy book - did I mention that?). I merely used the word 'bonfire' as a substitute, not wanting to reveal everything about my story. Essentially, they don't need anything to get this "fire" started and it can be as hot as I want it to be. - The two characters are in an underground building. I say building, but it's a vast series of connected chambers and tunnels that goes on for miles in every direction, including downwards. The characters have fallen some distance (but not enough to warrant any injury other than the ones being discussed) into this body of freezing water. As such, there is no wind, as they are far underground. - As I envision it currently, the bank upon which the characters have hauled themselves is pretty barren, with only a few rocks around. If people think that a shelter is needed, I could write in that there are some sort of materials, but remember we're far underground here - there's not going to be any lovely trees or anything like that. - About the characters themselves. One is an adult in his 30s. For lack of a better term (and without having to explain the whole story), he's sort of like S.A.S or Seals. He's part of an elite military unit and as such is very fit and, as he's been coming to the dangerous place in which this story is mostly set, he's got a pretty good survival knowledge. And we'd be talking real survival here, not "TV Survival" (if indeed there is a difference - I can't say I watch those programmes). The other character is a teenage boy. He's quite fit, but not as much as the adult. I describe him as someone who "likes outdoors and survival", but in this instance we would probably be talking "TV Survival". He's never been in a real life situation in which he's had to use any of the skills he's picked up through reading/watching TV/surfing the net (which may or may not be useless), he's only done stuff like building "shelters" with the trees in a forest near his house. He's the one that's reluctant to strip. I say reluctant, he's more hesitant. Our adult character convinces him pretty quick. But I can write this out completely if need be. So I hope this extra info helps you all but thanks again for your many insightful and informative posts!
It's good to have a fire, but in a hypothermia situation you want to warm the body form multiple directions. Hence the shelter as an insulator. It's not a perfect solution, but maybe they could warm rocks in the fire and hold them against their bodies.
Being that deep underground probably meets the requirements for "shelter" laid out above. I'd also like to remark on the fact that first aid procedures can differ considerably between military and civilian spheres, for a couple of reasons: - in a military situation, chances are that you are under fire or may be shot at soon - thus you are not "free" to pursue the course of action that might be medically ideal - help may be far away in a military scenario, although admittedly civilian hikers in the depths of the wilderness will face an even worse situation - the typical type of wounds inflicted are different (irrelevant in this case, but civilian first aid tends to focus on heart attacks and traffic incidents while military first aid focuses on gunshot and shrapnel wounds) - the clothing/equipment worn and carried can be highly different (probably irrelevant in this case)
Fm3-05.70 4-114 Fm3-05.70 4-114 try reading my posts, i work 13 fucking hours a day i dont have time to deal with people that cant read
Sorry DPVP, but I have no clue what your issue is. And I especially don't know why my anecdote should have offended you or anyone else.
Warning, dead horse beating ahead, feel free not to read this post. Not that I should bother after such an uncalled for personal attack, but I went back again to figure out your problem. I think it's worth beating this dead horse one more time because you are not supporting the claim you made, instead you are arguing something no one is arguing (a straw man). First, how was anyone supposed to know what your code meant? Let me help you out, since you can't expect people to hunt back through the thread or guess what your code letters/numbers mean. United States Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School (USAJFKSWCS) Survival Manual Then you quote the relevant part so people can find the paragraph (not everyone is used to that kind of document section numbering) (bold is mine) If the best shelter possible is still outside, removing wet clothes is still done. Here's the original scenario: So we have 2 people, wet clothes, and a raging bon fire (i.e. plenty warm enough and no one has hypothermia yet). You then claimed: This is the claim you have not supported and the source you've cited does not say leave wet clothes on if there is no shelter. No one is saying not to do all these things: shelter, heat, remove wet clothes. I went back through my posts to see if ever once I said which one should a person do first and I did not. The issue under dispute in the thread is whether or not to remove wet clothes when no shelter is available. Jack Asher cited an example of people with hypothermia removing DRY clothes, an irrelevant analogy. You can scream, "shelter" all you want. No one is arguing about shelter, nor is anyone arguing about what to do FIRST. Jack can scream, "shelter first, fire second", I don't care. He can argue with other people whether a raging bon fire is enough without shelter. I don't have a horse in that race, I think people can figure that out. But you have not supported your claim, the claim I find is dangerous advice or I wouldn't care either. A person will lose more body heat with wet clothes on (except wool and some modern fabrics) than if they had no clothes on. Shelter, blocking the wind, building a fire are all separate issues no one is arguing about.
