A handsome boy plays guitar in his garage band, thick black hair down to his shoulders. Man is he in to the music. The drummer in the background is also smiling, the kid on the bass is into it too. The photo colors are faded. I’m thinking 1970. In front of the 3X5 photo in […]

I promised more columns on enhanced BLS, but I have instead been silent for the last two weeks as I have struggled to come to a clear understanding of the issue. The most successful commentators all stake out clear positions (whether they believe them or not). But I continue to struggle with this one.

He conceded that while, it was true BLS could easily be taught to give IN Narcan or put on CPAP, his worry was that allowing Basic EMTs to do so many things, their towns or services would feel they did not have to upgrade to the paramedic level. He had a point.

If there was any place I could be this weekend, besides sitting here at home playing with my five-year old daughter (and working the ambulance tomorrow), it would be in Dallas for the annual “Gathering of the Eagles” conference.

Now some say EMTs should not be doing invasive procedures, and an IM med is invasive. I think the invasive procedure distinction is artificial. The sole distinction should be risk versus benefit. If the risk is minimal and benefit is large, then I am for it. I think that is true in this case.

Here is what they chose: The health of patients over fear of lawyers. Evidence of harm over no evidence of benefit. To lead rather than to follow.

Some argue you should never leave the hospital without leaving a complete PCR. The PCR is essential to the patient’s continuing care. Others would argue the lady having a stroke in the aisle at Wal-Mart is more important than finishing the run form for the patient sitting in the waiting room with cold and flu symptoms, who you picked up three blocks from the hospital.

sneaker x1, socks, all cut off …

I am also in support of Narcan for BLS because of the advent of IN (Intranasal) Narcan delivery.