[uguysrsick!]

so lets say that going to get her is like maybe 2 to 3mins tops, then like 2 mins back to shore then like 2 more to restore breathing, so in total like 6mins, that defiantly did some damage to the brain

[ousoonerchic]

Yay!!! Awesome

[philovan]

Originally Posted by uguysrsick! ↗

so lets say that going to get her is like maybe 2 to 3mins tops, then like 2 mins back to shore then like 2 more to restore breathing, so in total like 6mins, that defiantly did some damage to the brain

No way to know. It's not as simple as figuring the time involved. People have been revived with no brain damage who have been underwater for 45 minutes or more. The water temperature is a key factor. Cold water slows down bodily metabolic processes with the result that much less oxygen is needed to keep the person alive. Hence the long survival times sometimes found in cold water near drowning cases. Without knowing the water temperature, it is useless to speculate on whether or not she suffered brain damage.

[simenr]

Originally Posted by indybob ↗

wow...its kinda nice to see some1 make it on here.

I know right

[cujemi55]

stale mate... ah too late too late

[Evil Twin]

Originally Posted by philovan ↗

I'm not disputing anything you say, as a professional, but I just want to note that the guidelines have changed quite a bit through the years. When I learned CPR in the Air Force in the 1960's it was an 8 to 2 ratio (8 compressions followed by 2 mouth-to-mouth breaths. Then, later on in civilian life I took a course where they taught us to do three sets of 5 compressions followed by 2 breaths. I am wondering what is the basis for the various changes. I mean, one can't go back and do studies that show how many more people (if any) would have survived using each new and revised method as compared to the 1960's approach, so how does one determine which method is better?

You are absolutely correct. Guidelines have been changed many times over the years to reflect any advances in knowledge made in the medical community. The American Heart Association updates their ACLS (Advanced Cardiac Life Support) guidelines every 5 years. Here's a good example. The 2010 ACLS criteria states that first responders are to do compressions and rescue breaths at a rate of 30:2 until a definitive airway has been placed (E/T tube, King, LMA), and then change to continuous compressions after that. However, the most recent BLS (Basic Life Support) CPR instructions are to do continuous compressions from the start. The 2015 ACLS guidelines are expected to include this change.

While it is not wrong to do the 30:2 method, it is still advised to stick with continuous compressions.

I second OneSkiWonder's statement about not being dead until they're warm and dead. The body's metabolism slows drastically with just a few degrees reduction in core temperature. Slower metabolism, less oxygen demand. Decreased oxygen demand, fewer dead brain cells.

[icecreamchamp]

Oh wow a video with someone actually preforming CPR, nice.

[gunerking]

I'm glad she's still alive. Thank you.. TT

[gunerking]

I wish you a speedy recovery. I wish you good luck.