alt Hacker NewsSorry, that blows my mind more. This advice is twenty plus years out of date. It had been large discredited before I even began as a lowly EMT in the early 2000s. It doesn't help. It's actually more likely to do more harm than good. And I realize I'm a retired paramedic arguing with a physician, but at the very least:
Doing compressions at 60/minute is not going to resuscitate your patient if they are in cardiac arrest. Ever.
https://cpr.heart.org/en/resuscitation-science/cpr-and-ecc-g...
> 3. For adults in cardiac arrest, it is reasonable for rescuers to perform chest compressions at a rate of 100 to 120/min.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8152146/ "Clinical outcomes and safety of passive leg raising in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a randomized controlled trial":
> In this trial, PLR during CPR did not improve survival to hospital discharge
Sorry, dang, but while not litigating this - the advice in this post is outdated, and factually inaccurate, and entirely likely to cause actual harm when performed by a layperson.
I have no idea about what does or doesn't happen when lifting someone else's legs to waist height, and am not implying anything about that.
What I do know is how HN is supposed to work in cases like this: respond to incorrect information with correct information. Do not respond with snark, shallow dismissals, or internet tropes. If people respond by arguing back (though I don't think I saw that in the current thread), either continue to do those things while remaining respectful, or simply don't continue the discussion.
It's that simple! At least conceptually. It can be hard in practice, of course, because other people being wrong on the internet is so provocative.