SRS131EMTFF

It was a question not bashing. If one guy was going to be driving that around all day as an ESU piece, it would be a lot of truck. That's all.
It's no different then one FF on an engine or ladder and that's downright ridiculous. Or a department buying a 10 FF engine when they're lucky to put 4 guys on it for a call on a drill night.
What kind of jobs will it respond for? Again, a question, not bashing.

In VT, at the EMT level, Narcan is administered 2mg IN for adults (1mg in each nostril) and 1 mg IN for pediatrics (0.5 mg in each nostril). The IN Narcan drug kit comes with 1 IN applicator with 2mg of Narcan in the sole vial. The IN dose of Narcan can be titrated for pediatrics by simply not administering 1mg in each nostril and instead only administering 0.5mg per nostril.
While it is not "official" protocol, most ED docs have no problem with you giving a pediatric dose of Narcan to adult pts provided the adult pt is breathing adequately without additional ventilation after a pediatric dose of Narcan is administered. In that way can it be titrated to avoid combative patients or unwanted situations.

In VT, at the EMT level, Narcan is administered 2mg IN for adults (1mg in each nostril) and 1 mg IN for pediatrics (0.5 mg in each nostril). The IN Narcan drug kit comes with 1 IN applicator with 2mg of Narcan in the sole vial. The IN dose of Narcan can be titrated for pediatrics by simply not administering 1mg in each nostril and instead only administering 0.5mg per nostril.
While it is not "official" protocol, most ED docs have no problem with you giving a pediatric dose of Narcan to adult pts provided the adult pt is breathing adequately without additional ventilation after a pediatric dose of Narcan is administered. In that way can it be titrated to avoid combative patients or unwanted situations.

In VT, at the EMT level, Narcan is administered 2mg IN for adults (1mg in each nostril) and 1 mg IN for pediatrics (0.5 mg in each nostril). The IN Narcan drug kit comes with 1 IN applicator with 2mg of Narcan in the sole vial. The IN dose of Narcan can be titrated for pediatrics by simply not administering 1mg in each nostril and instead only administering 0.5mg per nostril.
While it is not "official" protocol, most ED docs have no problem with you giving a pediatric dose of Narcan to adult pts provided the adult pt is breathing adequately without additional ventilation after a pediatric dose of Narcan is administered. In that way can it be titrated to avoid combative patients or unwanted situations.

What really irks me, more then the article itself, is that we have a fellow emergency provider, someone who is supposed to be on the same team as all of us, trying to defend the abysmal staffing of what occurs in almost 99.9% of career departments (volunteer staffing is a different problem altogether, and I'm a volunteer). It's not safe for anyone, and anyone who sits there and tries to defend it is absolutely clueless about firefighting, the safety issues that we face (and manage to miraculously dodge fire after fire without more LODDs), and the politicians that we currently fight with day in and day out to provide a safe environment for the communities we've sworn to protect. All of the fire engines in the world mean absolutely nothing, if the correct staffing levels are not there to safely, correctly and efficiently do the job.
I am not a paramedic, and will never sit there and attempt to tell you your protocols need to change when it comes to dosage rates of atropine during a heart attack, because I don't have a damn clue about what I'm talking about. I am not a electrician, nor a painter, or a ditch digger, or a cable repair man, so I will never sit there and tell them how to do their job, or the correct and safe way to do it.
So until you strap on a pair of bunkers, make a hallway, pull a victim out, all while having a vertical vent simultaneously cut, with multiple handlines being stretched, don't tell me the safe way to do my job, because I've also done it the poor staffing way, and can tell you the horrible differences between the two.
This is a public forum now, and every reply that is posted can be read by the public, press, politicians, and those who vote. And for someone who is supposed to be on the same team, as stated in your affiliations under your user name, to sit there and say 2 guys on a rig is perfectly good, does absolutely nothing but hurt us, and all the years of work that unions have fought for.
/rant.

You'd be wrong.
If one dime of tax money was used to put the mural on the rig, then the mural should be removed.

Explain how that would work.
Yes.

You'd be wrong.
If one dime of tax money was used to put the mural on the rig, then the mural should be removed.

Maybe its just me, but I'm much more concerned that there are towns that have 9 Chiefs cars in service but only 5 Engines than I am with a PRIVATE company buying a large military tow rig.
Last I checked the owner of a private company can spend his money as he pleases. This being America and all.

Inside your current rig if the previous low bids are any indication

Maybe... we should forward this incident to the CHP officer who arrested the firefighter last week for trying to protect the scene of an MVA.

You are right in many ways and I fully respect your views, but as one who has been on both sides of the drug abuse fence I can tell unequivocally that the legal repercussions of drug use are an insignificant deterrent if they are one at all. Now I'm sure some will blow a head gasket with this next comment but when it comes right down to it drug addiction is no different than alcoholism other than alcohol is legal and drugs aren't. The root causes of both afflictions are the same. And when we look at the effectiveness of prohibition it's clear that making alcohol illegal created far more problems than it solved, that's why they repealed the 18th Amendment (alcohol is also a drug by the way). Today people still abuse and illicitly produce and distribute alcohol, but by far making alcohol legal again and giving those who want to drink access to it legally has been the best road to take. And in this day and age with the societal views on drug use, prescription or otherwise, as they are and the stigma far less ingrained as it used to be, so is it with drugs too. No one likes to admit defeat, but the war on drugs, just like the one against alcohol in the 1920's, is one that is unwinnable and no amount of ire, disgust or contempt about drugs and drug users is going to change that.

Yes and no. While securing the border would most likely cut some of the drug traffic across the border, it won't stop it, nothing defensive will. Even in places like Singapore and Saudi Arabia where drug possession and distribution means the death penalty there is still illegal drug use. In our case the money is just too enticing to think it would stop and truth be told there are alot of people whose livelihoods depend on the drug trade for a living..and I don't mean drug dealers, I mean DEA and State and local PDs as well. Please understand I mean no offense to law enforcement here, but by some accounts at least half of all crime is directly related to drug usage, so is it really in the best interests of those who fight that scourge and the crime it creates to see it gone completely? I think it's time to look at this realistically. Drugs have been here for centuries, they're here now and they are going to be here in the future and no matter how stringent the laws or how enlightened the education this is simply how it is. We have to grab this problem by the balls not the brains and hit them where it hurts, in the wallet. To pull the rug out from under the drug barons and their corrupt accomplices in law enforcement and politics the only real solution is legalization so that much of the profit and allure disappear. Do you think a junkie would buy street drugs if he could go to CVS and buy them legally for the same price or less? And by legalizing them they can be regulated in terms of purity and strength and taxed as well, plus most if not all law enforcement jobs would remain to ensure compliance to boot. And while even this would not eliminate illegal drugs completely, it would control them and their users far more effectively than the decades long "war on drugs" has done. And that's not an indictment of law enforcement either, they do the best they can under the circumstances when you realize that for every dollar spent to fight drugs at least two are spent to produce and smuggle them illegally and the drug lords still make billions...that's how much money we're talking about here.

We replaced heroin with pills which are now being replaced with, you guessed it, heroin.
In VT, the state:
-Allowed lay people to obtain and admin Narcan without a prescription
-EMT BLS Intranasal Narcan
-VT State Police pilot program, hopefully during the summer, that will put Narcan into every VSP patrol car for use by officers during overdose emergencies
We will never remove the human desire to "get high", what we can do is make the possibility of death as minimal as possible.

Your Tax Dollars at Work: Training firefighters burns up buildings -and money
http://www.lohud.com/article/20140131/NEWS02/301310066/Your-Tax-Dollars-Work-Training-firefighters-burns-up-buildings-money

If it's not on emtbravo then it didn't really happen.

100% going back 50+ years.

Having just completed our annual refresher on ice rescue this past Saturday I'll add what our discussion about the risks led to. Generally speaking with the proper training and maintenance of the equipment, the greatest risk of a surface ice/water rescue was the Code 3 response getting there. Using full Ice Commander Suits, helmets and 'creepers" as needed and operating in a safe manner consistent with the training and SOG's, the risks to the rescuers is pretty low. This is one area where the proper PPE really can have a huge impact on the risk.

Who wants to take bets on the BAC of the parties involved at the time of the incident?

Who wants to take bets on the BAC of the parties involved at the time of the incident?

VT EMS Standing Orders as of 1/1/14.
6.5 Taser (Conducted Electric Weapon) Probe Removal and Assessment
State and local law enforcement may use a conducted electrical weapon (CEW), also called a Taser. This device is a tool that can be deployedin either a drive stun (sensory nervous system) or dart (sensory & motor nervous systems that causes neuro-muscular incapacitation) mode. In the dart mode, two probes with attached wires are discharged from the CEW. The probes are #8 straightened fish hooks that penetrate the suspect’s skin a maximum of ¼ inch. Each trigger pull discharges an electric charge for a 5-second cycle. The electric charge is high voltage (generally 12,000 volts) and low amperes (generally 0.0036 amp). Current medical literature does not support routine medical evaluation for an individual after a CEW application. In most circumstances probes can be removed by law enforcement without further EMS or other medical intervention.EMT/ADVANCED EMT/PARAMEDIC STANDING ORDERS EMS should be activated and transport the patient following CEW (conducted electrical weapon) application (i.e., Taser™) in the following circumstances: The probe is embedded in the eye, genitals, or bone.Seizure is witnessed after CEW application.There is excessive bleeding from probe site after probe removal.Cardiac arrest, complaints of chest pain, palpitations.Respiratory distress.Altered mental status.Pregnancy.Developmental or physical disability and unable to assess the above. INDICATIONS FOR REMOVALPatient with uncomplicated conducted electrical weapon probes embedded subcutaneously in non-vulnerable areas of skin. CONTRAINDICATIONS TO REMOVALPatients with probe penetration in vulnerable areas of the body as mentioned below should be transported for further evaluation and probe removal. Genitalia, female breast, or skin above level of clavicles.Suspicion that probe might be embedded in bone, blood vessel, or other sensitive structure.Any condition listed above that requires transport to the emergency department. PROCEDURE 1. Ensure wires are disconnected from weapon.2. Stabilize skin around probe using non-dominant hand.3. Grasp probe by metal body using dominant hand.4. Remove probe by pulling straight out in a single quick motion.5. Insure that the probes and barbs are intact.6. Removed probes should be handled and disposed of like contaminated sharps in a designated sharps container, unless requested as evidence bypolice.7. Cleanse wound and apply dressing.8. If last tetanus immunization was greater than 5 years, advise the patient that they may need one.9. Obtain a refusal of care for patients refusing transport. http://healthvermont.gov/hc/ems/documents/FinalProtocolsfor2013Oct81600LOCKED_000.pdf

Who cares ? Just more s*** to add to the pot. She's just trying to make a better name for herself

Non-issue. Sounds politically motivated to me. I have seen worse. Good luck to the couple.

And that is because?

rules are rules if he took the punishment because he knew he broke the rule. that is in black and white for them. would we have actually heard about this and start to hit the national new circuit? Real question is how many other people in the country have broken a rule like this and have taken the punishment because they knew they broke a rule and took the punishment that goes along with it?