HikeArizona.COM

The good people at Superstition Search and Rescue have aquired a drone to help find injured and lost hikers in the Superstitions. There is an excellent article written by Mr Kollenborn in the latest issue of the Apache junction news. The drone can be packed into a suitcase sized carrier and can be fairly easily packed into the area where the person is missing. It can search up to 200 yards from the receiver. for more details please read the article in the AJ news.

it is good to know that they have this so that it doesn't scare uninformed hikers who may try to shoot it down in their suspecion of a government conspirecy...

Most rattlesnake bites are on the hand or arm which indicates what was happening at the time. The majority of victims are young men and alcohol is often involved. Prevention is best so watch where you're walking and don't try to pick up a snake or poke your hands down a hole to "see what's in it". I've seen a lot of snakes and have never been struck. I give them the right of way.

Those snakebite kits aren't totally useless. You can always use the little knife to skin the snake if you're hungry. Also, the suction cups can make fun raised red circles on your forehead to amuse the first responders.

On the OT, I think SSAR rocks and that little drone will help to quickly clear ridges, cliffs, and other areas with challenging terrain.

everyone tends to have a different answer about snake bites that they know for sure is the right one...

Tough_Boots wrote:everyone tends to have a different answer about snake bites that they know for sure is the right one...

So what? BFD! Those are laymen's OPINIONS. Their opinions don't matter a hill of beans. A lot of people think a lot of stupid things that aren't true. Don't listen to your dad, your boyfriend, your girlfriend or to your hunting pals. Take a first aid class given by a reputable organization.

I personally am a big fan of science, of peer-reviewed studies. Opinions may vary, which means a lot of people are probably dead wrong. Old wives' tales and opinions go hand in hand.

The Wilderness First Responder textbook uses EVIDENCE. This is not something new. As the SAR woman mentioned, she'd heard that snakebite kits are dangerous back in the 80's. I heard it in the early 90's. We both heard it at a first aid class. NO reputable modern first aid text will tell you to use a snakebite kit.

Disclaimer: This is my OPINION on this statement:

Tough_Boots wrote:everyone tends to have a different answer about snake bites that they know for sure is the right one...

Kyle, you ought to know better than to kick a coiled and buzzing azbackpackr... er.. rattler! ;)

@azbackpackr First off, I fully agree with your opinion on snake-bite kits.
:SB:
While I too am a big fan of science, peer-reviewed studies and evidence-based conclusions, in reality, just how much of science is actual FACT? For every LAW of gravity we have numerous THEORIES of relativity, all based on conclusions drawn from research, studies and what-have-you. (Not to get off on a tangent, but theories/conclusions like is there global warming or not, and if so, what is causing it, man or nature or both?)

For almost everyone who has heard of the many trials and tribulation of modern scientific research, surely we must know there are more than a few flawed conclusions, based on flawed evidence, based on flawed research, based on flawed human beings.

Just think, for something to become a scientific fact it must come through a long process:
(Disclaimer: this is ad-lib so pardon me if I miss something important)
1. Someone comes up with a theory
2. A study must be designed to test the theory. (At this stage it is simply to 'test', not 'prove')
3. Researchers need to be gathered before embarking on the actual research
4. Now that you have the researchers, do they all agree with the method? Yes? Great! Move on. No? Go back to step 2.
5. Gather the necessary facilities, equipment, subjects (white rats, cancer-ridden humans, babies, etc.)
6. Begin the LONG process of research
7. Nope, not long enough, do more research...
8. Start wading through the evidence
9. Draw conclusions from that evidence
10. Whoops! The evidence either doesn't support the theory. Go back to step 6
<or>
11. The method used cannot prove it. Go back to step 2.
12. Conclusions (#9) are positive, the theory has merit. (Not 'proven', just 'has merit')
13. More research by others (the first level of peer-review)
14. Positive results? Go on. Negative? Back to step 2 or 6.
15. Publish the results in a respected scientific journal
16. Get attacked by those with conflicting views
17. Defend the theory, the method, the research, the evidence and the conclusions
18. Use the media to butter the bread and spread the baloney to the general public, yes, we lemmings who are so eager to lap up what the scientists have 'proven'.

Ok, now, let's remember:
1. Humans are at work through this whole process
2. Humans can and do make mistakes, sometimes quite often
3. So every step of the way, all it takes is one mistake and whatever conclusions drawn are flawed in some way.
And then in today's world... was it Monsanto (et. al.) who paid for the research and did it 'prove' what they wanted?

So... at what point do we believe the theory has become fact?
Is it our opinion which tells us to believe it is now proven fact?
1. What happened to the dinosaurs?
2. Where did the Anasazi (or whatever ancient group you want) go and why?
3. Does the sun revolve around the earth or the other way around?
While we have proof as to the answer of the latter, how can we ever know the answer to the first two?

In the end, in my opinion, science has become more of ever-changing reality than proven fact.

Ok, so to finally wrap this up, what are we to decide about how to treat rattlesnake bites?
Who wants to volunteer to be bitten on both legs so we can treat:
1. Treat the left with a snake-bite kit
2. Treat the right following 'generally accepted' steps:
- Call 911
- Calm the person
- Wash in soapy water (Do you have that in your pack?)
- Wrap above and below the bite with a wide band, not too tight as to cut off blood flow but tight enough to stop lymphatic flow (Do you know how tight that is?)
- Get the person to medical help as quickly as possible
- And all that without raising their heart rate or blood pressure

Oh, and by the way, neither 1 or 2 makes any difference in serious cases... my 12 year old nephew found that out the hard way. He grabbed what he thought was a gopher snake in the brush and was rewarded with a bite on the forearm and a massive injection of venom. Thankfully they were only a short distance from their car and his dad carried him there then raced to the ER immediately about 20 minutes away. In the ER he coded and was revived 3 times and eventually spent over a month in the hospital. Oh yeah, he no longer wants to milk venom from rattlesnakes... one of his previous wishes.

Ok, so who wants to be part of that study? Not me, I'd rather not get bitten in the first place.
For whatever reason (luck or the rattlers never felt threatened), this year alone I've managed to step next to them, over them and in one case even ON one but so far so good. Plenty of buzzing but no biting.
Have at it, I'm off the :SB:

@azbackpackr

go call your congressman

Glad your nephew survived. Two other rattlesnake bite victims in Tucson I knew of had serious repercussions. One had lingering neuro problems in his leg, and was still walking with a cane a year later. The other one recovered just fine, but at the time of the bite, she almost immediately was in a life-threatening state, and had to be helicoptered off the Finger Rock Trail. It can definitely be very serious.

Yes, science is replete with theories, but science also comes up with facts, which are theories that have been tested by enough studies to be considered as facts.

Where did the Anasazi go? Ask a Hopi. What happened to the dinosaurs? Well, gee, they all died... ;)

I have no idea who my congressman is. Just moved here.

I remember a boss in Tucson, saying to a pregnant co-worker, "Oh don't reach up to that high shelf! That will hurt the baby!" I said, "Oh, that's an old wives' tale!" To which my boss replied, (she really did say this, I still laugh about it) "It's not an old wives' tale! My mother and grandmother told me that!"

azbackpackr wrote:Yes, science is replete with theories, but science also comes up with facts, which are theories that have been tested by enough studies to be considered as facts.

Totally off-topic here, but one of my favorites is "Smoking Causes Cancer". This is not true. It is not a fact. There are plenty of instances of people who have smoked their entire lives and either died cancer-free, or are still living, with no sign of cancer.

I'm not suggesting that smoking is good for you, nor am I suggesting that smoking does not significantly increase the likelihood of cancer occurrence in most people, but smoking alone does not cause cancer. That is a false statement that is supposedly a scientific fact.

chumley wrote:

azbackpackr wrote:Yes, science is replete with theories, but science also comes up with facts, which are theories that have been tested by enough studies to be considered as facts.

Totally off-topic here, but one of my favorites is "Smoking Causes Cancer". This is not true. It is not a fact. There are plenty of instances of people who have smoked their entire lives and either died cancer-free, or are still living, with no sign of cancer.

I'm not suggesting that smoking is good for you, nor am I suggesting that smoking does not significantly increase the likelihood of cancer occurrence in most people, but smoking alone does not cause cancer. That is a false statement that is supposedly a scientific fact.

How would you explain the cause and effect? I'm not saying you are wrong, just interested in the topic.

Let's say, for the purposes of argument, that in SOME people, lung damage due to smoking will trigger lung cancer. Could there be genetic factors present in some people, not present in others? Could there be other factors combined with the smoking that trigger the cancer to begin?

This thread has been spinning like a weather vane in a toronado. Searching previous posts for a product called Extractor I found the following dated May of 2009 by none other than Azbackpackr. And I quote:

"Many people do recommend the Sawyer Extractor, which is sold at REI. This equipment does NOT include instructions for any cutting of the bite area with a blade. Wilderness Medical Associates does recommend its use, or at least their 2006 book did recommend it. I am up for recert of my WFR in June, so can find out if they have revised this information in any significant way.

Those old cut-and-suck snakebite kits have been condemned by many first aid organizations since at least the late 1980's, maybe longer. This is why it is so disturbing that they are still on the market. The main problem is the cutting. It can cause the person to go into shock.

Anyway, if your kit is the Sawyer, that one is recommended, as far as I have heard."

End of quote....

My experience with the Extractor is that it is very useful for cleaning puncture wounds and removing venom from bee stings (if you pump immediatly). It weighs almost nothing and can be easily carried in an outside pocket of your backpack or daypack. I never go into the wilderness without one but NO I have never used it on a snake bite. However if I were bitten and was hours away from transportation you better believe that I would be pumping that bite in less than 30 seconds from when the rattler bit me. Even if it only removes 10 % of the venom I would be happy to know that I tried to lesson the damage that venom causes. A minute or two pumping before heading out for transportation I feel is well worth the time.

Hi, Yes I remember this discussion, but since then recerted with 2008 book. (I should recert again, right now, but maybe I won't, costs too much for me right now.) Anyway, the 2008 book is the one that says that suction devices, even modern ones, do very little and could cause harm. That sentence I quoted above is specific to rattlesnake bites, however--it is not referring to bee stings. (See where I quoted book above.) If there is newer version of text, I'd like to see it, to see if it has been revised yet again.

I would like to know what harm an extractor could cause? That seems ridiculous.

azbackpackr wrote:I should recert again, right now, but maybe I won't, costs too much for me right now.

Yup, the costs for initial SAR training and recertifications will put you into the poor house real quick. One year I spent $500.00 and that does not include transportation, hotel, meals, etc.

Tough_Boots wrote:everyone tends to have a different answer about snake bites that they know for sure is the right one...

Don't get bit.

You all are quite and interesting lot....funny too ;)
Bottom line, I think: first--don't mess with the snakes and watch where you put your hands and feet, and where you sit!! Second: if bitten--you have an hour to get to medical care (hospital). Because of that, thought should be given ahead of time as to how far you are from the trail head or the nearest hospital. And thought should be given to just how you will contact the hospital. Don't mess around with this. so most importantly--get evacuated to medical care. Don't mess with cutting or sucking or anything else until medical assistance has been contacted. Then--do what the Doc says to do.
Remember--Mohave Ratlers have a central nervous system poison--Western Diamonbacks have Digestive enzymes and some neuro toxins. Hemorging from circulatory breakdown can occur in only 6 minutes. the neuro toxins effect breathing and heart and muscles. On that point I would like the first responder person to tell us how to deal with breathing problems--CPR? I don't remember from back in the dark ages....
The digestive enzymes turn the bitten area black--or so I've heard--and for a while there was discussion about dermabrasion as a treatment for the damage done by the enzymes. Of course, that wouldn't be attempted in the field.--Any comment on what's the latest?

http://sbsc.wr.usgs.gov/products/htms/snake.aspxit



so now would you all like to take off on hypothermia? ;)

P.S. When I was just starting the PCT (by myself) i was hiking the trail thru the chaparrel in southern California when I heard a rattle in the brush about even with my head. Freaked me out! Didn't stop--just kept on and I started making more noise and I started singing "what will happen to you and your relatives if any snake bites me" songs. Thought is was best to give the snakes the most warning possible that a possibly crazy lady was on her way! (That worked that day but the next morning i lost the trail and jumped on a boulder to get a look and right at my feet was a very large, well fed snake basking in the sun--never relocated so quickly in my life.

Haha, definitely watch where you sit! My former boss squatted over one. She's the only female in her family and when she saw the snake she shrieked and jumped up and hobbled away with her drawers down around her ankles. Her hubby and sons laughed about it for years, and never let her forget it! (Thankfully she wasn't bitten!)

sbwoman wrote:You all are quite and interesting lot....funny too ;)

so now would you all like to take off on hypothermia? ;)

Sure, it's just like the rattlesnake thing. Don't go hiking where it's cold!