QuoteWhen Scotland Yard confirmed in August that it had begun an investigation into claims that Diana, Princess of Wales was murdered by a member of the British Armed Forces, no one was more surprised than members of the Royal family.
Now, the Duke of Cambridge and Prince Harry are to be told whether there was any truth in the sensational new allegations.
More: Princes William and Harry to learn 'truth’ of Diana murder claims - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/10486123/Princes-William-and-Harry-to-learn-truth-of-Diana-murder-claims.html)
I have never seen any of this. Yes she was bulimic. She experienced despondency. Nobody has ever diagnosed her as misery from Borderline Personality Disorder, In any case since psychiatric reports are secret it is extremely unlikely that any of this might ever be affirmed by a specialist.
Double post auto-merged: April 16, 2014, 07:17:52 AM
What happened next?
Penny Junor was the one who said she had Borderline Personality Disorder. Junor has no qualifications to make diagnoses and she adores Charles and Camilla. She got treatment for an eating disorder and got it under control.
Quote from: pagtwashin on April 16, 2014, 07:17:06 AM
I have never seen any of this. Yes she was bulimic. She experienced despondency. Nobody has ever diagnosed her as misery from Borderline Personality Disorder, In any case since psychiatric reports are secret it is extremely unlikely that any of this might ever be affirmed by a specialist.
Double post auto-merged: April 16, 2014, 07:17:52 AM
What happened next?
What does Diana's mental state have to do with this thread or the article?. I firmly believe Diana was murdered in what was staged as a car crash. Diana had an eating disorder which as successfully treated before she died and as for this quack armchair diagnoses by Penny Junor she is as qualified as any member on this forum without a medical license to make such claim in her unabashed hatred toward Diana.
Let Diana rest in peace and leave William and Harry alone! If the brothers wanted comments on his mother's accident or NOT! But Diana been gone for 17 years since 1997..
William and Harry wanted truth on his mom's accident and need justice so badly!! And his mom wouldn't bring back it's hard for brothers
But Paris and London authority would cover this story on late Diana,princess of Wales like 24/7 I don't think so!
I am a fan of PD.
The Penny Junors who take on these wild accusastions of attacking a dead woman in order to gain favor and/or keep for with King Charles and Queen Camilla to be ARE NOT ENDEARING themselves to PW and PH.
This reprot is awful for them.
People like the Penny Junors are awful people.
Facts FACTS are:
PD was not manic depressive, schzo, Bi-Polar, crazy,etc.
She had an eating disorder during her early 20's due to the pressures of she had Charles and Camilla, new mom, lack of self-esteem, no good, solid personal life of a husband, mother, etc.
She had. Had. past tense. She sought treatment and found herslef, got it together way back when she had this eating disorder in the 1980's. Early 1980's.
She loved her sons and was a good mother. That cannot be disputed even it it is by some low people here, there, wherever.
The princes lost their mother, they loved very much at PW's teen years and PH's preteen years.
PD died , was killed in a car crash because she did not take the proper security she needed being PD. Being mother to PW adn PH. Being jsut who she was.
She should have taken her own security team. TRJ was not a security team.
her fault.
Andre Paul was off duty, then called on-duty. He was drunk. His fault.
DF should have, could, stayed at his home at the Paris -Ritz.
His fault.
PD could have, should have insisted that they ,it being alte, the paps were on them, just stay at his home at P-R Hotel. Her fault.
Andre Paul drove that tank of automobile and crahsed it like a tin can which is nearly impossible to do unlesssssss, you drive at rapid speed and lose control and hit metal walls, concrete walls and he did. His fault.
The paps on motorcycles...their fault.
There is enough fault there to go around.
The real story is simply it was a tragic accident.
Some people like conspiracies for everything. Really, things can just happen as they happen. They simply happen as they are. No conspiracy.
The let her RIP, well , yes when it comes to this stuff of the Muslims did. PC did it. The BRF did it.
Nonsense. All of it.
FACTS' If she were alive, she would be very proud of PW's life and PH's life as men.
She would have been close to her children and they to her.
Sad it happend as it did.
Her legacy is her sons. Her passions for her work then. Her imapct on the things she did and causes she supported.
Her grandchildren.
Her sons and grandchildren can be proud to be from her.
Diana had an eating disorder while still in school.
Diana died because she wasn't wearing a seat belt.
QC you were not at the scene--you don't know the circumstances. The seat belt could have been malfunctioning that day. Diana did not just get into a car and say gosh, I think I'll risk my life and not buckle up. You have no idea what happened. Diana was never blamed for causing her own death. Diana died because she was in a car accident. And the inquest never blamed Diana for it so why should you even if you don't care for the woman?
An eating disorder is treatable. Diana was happy and healthy in school and pre marriage as testimony from her employers and friends. There are no skin and bones photos of Diana as a teenager. The skin and bones photos came after the marriage. It is on record. Stress from a lying cheating husband and his mistress can bring on bulimia if a person is predisposed to it. Her sister had it too and also got it under control.
According to the rental company, the seat belt did not work and according to Mercedes Benz, they were denied access to the vehicle to inspect it after the crash to find out if the car had a problem...
I've never read anything about the seat belt not working. Considering that no one was wearing seat belts, were they all not working? It's hard to imagine a limousine rental company would allow a car to be rented and driven with seat belts malfunctioning. :o
Cindy
I read about the seat belts not working in some articles. It should be recalled that this was a last minute switch of cars and drivers and the auto they used had just only recently been repaired. But what's the point of blaming Diana for not putting on the belt (and they could possibly not have worked and she would not cackle and think hey I think I'll risk my life and not buckle up--nobody knows what was said to her or what she said in the car--Rhys Jones has selective memory). The ruling was an auto accident not that Diana did not put on her seat belts. And nobody knows if she would have survived with the seatbelts on in any case. What did her in was the long long trip to the hospital--I think if she had gotten to the hospital sooner she would have had a chance and I am not the only one who commented on the overlong trip to the hospital. When I see news reports about accidents and people airlifted from them I think why could not Diana have been airlifted?
Quote from: cinrit on April 25, 2014, 02:37:22 PM
I've never read anything about the seat belt not working. Considering that no one was wearing seat belts, were they all not working? It's hard to imagine a limousine rental company would allow a car to be rented and driven with seat belts malfunctioning. :o
Cindy
The ones in the back weren't working and that was the only Mercedes available for rental left at that time in the company when it was rented, but it was not originally rented for this purpose, there was a last minute switch of cars...
Agreed, Sandy, at that hour of night, it was, at best, a 15 minute trip to the Hospital, I read, yet, it took over an hour...
Is there an official ruling about that? The two passengers in the front seat weren't wearing seat belts, either. It was initially believed that the PO was wearing one, but it turned out he was not. Nor was the driver.
Either way, urban legend or fact, Diana was not wearing a seat belt and it did contribute to her death. But no one is blaming her for not wearing one. In almost every (maybe every) accident report, if there is a fatality, it is reported whether or not the person was wearing their seat belt. It's not meant as a critique, only as a fact to maybe inspire more people to remember to wear theirs.
Cindy
Some reports say Rhys Jones wore seatbelts. Logically as a security officer he would have told all in the car to buckle up. He lost some of his memory so what happened among the people in that car will never be truly known so it is not fair to conclude Diana is to blame because she didn't "buckle up." Maybe she did but the seatbelts were broken in the back. There may not have been ample opportunity to inspect the car given that it was a last minute replacement.
I would not say that "nobody" blames Diana for not wearing them. The posts about this by some IMO sound very judgmental and it is used to slam Diana.
It went to Diana's grave with her what happened re the seatbelts.
The fact that it took her so long to get to the hospital should not be overlooked. That is why accident victims are airlifted to get them help ASAP not put in a very slow ambulance that does not have all the help that the patient would need to survive.
There's a difference between how French medical teams handle car accidents of this magnitude, and the way the U.S. handles them. The ambulance drivers followed France's regulations by trying to stabilize Diana on the scene before leaving. Diana also went into cardiac arrest and had to be resuscitated via CPR before the ambulance could leave the scene.
Cindy
Quote from: cinrit on April 25, 2014, 05:41:53 PM
There's a difference between how French medical teams handle car accidents of this magnitude, and the way the U.S. handles them. The ambulance drivers followed France's regulations by trying to stabilize Diana on the scene before leaving. Diana also went into cardiac arrest and had to be resuscitated via CPR before the ambulance could leave the scene.
Cindy
This is true. I'm not sure how this is handled in the UK ,but there are big difference between the U.S. and France with the procedure. My brother was killed in a car accident in 1992. The jeep he was a passenger in was sideswiped by another vehicle. Seat belts were only available in the front seats and my brother was seated in the rear. The accident occurred near a California Highway Patrol office so they were on the scene very quickly as were the fire/paramedic units. He was just minutes away from the Univ. of California Irvine Medical Center which was the regional trauma center. Unfortunately he sustained almost identical injuries as Diana. He was 23, she was 36. Both were young and healthy which would have prompted any trauma team to work for as long as possible. However, their injuries were just too severe and loss of blood (exsanguination) would have been a leading cause of death. Fortunately there were no other fatalities in my brother's accident.
The rate of speed, the narrow lanes and support structures in the Pont de Alma tunnel, lack of car restraints more than likely all played a part in the deaths of three people that evening. :no:
I'm sorry about your brother, TLLK. Losing a sibling is so heartbreaking.
Cindy
I'm sorry, TLLK. :hug:
True... There's much more to that...
Quote from: sandy on April 25, 2014, 04:34:54 PM
The fact that it took her so long to get to the hospital should not be overlooked. That is why accident victims are airlifted to get them help ASAP not put in a very slow ambulance that does not have all the help that the patient would need to survive.
^ That has always bothered me...
TLLK, :hug:
TLLK :hug: ...as for Di I am no expert but Ive heard that her injuries didn't permit the ambulance to go on full speed or she would have died in the ambulance again given the severity of her injuries that makes sense to me but again I am no expert ...
I suppose we will never know why they took that decision. That is why questions will always be asked.
Quote from: Eri on April 25, 2014, 07:57:50 PM
TLLK :hug: ...as for Di I am no expert but Ive heard that her injuries didn't permit the ambulance to go on full speed or she would have died in the ambulance again given the severity of her injuries that makes sense to me but again I am no expert ...
As I said, once, I am no believer in conspiracy theories but the amount of inconsistencies, questions and preventing people from further investigating convinced me there is stuff to hide and very few would have a reason to ask for and obtain those favors... The ambulance couldn't go on full speed because of her injuries? That is when they are supposed to go full speed...
^ But when you have internal bleeding you can't be on a speeding ambulance or you would die in the ambulance but I guess someone who knows more than me can explain it better ... besides that she did go on the Hospital and they operated her for an hour (if I am not mistaken) so ...
Over an hour versus fifteen minutes, I don't think anything can justify that...
I believe they stopped twice to give her CPR, so that would slow them down. Also, the impact had thrown her heart to the right side of her chest, tearing some pulmonary vein which affects both the heart and the lungs. She was bleeding massively internally, so yes, any bump or sudden start/stop would have killed her immediately. Once the ambulance left the scene of the accident, they got to the hospital in about 30 minutes.
Cindy
Quote from: sandy on April 25, 2014, 02:41:43 PM
-I think if she had gotten to the hospital sooner she would have had a chance and I am not the only one who commented on the overlong trip to the hospital. When I see news reports about accidents and people airlifted from them I think why could not Diana have been airlifted?
Yes...why?
IMO they wanted her out of the way.
Seatbelts?
What for?
Some of us are getting us mixed up with them.US and Them do not live in the same world.
(I am not referring to TLLK . I wanted to post this before I read your post. Thank you for sharing that. Still,for you and yours, that is a very hurt that will not leave. You have all your good memories to keep you.)
Seatbelt?
There was not need for her, them to wear seatbelts in their world. Usually, they in their world have a lead car. Follow car. Blocked streets by police, etc. All of this or some of this.
The automobile, as I recall reading , hearing on the news then was like a tank. It was not a Mercedes that your aunt, you, your sister, etc. has. Pardon me if I have that wrong.
She should have had her own sercurity team and proper security. I know I am repeating myself. She was a bit bullheaded there.
TRJones , it was said wearing a seatbelt, and he was left so-so. He will never be the same.
The back of the car was smashed down like a tin can. Crushed. Jaws of life were defintely needed to cut that mangled mess of metal apart.
Diana inquest: Mercedes will finally be crushed - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/diana/1584306/Diana-inquest-Mercedes-will-finally-be-crushed.html)
If she had a seatbelt and lived, the quality of her life would have been ,no doubt, very small if perhaps of any quality.
Some of us believe being alive is great no matter what and that is fine. Some of us believe the opposite.
Airlifting? Airlife? I forgot what you call it here in the USA.
Maybe in France,they did not have that then. I do not know. I am just throwing that out there.
Double post auto-merged: April 25, 2014, 10:36:37 PM
The car
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/politics97/diana/endingcar.html
from BBC report.Pardon me for remembering it was a rental.
Article states a seatblet really could not have prevetned her death and that of DF.
Thank you to everyone for your kind remarks about my brother. :hug:
Quote from: Eri on April 25, 2014, 08:57:32 PM
^ But when you have internal bleeding you can't be on a speeding ambulance or you would die in the ambulance but I guess someone who knows more than me can explain it better ... besides that she did go on the Hospital and they operated her for an hour (if I am not mistaken) so ...
There are serious cases involving bleeding and yes, the medics need to get them to a hospital ASAP. So they are airlifted not put in a very very slow ambulance. She had a second heart attack when she got to the hospital after that extremely long ambulance ride.
Double post auto-merged: April 25, 2014, 11:57:05 PM
Quote from: Limabeany on April 25, 2014, 08:43:24 PM
Quote from: Eri on April 25, 2014, 07:57:50 PM
TLLK :hug: ...as for Di I am no expert but Ive heard that her injuries didn't permit the ambulance to go on full speed or she would have died in the ambulance again given the severity of her injuries that makes sense to me but again I am no expert ...
As I said, once, I am no believer in conspiracy theories but the amount of inconsistencies, questions and preventing people from further investigating convinced me there is stuff to hide and very few would have a reason to ask for and obtain those favors... The ambulance couldn't go on full speed because of her injuries? That is when they are supposed to go full speed...
That is so true. The patient who has broken bones (which hurt) or broken hip needs to get to the hospital ASAP. Or someone who is bleeding from a wound needs to get there. And so on.
Does anyone here believe that if Diana was murdered by anyone associated with The Firm or government (which I don't) that William and Harry would ever be told? Such a revelation would show her sons that their own family couldn't be trusted.
:hmm: I can't think of anyone else to whom she was more convenient dead and over with... They will never know... I don't believe in coincidence + coincidence + keeping people away/uninformed = nothing...
If she were killed in a planned way by PC, Camilla, The ScotYard, TPTB, PP, The British Govt, Muslim terriosts, etc., NO, PH and PW would never be told.
I do not believe PP, PC, Camila, The ScotYard, The British Govt., QEII, TPTB, the nobility , the Muslim terriosts, Muslim world etc. and other thing of this like the crazy conspriacists want to put out there.
I believe it was simply was as how it happened.
YES, why the 45 min wait and work on in ann ambulance? Is that how it is or how it was done in Paris? Their resources or lack of of resources, etc.?
Princess Diana, world famous icon, mother of Princes William and Henry, rich, born of the nobility in England, White was dating a MUSLIM. Yes, he was superich, well, his father, but he was Muslim.
This , if she had amrried him or had a child by him would have shaken up the Class system of the nobility. The Princes William and Henry have a Muslim , illegtimate sister or brother and stepfather.
I do not believe PD was pregnant or was going to marry DF. She was first and foremost of the nobility. Many of her enemies there have said she wanted to bring down the world of the BRF, the nobility. Silly. She was of that and was that stupid.
I keep saying here, really, TPTB, PC, Camilla, have not lost a days' sleep since she died. She made life so easy by dying for so many.
Why the awful, one-sided views here about a dead woman whoose death made life so wonderful, easy and convenient for PC and C.
She is dead. it ahppend as it did. Yes, loose with the aftermath of her care.
I believe it happened all as it did.
Quote from: FanDianaFancy on April 25, 2014, 10:18:55 PM
Seatbelts?
There was not need for her, them to wear seatbelts in their world. Usually, they in their world have a lead car. Follow car. Blocked streets by police, etc. All of this or some of this.
The automobile, as I recall reading , hearing on the news then was like a tank. It was not a Mercedes that your aunt, you, your sister, etc. has. Pardon me if I have that wrong.
She should have had her own sercurity team and proper security. I know I am repeating myself. She was a bit bullheaded there.
TRJones , it was said wearing a seatbelt, and he was left so-so. He will never be the same.
The back of the car was smashed down like a tin can. Crushed. Jaws of life were defintely needed to cut that mangled mess of metal apart.
Diana inquest: Mercedes will finally be crushed - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/diana/1584306/Diana-inquest-Mercedes-will-finally-be-crushed.html)
If she had a seatbelt and lived, the quality of her life would have been ,no doubt, very small if perhaps of any quality.
Article states a seatblet really could not have prevetned her death and that of DF.
I agreed with this post but not your later post. (C&C had a harder time because of her death.)
There is no way anyone could have planned to kill Diana or was involved with her death.
She and Dodi spent most of the evening going back & front trying to decide where there were going to eat.
It was an accident. If you read the timeline of events of the
entire day you can only come to the same conclusion.
As for the seat belt, she may not have had time to put in on. She might have first felt safe without in on but when they started speeding she didn't have time. IIRC, from the time they left the hotel the final time to the accident was about 5 minutes. Also some people have stated that even if she had the seat belt on it probably would not have made a difference as it was her side of the car that slammed into the post.
Double post auto-merged: April 28, 2014, 01:52:41 PM
Quote from: Mike on April 26, 2014, 02:12:22 AM
Does anyone here believe that if Diana was murdered by anyone associated with The Firm or government (which I don't) that William and Harry would ever be told? Such a revelation would show her sons that their own family couldn't be trusted.
No secret is ever a secret. Everything comes out sooner or later.
But since it was an accident there is no secret.
Quote from: Queen Camilla on April 28, 2014, 01:47:27 PM
Quote from: FanDianaFancy on April 25, 2014, 10:18:55 PM
Seatbelts?
There was not need for her, them to wear seatbelts in their world. Usually, they in their world have a lead car. Follow car. Blocked streets by police, etc. All of this or some of this.
The automobile, as I recall reading , hearing on the news then was like a tank. It was not a Mercedes that your aunt, you, your sister, etc. has. Pardon me if I have that wrong.
She should have had her own sercurity team and proper security. I know I am repeating myself. She was a bit bullheaded there.
TRJones , it was said wearing a seatbelt, and he was left so-so. He will never be the same.
The back of the car was smashed down like a tin can. Crushed. Jaws of life were defintely needed to cut that mangled mess of metal apart.
Diana inquest: Mercedes will finally be crushed - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/diana/1584306/Diana-inquest-Mercedes-will-finally-be-crushed.html)
If she had a seatbelt and lived, the quality of her life would have been ,no doubt, very small if perhaps of any quality.
Article states a seatblet really could not have prevetned her death and that of DF.
I agreed with this post but not your later post. (C&C had a harder time because of her death.)
There is no way anyone could have planned to kill Diana or was involved with her death.
She and Dodi spent most of the evening going back & front trying to decide where there were going to eat.
It was an accident. If you read the timeline of events of the entire day you can only come to the same conclusion.
As for the seat belt, she may not have had time to put in on. She might have first felt safe without in on but when they started speeding she didn't have time. IIRC, from the time they left the hotel the final time to the accident was about 5 minutes. Also some people have stated that even if she had the seat belt on it probably would not have made a difference as it was her side of the car that slammed into the post.
Double post auto-merged: April 28, 2014, 01:52:41 PM
Quote from: Mike on April 26, 2014, 02:12:22 AM
Does anyone here believe that if Diana was murdered by anyone associated with The Firm or government (which I don't) that William and Harry would ever be told? Such a revelation would show her sons that their own family couldn't be trusted.
No secret is ever a secret. Everything comes out sooner or later.
But since it was an accident there is no secret.
C and C never had a "harder time" not with the spin campaign they had (or Charles had) at their disposal.
An "article" is not an inquest nor an oracle. And nobody knows if she would have lived had the seatbelt been buckled. I think the seatbelt was defective.
Quote from: Queen Camilla on April 28, 2014, 01:47:27 PM Also some people have stated that even if she had the seat belt on it probably would not have made a difference as it was her side of the car that slammed into the post.
From what I've read and the photos I've seen, the car struck the pillar head-on; the engine bay being crushed, with the sides sustaining lesser damage. Is this how others see it?
Quote from: TLLK on April 25, 2014, 05:58:25 PM
Quote from: cinrit on April 25, 2014, 05:41:53 PM
There's a difference between how French medical teams handle car accidents of this magnitude, and the way the U.S. handles them. The ambulance drivers followed France's regulations by trying to stabilize Diana on the scene before leaving. Diana also went into cardiac arrest and had to be resuscitated via CPR before the ambulance could leave the scene.
Cindy
This is true. I'm not sure how this is handled in the UK ,but there are big difference between the U.S. and France with the procedure. My brother was killed in a car accident in 1992. The jeep he was a passenger in was sideswiped by another vehicle. Seat belts were only available in the front seats and my brother was seated in the rear. The accident occurred near a California Highway Patrol office so they were on the scene very quickly as were the fire/paramedic units. He was just minutes away from the Univ. of California Irvine Medical Center which was the regional trauma center. Unfortunately he sustained almost identical injuries as Diana. He was 23, she was 36. Both were young and healthy which would have prompted any trauma team to work for as long as possible. However, their injuries were just too severe and loss of blood (exsanguination) would have been a leading cause of death. Fortunately there were no other fatalities in my brother's accident.
The rate of speed, the narrow lanes and support structures in the Pont de Alma tunnel, lack of car restraints more than likely all played a part in the deaths of three people that evening. :no:
TLLK,
So sorry to hear about your brother. :consoling1: His accident does sound similar to Lady Diana's accident.
I agree about all the elements that led to the tragic outcome in Diana's case. If one or a few things had gone down differently, Diana may be alive today. The lastest movie about Diana, starring Naomi Watts, strongly suggests that any number of factors could have changed Diana's fate. I am also reading the book by Tina Brown and she makes the same suggestions.
Ambulances don't generally go at snail's paces. The equipment is not there that is in the hospital. It took over an hour to get her there not 30 minutes. It certainly didn't help her to have the long delay in getting her help only the hospital could provide. Don't get trying to justify this. I certainly would not want a loved one in a slow ambulance. See no excuses or justification for it. Reagan had gunshot wounds and it was said that if he didn't get to the hospital ASAP he would have been a goner.
French paramedics and ambulance services treat the victim on site and transport when stable. Many are like mobile emergency rooms with trained technicians. They were following policy by attempting to stabilize a patient before transport so that they could take her into the operating room as soon as she arrived. Unfortunately she kept going into cardiac arrest. :(
If Reagan had that treatment where there was a very slow ambulance he would not have survived the assassination attempt. He was taken to the hospital pronto. Just because it's a "policy" does not mean it is good treatment for the patient. Airlifting would have given her a better chance. Diana had no chance when put into that extremely slow ambulance.
Quote from: TLLK on April 25, 2014, 05:58:25 PM
Quote from: cinrit on April 25, 2014, 05:41:53 PM
There's a difference between how French medical teams handle car accidents of this magnitude, and the way the U.S. handles them. The ambulance drivers followed France's regulations by trying to stabilize Diana on the scene before leaving. Diana also went into cardiac arrest and had to be resuscitated via CPR before the ambulance could leave the scene.
Cindy
This is true. I'm not sure how this is handled in the UK ,but there are big difference between the U.S. and France with the procedure. My brother was killed in a car accident in 1992. The jeep he was a passenger in was sideswiped by another vehicle. Seat belts were only available in the front seats and my brother was seated in the rear. The accident occurred near a California Highway Patrol office so they were on the scene very quickly as were the fire/paramedic units. He was just minutes away from the Univ. of California Irvine Medical Center which was the regional trauma center. Unfortunately he sustained almost identical injuries as Diana. He was 23, she was 36. Both were young and healthy which would have prompted any trauma team to work for as long as possible. However, their injuries were just too severe and loss of blood (exsanguination) would have been a leading cause of death. Fortunately there were no other fatalities in my brother's accident.
The rate of speed, the narrow lanes and support structures in the Pont de Alma tunnel, lack of car restraints more than likely all played a part in the deaths of three people that evening. :no:
:hug:
I also lost my mother in a car accident because she wasn't wearing her seat belt. In fact, the police told us that had she been wearing it, she would have sustained minor injuries. Which is not something a grieving child wants to hear....
As for why there were so many inconsistencies, think about this. You had a former member of the British Royal Family, and mother to the heir, along with the son of a prominent Egyptian billionaire in France. So you have three sovereign nations all with an interest in this one accident.
I'm sorry to hear about your loss.
But as I said, there is speculation that the seatbelt was malfunctioning in Diana's car. Circumstances that can never be known. The sole survivor Rees Jones has memory loss issues and I doubt what went on in that car as they took off (conversations) will ever be fully known.
Also there has been much comment on that overlong trip to the hospital. Some heart specialists including Christian Barnard thought if she had gotten to a hospital sooner she could have been saved.
^If the seat belt were not functioning, then it becomes an episode of the blame game. Do you blame the makers of the car? The people who provided the car? Or Diana and Dodi for riding in the car when the seat belts didn't work?
Unfortunately (and I am in no way, shape, or form blaming the two of them for this), many people do not wear their seat belts. Like I said, my mom died because she wasn't wearing hers. And on the way back from planning her funeral, my brother allowed his girlfriend's son to sit on the front console of his truck, without a seat belt, because he was "a safe driver" :thumbsdown:
Again, not blaming her, but many many people have a very relaxed view when it comes to wearing their seat belts. And honestly, she may have just been thinking about getting out of there as quickly as possible.
There is a larger picture to this than just the seatbelt issue. Dodi disagreed with his father and did not stay at the Ritz overnight like his father advised him to do. He impulsively set up the trip to his apartment instead of staying at the Ritz. It was a last minute switch of cars and drivers. Who knows how much inspection time was given to the car they ultimately chose to go to Dodi's apartment?
Diana was said to buckle up at other times and this was noted in some articles at the time of the accident. Three of the people in that car are no longer with us and Rees Jones has had memory issues. Nobody knows the thought processes of those in the car. Maybe Diana found the seat belt was not working. Also, if it is true that Rees Jones did buckle up (there are contradictory reports) then as the security he should have made sure the seat belts were functioning to protect his charges or told them to buckle up if the seat belts were working.
Quote from: TLLK on April 29, 2014, 12:29:55 AM
French paramedics and ambulance services treat the victim on site and transport when stable. Many are like mobile emergency rooms with trained technicians. They were following policy by attempting to stabilize a patient before transport so that they could take her into the operating room as soon as she arrived. Unfortunately she kept going into cardiac arrest. :(
What they did was stupid! Hopefully, no one I love will need an ambulance in Paris! :no: A hospital is a hospital for a purpose!
Double post auto-merged: April 29, 2014, 01:38:18 AM
:goodpost:
Quote from: sandy on April 29, 2014, 12:24:36 AM
Ambulances don't generally go at snail's paces. The equipment is not there that is in the hospital. It took over an hour to get her there not 30 minutes. It certainly didn't help her to have the long delay in getting her help only the hospital could provide. Don't get trying to justify this. I certainly would not want a loved one in a slow ambulance. See no excuses or justification for it. Reagan had gunshot wounds and it was said that if he didn't get to the hospital ASAP he would have been a goner.
There is no reason for this. :blank:
Double post auto-merged: April 29, 2014, 01:37:58 AM
Sorry, Lothwen. :hug:
Quote from: Lothwen on April 29, 2014, 01:06:07 AMAgain, not blaming her, but many many people have a very relaxed view when it comes to wearing their seat belts. And honestly, she may have just been thinking about getting out of there as quickly as possible.
I don't think many people wore seat belts in the back seat in the nineties...
Quote from: cinrit on April 25, 2014, 09:21:00 PM
I believe they stopped twice to give her CPR, so that would slow them down. Also, the impact had thrown her heart to the right side of her chest, tearing some pulmonary vein which affects both the heart and the lungs. She was bleeding massively internally, so yes, any bump or sudden start/stop would have killed her immediately. Once the ambulance left the scene of the accident, they got to the hospital in about 30 minutes.
Cindy
They had to go slowly because she kept going into Cardiac arrest. If They had rushed, she would have probably died in the ambulance, from the bumping of the ambulance and the difficulty of stabilising her.
Only in Paris is this necessary? :shrug: Even in 3rd world countries they don't turtle back to the hospital...
^^ No, only when there are probable internal injuries that haven't been identified, and when CPR has to be administered. They also had to slow down when Diana's blood pressure dropped dramatically and had to be dealt with.
Cindy
That is why there is a driver and paramedics inside, that was shoddy... :shrug:
The paramedics can't work on a body that's bouncing around with the movement of the ambulance.
Cindy
There is no reason to believe they couldn't have gone faster... Since, even in Paris, it happens all the time...
They should have driven at the ultimate safe, speed - and blue-lighted all the way....regardless of who was on board. They did not, that will always raise questions. Ambulances are meant to get patients to the place of safety as quickly as possible....they did not.
IMVHO the French policies were developed based upon their own experiences with transporting seriously injured patients to an awaiting hospital team. I understand that they are different than American and from what I've inferred British ones, however I do believe that they developed these policies after reviewing many cases. They formed what they believed would be the best plan to try and ensure patient survival. Unfortunately Diana's injuries were so severe it is very, very unlikely should would have survived any attempt to repair her severed blood vessels.
I can't remember where I read it, but I saw a review by an American trauma surgeon after he read the accident and autopsy reports. He felt Diana might have survived only if her car had crashed into a trauma center. Her injuries were just too severe.
I have worked in Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Peru, Costa Rica, Panama, Ecuador and other 3rd world countries, the timeline for the ambulance arrival time is inexcusable and unacceptable... The likelihood of her surviving her injuries is irrelevant to the speed at which the ambulance should have traveled unless she died in it, which she didn't, they were simply shockingly slow... Why did they take that long at an hour with very little traffic? A reason other than the streets of Paris are bumpier than third world country streets, of course...
^^^The only thing that I know if that in France the focus in on ensuring that the patient is stabilized during transport. If they go into cardiac arrest like Diana, then they believe it is preferable to stop and gain control of the patient before resuming the transport. It isn't what happens in the U.S.
(My friend has family in France with two physicians in the family. This is what she's explained to me and it matches what I read years ago regarding Diana's accident.)
Double post auto-merged: May 10, 2014, 08:30:18 AM
^^^Mike I have to agree.
Quote from: TLLK on May 09, 2014, 11:00:48 PM
They formed what they believed would be the best plan to try and ensure patient survival. Unfortunately Diana's injuries were so severe it is very, very unlikely should would have survived any attempt to repair her severed blood vessels.
They had to stop because Diana went inot cardiac arrest. She would have died in the ambulance.
^^^Right and I mentioned it in my earlier post. :)
Quote from: TLLK on May 10, 2014, 05:34:36 AM
^^^The only thing that I know if that in France the focus in on ensuring that the patient is stabilized during transport. If they go into cardiac arrest like Diana, then they believe it is preferable to stop and gain control of the patient before resuming the transport. It isn't what happens in the U.S.
If France were way ahead of the rest of the world I would agree, but it is not, so to say that this happened because their focus is on ensuring the patient is stabilized versus everywhere else in the world where they focus on stabilizing the patient while getting him or her to the hospital as quickly as possible is to say they are the best versus everyone else in the world and that is not the case... There is no evidence to that effect... :shrug:
If the goal is to stabilize the patient and then proceed with transport then yes it could take awhile to bring the situation under control.
Quote from: Limabeany on May 10, 2014, 05:09:13 PM
Quote from: TLLK on May 10, 2014, 05:34:36 AM
^^^The only thing that I know if that in France the focus in on ensuring that the patient is stabilized during transport. If they go into cardiac arrest like Diana, then they believe it is preferable to stop and gain control of the patient before resuming the transport. It isn't what happens in the U.S.
If France were way ahead of the rest of the world I would agree, but it is not, so to say that this happened because their focus is on ensuring the patient is stabilized versus everywhere else in the world where they focus on stabilizing the patient while getting him or her to the hospital as quickly as possible is to say they are the best versus everyone else in the world and that is not the case... There is no evidence to that effect... :shrug:
This was their policy in 1996. I do not know if it has undergone a change. The odds were not in Diana's favor that she was going to survive due to the nature of her injuries.
That is the goal everywhere in the world, but they don't stop for an hour everywhere else in the world to do so which is why everyone wondered why on earth they took so long... If that is their policy, than in 1996, they had the worst ambulance service in the world and the fact that everyone around the world wondered why that ambulance specifically took so long even to this day says that even for france it was an extremely long period of time...
The policy of stabilizing the patient at the scene is what France determined is best. Surely, this policy is based on their experiences in their country.
QuoteStrategies for delivering care
The essential decision in prehospital care is whether the patient should be immediately taken to the hospital, or advanced care resources are taken to the patient where they lie. The "scoop and run" approach is exemplified by the MEDEVAC aeromedical evacuation helicopter, whereas the "stay and play" is exemplified by the French and Belgian SMUR emergency mobile resuscitation unit or the German "Notarzt"-System (preclinical emergency physician).
Emergency medical services - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_medical_services)
Cindy
^^^Thank you for the article Cindy. The information on French emergency medical services and policies are clearly explained and it does mention that they differ from English speaking countries. The French have determined that this is what is best for their patients.
Also I'm not sure if it has been mentioned how long it took to safely remove Diana from the wreckage. The firefighters and EMTs would have been working in cramped and dangerous conditions while trying to not cause further injury to the patient.
Apparently, it took about 30 minutes to remove her from the car:
QuoteThe first police patrol officers arrived at 12.30. Shortly afterwards, the seven paparazzi on the scene were arrested. Diana was removed from the car at 1:00 am. She then went into cardiac arrest. Following external cardiopulmonary resuscitation, her heart started beating again. She was moved to the SAMU ambulance at 1:18 am, left the scene at 1:41 am and arrived at the Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital at 2:06 am.[17]
Death of Diana, Princess of Wales - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Diana),_Princess_of_Wales
Cindy
^^^Which from looking at the crash photos appears to be a realistic time frame for the firefighters to do their job as quickly as possible.
One other bit of information that I have yet to see in the discussion is that there was a physician and nurse in the ambulance aiding Diana, not just emergency technicians. The physician would be the one making the decision on the scene to stop and stabilize Diana, not just technicians acting on the orders of a doctor at the hospital.
Prayers to never be involved in an accident requiring an ambulance while in France will be started nightly... <_<
Well hopefully you'll never be involved in such a serious accident like Diana. :hug: Once she was extracted from the vehicle and in the ambulance, the doctor could see how life threatening her injuries were and began to try and stabilize her. Once she was at the hospital doctors operated for two hours. Like Mike mentioned in an earlier post, based upon the medical records and autopsy report she really did not stand a chance. :no: IMVHO had she been in the UK or US, the outcome would have been the same.
Some noted physicians like Dr. Barnaard said she would have had a better chance if she had not taken that long ambulance ride. I read so many cases of people being airlifted from horrendous accidents and surviving them. Having some physician in an ambulance and a nurse does not mean it had everything a hospital would have had. I think it a disgrace that she took that long trip and I think it indefensible. I don't think saying "it is best" is by any stretch of the imagination remotely an accurate description of it.
Based on information supplied by cinrit:
The ambulance left the scene 23 minutes after placing her in the ambulance & arrived at the hospital 25 minutes later.
That does not seem like a long time. I routinely see ambulances not leave the scene after loading a person for nearly 15-30 minutes & I do not live in France, Germany nor Belgium.
Every second counts in a situation such as this one. If this were "not so bad" then how come people are airlifted to get them to a hospital ASAP.
This is the article that mentions Dr. Barnard's assessment which should not be sneezed at.:
The key questions about Diana and Dodi's death that still remain | UK | News | Daily Express (http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/427512/The-key-questions-about-Diana-and-Dodi-s-death-that-still-remain)
Double post auto-merged: May 11, 2014, 01:57:42 AM
QC it's a long time if every second counts QC. I would not want a loved one treated that way. That's why airlifting is used since this is not acceptable. This time "only" an hour is an eternity for someone dying and deprived of proper care.
Sandy, don't know where you are but very few people are airlifted.
Not many cities, even large urban ones can afford helicopters for each crash victim.
Helicopters are usually stationed only in certain areas so the time it would take from getting the call to arriving at the scene would probably be longer than a traditional ambulance so most rely on standard ambulances.
Quote from: Queen Camilla on May 11, 2014, 03:05:27 AM
Sandy, don't know where you are but very few people are airlifted.
Not many cities, even large urban ones can afford helicopters for each crash victim.
Helicopters are usually stationed only in certain areas so the time it would take from getting the call to arriving at the scene would probably be longer than a traditional ambulance so most rely on standard ambulances.
Agreed. Trying to land a helicopter in that area would have been very difficult. Also a doctor was on board the ambulance so Diana was receiving care from a physician.
I think she meant that if critical patients can be stabilized for airlifting, they can be stabilized for transport by ambulance, this just makes French ambulance services inept... :shrug:
Diana's fatal injury was internal. There was no way even a doctor could have known how extensive that injury was without opening her up. So while Diana's condition was certainly critical, there was no way of knowing that there was "a tear to the upper left pulmonary vein - the vessel which carries blood from the lungs to the heart".
QuoteMedical experts who reviewed the treatment for the French investigation concluded: "The treatment given was in accordance with current medical knowledge in the light of the operating conditions and injuries that could be detected at the time."
"The type of injury found is commonly fatal, regardless of the treatment given. It is exceptional for patients with this type of injury to reach hospital alive."
The UK report stated that after hearing evidence from a number of medical staff who treated Diana: "There was no evidence to show that there was a more appropriate hospital that could have provided this treatment."
http://www.24dash.com/news/communities/2006-12-14-Inquiry-reveals-graphic-details-of-Princess-Dianas-injuries#.U2-AtvldWSo
Cindy
She certainly wasn't cracking jokes with them and drinking scotch in the ambulance. They should have known they should have been hurrying and not counting the cracks in the pavement... :shrug:
Quote from: Queen Camilla on May 11, 2014, 03:05:27 AM
Sandy, don't know where you are but very few people are airlifted.
Not many cities, even large urban ones can afford helicopters for each crash victim.
Helicopters are usually stationed only in certain areas so the time it would take from getting the call to arriving at the scene would probably be longer than a traditional ambulance so most rely on standard ambulances.
I don't know where you are but whenever there are severe accidents there is indeed airlifting. In most cases too where there are severe injuries. Not every injury is traumatic so not every single injury patient is airlifted.
Double post auto-merged: May 11, 2014, 05:12:06 PM
Quote from: TLLK on May 11, 2014, 03:40:06 AM
Quote from: Queen Camilla on May 11, 2014, 03:05:27 AM
Sandy, don't know where you are but very few people are airlifted.
Not many cities, even large urban ones can afford helicopters for each crash victim.
Helicopters are usually stationed only in certain areas so the time it would take from getting the call to arriving at the scene would probably be longer than a traditional ambulance so most rely on standard ambulances.
Agreed. Trying to land a helicopter in that area would have been very difficult. Also a doctor was on board the ambulance so Diana was receiving care from a physician.
Nothing is "difficult" if getting a severely injured patient the proper care. Everything is "difficult" in treatment of patients. Does that mean people should not bother?
The doctor on board had no access to the equipment found in a hospital so it was not the same.
Double post auto-merged: May 11, 2014, 05:13:12 PM
Quote from: TLLK on May 10, 2014, 06:20:56 PM
^^^Which from looking at the crash photos appears to be a realistic time frame for the firefighters to do their job as quickly as possible.
One other bit of information that I have yet to see in the discussion is that there was a physician and nurse in the ambulance aiding Diana, not just emergency technicians. The physician would be the one making the decision on the scene to stop and stabilize Diana, not just technicians acting on the orders of a doctor at the hospital.
Doctors can make awful decisions. That's why there are malpractice cases and insurance. This decision was atrocious.
Quote from: Limabeany on May 11, 2014, 02:00:33 PM
She certainly wasn't cracking jokes with them and drinking scotch in the ambulance. They should have known they should have been hurrying and not counting the cracks in the pavement... :shrug:
what do you suggest they did when she went into cardiac arrest in the ambulance?
What they didn't do is rush to the hospital and since the French ambulance service isn't revolutionizing the world with this new modality, it is safe to say, it was not a recommendable decision...
When CPR is performed, it must be done on a firm, steady surface. A moving ambulance, whether speeding or not, is not steady.
Cindy
Quote from: Limabeany on May 12, 2014, 11:01:21 AM
What they didn't do is rush to the hospital and since the French ambulance service isn't revolutionizing the world with this new modality, it is safe to say, it was not a recommendable decision...
I don't get why some on the thread think the "treatment" of a slow ambulance is "best."
No one has said that the ambulance was slow. But there are those who believe that the French followed their normal method, which is to stabilize the patient before leaving for the hospital, and therefore didn't deliberately delay getting Diana to a trauma center. There are also those who understand why the ambulance had to stop when Diana's blood pressure dropped and the chance of her going into cardiac arrest again was real.
Cindy
Different countries have different philosophies regarding emergency care. Here in Canada we have the scoop and go idea. The paramedics treat according to symptom but the idea is to get the patient to the hospital ASAP. In France they have the SMUR system in which physicians ride with the ambulance and the patient is stabilized on site.
There are advantages for both. I have worked in both types of settings (we had no choice but to try to stabilized patients up north - the air ambulances could be hours before arriving) I prefer to get the patient to the hospital quickly but SMUR is basically a trauma unit on wheels. France has been using that system for a long time and Diana's death didn't change anything, so they obviously have faith in it. She had significant internal damage and there was little chance of survival whether she was treated on site or rushed to the hospital.
There was no advantage for Diana being in that slow ambulance ride and not getting to the hospital in a timelier fashion. They may have faith in it but if I saw one of my friends or relatives who needed to get to the hospital be put in a slow ambulance I would fear for t heir lives.
Double post auto-merged: May 12, 2014, 05:29:17 PM
Quote from: cinrit on May 12, 2014, 02:12:27 PM
No one has said that the ambulance was slow. But there are those who believe that the French followed their normal method, which is to stabilize the patient before leaving for the hospital, and therefore didn't deliberately delay getting Diana to a trauma center. There are also those who understand why the ambulance had to stop when Diana's blood pressure dropped and the chance of her going into cardiac arrest again was real.
Cindy
Cindy, who is "no one?" I have ready many articles discussing the slow ambulance and even posted something written about Dr. Barnard criticizing the slow ride. Cindy, it is not correct that "no one" complained about the length of time it took Diana to get to that hospital.
Sandy, I meant no one at this forum. I was responding to your post, in which you said:
"I don't get why some on the thread think the "treatment" of a slow ambulance is "best."
Cindy
Quote from: Macrobug on May 12, 2014, 04:34:02 PM
Different countries have different philosophies regarding emergency care. Here in Canada we have the scoop and go idea. The paramedics treat according to symptom but the idea is to get the patient to the hospital ASAP. In France they have the SMUR system in which physicians ride with the ambulance and the patient is stabilized on site.
There are advantages for both. I have worked in both types of settings (we had no choice but to try to stabilized patients up north - the air ambulances could be hours before arriving) I prefer to get the patient to the hospital quickly but SMUR is basically a trauma unit on wheels. France has been using that system for a long time and Diana's death didn't change anything, so they obviously have faith in it. She had significant internal damage and there was little chance of survival whether she was treated on site or rushed to the hospital.
Thank you Macrobug for sharing you insight and experience with both types of emergency services systems. Also you've stated what the physician on board must have realized when her blood pressure was dropping so rapidly and what the surgeons discovered in the operating room, Diana's injuries were so severe that she would not have survived.
But you don't know this for sure. Nobody does really. It is all speculative. I think she'd have had a much better chance if she did not have the delay in getting to the hospital.
Double post auto-merged: May 12, 2014, 07:39:26 PM
Quote from: cinrit on May 12, 2014, 06:03:07 PM
Sandy, I meant no one at this forum. I was responding to your post, in which you said:
"I don't get why some on the thread think the "treatment" of a slow ambulance is "best."
Cindy
I think you are getting into hairsplitting and word games again Cindy. Let's stick to the topic please.
It is clear that there is disagreement on the thread. And indeed there had been criticism of the slowness of the ambulance both on the threads (and there were others) and in the media.
I don't get why some on the thread think the "treatment" of a slow ambulance is "best." (my statement)
Your reply:
"No one has said that the ambulance was slow"
My statement said "best" yours said "slow" You in effect did not reply to my post. And clearly people on the thread besides me said the ambulance was slow.
So much time wasted on going off topic on word games.
From what I read, she had a pulmonary vein tear. Not easily diagnosed, not easily treated and very poor outcome.
It does not matter the speed of the ambulance. The principles of trauma care is quick identification of the problem and treatment. Some countries bring the patient to the trauma care, other countries take the trauma centre to the patient. France has these mobile trauma centres.
France has been using this system for many years. There has been many, many studies done regarding the different methodology of trauma care. France has an excellent health care system, one of the best in the world. If the trauma system they employed didn't work it would have been abandoned years ago.
The question is not the system but the actual care given. Did the care givers attending Diana properly care for her. Did they identify the injuries and did they treat them correctly. Even if they did do every thing correctly her injuries were such that she couldn't survive. I don't know. I don't have access to the actual medical records. I take anything reported with a huge grain of salt because reporters are not health care professions and quite frankly have no idea what they are talking about.
Some physicians commented about the long time it took her to get to the hospital. It speaks volumes that Dr. Christian Barnard believed that it made a difference.
Getting a person to the hospital in a very slow ambulance to me does not scream excellent healthcare.
I don't know if the health care is the best in the world, but the ambulance service is certainly the slowest in the world... :shrug:
Quote from: Macrobug on May 12, 2014, 07:59:27 PM
From what I read, she had a pulmonary vein tear. Not easily diagnosed, not easily treated and very poor outcome.
It does not matter the speed of the ambulance. The principles of trauma care is quick identification of the problem and treatment. Some countries bring the patient to the trauma care, other countries take the trauma centre to the patient. France has these mobile trauma centres.
France has been using this system for many years. There has been many, many studies done regarding the different methodology of trauma care. France has an excellent health care system, one of the best in the world. If the trauma system they employed didn't work it would have been abandoned years ago.
The question is not the system but the actual care given. Did the care givers attending Diana properly care for her. Did they identify the injuries and did they treat them correctly. Even if they did do every thing correctly her injuries were such that she couldn't survive. I don't know. I don't have access to the actual medical records. I take anything reported with a huge grain of salt because reporters are not health care professions and quite frankly have no idea what they are talking about.
Excellent point Macrobug. I agree that if the French did not believe that their policies were working that they would have been abandoned.
I don't think if it were a family member of any of us, we would find that time acceptable unless we live a jungle in Africa or Asia or the Amazon rainforest... :blank:
That is because we are used to the scoop and go method. Neither method is superior to the other.
Double post auto-merged: May 12, 2014, 09:03:02 PM
Quote from: sandy on May 12, 2014, 08:23:59 PM
Some physicians commented about the long time it took her to get to the hospital. It speaks volumes that Dr. Christian Barnard believed that it made a difference.
Getting a person to the hospital in a very slow ambulance to me does not scream excellent healthcare.
It was going slow because they were working on her doing exactly in-ambulance what they would be doing in-hospital! I don't know how else to explain it. In Canada, USA and UK we expect a fast trip via ambulance to the trauma centre then the care starting once the patient is in the trauma unit. In France they start that care on site. And once the patient is stable THEN they transfer. It does have merit.
I don't know, Macrobug, the method that gets the injured patient to the hospital where the actual doctors are is, IMO, the better one... :shrug: An ambulance is not a motorcycle, they should certainly be able to do their best to stabilize the patient on their way to the hospital (where they should be headed at high speed and not a snail's pace...
^the French method DOES have a doc(s) on board. Vive la difference!
It didn't save Diana. I would not Vive this difference!
There are car accident victims who don't make it to the hospital alive with the Scoop and Run method, either. It's unfortunate, but not every patient can be saved with either method. Very sadly, Diana was one who didn't make it.
Cindy
Diana had no choice and got the worst possible option for her situation.
Quote from: cinrit on May 12, 2014, 11:35:18 PM
There are car accident victims who don't make it to the hospital alive with the Scoop and Run method, either. It's unfortunate, but not every patient can be saved with either method. Very sadly, Diana was one who didn't make it.
Cindy
Even sadder yet that the accident didn't occur in a country had a scoop-and-run policy but a get-to-hospital-whenever policy... I just find the time line inexcusable... :shrug:
Quote from: cinrit on May 12, 2014, 11:35:18 PM
There are car accident victims who don't make it to the hospital alive with the Scoop and Run method, either. It's unfortunate, but not every patient can be saved with either method. Very sadly, Diana was one who didn't make it.
Cindy
I have to agree. With the advances in modern medicine it can easily lead us to believe that doctors can save everyone. Sadly this is not the case.
Princess Grace was not saved.
Prince Frisco was not saved.
It is not about everyone being saved, but about doing all one can or even the best one can, whether she could have been saved is irrelevant, it shouldn't have taken such an obscenely long amount of time.
But according to France's method, they did do all they could to save her.
Cindy
I disagree. If I had a relative that had that slow trip I would not think that they did "all they could." It's a matter of opinion and no, I don't think they did all they could.
To the best of my knowledge Di went into cardiac arrest on the Ambulance actually she had multiple cardiac arrests from what I can gather (please feel free to correct me) so the fact she went to the Hospital alive and they were able to work on her desperate situation for an hour (pleas feel free to correct me I was 12) tells us the professionals in the Ambulance are heroes ...
Your information is correct Eri. (Good memory considering you weren't even a teenager when she was killed.) :wink: As Macrobug explained earlier the ambulance that she was transported in was a mobile trauma unit with a doctor and nurse on board, so I believe that they were making heroic attempts to save a gravely injured patient. From what I've read she spent two hours in surgery, but the damage was too great.
She didn't get the proper care. A doctor in a mobile unit is not nearly the same. I think it is all speculation and nobody can say the damage was "too great." It was "too great" because she didn't get the right help ASAP. Dr. Barnard's statements appear to be dismissed or ignored.
When Diana got to the hospital she had a Second heart attack. Had she gotten there earlier I think she would have had a better chance. And I don't think anybody should dismiss the possibility that she could have been saved had she gotten there earlier. Nobody is in a position to know that she would not have survived even if she had gotten to the hospital within minutes. It's speculation to say that she could not have survived in any case.
I was there for the coverage and I never heard those ambulance workers called "heroes." They were doing their job. But that said it was not their fault it was the fault of the way things were done about emergencies such as this one. Whatever is is not always "right".
I think if people had loved ones in that slow ambulance they would think differently and not praise the shoddy treatment Diana got not getting to the hospital quickly enough. And sorry if a doctor in a mobile unit is supposed to be "enough" then why have hospitals at all?
Beyond the best of anyone's recollection, the more serious the injuries, the faster the ambulance should get to the Hospital, otherwise why bother! :Lothwen: No one, except posters in this forum, calls their snail pace to the hospital, the work of heroes... :orchid:
:goodpost: Sandy.
She had two cardiac arrests, one when she was removed from the car and one while on the operating table. In the ambulance, her blood pressure dropped dramatically, which made the doctor realize that if she weren't stabilized immediately, she would go into cardiac arrest again. The ambulance stopped so that she could be stabilized. If it hadn't, she possibly would have died then.
Dr. Barnard was a brilliant surgeon. His supposition that Diana could have been saved is no more valid than the several cardiologists whose suppositions are that she couldn't have been, because none of them were there.
Cindy
She still had cardiac arrest when she got to the hospital.
And I see suppositions on this board that she could not be saved under any circumstances which I don't agree with. Nobody knows what would have happened had she gotten to an operating room ASAP. Pus it was said at the time that because she exercised she was in excellent shape which could have helped her chances of survival had she gotten to the hospital quickly. The ones "there" did not get to help her soon enough. And they don't "know" if they could have saved her had she gotten there sooner.
I don't buy into the "she would have died no matter what" opinions.
Getting to the Hospital quickly is never unimportant and certainly wasn't on that night.
Sadly, no matter if you exercise every day and are in excellent condition, that won't help if your pericardium and pulmonary vein are torn. Diana's heart was moved all the way to the opposite side of her chest by the force of the crash. Her injuries were extremely serious.
Cindy
Again, one can't make medical pronouncements like that unless the person is a physician and it depends on the patient. How is it "known" that exercise makes no difference. It might in Patient A and might not in Patient B. But at times it can make a difference. We are not all from cookie cutters and are the same. Diana was kept from medical care in a hospital for too long a time and that was IMO what made a huge difference in her living or dying. Theoretically had Diana gotten to the hospital in time it would have given doctors a better chance to help her and no I don't think she would have "died anyway." If so, then why did they take her to the hospital if she was "doomed". Apparently somebody thought it was the right thing to do to get her to the hospital.
President Reagan and John Paul II had serious wounds from assassination attempts. Neither was put in an ultra slow ambulance and both survived because they got prompt treatment. And both were a lot older than Diana was at the time of her car accident.
No critically injured patient has much a chance, Diana or not, if ambulances take their time getting to hospitals, it was supposed to be an ambulance not a rickshaw..
Quote from: sandy on May 13, 2014, 07:31:26 PM
Again, one can't make medical pronouncements like that unless the person is a physician and it depends on the patient. How is it "known" that exercise makes no difference. It might in Patient A and might not in Patient B. But at times it can make a difference. We are not all from cookie cutters and are the same. Diana was kept from medical care in a hospital for too long a time and that was IMO what made a huge difference in her living or dying. Theoretically had Diana gotten to the hospital in time it would have given doctors a better chance to help her and no I don't think she would have "died anyway." If so, then why did they take her to the hospital if she was "doomed". Apparently somebody thought it was the right thing to do to get her to the hospital.
President Reagan and John Paul II had serious wounds from assassination attempts. Neither was put in an ultra slow ambulance and both survived because they got prompt treatment. And both were a lot older than Diana was at the time of her car accident.
Remember they both were shot which is different from what happened to Diana. Diana was an unrestrained occupant in a vehicle that was traveling at a high rate of speed 60mph (estimated) and it crashed into a concrete pillar. Her body suffered massive trauma throughout her chest and abdomen. Diana received treatment as quickly as possible, but it did take firefighters 30 minutes just to remove her from the vehicle. If they'd rushed her out of the car then they risked causing more injury to their patient. Once out she was in a mobile trauma unit with a physician on board. Medical teams were awaiting Diana's ambulance and would have been updated as to why the mobile trauma unit needed to stop and stabilize her as per medical policy in France.
Reagan and JPII did not need to be removed from a crushed vehicle. Each was taken away in their own vehicles which were capable of being driven to awaiting medical teams.
If they rushed? That is what ambulances are supposed to do... :orchid: There is no excusing why they didn't rush a critically injured patient to the hospital. None....
The "they" that I was referring to in my post were the firefighters who were in charge of removing the victims from the car. My previous sentence in that part of the post gives reference to the first responders. The mobile trauma unit could take over once they (firefighters/first responders) had safely removed Diana from the vehicle.
:thumbsup: :nod: The ones who removed Diana from the car are exempt from criticism, IMO, the driver of the ambulance and his mobile trauma unit cronies are inexcusable! It's like they were driving through peanut butter flooded roads! :blink:
I do think that the half an hour or so that it took firefighters to cut Diana from the car-wreck was fatal to her chances of survival, unfortunately.
Why oh why too, didn't she (and Dodi) wear a seatbelt? It might not have saved her but the resulting trauma to her body was just too much for her heart to cope with.
Ultimately, blame for her death, if we have to attribute blame, has to lie with the driver, Henri Paul. Drive in a safe manner, don't drink and drive and don't speed and you'll get safely to your destination. This goes double if you have passengers.
If they had cut her out of the car and airlifted her to the hospital pronto or kept her out of the snail driven ambulance it may not have been"fatal."
Again, the seatbelt may not have been functioning. The car was a last minute switch. Plus Rees Jones had memory loss and did not remember what was said or done. He was the security person on duty responsible for their safety.
If Henri Paul had been drinking that much he could not have deftly tied his shoes (as was filmed) without falling over. Plus he would have reeked of alcohol and that would have scared Rees Jones, Diana and Dodi from getting in the car. Some are suspicious Paul's blood sample was switched with another's. Or so his family has contended.
The slow ambulance trip IMO did her in. I keep hearing in the news about people injured that they are airlifted.
Quote from: Limabeany on May 12, 2014, 11:01:21 AM
What they didn't do is rush to the hospital and since the French ambulance service isn't revolutionizing the world with this new modality, it is safe to say, it was not a recommendable decision...
How do you rush someone to hopstial when they are In cardiac arrest and need immediate treatemetn or they will die in the ambulance?
I read that Diana had exactly the same injury Pres Reagan had - Reagan was immediately rushed to a hospital and survived - a much older person than Diana. The doctor who wrote this article around the time of her death was appalled that 1) the ambulance took so long and 2) there are questions about the medication they gave her to elevate her BP in the ambulance - apparently this med also would have caused more bleeding
The reason so many controversies still exist is because IMHO the report never really satisfactorily addressed the issues.
Ronald Reagan was shot in the underarm as he was waving to the waiting crowd outside a building after a speech. The bullet entered his lung and lodged about an inch from his heart. Though he was closer to death than originally thought at the moment, his wounds were not like Diana's in any way.
Cindy
The Ambulance staff are heroes because she reached the Hospital alive :shrug: ... other than that ... I wonder who is gonna be blamed for her death next Obama?
Quote from: cate1949 on May 14, 2014, 05:29:00 AM
I read that Diana had exactly the same injury Pres Reagan had - Reagan was immediately rushed to a hospital and survived - a much older person than Diana. The doctor who wrote this article around the time of her death was appalled that 1) the ambulance took so long and 2) there are questions about the medication they gave her to elevate her BP in the ambulance - apparently this med also would have caused more bleeding
The reason so many controversies still exist is because IMHO the report never really satisfactorily addressed the issues.
Reagan had a bullet track wound that was very serious but in no way was it the same as the injuries Diana received. Diana had deceleration injuries that rearranged her complete pulmonary/cardiac system. Her pulmonary vein tore. The two can not be compared.
Reagan was a lot older than Diana and he did have serious injuries and he had to be operated on ASAP. And a slow trip in an ambulance would not have helped his chances of survival to put it mildly. Macrobug, of course it can be compared. Posters are free to compare things as they see fit.
Double post auto-merged: May 14, 2014, 02:16:12 PM
Quote from: cinrit on May 14, 2014, 12:28:01 PM
Ronald Reagan was shot in the underarm as he was waving to the waiting crowd outside a building after a speech. The bullet entered his lung and lodged about an inch from his heart. Though he was closer to death than originally thought at the moment, his wounds were not like Diana's in any way.
Cindy
Cindy that does not matter. The point is putting Reagan in a very slow ambulance was not an option for obvious reasons. It was not "OK" to put Diana in a slow ambulance despite all the defense of it.
Double post auto-merged: May 14, 2014, 02:17:21 PM
Quote from: Eri on May 14, 2014, 01:11:32 PM
The Ambulance staff are heroes because she reached the Hospital alive :shrug: ... other than that ... I wonder who is gonna be blamed for her death next Obama?
Eri, I think you are getting into a weird area here. Who on this thread blamed the hospital people for doing their job. Diana did not survive and her life was not saved, it was not enough to get the poor woman to the hospital so she was breathing--she died! and the fault lies with the system of using the very slow ambulance--the workers were part of the system and doing their job.
I am not getting this slow ambulance getting such ardent defense. Think about it. Would you want one of your near and dear ones creeping along in a slow ambulance to get help. I think not. I know I wouldn't.
Quote from: Eri on May 14, 2014, 01:11:32 PM
The Ambulance staff are heroes because she reached the Hospital alive :shrug: ... other than that ... I wonder who is gonna be blamed for her death next Obama?
:crazylaugh: :laugh10: :crazylaugh: .....they just might :o
Quote from: amabel on May 14, 2014, 05:09:21 AM
Quote from: Limabeany on May 12, 2014, 11:01:21 AM
What they didn't do is rush to the hospital and since the French ambulance service isn't revolutionizing the world with this new modality, it is safe to say, it was not a recommendable decision...
How do you rush someone to hopstial when they are In cardiac arrest and need immediate treatemetn or they will die in the ambulance?
Patients with cardiac arrest are rushed to hospitals. I see sirens going and ambulances speeding to the hospital. I don't see ambulances going as slow as snails to get the patient to the hospital.
Double post auto-merged: May 14, 2014, 02:23:20 PM
Quote from: georgiana996 on May 14, 2014, 02:20:58 PM
Quote from: Eri on May 14, 2014, 01:11:32 PM
The Ambulance staff are heroes because she reached the Hospital alive :shrug: ... other than that ... I wonder who is gonna be blamed for her death next Obama?
:crazylaugh: :laugh10: :crazylaugh: .....they just might :o
Oh come on Georgiana. Nobody blamed the ambulance workers. And Diana's death is not something funny to joke about. I don't get the amusement over Eri's post, which accuses people of something they did not do.
I can't imagine defending the system in France and praising Eri's comments about "blame." If people don't want to believe that the slow ambulance didn't hurt Diana it's their choice but joking about it is out of line.
Sandy. Not once did I say that people could not post. I said that the injuries could not be compared. Please don't pick fights with me. If you have an issue, take it to the mods. As I will.
They can be compared. And some out in the media have done so. My point is that people can compare them and they have. A serious injury is a serious injury. And I think Reagan would have passed on in 1981 had he been in a slow ambulance. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.
Quote from: sandy on May 14, 2014, 02:15:15 PM
Quote from: cinrit on May 14, 2014, 12:28:01 PM
Ronald Reagan was shot in the underarm as he was waving to the waiting crowd outside a building after a speech. The bullet entered his lung and lodged about an inch from his heart. Though he was closer to death than originally thought at the moment, his wounds were not like Diana's in any way.
Cindy
Cindy that does not matter. The point is putting Reagan in a very slow ambulance was not an option for obvious reasons. It was not "OK" to put Diana in a slow ambulance despite all the defense of it.
I was responding to the cate1949's post that she'd read the injuries were the same, that's all ... I said nothing about ambulances. And yes, the two injuries can be compared as both being serious, but as Macrobug and I both pointed out, they were not the
same injuries.
Quote from: sandyI am not getting this slow ambulance getting such ardent defense. Think about it. Would you want one of your near and dear ones creeping along in a slow ambulance to get help. I think not. I know I wouldn't.
No one is defending slow ambulances. Who knows, except for having to stop when there was danger of Diana going into cardiac arrest, the ambulance could very well have been speeding.
Cindy
QuoteQuote from: georgiana996 on May 14, 2014, 02:20:58 PM
Quote from: Eri on May 14, 2014, 01:11:32 PM
The Ambulance staff are heroes because she reached the Hospital alive :shrug: ... other than that ... I wonder who is gonna be blamed for her death next Obama?
:crazylaugh: :laugh10: :crazylaugh: .....they just might :o
Oh come on Georgiana. Nobody blamed the ambulance workers. And Diana's death is not something funny to joke about. I don't get the amusement over Eri's post, which accuses people of something they did not do.
I can't imagine defending the system in France and praising Eri's comments about "blame." If people don't want to believe that the slow ambulance didn't hurt Diana it's their choice but joking about it is out of line.
Wait a minute thats not what I meant , death is never funny , Eris post was so thats what I laughed at , I didnt praise her.
OK. But again, nobody panned the ambulance workers who were doing their jobs and did not run the shoddy system in France. And to me it's not a "conspiracy" theory to blame the slow ambulance. And nobody knows what would have happened had Diana been transported in timely fashion to the hospital so I don't see how a blanket statement can be made by some that she would have died anyway.
^ They operated an hour or so (thanks to the Ambulance) so that tells us her situation was desperate and her death has nothing to do with the Ambulance ...
If you don't want to blame the slow ambulance and ignore the elephant in the room that's your choice. But the sooner she got there the more chance she had. The doctors had to open her chest and massage her heart something not possible in the dinky ambulance.
Eri you are not a doctor nor were there so you cannot state as fact that it had nothing to do with the Ambulance. Some doctors publicly said it did.
Well, to be fair, none of us were there. Thankfully, they didn't have to do open-chest heart massage in the ambulance because she didn't go into cardiac arrest there. Her blood pressure dropped dramatically, and it was due to the ambulance stopping to allow the doctor to stabilize her that she didn't. They got her to the hospital in time for the massage, and that's what's important. What's sad is that, despite the efforts, she didn't make it.
Cindy
^^ It goes both ways ... you can't blame the Ambulance ... I have heard a lot of people who can't get over the fact she was in a speeding car , with a drunken driver with no seat belt blame the Ambulance ignoring they saved her life several times that night and they took her to the Hospital to be operated alive !!!
What was an important factor in her demise is that they did not get her to the hospital in time for the massage.
And yes to be fair none of us were so it can't be stated as "fact" she would have died anyway if she were in a faster ambulance or airlifted.
Cindy if they had gotten her to the hospital "in time" for the massage she would be alive today.
She was not gotten there in time. Period.
Eri, why keep harping on something none of us on this thread did: Blame the ambulance drivers and attendants. They were doing their jobs and did not run the shoddy system with the slow ambulance.
Driving her to the ambulance in that slow slow way did not mean she got there in time. Obviously she was not "saved" since she died. For all you know the ambulance attendants stabilizing her were upset at the time it took her to get there. Who knows?
Her life IMO was lost due to a speeding car and an ambulance going at a snail's pace. And a combination of various factors. But I think the slow ambulance was a decisive factor in her death.
Quote from: cate1949 on May 14, 2014, 05:29:00 AM
I read that Diana had exactly the same injury Pres Reagan had - Reagan was immediately rushed to a hospital and survived - a much older person than Diana. The doctor who wrote this article around the time of her death was appalled that 1) the ambulance took so long and 2) there are questions about the medication they gave her to elevate her BP in the ambulance - apparently this med also would have caused more bleeding
The reason so many controversies still exist is because IMHO the report never really satisfactorily addressed the issues.
wel no he certainly didn't have the same injuries.
He had severe injuries. Arguably he could have died if he were placed in a slow ambulance. I think he would have.
Quote from: sandy on May 14, 2014, 03:59:28 PM
What was an important factor in her demise is that they did not get her to the hospital in time for the massage.
I'm confused. They did do open chest cardiac massage on Diana in the hospital. If they didn't do it in the hospital, where did they do it? You, yourself, say that they didn't do it in the ambulance.
Quote from: sandyThe doctors had to open her chest and massage her heart something not possible in the dinky ambulance.
Cindy
It was too late to save Diana in the hospital. Had they gotten her there earlier I think she would have had a better chance of survival. Are you missing the point Cindy or are we getting into semantics again? Put away the word games.
Obviously the ambulance did not have all the equipment and staff the hospital had. So obviously she didn't get the treatment she needed in a timely fashion.
Quote from: Limabeany on May 13, 2014, 08:08:22 PM
No critically injured patient has much a chance, Diana or not, if ambulances take their time getting to hospitals, it was supposed to be an ambulance not a rickshaw..
well I'll just say it one more time. How are they to speed when Diana's heart was stopping and they needed to stabilise her? If they had just sped along, her heart would have given up and she'd have died I the ambulance.
Sandy, I am responding to what you say literally, word-for-word, which is what we do on forums. That is not "word games".
Cindy
Since none of us were there and none of us are doctors there is nothing definitive. All I know is doctors did criticize the long length of time it took her to get to the hospital. If some want to dismiss this so be it.
Double post auto-merged: May 14, 2014, 04:15:42 PM
Quote from: cinrit on May 14, 2014, 04:13:12 PM
Sandy, I am responding to what you say literally, word-for-word, which is what we do on forums. That is not "word games".
Cindy
Cindy I think what I said was obvious enough. And yes you do get into word games for very obvious things (like the one recently on another thread about William). Why not review the thread if you are confused instead of getting into the word games which are getting tiresome.
Quote from: sandy on May 14, 2014, 04:08:04 PM
He had severe injuries. Arguably he could have died if he were placed in a slow ambulance. I think he would have.
Reagan arrived at the hospital via the presidential limo and walked into the ER. It was only then that he began to collapse. He was still conscious on the operating table prior to being anesthetized. It was then that they discovered the extent of his injuries.
Quote from: amabel on May 14, 2014, 04:12:05 PM
Quote from: Limabeany on May 13, 2014, 08:08:22 PM
No critically injured patient has much a chance, Diana or not, if ambulances take their time getting to hospitals, it was supposed to be an ambulance not a rickshaw..
well I'll just say it one more time. How are they to speed when Diana's heart was stopping and they needed to stabilise her? If they had just sped along, her heart would have given up and she'd have died I the ambulance.
Agreed the logical decision was to aid the patient immediately as the necessary equipment and personnel were there inside the mobile trauma unit. The trauma units came to the accident site to aid the surviving victims. The doctor on board of Diana's mobile unit made the decision to stop the ambulance and stabilize Diana. Once she was stabilized, the ambulance could proceed to the hospital. Then the surgeons could begin their work on a patient that was not in cardiac arrest.
Quote from: Eri on May 14, 2014, 03:59:17 PM
^^ It goes both ways ... you can't blame the Ambulance ... I have heard a lot of people who can't get over the fact she was in a speeding car , with a drunken driver with no seat belt blame the Ambulance ignoring they saved her life several times that night and they took her to the Hospital to be operated alive !!!
I agreee Eri. The inebriated driver who was driving at twice the legal limit in the tunnel crashed into a concrete support. The passengers were unrestrained. The laws of physics took over and the result was two people killed instantly. One died later from massive chest trauma injuries and the survivor needed months of rehabilitation.
I believe that the first responders, mobile trauma unit and hospital staff did their best to provide aid to the survivors of the crash. Unfortunately one of the victims who was removed from the wreckage did not survive.
Quote from: Macrobug on May 14, 2014, 01:37:41 PM
Quote from: cate1949 on May 14, 2014, 05:29:00 AM
I read that Diana had exactly the same injury Pres Reagan had - Reagan was immediately rushed to a hospital and survived - a much older person than Diana. The doctor who wrote this article around the time of her death was appalled that 1) the ambulance took so long and 2) there are questions about the medication they gave her to elevate her BP in the ambulance - apparently this med also would have caused more bleeding
The reason so many controversies still exist is because IMHO the report never really satisfactorily addressed the issues.
Reagan had a bullet track wound that was very serious but in no way was it the same as the injuries Diana received. Diana had deceleration injuries that rearranged her complete pulmonary/cardiac system. Her pulmonary vein tore. The two can not be compared.
Macrobug could you explain what "deceleration injuries" mean to me? Is that another term for blood loss?
Decleration injuries are what happens in an accident when there is a transfer of energy. The person is going the same speed as the car. When the accident happens the person "decelerates" (slows down) just like the car does. If unrestrained then the person is violently thrown arooud and injuries happen. Also (and this is what is important about Diana's injuries from what I have read) the internal organs also get thrown around ie the heart and lungs move around in the chest cavity. And when that happens there is the possibility of tears and ruptures of the arteries and veins. A big tear and the person usually dies very quickly. A small tear can compromise the functioning of the heart and lungs, both from a build up of the leaking blood around the heart that interfers with the movement/action of the heart and from a lack of oxygen (the vein that tore with Diana is the one that brings oxygenated blood back from the lungs for the heart to pump to the rest of the body). Unfortuately, further movement of the person and the little tear can become a big tear and the person dies of blood loss.
Along with the tears other injury can happen with deceleration injuries.
deceleration injury - definition of deceleration injury in the Medical dictionary - by the Free Online Medical Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia. (http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/deceleration+injury)
Thank you Macrobug for the explanation in terms that I can actually understand :nod: :thumbsup:
Knowing that this type of trauma can worsen when an accident victim is being moved surely accounts for the time and care that the firefighters needed when extracting Diana from the vehicle.
Nobody here is a doctor--it is well and good to talk about injuries and trauma. But it cannot be proven nor can it be disproven that the slow ride to the hospital was a huge factor in Diana's demise. It is my opinion and I am sticking to it.
Double post auto-merged: May 14, 2014, 06:43:53 PM
Quote from: TLLK on May 14, 2014, 04:33:57 PM
Quote from: sandy on May 14, 2014, 04:08:04 PM
He had severe injuries. Arguably he could have died if he were placed in a slow ambulance. I think he would have.
Reagan arrived at the hospital via the presidential limo and walked into the ER. It was only then that he began to collapse. He was still conscious on the operating table prior to being anesthetized. It was then that they discovered the extent of his injuries.
He was surrounded by "people" and did not exactly get there all by himself. He was literally shoved into the limo and whisked away. He still did not get into a slow moving ambulance. It also proves a point I am making. He got there quickly but obviously he was deteriorating. In a slow ambulance the deterioration would continue at a fast pace and he might not have survived. The doctors had to treat him Pronto.
Double post auto-merged: May 14, 2014, 06:52:48 PM
Quote from: cinrit on May 14, 2014, 04:13:12 PM
Sandy, I am responding to what you say literally, word-for-word, which is what we do on forums. That is not "word games".
Cindy
My point was clear but you get into questioning meanings and words like a teacher and ask me to explain. I call them word games and I think in some cases it just an attempt to go off topic so I can explain "what I meant". If you are confused about anything, why not look at the posts I respond to. It does deteriorate into word games. You know the topic better than that and since we went through it before in earlier discussions I don';t get why you are confused now. The massage only could be given in the hospital if you are still confused and by the time she got there from the ambulance it was too little too late and the woman passed away. Get it now Cindy?
Quote from: sandy on May 14, 2014, 09:59:28 PM
What was an important factor in her demise is that they did not get her to the hospital in time for the massage.
I'm confused. They did do open chest cardiac massage on Diana in the hospital. If they didn't do it in the hospital, where did they do it? You, yourself, say that they didn't do it in the ambulance.
Quote from: sandy
The doctors had to open her chest and massage her heart something not possible in the dinky ambulance.
Honestly Cindy, your answer to my post saying you are "confused" is nothing more than double talk to try to put down the post. You can deny it all you want but just looking at the last exchange is a clear case of word games and trying to trip up another poster. I'll say no more.
Would you settle for a Nurse Practitioner? :P You are right. None of us were there and none of us ( that I know of) have read the official medical records. We don't know what injuries she had. We don't know if she received the right treatment. We don't know if the Scoop and Run system would have saved her nor do we know if the French system contributed to her death.
What I do know is that the type of injury that it has been reported that Diana received has a very poor outcome and very few people survive it. No matter what type of EMR system is in place.
Diana had no choice of who she could "settle with" the woman was unconscious. I doubt families with loved ones in danger would settle for Nurse Practitioners when there are skilled physicians on duty with all the resources a good hospital would have to offer.
If the nurse practitioner was trained in trauma services and worked in an emergency room then I would choose her/him over a doctor that was not. I hope that a doctor who was not trained in those areas would also step aside for a more qualified candidate.
Quote from: Macrobug on May 14, 2014, 06:55:57 PM
Would you settle for a Nurse Practitioner? :P You are right. None of us were there and none of us ( that I know of) have read the official medical records. We don't know what injuries she had. We don't know if she received the right treatment. We don't know if the Scoop and Run system would have saved her nor do we know if the French system contributed to her death.
What I do know is that the type of injury that it has been reported that Diana received has a very poor outcome and very few people survive it. No matter what type of EMR system is in place.
Thank you again for sharing your medical knowledge and understanding of hospital procedure with us.
:blowkiss:
Would people who defend the slow ambulance not think it a good thing if it turned out and could be proven that the slow ambulance was the factor that killed her? I know it will never be proven or disproven and is subject to speculation. But I don't get the zealous defense of a shoddy procedure. Imagine a family that experiences this where it takes forever to get a beloved relative to a hospital for treatment. It is what the system "did" but it does not make it great as far as medical procedures and care in France. And none of us are doctors or were actually there.
I keep hearing on the news about heart patients "rushed to the hospital" not "slowed down to the hospital."
I can see the logic in bringing the trauma services (doctor(s),nurse(s) equipment, medication etc..) and moving slowly to avoid further injury to a patient as well as transporting a patient rapidly to an awaiting team. Macrobug has the medical knowledge/experience to share her thoughts on the subject and she can see the advantages/disadvantages that each has. Her explanation of SAMU and the "scope and run" systems make sense to me. I won't call either system shoddy as I do not possess the knowledge or experience to make that determination.
IMO, a snail pace ambulance isn't an acceptable option for critically injured patients... :shrug:
Even if there's the trauma unit inside? I see the advantages to both systems, actually. They both seem to work, since individual countries continue to use their chosen method.
Cindy
From my reading it appears that most of Europe uses the Franco-German model. One of the exceptions is the Netherlands.
It still is flawed.
Quote from: TLLK on May 14, 2014, 07:32:40 PM
I can see the logic in bringing the trauma services (doctor(s),nurse(s) equipment, medication etc..) and moving slowly to avoid further injury to a patient as well as transporting a patient rapidly to an awaiting team. Macrobug has the medical knowledge/experience to share her thoughts on the subject and she can see the advantages/disadvantages that each has. Her explanation of SAMU and the "scope and run" systems make sense to me. I won't call either system shoddy as I do not possess the knowledge or experience to make that determination.
Macrobug does have knowledge but does not have the perspective of specialists who deal with cases like Diana's or those who were on hand at the scene. And each person is an individual. Patients do not come in cookie cutters and what might work for one may not work for another.
[mod]Ladies and gentlemen: it seems this topic has run its course and we are simply playing ping pong with each other's perspectives, perhaps it is time to move on to more open-ended and thrilling threads!
:RAFWilliam: [/mod]