Damar Hamlin

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I don't know if it has already been mentioned, but the ESPN team did a remarkable job under challenging circumstances. Joe Buck, partnered with Troy Aikman, explained how their task shifted from calling the game to reporting on a news story. Lisa Salters did some emotional and compelling reporting about what it was like to be in the stadium. The studio crew of Suzy Kolber, Booger McFarland, and Adam Schefter had perhaps the toughest job trying to find the right words to make sense of what was happening without knowing any facts. After the game, Ryan Clark, working with Scott Van Pelt, was emotional, powerful, and insightful. I was in awe of all of them, but Clark in particular.


Really? I thought they did a terrible job.

Nothing but a lot of stammering and deer in the headlights look.

Would have been great to have up a graphic with some basic info about him.
They did eventually do this… what 2 hours later.

How about a phoner or Zoom with a medical expert.
Your questions could be what has caused NFL players to collapse in the past? Why would someone need CPR and explain CPR? Why would you use an AED? How is this different from CPR? What is a Level 1 Trauma Center? Does the NFL have emergency protocols?
These are pretty basic questions without giving specific medical information or outcomes, but helps keep the story in perspective.

The timeline graphic was awful.





Wow, that would’ve been completely inappropriate! They’re in the middle of cutting his jersey off and resuscitating him and when you want a play-by-play zoom call with a medical expert? The situation was not for your entertainment.


Not to mention no qualified trauma doctor would want to do that job.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I don't know if it has already been mentioned, but the ESPN team did a remarkable job under challenging circumstances. Joe Buck, partnered with Troy Aikman, explained how their task shifted from calling the game to reporting on a news story. Lisa Salters did some emotional and compelling reporting about what it was like to be in the stadium. The studio crew of Suzy Kolber, Booger McFarland, and Adam Schefter had perhaps the toughest job trying to find the right words to make sense of what was happening without knowing any facts. After the game, Ryan Clark, working with Scott Van Pelt, was emotional, powerful, and insightful. I was in awe of all of them, but Clark in particular.


Really? I thought they did a terrible job.

Nothing but a lot of stammering and deer in the headlights look.

Would have been great to have up a graphic with some basic info about him.
They did eventually do this… what 2 hours later.

How about a phoner or Zoom with a medical expert.
Your questions could be what has caused NFL players to collapse in the past? Why would someone need CPR and explain CPR? Why would you use an AED? How is this different from CPR? What is a Level 1 Trauma Center? Does the NFL have emergency protocols?
These are pretty basic questions without giving specific medical information or outcomes, but helps keep the story in perspective.

The timeline graphic was awful.





-1

I absolutely hate the suggestion of a zoom with a medical expert that will absolutely not add anything to the unknown. CNN had that last night, it was speculative and useless.

I agree Ryan did a fantastic job. He’s a family friend and we are all so very proud of the words he spoke under the pressure and emotion of last night. He’s already been getting increased visibility but he’s due for a HUGE prime time role. Larger than Skip and Steven A. ESPN really ought to make him the face of football going forward. He’s young enough to make a real impact. I know I’m biased knowing him, but I really like the idea of an actual former player being the face of football on a network.


I didn't know much about his football background but was in awe of his commentary last night. His demeanor was somehow calming yet deeply emotional and impactful. It was like he commanded the room, offered insight based on his personal experience, yet didn't make it all about him. I'm not sure he could have improved on any of his work last night. Please tell him that he earned many new fans during a heartbreaking telecast.


Thanks for the kind words.

He has a podcast that is very well done as well. Not trying to advertise this during this time at all, but his podcast is a great way to get to know more of him. He may have some controversial opinions, but he is a good man. I can attest to that.

https://instagram.com/thepivot?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I don't know if it has already been mentioned, but the ESPN team did a remarkable job under challenging circumstances. Joe Buck, partnered with Troy Aikman, explained how their task shifted from calling the game to reporting on a news story. Lisa Salters did some emotional and compelling reporting about what it was like to be in the stadium. The studio crew of Suzy Kolber, Booger McFarland, and Adam Schefter had perhaps the toughest job trying to find the right words to make sense of what was happening without knowing any facts. After the game, Ryan Clark, working with Scott Van Pelt, was emotional, powerful, and insightful. I was in awe of all of them, but Clark in particular.


Really? I thought they did a terrible job.

Nothing but a lot of stammering and deer in the headlights look.

Would have been great to have up a graphic with some basic info about him.
They did eventually do this… what 2 hours later.

How about a phoner or Zoom with a medical expert.
Your questions could be what has caused NFL players to collapse in the past? Why would someone need CPR and explain CPR? Why would you use an AED? How is this different from CPR? What is a Level 1 Trauma Center? Does the NFL have emergency protocols?
These are pretty basic questions without giving specific medical information or outcomes, but helps keep the story in perspective.

The timeline graphic was awful.





They didn't have that information as the situation unfolded. Nothing like this has ever happened before. They did their best under the circumstances, exhibiting real emotion without speculating.


Agreed. They did have his stats up, multiple times and way earlier than 2 hours. If they had done anything you mentioned it would have been horribly inappropriate and done for "ratings." As it was, they weren't trying to entertain you, or even be informative. My impression is they were trying to get information on the condition of the player - that's it. The rest was filler because it WAS filler. There was no "perspective of the story" need. Full stop. That poster is as bad as the NFL-is-a-business-they-should-have-played poster.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I don't know if it has already been mentioned, but the ESPN team did a remarkable job under challenging circumstances. Joe Buck, partnered with Troy Aikman, explained how their task shifted from calling the game to reporting on a news story. Lisa Salters did some emotional and compelling reporting about what it was like to be in the stadium. The studio crew of Suzy Kolber, Booger McFarland, and Adam Schefter had perhaps the toughest job trying to find the right words to make sense of what was happening without knowing any facts. After the game, Ryan Clark, working with Scott Van Pelt, was emotional, powerful, and insightful. I was in awe of all of them, but Clark in particular.


Really? I thought they did a terrible job.

Nothing but a lot of stammering and deer in the headlights look.

Would have been great to have up a graphic with some basic info about him.
They did eventually do this… what 2 hours later.

How about a phoner or Zoom with a medical expert.
Your questions could be what has caused NFL players to collapse in the past? Why would someone need CPR and explain CPR? Why would you use an AED? How is this different from CPR? What is a Level 1 Trauma Center? Does the NFL have emergency protocols?
These are pretty basic questions without giving specific medical information or outcomes, but helps keep the story in perspective.

The timeline graphic was awful.





-1

I absolutely hate the suggestion of a zoom with a medical expert that will absolutely not add anything to the unknown. CNN had that last night, it was speculative and useless.

I agree Ryan did a fantastic job. He’s a family friend and we are all so very proud of the words he spoke under the pressure and emotion of last night. He’s already been getting increased visibility but he’s due for a HUGE prime time role. Larger than Skip and Steven A. ESPN really ought to make him the face of football going forward. He’s young enough to make a real impact. I know I’m biased knowing him, but I really like the idea of an actual former player being the face of football on a network.


Yeah, I think the PP was expecting them to behave the way cable news does with whatever the sensational story of the day is, like with car chases or political scandals or whatever, where they immediately call in "experts" and produce content that will capitalize off the news and draw eyeballs and ad revenue.

PP is missing that this is not a broadcast designed to cover "breaking news" and these people were not really detached from what was happening on field in the same way a TV talking head or journalist might be. They were there to cover the fun and exciting football game that night, not to report on the condition and background of a 24 year old football player who had suffered a catastrophic medical event. Their response was honest and emotional. I don't really have an opinion as to whether they did a "good job" or not -- I think it's weird to expect people in that situation to do a good job. I mostly felt terrible for them and we turned off the broadcast because there was no good option -- watch shellshocked commentators try to piece together what was going on and come up with something to say, or watch commercials. It all felt terrible. I have nothing but empathy for how the people covering the game reacted because I felt the same way, but with the advantage of being able to simply turn it off.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:I feel like I’m becoming one of those boomers in the progressive commercials, but whenever I’m in an airport or public building and see an aed, I always think to myself - ok, that’s where it is in case I have to run and get it. Our house is 2 houses away from a park that has an aed, and every time I see it, I think about what if I had to run to get it. I also drive an electric vehicle, but I still carry around my weego, in case someone needs a jump. Progressive should call me for ad ideas.


But would you know how to use it?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I don't know if it has already been mentioned, but the ESPN team did a remarkable job under challenging circumstances. Joe Buck, partnered with Troy Aikman, explained how their task shifted from calling the game to reporting on a news story. Lisa Salters did some emotional and compelling reporting about what it was like to be in the stadium. The studio crew of Suzy Kolber, Booger McFarland, and Adam Schefter had perhaps the toughest job trying to find the right words to make sense of what was happening without knowing any facts. After the game, Ryan Clark, working with Scott Van Pelt, was emotional, powerful, and insightful. I was in awe of all of them, but Clark in particular.


Really? I thought they did a terrible job.

Nothing but a lot of stammering and deer in the headlights look.

Would have been great to have up a graphic with some basic info about him.
They did eventually do this… what 2 hours later.

How about a phoner or Zoom with a medical expert.
Your questions could be what has caused NFL players to collapse in the past? Why would someone need CPR and explain CPR? Why would you use an AED? How is this different from CPR? What is a Level 1 Trauma Center? Does the NFL have emergency protocols?
These are pretty basic questions without giving specific medical information or outcomes, but helps keep the story in perspective.

The timeline graphic was awful.





-1

I absolutely hate the suggestion of a zoom with a medical expert that will absolutely not add anything to the unknown. CNN had that last night, it was speculative and useless.

I agree Ryan did a fantastic job. He’s a family friend and we are all so very proud of the words he spoke under the pressure and emotion of last night. He’s already been getting increased visibility but he’s due for a HUGE prime time role. Larger than Skip and Steven A. ESPN really ought to make him the face of football going forward. He’s young enough to make a real impact. I know I’m biased knowing him, but I really like the idea of an actual former player being the face of football on a network.


Yeah, I think the PP was expecting them to behave the way cable news does with whatever the sensational story of the day is, like with car chases or political scandals or whatever, where they immediately call in "experts" and produce content that will capitalize off the news and draw eyeballs and ad revenue.

PP is missing that this is not a broadcast designed to cover "breaking news" and these people were not really detached from what was happening on field in the same way a TV talking head or journalist might be. They were there to cover the fun and exciting football game that night, not to report on the condition and background of a 24 year old football player who had suffered a catastrophic medical event. Their response was honest and emotional. I don't really have an opinion as to whether they did a "good job" or not -- I think it's weird to expect people in that situation to do a good job. I mostly felt terrible for them and we turned off the broadcast because there was no good option -- watch shellshocked commentators try to piece together what was going on and come up with something to say, or watch commercials. It all felt terrible. I have nothing but empathy for how the people covering the game reacted because I felt the same way, but with the advantage of being able to simply turn it off.


Exactly. Not to compare the two, but it’s not unlike covering breaking news like 9/11. Add to that these are sports analysts, not journalists. Same with the producers, they’re sports/entertainment producers, not hardcore news producers.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I don't know if it has already been mentioned, but the ESPN team did a remarkable job under challenging circumstances. Joe Buck, partnered with Troy Aikman, explained how their task shifted from calling the game to reporting on a news story. Lisa Salters did some emotional and compelling reporting about what it was like to be in the stadium. The studio crew of Suzy Kolber, Booger McFarland, and Adam Schefter had perhaps the toughest job trying to find the right words to make sense of what was happening without knowing any facts. After the game, Ryan Clark, working with Scott Van Pelt, was emotional, powerful, and insightful. I was in awe of all of them, but Clark in particular.


Really? I thought they did a terrible job.

Nothing but a lot of stammering and deer in the headlights look.

Would have been great to have up a graphic with some basic info about him.
They did eventually do this… what 2 hours later.

How about a phoner or Zoom with a medical expert.
Your questions could be what has caused NFL players to collapse in the past? Why would someone need CPR and explain CPR? Why would you use an AED? How is this different from CPR? What is a Level 1 Trauma Center? Does the NFL have emergency protocols?
These are pretty basic questions without giving specific medical information or outcomes, but helps keep the story in perspective.

The timeline graphic was awful.





-1

I absolutely hate the suggestion of a zoom with a medical expert that will absolutely not add anything to the unknown. CNN had that last night, it was speculative and useless.

I agree Ryan did a fantastic job. He’s a family friend and we are all so very proud of the words he spoke under the pressure and emotion of last night. He’s already been getting increased visibility but he’s due for a HUGE prime time role. Larger than Skip and Steven A. ESPN really ought to make him the face of football going forward. He’s young enough to make a real impact. I know I’m biased knowing him, but I really like the idea of an actual former player being the face of football on a network.


Yeah, I think the PP was expecting them to behave the way cable news does with whatever the sensational story of the day is, like with car chases or political scandals or whatever, where they immediately call in "experts" and produce content that will capitalize off the news and draw eyeballs and ad revenue.

PP is missing that this is not a broadcast designed to cover "breaking news" and these people were not really detached from what was happening on field in the same way a TV talking head or journalist might be. They were there to cover the fun and exciting football game that night, not to report on the condition and background of a 24 year old football player who had suffered a catastrophic medical event. Their response was honest and emotional. I don't really have an opinion as to whether they did a "good job" or not -- I think it's weird to expect people in that situation to do a good job. I mostly felt terrible for them and we turned off the broadcast because there was no good option -- watch shellshocked commentators try to piece together what was going on and come up with something to say, or watch commercials. It all felt terrible. I have nothing but empathy for how the people covering the game reacted because I felt the same way, but with the advantage of being able to simply turn it off.


Exactly. Not to compare the two, but it’s not unlike covering breaking news like 9/11. Add to that these are sports analysts, not journalists. Same with the producers, they’re sports/entertainment producers, not hardcore news producers.


Ryan Clark said as such. He literally said "we weren't prepared to talk about any of this. We came prepared to discuss football." I finally watched his commentary, and it was so well said. Because it was from his heart.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I don't know if it has already been mentioned, but the ESPN team did a remarkable job under challenging circumstances. Joe Buck, partnered with Troy Aikman, explained how their task shifted from calling the game to reporting on a news story. Lisa Salters did some emotional and compelling reporting about what it was like to be in the stadium. The studio crew of Suzy Kolber, Booger McFarland, and Adam Schefter had perhaps the toughest job trying to find the right words to make sense of what was happening without knowing any facts. After the game, Ryan Clark, working with Scott Van Pelt, was emotional, powerful, and insightful. I was in awe of all of them, but Clark in particular.


Really? I thought they did a terrible job.

Nothing but a lot of stammering and deer in the headlights look.

Would have been great to have up a graphic with some basic info about him.
They did eventually do this… what 2 hours later.

How about a phoner or Zoom with a medical expert.
Your questions could be what has caused NFL players to collapse in the past? Why would someone need CPR and explain CPR? Why would you use an AED? How is this different from CPR? What is a Level 1 Trauma Center? Does the NFL have emergency protocols?
These are pretty basic questions without giving specific medical information or outcomes, but helps keep the story in perspective.

The timeline graphic was awful.





-1

I absolutely hate the suggestion of a zoom with a medical expert that will absolutely not add anything to the unknown. CNN had that last night, it was speculative and useless.

I agree Ryan did a fantastic job. He’s a family friend and we are all so very proud of the words he spoke under the pressure and emotion of last night. He’s already been getting increased visibility but he’s due for a HUGE prime time role. Larger than Skip and Steven A. ESPN really ought to make him the face of football going forward. He’s young enough to make a real impact. I know I’m biased knowing him, but I really like the idea of an actual former player being the face of football on a network.


Yeah, I think the PP was expecting them to behave the way cable news does with whatever the sensational story of the day is, like with car chases or political scandals or whatever, where they immediately call in "experts" and produce content that will capitalize off the news and draw eyeballs and ad revenue.

PP is missing that this is not a broadcast designed to cover "breaking news" and these people were not really detached from what was happening on field in the same way a TV talking head or journalist might be. They were there to cover the fun and exciting football game that night, not to report on the condition and background of a 24 year old football player who had suffered a catastrophic medical event. Their response was honest and emotional. I don't really have an opinion as to whether they did a "good job" or not -- I think it's weird to expect people in that situation to do a good job. I mostly felt terrible for them and we turned off the broadcast because there was no good option -- watch shellshocked commentators try to piece together what was going on and come up with something to say, or watch commercials. It all felt terrible. I have nothing but empathy for how the people covering the game reacted because I felt the same way, but with the advantage of being able to simply turn it off.


Exactly. Not to compare the two, but it’s not unlike covering breaking news like 9/11. Add to that these are sports analysts, not journalists. Same with the producers, they’re sports/entertainment producers, not hardcore news producers.


Ryan Clark said as such. He literally said "we weren't prepared to talk about any of this. We came prepared to discuss football." I finally watched his commentary, and it was so well said. Because it was from his heart.


For those that haven’t seen it:

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Is there any chance he is brain dead? Is it expected that vital signs are normal but a patient is still in critical condition?


Yes, I believe not having an update on his condition is because they are assessing his brain damage. They performed CPR for 10 minutes. That's a lot of time for the brain to not have oxygen or to have low oxygen. And he had the best medical response you could ever imagine when something like this happens.


Disagree. The chance of him being brain dead is very low. He may have some recovery to do from hypoxia, but it shouldn't be severe.

They don't have an update because there isn't one. His vitals are stable. They will let him rest in heavy sedation while they do tests. They probably won't even try to lower his sedation until 48 hours of brain rest. So we are looking at Wednesday morning.


He was down for a long time. He will be lucky to survive and if he does, he will be lucky if he experienced only mild hypoxia. It only takes a few minutes before the brain starts to react to loss of oxygen.


If by “down” you mean period without adequate oxygenation of his brain, it’s hard to tell from what I have read. I thought I read that he was cardioverted on the field, but the last nyt article I read didn’t mention being shocked, only that he received cpr for 9-10 min. That could sound as if he needed cpr for 9-10 min because he didn’t have an organized heart rhythm, but it’s also possible that he got cpr after he was cardioverted. You are supposed to resume cpr even after a successful shock, so best case scenario is that he got cpr while they were attaching the aed, got shocked back to sinus (normal) rhythm , and then cpr was resumed as recommended. If that was the case, then he was “down” for only a few minutes, which is much better than 9-10 min. I really hope that the best case scenario is true. Impossible to assume anything right now.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Is there any chance he is brain dead? Is it expected that vital signs are normal but a patient is still in critical condition?


Yes, I believe not having an update on his condition is because they are assessing his brain damage. They performed CPR for 10 minutes. That's a lot of time for the brain to not have oxygen or to have low oxygen. And he had the best medical response you could ever imagine when something like this happens.


Disagree. The chance of him being brain dead is very low. He may have some recovery to do from hypoxia, but it shouldn't be severe.

They don't have an update because there isn't one. His vitals are stable. They will let him rest in heavy sedation while they do tests. They probably won't even try to lower his sedation until 48 hours of brain rest. So we are looking at Wednesday morning.


He was down for a long time. He will be lucky to survive and if he does, he will be lucky if he experienced only mild hypoxia. It only takes a few minutes before the brain starts to react to loss of oxygen.


If by “down” you mean period without adequate oxygenation of his brain, it’s hard to tell from what I have read. I thought I read that he was cardioverted on the field, but the last nyt article I read didn’t mention being shocked, only that he received cpr for 9-10 min. That could sound as if he needed cpr for 9-10 min because he didn’t have an organized heart rhythm, but it’s also possible that he got cpr after he was cardioverted. You are supposed to resume cpr even after a successful shock, so best case scenario is that he got cpr while they were attaching the aed, got shocked back to sinus (normal) rhythm , and then cpr was resumed as recommended. If that was the case, then he was “down” for only a few minutes, which is much better than 9-10 min. I really hope that the best case scenario is true. Impossible to assume anything right now.


I think that is what happened. He was hooked up to oxygen before being put in the ambulance on the field, and I don't think they would have done that unless he'd already been shocked and had cpr. Also, even if the on-field medics didn't have an aed (which I really think they do, and would have administered as soon as they checked his pulse if they could get one), there is definitely an aed in the ambulance, which was on the field within a few minutes. And again, they would not put him on oxygen for transport until AFTER administering the aed.

As awful as all of this is, it would have been very hard for him to get any better medical care and treatment, and that matters. I hope it was enough.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Is there any chance he is brain dead? Is it expected that vital signs are normal but a patient is still in critical condition?


Yes, I believe not having an update on his condition is because they are assessing his brain damage. They performed CPR for 10 minutes. That's a lot of time for the brain to not have oxygen or to have low oxygen. And he had the best medical response you could ever imagine when something like this happens.


Disagree. The chance of him being brain dead is very low. He may have some recovery to do from hypoxia, but it shouldn't be severe.

They don't have an update because there isn't one. His vitals are stable. They will let him rest in heavy sedation while they do tests. They probably won't even try to lower his sedation until 48 hours of brain rest. So we are looking at Wednesday morning.


He was down for a long time. He will be lucky to survive and if he does, he will be lucky if he experienced only mild hypoxia. It only takes a few minutes before the brain starts to react to loss of oxygen.


If by “down” you mean period without adequate oxygenation of his brain, it’s hard to tell from what I have read. I thought I read that he was cardioverted on the field, but the last nyt article I read didn’t mention being shocked, only that he received cpr for 9-10 min. That could sound as if he needed cpr for 9-10 min because he didn’t have an organized heart rhythm, but it’s also possible that he got cpr after he was cardioverted. You are supposed to resume cpr even after a successful shock, so best case scenario is that he got cpr while they were attaching the aed, got shocked back to sinus (normal) rhythm , and then cpr was resumed as recommended. If that was the case, then he was “down” for only a few minutes, which is much better than 9-10 min. I really hope that the best case scenario is true. Impossible to assume anything right now.


I think that is what happened. He was hooked up to oxygen before being put in the ambulance on the field, and I don't think they would have done that unless he'd already been shocked and had cpr. Also, even if the on-field medics didn't have an aed (which I really think they do, and would have administered as soon as they checked his pulse if they could get one), there is definitely an aed in the ambulance, which was on the field within a few minutes. And again, they would not put him on oxygen for transport until AFTER administering the aed.

As awful as all of this is, it would have been very hard for him to get any better medical care and treatment, and that matters. I hope it was enough.


I thought I read that nfl protocol is to have an aed with the trainers, ready to go. The ambulance would have had a standard defibrillator, one that the user controls. The aed is great, but emts and medical professionals trained in acls (advanced cardiac life support) are able to run a code and decide all the things that the aed automates - shock strength, which rhythm to shock etc. They also push meds depending on the situation. It’s faster for a professional to read the rhythm and shock without waiting for the aed. In the old days, we were taught “abc’s” - airway, breathing and circulation, but these days it’s more like “cab” - circulation comes first. That is why they say don’t bother with rescue breaths but do vigorous chest compressions and don’t stop to check a pulse or for breathing, just do those compressions. I haven’t watched a medical drama in a long time, but I wonder if they have changed it on tv. Most people’s knowledge of cpr and defibrillation comes from tv/movies (fortunately!)
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Is there any chance he is brain dead? Is it expected that vital signs are normal but a patient is still in critical condition?


Yes, I believe not having an update on his condition is because they are assessing his brain damage. They performed CPR for 10 minutes. That's a lot of time for the brain to not have oxygen or to have low oxygen. And he had the best medical response you could ever imagine when something like this happens.


Disagree. The chance of him being brain dead is very low. He may have some recovery to do from hypoxia, but it shouldn't be severe.

They don't have an update because there isn't one. His vitals are stable. They will let him rest in heavy sedation while they do tests. They probably won't even try to lower his sedation until 48 hours of brain rest. So we are looking at Wednesday morning.


He was down for a long time. He will be lucky to survive and if he does, he will be lucky if he experienced only mild hypoxia. It only takes a few minutes before the brain starts to react to loss of oxygen.


If by “down” you mean period without adequate oxygenation of his brain, it’s hard to tell from what I have read. I thought I read that he was cardioverted on the field, but the last nyt article I read didn’t mention being shocked, only that he received cpr for 9-10 min. That could sound as if he needed cpr for 9-10 min because he didn’t have an organized heart rhythm, but it’s also possible that he got cpr after he was cardioverted. You are supposed to resume cpr even after a successful shock, so best case scenario is that he got cpr while they were attaching the aed, got shocked back to sinus (normal) rhythm , and then cpr was resumed as recommended. If that was the case, then he was “down” for only a few minutes, which is much better than 9-10 min. I really hope that the best case scenario is true. Impossible to assume anything right now.


I think that is what happened. He was hooked up to oxygen before being put in the ambulance on the field, and I don't think they would have done that unless he'd already been shocked and had cpr. Also, even if the on-field medics didn't have an aed (which I really think they do, and would have administered as soon as they checked his pulse if they could get one), there is definitely an aed in the ambulance, which was on the field within a few minutes. And again, they would not put him on oxygen for transport until AFTER administering the aed.

As awful as all of this is, it would have been very hard for him to get any better medical care and treatment, and that matters. I hope it was enough.


The NFL said his hearbeat was restored on the field.

"Damar Hamlin suffered a cardiac arrest following a hit in the Buffalo Bills' game versus the Cincinnati Bengals. His heartbeat was restored on the field and he was transferred to the University of Cincinnati Medical Center for further testing and treatment. He is currently sedated and listed in critical condition."
Anonymous
They absolutely had to have an AED there, it’s a basic at all professional sports. You’d be surprised all the places that have them. Even small businesses often have one and they are easy to operate.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Is there any chance he is brain dead? Is it expected that vital signs are normal but a patient is still in critical condition?


Yes, I believe not having an update on his condition is because they are assessing his brain damage. They performed CPR for 10 minutes. That's a lot of time for the brain to not have oxygen or to have low oxygen. And he had the best medical response you could ever imagine when something like this happens.


Disagree. The chance of him being brain dead is very low. He may have some recovery to do from hypoxia, but it shouldn't be severe.

They don't have an update because there isn't one. His vitals are stable. They will let him rest in heavy sedation while they do tests. They probably won't even try to lower his sedation until 48 hours of brain rest. So we are looking at Wednesday morning.


He was down for a long time. He will be lucky to survive and if he does, he will be lucky if he experienced only mild hypoxia. It only takes a few minutes before the brain starts to react to loss of oxygen.


If by “down” you mean period without adequate oxygenation of his brain, it’s hard to tell from what I have read. I thought I read that he was cardioverted on the field, but the last nyt article I read didn’t mention being shocked, only that he received cpr for 9-10 min. That could sound as if he needed cpr for 9-10 min because he didn’t have an organized heart rhythm, but it’s also possible that he got cpr after he was cardioverted. You are supposed to resume cpr even after a successful shock, so best case scenario is that he got cpr while they were attaching the aed, got shocked back to sinus (normal) rhythm , and then cpr was resumed as recommended. If that was the case, then he was “down” for only a few minutes, which is much better than 9-10 min. I really hope that the best case scenario is true. Impossible to assume anything right now.


I think that is what happened. He was hooked up to oxygen before being put in the ambulance on the field, and I don't think they would have done that unless he'd already been shocked and had cpr. Also, even if the on-field medics didn't have an aed (which I really think they do, and would have administered as soon as they checked his pulse if they could get one), there is definitely an aed in the ambulance, which was on the field within a few minutes. And again, they would not put him on oxygen for transport until AFTER administering the aed.

As awful as all of this is, it would have been very hard for him to get any better medical care and treatment, and that matters. I hope it was enough.


I thought I read that nfl protocol is to have an aed with the trainers, ready to go. The ambulance would have had a standard defibrillator, one that the user controls. The aed is great, but emts and medical professionals trained in acls (advanced cardiac life support) are able to run a code and decide all the things that the aed automates - shock strength, which rhythm to shock etc. They also push meds depending on the situation. It’s faster for a professional to read the rhythm and shock without waiting for the aed. In the old days, we were taught “abc’s” - airway, breathing and circulation, but these days it’s more like “cab” - circulation comes first. That is why they say don’t bother with rescue breaths but do vigorous chest compressions and don’t stop to check a pulse or for breathing, just do those compressions. I haven’t watched a medical drama in a long time, but I wonder if they have changed it on tv. Most people’s knowledge of cpr and defibrillation comes from tv/movies (fortunately!)


Yes, I'm the PP -- I absolutely think the trainers and on-field medics had an AED and it was likely administered within minutes of him collapsing, with CPR administered both before and after, until they could get the ambulance on the field and put him on oxygen for transport. I was just pointing out to the previous poster who was unsure whether he had received shocks on the field that even if for some reason they didn't have an AED on hand, the ambulance would have had equipment to restart his heart, and all of that unfolded pretty quickly.
Anonymous
As I said to some friends last night - with the number of well qualified medical personnel on site for each game, plus required AEDs and other equipment, and an ambulance on standby, outside of a hospital there probably isn’t much better of a place to suffer a cardiac event than a professional sporting event
post reply Forum Index » Sports General Discussion
Message Quick Reply
Go to: