Login
Site Search
Subscribe
Modify
Home >
List Archives
Dr. Mattox at the Detroit Trauma Symposium
Robert Smith rfsmithmd at comcast.netFri Nov 10 18:18:27 GMT 2006
- Previous message: Dr. Mattox at the Detroit Trauma Symposium
- Next message: Dr. Mattox at the Detroit Trauma Symposium
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Exactly. And as Dr. Frykberg used to point out, 99+% of all terrorist events involve explosion and subsequent injury. Bioterrorism is a huge boondoggle industry. IMHO. And as Ron Gross would point out, once you get it, whatever toxic or biological thing it would theoretically be, you're either dead or will be by the time you realize you "got it". R. Smith -----Original Message----- From: trauma-list-bounces at trauma.org [mailto:trauma-list-bounces at trauma.org] On Behalf Of Howard Berkowitz Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 1:11 PM To: trauma-list at trauma.org Subject: RE: Dr. Mattox at the Detroit Trauma Symposium >From: bensonblues at comcast.net >Reply-To: "Trauma & Critical Care mailing list" ><trauma-list at trauma.org> >To: trauma-list at trauma.org >Subject: Dr. Mattox at the Detroit Trauma Symposium >Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 17:48:36 +0000 > >Our revered "k" gave an excellent presentation on Disaster Management >at the 54th Detroit Trauma Symposium yesterday. What was most >impressive to me (besides k's oratory skills) was the gasps from the >younger (probably >resident) attendees when the Dr. pointed out that a terrorist attack >using "dirty" bombs was probable in the near future. Do we not >understand that we are not living in the '60s any longer? Are these >(mostly surgical) residents so busy with their training that they don't get the news? > >The EM residents in my program receive lectures in biochemical >terrorism and blast injuries, as well as training in Hazmat and Mass >Casualty management - this is the best I can do in preparing them for their future. >Like Ken said yesterday, disaster readiness/management is a local issue >that is best managed by local yokles. While radiologic weapons certainly are possible, may I offer a bit of perspective on other risks? When I'm presenting on disaster preparedness in the telecommunications/Internet industry, I point out that the first WWI chemical attack used 160 tons of chlorine, brought into position by rail, against an approximately 8 kilometer front. In the US, chlorine typically is shipped in 90 or 55 ton rail cars. Far more toxic chemicals, of course, are routinely shipped throughout the country. What would be the effect of one or two shoulder-launched antitank rockets fired into chemical rail cars or fixed storage tanks, to say nothing of more sophisticated explosive systems intended to maximize release? Do we all remember Bhopal? There are such rockets in private hands, illegal as they may be, in the US. Of course, there are a wide range of explosive attack systems. Consider the relative difficulty, for the terrorist, of carrying stable explosives or military weapons, as opposed to transporting a hot radioisotope and a burster charge. Why steal or smuggle radioactives when chemical facilities are there, with large quantities needing just a little help to go free? _________________________________________________________________ Add a Yahoo! contact to Windows Live Messenger for a chance to win a free trip! http://www.imagine-windowslive.com/minisites/yahoo/default.aspx?locale=en-us &hmtagline -- trauma-list : TRAUMA.ORG To change your settings or unsubscribe visit: http://www.trauma.org/traumalist.html
- Previous message: Dr. Mattox at the Detroit Trauma Symposium
- Next message: Dr. Mattox at the Detroit Trauma Symposium
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the trauma-list mailing list
