|
Quoted:
Someone please post a link of a reliable vendor for the CAT tourniquet. Thanks. |
|
Quoted:
Someone please post a link of a reliable vendor for the CAT tourniquet. Thanks. https://www.narescue.com/combat-application-tourniquet-c-a-t |
|
Quoted:
Someone please post a link of a reliable vendor for the CAT tourniquet. Thanks. |
|
Quoted:
This thread has got me thinking that I probably buy a few tourniquets. Are these any good? And is this a reliable source? https://www.tacmedsolutions.com/SOF-Tourniquet-Gen-4 Reliable source? Yes. They are the designer / manufacturer. This would be like ordering cats from NAR direct. |
| i followed that idiot for about a year when he first got the readyman stuff going. i got some free shit from him on a promotion. It took me a couple of months to realize he is a shill for mostly garbage products and his "expertise" is pretty much tied to removing people from their money, not prep and survival. |
|
Quoted:
I was an FF/EMT from 2004-2010. There were essentially 0 situations in which tourniquet use was ok. IDPH would take your license over it. Strange how everything seems to come full circle if you wait long enough. |
|
Quoted:
i followed that idiot for about a year when he first got the readyman stuff going. i got some free shit from him on a promotion. It took me a couple of months to realize he is a shill for mostly garbage products and his "expertise" is pretty much tied to removing people from their money, not prep and survival.  The fake company named after a government board to endorse them really smells. It's a like a pilot showing off some FAA (Friendly Aviation Association) certs. |
|
Quoted:
This thread has got me thinking that I probably buy a few tourniquets. Are these any good? And is this a reliable source? https://www.tacmedsolutions.com/SOF-Tourniquet-Gen-4 TMS is good to go, and that’s a fine tourniquet |
|
Quoted: We’ve probably swung too far and need to dial it back a bit. People are applying tourniquets on wounds that are clearly non-life threatening. 
In my opinion, it's like the saying when you have a hammer everything looks like a nail. The mil gave out the Cats and made a big deal out of everyone carrying one in a pocket, to the detriment (IMO) of better first aid training. So you had a bunch of people running around throwing tourniquets on everything they could because it was easy and if it wasn't safe why did the Army issue them one? Saw that with the quikclot also. Being used for minor injuries that a simple pressure dressing could have handled. I personally had to stop a guy from using quickclot on me for a wound that barely required stitches (training accident, not downrange). |
|
Quoted:
I was an FF/EMT from 2004-2010. There were essentially 0 situations in which tourniquet use was ok. IDPH would take your license over it. Strange how everything seems to come full circle if you wait long enough. It'll be interesting to where combat trauma care takes its pointers from as our military presence in combat areas continues to be reduced. I remember my dad saying 18Ds were sent to Baltimore or Detroit ERs for hands on experience prior to joining the teams in the 70s and 80s. While that may be the best place to learn current best practices, I don't know if those types of environments would be the best to learn about forerunner best practices that haven't been fully accepted in the civilian medical world. |
|
Quoted: I've know a few people that should have had neck tourniquets applied.
In my opinion, it's like the saying when you have a hammer everything looks like a nail. The mil gave out the Cats and made a big deal out of everyone carrying one in a pocket, to the detriment (IMO) of better first aid training. So you had a bunch of people running around throwing tourniquets on everything they could because it was easy and if it wasn't safe why did the Army issue them one? Saw that with the quikclot also. Being used for minor injuries that a simple pressure dressing could have handled. I personally had to stop a guy from using quickclot on me for a wound that barely required stitches (training accident, not downrange). BTW. Everyone should check out Jeff-Kirkham.com. |
|
Quoted:
I think more than the military implementation, is the rapid implementation within the civilian sector. We’ve told everyone to apply tourniquets and that they are safe. Well, probably safe for 2 hours, if properly applied. BTW. Everyone should check out Jeff-Kirkham.com. Quoted:
Quoted: I've know a few people that should have had neck tourniquets applied.
In my opinion, it's like the saying when you have a hammer everything looks like a nail. The mil gave out the Cats and made a big deal out of everyone carrying one in a pocket, to the detriment (IMO) of better first aid training. So you had a bunch of people running around throwing tourniquets on everything they could because it was easy and if it wasn't safe why did the Army issue them one? Saw that with the quikclot also. Being used for minor injuries that a simple pressure dressing could have handled. I personally had to stop a guy from using quickclot on me for a wound that barely required stitches (training accident, not downrange). BTW. Everyone should check out Jeff-Kirkham.com. 
|
|
Quoted:
I think more than the military implementation, is the rapid implementation within the civilian sector. We’ve told everyone to apply tourniquets and that they are safe. Well, probably safe for 2 hours, if properly applied. BTW. Everyone should check out Jeff-Kirkham.com. Quoted:
Quoted: I've know a few people that should have had neck tourniquets applied.
In my opinion, it's like the saying when you have a hammer everything looks like a nail. The mil gave out the Cats and made a big deal out of everyone carrying one in a pocket, to the detriment (IMO) of better first aid training. So you had a bunch of people running around throwing tourniquets on everything they could because it was easy and if it wasn't safe why did the Army issue them one? Saw that with the quikclot also. Being used for minor injuries that a simple pressure dressing could have handled. I personally had to stop a guy from using quickclot on me for a wound that barely required stitches (training accident, not downrange). BTW. Everyone should check out Jeff-Kirkham.com. |
|
Quoted:
I carry a SOFTT-W and full kit daily... on my person... Tell me again how difficult it is to carry a real tourniquet. Quoted:
Quoted: Must be subjective. I have used both in training classes and experimentation and I find the CAT TQ to be very painful when applied correctly. I have small child a worry that if I ever had to use a TQ on him, he would fight it, especially if it hurts. Also he RATS is just easier to carry day to day. I feel it is better to have a TQ that has a steeper learning curve and takes a few extra seconds to apply on my person vs having a better TQ in my car that may be five minutes away (or more if we are hiking in the woods. In that scenario, which is the best TQ. Also I have trained to apply the RATS one handed. It is a steeper learning curve then the CAT, but it can be done. Bottom line the RATS is like my CCW pistol, I would rather have a rifle/CAT, but the pistol/RATS is what I can easily carry concealed on my person daily. The RATS will work well enough for my purposes just like the pistol. |
|
Quoted: We've probably swung too far and need to dial it back a bit. People are applying tourniquets on wounds that are clearly non-life threatening. |
|
Quoted:
I was an FF/EMT from 2004-2010. There were essentially 0 situations in which tourniquet use was ok. IDPH would take your license over it. Strange how everything seems to come full circle if you wait long enough. |
|
Quoted:
I dress ina t-shirt and jeans pretty much year round. A large TQ does not fit into my mode of dress/lifestyle. Also I have trained to apply the RATS one handed. It is a steeper learning curve then the CAT, but it can be done. Bottom line the RATS is like my CCW pistol, I would rather have a rifle/CAT, but the pistol/RATS is what I can easily carry concealed on my person daily. The RATS will work well enough for my purposes just like the pistol. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: Must be subjective. I have used both in training classes and experimentation and I find the CAT TQ to be very painful when applied correctly. I have small child a worry that if I ever had to use a TQ on him, he would fight it, especially if it hurts. Also he RATS is just easier to carry day to day. I feel it is better to have a TQ that has a steeper learning curve and takes a few extra seconds to apply on my person vs having a better TQ in my car that may be five minutes away (or more if we are hiking in the woods. In that scenario, which is the best TQ. Also I have trained to apply the RATS one handed. It is a steeper learning curve then the CAT, but it can be done. Bottom line the RATS is like my CCW pistol, I would rather have a rifle/CAT, but the pistol/RATS is what I can easily carry concealed on my person daily. The RATS will work well enough for my purposes just like the pistol. For less than $10, see if it will fit your needs as well as the RATS and do a better job of stopping an arterial bleed at the same time. The difference between a wide band of pressure vs that applied by a shoestring is huge, man. It could make the difference if you ever need it... |
|
Quoted:
Right before we left Kuwait to go to Iraq we were issued 1x TQ and an Israeli dressing and our medics gave us a quick glass on both. Combat Lifesavers are issued a few more TQs and 3 or 4 more Israeli dressings. This was early Jan, 2005. It'll be interesting to where combat trauma care takes its pointers from as our military presence in combat areas continues to be reduced. I remember my dad saying 18Ds were sent to Baltimore or Detroit ERs for hands on experience prior to joining the teams in the 70s and 80s. While that may be the best place to learn current best practices, I don't know if those types of environments would be the best to learn about forerunner best practices that haven't been fully accepted in the civilian medical world. |
|
Quoted:
I'm waiting with popcorn to see the 68Ws, Corpsmen, and other mil medical bros here rape this statement. I must say arfcom never ceases to surprise, I’ll eat my hat and defer to the SME |
|
Quoted:
Now that our cops are carrying them, we have had at least one instance where the TQ got applied on a wound that didn't need it (at all.) |
|
Quoted:
Hold on bro, I've got my 1996 Boy Scout first aid badge book opened to the TQ page right here... Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm waiting with popcorn to see the 68Ws, Corpsmen, and other mil medical bros here rape this statement.
|
|
Quoted:
I was an FF/EMT from 2004-2010. There were essentially 0 situations in which tourniquet use was ok. IDPH would take your license over it. Strange how everything seems to come full circle if you wait long enough. |
|
Quoted:
By the way, what’s wrong with my statement? Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm waiting with popcorn to see the 68Ws, Corpsmen, and other mil medical bros here rape this statement. TQs are used in hospital surgical settings for mich longer than 2 hours at a time. This personally happened to me after my 3rd deployment. Aside from my arm being a little cold there were no effects of the prolonged use of a TQ that I felt by the time the anesthesia wore off. It is hard for me the believe that after almost 18 years of GWOT/OCO and the lessons literally learned by blood, sweat, and tears that there is still any negative stigma associated with TQ use. Even a TQ left on for too long without reevaluation resulting in an unneeded amputation is better than bleeding out within the Golden Hour. Obviously that's not ideal, but it is better than death. |
|
Quoted: @Doc_Hurley Can I ask what problems they found with them? They're gaining some steam here locally and if they aren't a good product, I really need to let people know...because they're already being fielded. But a little more info would really help; like so many things that have almost cult like followings, its hard to tell if its not accepted because "its not what we are used to" or if it genuinely just breaks during use. It seems stout, but my concern is the plastic buckle. Didn't care for them on CATs either compared to other designs, but obviously they work. Just wondering if that is a common failure point, especially on the recon. The only change between the CAT and the sample submitted was the windless. Yes, aluminum has less chance of breaking as a windlass, but everything else was/is identical. Also, the nylon used is identical to 1st gen CATs, which was super susceptible to UV degradation, hence the reinforced sewing on the Recon. No appreciable difference was found, no improvement on hemorrhage control was found, and the failure rate was just under that of the CAT. So guess which one we stick with, since there are hundreds of thousands in inventory, and NARP replaces every single last Gen with a new one without additional costs to the .mil, and has an actual record of of saving lives. Sure, the Recon will work if needed, because it's a carbon copy of the TQ of choice for combat casualties. Will I use it? No. Will someone else? Probably. But what will I carry when lives are on the line? CATs and SOFT-Ws. |
|
Quoted:
Poorly sourced argument based on shallow internet research, combined with personal atatcks? https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/81701409/achievement-unlocked-went-full-steinhab.jpg |
|
Quoted: By the way, what’s wrong with my statement? Use of TQs, in an expeditious manner is always a good thing. See blood, apply TQ. If unnecessary, you can always remove it while you're no longer being shot at. Now let's go to the whole two hour thing. Hello, 1999. I've personally sat on patients with a TQ applied for far longer than 2 hours, pretty sure the record I've witnessed, in theater, is 13. Also, Kragh has put out case studies of folks with a TQ in place for greater than 18 hours without loss of the affected limb. In fact, there are ZERO cases of limbs lost due to TQ application in OEF, OIF, OND, or OIR. And before the BS starts, I've first assisted on many surgeries for limb repair where a TQ applied in the OR was left on place for 12 or more hours while we re-attach a severed limb to prevent blow outs. So, in closing, for a so called "TQ expert," you dont seem to know shit. |
|
Quoted:
You may be on to something here. He does seem...familiar Quoted:
Quoted:
Poorly sourced argument based on shallow internet research, combined with personal atatcks? https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/81701409/achievement-unlocked-went-full-steinhab.jpg |
|
Quoted:
Someone please post a link of a reliable vendor for the CAT tourniquet. Thanks. Rescue Essentials interesting that neither sell the RATS |
|
Quoted:
The last medical training I went thru was in August - so this might have changed - but my understanding is that a properly applied CAT or SOFTTW is safe for at least 2 hours. After 2 hours, it should be reevaluated and the TQ might be left in place, replaced, or removed and the wound treated with a hemostatic agent or something else. TQs are used in hospital surgical settings for mich longer than 2 hours at a time. This personally happened to me after my 3rd deployment. Aside from my arm being a little cold there were no effects of the prolonged use of a TQ that I felt by the time the anesthesia wore off. Between two and four hours I’d be prepared to resuscitate, after four, probably wouldn’t take down outside the hospital and in the hospital I’d be actively resuscitating. Some people point to the pilot who had one on for 16 hours. 1. That’s rare, 2. The extremity was cooled. There are cases in the Battle of the Bulge, tourniquets were left on six to eight hours without associated morbidity. This is because the limbs were cold. Cold limbs mean longer tourniquet time. Another issue with tourniquets, because we’ve put them out for everyone to use, there are a lot of people who speak about tourniquets without knowing the data and backing studies. I’m not implying you haven’t, but in general, I’m sure you would agree, throughout social a lot of people talk out their ass, but claim to know about tourniquets. For reference, I’m a on the Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care and current member of the tourniquet review working group. |
|
I think it is ok if a tourniquet is applied to a wound that doesn’t need it in our EMS world. Most places(not all) are 30 minutes or less from a Doctor in a hospital. If the TQ needs to come off...it will and likely with very little or no damage if properly applied.
Of course, more training and better recognition of what needs a tourniquet and what doesn’t is great and should be done. But...I would rather have a guy who doesn’t need a tourniquet show up to the ER in a timely manner and have it removed than have a guy die because someone was afraid or was unsure of using the tourniquet for a given wound. |
|
Quoted: Literally? Every word. Use of TQs, in an expeditious manner is always a good thing. See blood, apply TQ. If unnecessary, you can always remove it while you're no longer being shot at. Now let's go to the whole two hour thing. Hello, 1999. I've personally sat on patients with a TQ applied for far longer than 2 hours, pretty sure the record I've witnessed, in theater, is 13. Also, Kragh has put out case studies of folks with a TQ in place for greater than 18 hours without loss of the affected limb. In fact, there are ZERO cases of limbs lost due to TQ application in OEF, OIF, OND, or OIR. And before the BS starts, I've first assisted on many surgeries for limb repair where a TQ applied in the OR was left on place for 12 or more hours while we re-attach a severed limb to prevent blow outs. So, in closing, for a so called "TQ expert," you dont seem to know shit. |
|
Quoted: Kragh has published one case of a tourniquet on an upper extremity for 16 hours. There was a limb lost due to tourniquet application in Africa after it was placed high and tight and left on for eight hours. Seen by multiple physicians, also, there was no arterial injury. 
|
|
Quoted: I dress ina t-shirt and jeans pretty much year round. A large TQ does not fit into my mode of dress/lifestyle. Also I have trained to apply the RATS one handed. It is a steeper learning curve then the CAT, but it can be done. Bottom line the RATS is like my CCW pistol, I would rather have a rifle/CAT, but the pistol/RATS is what I can easily carry concealed on my person daily. The RATS will work well enough for my purposes just like the pistol. A flat pack softtw is about the size of a 1911 mag. |
|
Quoted:
Ditch the skinny Jeans. A flat pack softtw is about the size of a 1911 mag. Quoted:
Quoted: I dress ina t-shirt and jeans pretty much year round. A large TQ does not fit into my mode of dress/lifestyle. Also I have trained to apply the RATS one handed. It is a steeper learning curve then the CAT, but it can be done. Bottom line the RATS is like my CCW pistol, I would rather have a rifle/CAT, but the pistol/RATS is what I can easily carry concealed on my person daily. The RATS will work well enough for my purposes just like the pistol. A flat pack softtw is about the size of a 1911 mag. You don’t need a permit. |
|
Quoted:
I dress ina t-shirt and jeans pretty much year round. A large TQ does not fit into my mode of dress/lifestyle. Also I have trained to apply the RATS one handed. It is a steeper learning curve then the CAT, but it can be done. Bottom line the RATS is like my CCW pistol, I would rather have a rifle/CAT, but the pistol/RATS is what I can easily carry concealed on my person daily. The RATS will work well enough for my purposes just like the pistol. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: Must be subjective. I have used both in training classes and experimentation and I find the CAT TQ to be very painful when applied correctly. I have small child a worry that if I ever had to use a TQ on him, he would fight it, especially if it hurts. Also he RATS is just easier to carry day to day. I feel it is better to have a TQ that has a steeper learning curve and takes a few extra seconds to apply on my person vs having a better TQ in my car that may be five minutes away (or more if we are hiking in the woods. In that scenario, which is the best TQ. Also I have trained to apply the RATS one handed. It is a steeper learning curve then the CAT, but it can be done. Bottom line the RATS is like my CCW pistol, I would rather have a rifle/CAT, but the pistol/RATS is what I can easily carry concealed on my person daily. The RATS will work well enough for my purposes just like the pistol. |
|
Here ya go you can ankle carry it
http://darkangelmedical.com/ankle-kit-trauma-kit/ |
|
Quoted:
Now that our cops are carrying them, we have had at least one instance where the TQ got applied on a wound that didn't need it (at all.) |
Join the Community
Your next conversation starts here.
Create your free account to join discussions, share your experience, save topics, and connect with the AR15.COM community.
- Join discussions
- Follow topics and replies
- Connect with fellow enthusiasts
Already a member? Sign in
Stay informed by subscribing to our Newsletter