Ironworks Gaming Forum - A human's physical reaction, a single question.

Ironworks Gaming Forum (http://www.ironworksforum.com/forum/index.php)

- General Discussion (http://www.ironworksforum.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=36)

- - A human's physical reaction, a single question. (http://www.ironworksforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=93928)

Suppose that a metallic rod were to thrust through a human's chest and then be pulled out. The sharp-tipped rod with a diameter of 1 cm would pierce through one of the person's lungs and leave a hole in it.

What happens next? Will the bag be filled with blood? If so's the case, is such a wound bound to be fatal or is it possible to recover from it? Completely ignoring the external blood loss, would the other bag still work?

Quirky questions indeed. :D Since I can't leave this completely unexplained, I must admit that it's for a novel I'm writing.

Thanks in advance.

[ 07-21-2005, 06:00 PM: Message edited by: uss ]

<font color=skyblue>Seeing that the man has just lost one lung, and the shock of the incident itself would leave the man gasping for air, and he'd probably suffer even more shock at the inability to breath well enough as he was used to which would excite him even more. He'd kill himself out of sheer terror and lack of the ability to breath carefully for anyone to save him unless he was quickly attended to by professional assistance.

That's my guess</font>

Hmm, yes, that's a nice thought. A person would have to be mentally very strong to endure that. Thanks

Quote:

Originally posted by Illumina Drathiran'ar:
....Why do you ask?

The fact remains that it's for a novel. The protagonist at one point has to endure a near-fatal wound. As anatomy suggests, a stab through the upper part of a person's chest would also go through the lungs. Unless the stab only grazes through and therefore sucks. :D

If by bag you mean lung...the only thing it could fill up with could be blood. I believe it's referred to as a 'collapsed lung' and would not only be spilling out blood fairly quickly in this case, but it might even choke your protagonist as the blood 'backs up' down the esophagus and up the nasal cavity and the mouth. That is, if he or she (let's just say he) can get the exterior hole shut. Some blood might even make its way to the other lung at first. If he survives there's going to be lots of scarring inside the lung if it can be reinflated (read: can be saved). I'm no doctor, much less a trauma surgeon or forensic analyst, of course.

I found this about arrows, which is similar but not quite the same. In some ways it's worse, but the quick removal of that rod will make these different, since they stay until removed. Your situation has the added complications of trouble breathing (from the blood and collapsed lung), and severe blood loss.

Warning..the following is...gross.

Quote:

Novel techniques to treat arrow wounds were sometimes used, such as in 1881 after a Comanche arrow struck an Army officer, whose name was not revealed. According to a verbal report of the incident, "The weapon pierced the upper part of the right chest and passed nearly horizontally through the lung, the point protruding at the back between the scapula and the spine." At the wounded officer's request, "a silk handkerchief was fastened to the shaft, which was then pushed through his body, dragging the silk after it through the whole extent of the wound." Although the usefulness of this treatment is puzzling, the valiant soldier recovered and spent many more years on active duty in the Indian wars....

An arrow entered Martinez's chest between the fifth and sixth ribs on the right side and exited between the seventh and eighth ribs on the left. When physician J.H. Bill saw him, Martinez had already removed the arrow and was vomiting blood. After being hospitalized at Fort Defiance (in Navajo country) and taking half a grain of sulphate of morphia (morphine) at bedtime, the injured man rallied somewhat. The next morning he was given an enema comprising about half a pint of beef essence and 2 ounces of wine whey. He threw up again and was given half a grain of morphine. Enemas, morphine and even iced champagne were part of Martinez's rocky course of treatment until he died 18 days later. An autopsy revealed a solidified right lung engorged with pus and a left lung with a hole the size of a turkey's egg, also filled with pus. The arrow had wounded both lungs, the liver and the stomach.

http://www.thehistorynet.com/we/blar...st/index1.html

[ 07-21-2005, 08:31 PM: Message edited by: Lucern ]

In more modern day military training, we can treat a 'sucking chest wound' with our comabt life savers bag. The thought of the lung filling with blood is a concern, but mainly stopping the air being sucked in is the main concern. Then treating for shock, and keeping the area clean while awaiting e-vac.

In essence the silk could have sealed the wound from above, as plastic wrap was not hardly available during the "Indian wars".

Didn't this happen on Three Kings? (That movie with George Clooney(sp?), Ice Cube and Mark Walberg).

I don't know, can we have a volunteer to test it on? [img]tongue.gif[/img]

if there's a hole in your chest then your lungs will collapse, as each time you breath in the hole sucks air into the internal cavity, lungs work because of the lack of pressure in that cavity.

It's possible to be stabbed through the chest and miss all the organs, but you'd have to be very lucky, in that case it's just a matter of blocking the holes before too much air gets in.

medical database, gunshot wounds would be a good place to start looking for information, it's simmilar in some ways, you might be able to dig up accounts of acidents, construction sites have a few of these sorts of accidents each year, so it shouldn't be so hard.