49 minutes ago, ThreeEyedRaven said:

But not in a wet-suit, underwater in the pitch black, being tossed about by the current and manhandled through crevices in the dark, unless this is some new relaxation therapy on the way to surgery I have not heard of yet. You didn't quote on how many times they were knocked out either. One qualified guy, the others pressed into an emergency. Much could have gone wrong. Knocking the performance of those who got everything right, is somehow wrong, cos it turned out pretty well I thought.

You have a remarkably firm grasp of the obvious. It worked. Nuff said.

39 minutes ago, jenny2017 said:

Not necessarily true. There are many ways to Rome.................

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18095964

 

  

And thank you Jenny for the update on anaesthetic technique. Your Google skills are unparalled.

Surely the PM would have invented his own new drug just for this cave extraction. A variation of the one he regularly uses to extract his foot from his mouth

38 minutes ago, HooHaa said:

And thank you Jenny for the update on anaesthetic technique. Your Google skills are unparalled.

Thanks for the flowers. Your words: Kids in surgery most certainly use breathing appratus

 

    I've posted the link only because I knew that they weren't using such a breathing apparatus under these circumstances. 

 

    I did not say that I knew how they were knocked out, it's great that all went well. That matters, nothing else. 

4 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

If it was ketamine, the PM apparently is absolutely denying it, for whatever reasons.

• Could be that ketamine is an illegal drug ?

5 minutes ago, sanemax said:

• Could be that ketamine is an illegal drug ?

 

Ketamine is not an illegal drug per se. It is a controlled drug. It is a vital anaesthetic used daily in hospitals. Ketamine is a Schedule 2 drug in Thailand, so its use is strictly controlled to only hospitals. Any use outside of a controlled environment is illegal under the Psychotropic Substances Act BE 2518 (1975)

Just now, revelstone said:

 

Ketamine is not an illegal drug per se. It is a controlled drug. It is a vital anaesthetic used daily in hospitals. Ketamine is a Schedule 2 drug in Thailand, so its use is strictly controlled to only hospitals. Any use outside of a controlled environment is illegal under the Psychotropic Substances Act BE 2518 (1975)

And if it was used during the rescue , it would have been used outside a hospital.

The usage of it may technically have been illegal during the rescue 

28 minutes ago, sanemax said:

And if it was used during the rescue , it would have been used outside a hospital.

The usage of it may technically have been illegal during the rescue 

 

IIRC, the Australian and Thai governments executed an agreement to grant complete immunity to the Australian doctors involved in the rescue, which presumably covered anything they did and the methods/materials they used.

 

26 minutes ago, sanemax said:

And if it was used during the rescue , it would have been used outside a hospital.

The usage of it may technically have been illegal during the rescue 

 

Given the high risks involved in the rescue, I would imagine that it explicitly had ministerial-level approval as part of the operation itself. I'd wager that the PM himself gave approval for the rescue.

9 hours ago, darksidedog said:

I am a little confused by your post. Obviously as an anaesthetist he would know exactly what he was doing and what it would take to knock a child out for a set period of time. But this was not normal. After all, kids in surgery don't have to wear breathing apparatus and be dragged through flooded tunnels on their way to the operation. And then be knocked out again a couple more times along the way, by people with less training. Your post seems to suggest that this was totally normal and nothing to worry about, which is a very long way from the truth. The divers afterwards freely admitted they did not expect to get them all out alive. My post praised the care they took for such a successful outcome. Yours seems to belittle the bravery and skill it actually took, which I think quite shameful.

I'm not belittling anyone I think it was an outstanding effort. Thank you for interpreting what I was saying, what I was suggesting and then having the hide to say I belittled the effort. Even though you are completely incorrect It's the biggest problem with this forum. People reading only what they want to see. What I was saying is you couldn't of had a better man for the job and its a testament to his skill and ability that he would of known exactly what he was doing. Get off your high horse mate.

Edited July 28, 20187 yr by starky

4 hours ago, revelstone said:

 

Given the high risks involved in the rescue, I would imagine that it explicitly had ministerial-level approval as part of the operation itself. I'd wager that the PM himself gave approval for the rescue.

I believe it came from even higher than that.

4 hours ago, revelstone said:

 

Given the high risks involved in the rescue, I would imagine that it explicitly had ministerial-level approval as part of the operation itself. I'd wager that the PM himself gave approval for the rescue.

Most likely. The American team reported that they got clearance from the Ministry of the Interior, the head of which is one of the PMs right hand men. 

8 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

And I guarantee you the truth would have come out anyway, no questions.  

How can you guarantee this? Who are you? Do you have a special relationship to power in Thaiand?

 

In the best of circumstances, in the most liberal, open society in the world things get covered up and the emergence of truth cannot be guaranteed. Why do you think that if things had gone wrong that the impulse - or reflex action - to hide the truth for fear of embarrassment would not have kicked into action in Thailand which is not an open society? Witness Prayuth's lying as a reflex mechanism about the tranquiliser issue.

A loop recording of the PM's songs would have done the job just as well, sent to sleep by boredom.

6 hours ago, revelstone said:

 

Given the high risks involved in the rescue, I would imagine that it explicitly had ministerial-level approval as part of the operation itself. I'd wager that the PM himself gave approval for the rescue.

Yes, but that wouldnt make it legal , laws need to be passed to make it legal .

Had the outcome not been successful , Prayrut could have faced manslaughter charges .

  Thailand has a history of prosecuting former leaders and Prayrut may have faced manslaughter charges once his leadership is over .

  

10 hours ago, jenny2017 said:

The best article about the whole rescue operation seems to be from BBC.

 

        https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-44799779

 

   An outstanding job was done by all involved. 

 

And this is the best little documentary I've seen on it. It is better than the movie will be whenever they make it.

 

I’d take what the doctor ordered not what the suggestion of great leader was any day!

Nothing weird. No one cleared the precise nature of the evacuation with the PM and he took it upon himself to say what was going on.

 

As I mentioned in a previous post, declaring that someone is conscious in such a scenario does not make sense - they may or may not remember much of what happened in the evacuation. In the pic of the rescuerers around the patient in one of the links, one of the rescuers seems to be looking at a pulse-oximeter - something that you would expect. This device measures the pulse rate and the oxygen level in the blood of the patient. I would imagine that they also had resus bags and oxygen in small bottles (metal canisters) with them during the trip through the cave complex so that at each stage when they administered the anaesthetic they could check vitals and resuscitate if required. At the rate they rushed some of them to hospital, I would imagine they were resuscitating them at the end when they got out. For some of them, it must have been very touch and go. It would have been done against normal medical advice and standards - such anaesthetic would only be administered when there is a qualified person present, in a hospital with resus facilities and to a patient who has not been starved of food and oxygen in a cave in damp environment for weeks.

3 hours ago, tomta said:

How can you guarantee this? Who are you? Do you have a special relationship to power in Thaiand?

 

In the best of circumstances, in the most liberal, open society in the world things get covered up and the emergence of truth cannot be guaranteed. Why do you think that if things had gone wrong that the impulse - or reflex action - to hide the truth for fear of embarrassment would not have kicked into action in Thailand which is not an open society? Witness Prayuth's lying as a reflex mechanism about the tranquiliser issue.

Blimey, calm down.  I am Joseph Bloggs.  I have no special relationship to power in Thailand.

 

But consider the number of people involved in this rescue.  And consider how many of them were foreigners who don't live in Thailand and have no reason to keep a secret to protect a country's "face".  The truth would absolutely have come out, no matter what.

They got them out safely. That is all we need to know. A magnificent effort by all these rescuers, who ever thought they would get them all out alive.

Just watched an excellent short documentary on the rescue on Al Jazeera.

The Thais did not honor this man enough pittyful 

16 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

So all that in the Thai PBS article, and they don't even mention what drug was used.

 

But, for some reason, the article keeps using the word "dangerous" drug over and over again.

 

Could it have been Michael Jackson's Propofol???

 

Anything to sell a news article 

It was just a calming drug to stop the boys panicking and pulling off their oxygen masks under water,nothing like a dangerous drug.

17 hours ago, irlguy1 said:

It was ketamine


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I thought that was generally used on horses. Didn't they have an equivalent wild boar anaesthetic?

Just joking. It was a brilliant idea and it worked better than expected. Big thanks to Dr Harris, and all the other divers he instructed how to administer the drug safely.

56 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

Blimey, calm down.  I am Joseph Bloggs.  I have no special relationship to power in Thailand.

 

But consider the number of people involved in this rescue.  And consider how many of them were foreigners who don't live in Thailand and have no reason to keep a secret to protect a country's "face".  The truth would absolutely have come out, no matter what.

Well, really, you can't guarantee anything so why say it? There are lots of secrets about Thailand that have been well kept despite a number of foreigners knowing about them. Journalists, for instance, will abide by restrictions in order to keep their special access and to not be expelled from a cushy posting. 

3 hours ago, soalbundy said:

A loop recording of the PM's songs would have done the job just as well, sent to sleep by boredom.

Yes, but the coma might last 20 years

9 hours ago, revelstone said:

 

Given the high risks involved in the rescue, I would imagine that it explicitly had ministerial-level approval as part of the operation itself. I'd wager that the PM himself gave approval for the rescue.

This rescue involved expert doctors, cave diving experts, navy Seals, etc etc, why would anyone ask approval from the PM?

13 hours ago, tingtongtourist said:

In the nanny state like Australia they are well trained. Refuse to release "to much" info because:

a) not wanting to promote drugs not on the A list

b) not wanting to admit that any drug not on the A list can actually be usefull..(other than taxing/fining people for it of course)

c) not step on drug companies feet or the police that make a fortune out of banning eveything.

What a load of rubbish... no wonder you live in Thailand, Australia is too good for you.

11 hours ago, sanemax said:

• Could be that ketamine is an illegal drug ?

Ketamine is used by medical practitioners and veterinarians as an anaesthetic, so NOT illegal, unless used by unlicensed people, so was not the reason for denying its use.