Scientific Evidence for "Hydrostatic Shock"

[Shawn Dodson]

Just for the record:

In reply to a claim by gun writer Massad Ayoob (p31, Feb 93 Handguns), in which he claimed "...Fackler developed his 'improved' gelatin because animal rights activists had 'all but shut down' his ability to work with living animals:"

It is simply untrue that animal rights activists had any significant effect on my research. I stopped doing live animal shots in San Francisco because the French Army Medical Corps invited me to collaborate with them in performing live animal experimentation in Marseille. They were better equipped and had much more help that I had at LAIR, so I had no further need to do these shots in the USA. The gelatin is a lot less costly and is a far more ideal test medium than animals: this was the reason I calibrated and standardized it.

-- Martin L. Fackler, Personal Communication, 2/93

[DrJSW]

Shawn:

Thanks for sharing Dr. Fackler's personal comms with us. I do have a comment, though.

Just for the record, we need to keep in mind that Fackler's transition to ballistic gelatin occurred two decades ago. At that time trauma physicians who took the Advanced Trauma Life Support course (a national requirement for all ER docs, trauma surgeons, etc) used live anesthetized dogs or swine for training on placing central lines, chest tubes, endotracheal tubes, etc. Since then we've had to switch to plastic dummies, which are a damn poor substitute, in my opinion. Although no one will officially admit it, this transition was entirely due to pressure from the animal rights movement.

In the research world of 2009, the practical, regulatory, and ethical convolutions one has to go through to use live animals in research has increased enormously, again in no small part due to pressure from animal rights activists and their propaganda which the mass media are all too eager to parrot. I have had some involvement in training protocols for certain military personnel that involve using live anesthetized animals to demonstrate & train emergency medical procedures. These sessions are done under very tight security & secrecy and at staggering financial cost. Such work could not be accomplished outside the military.

I sincerely doubt that Dr. Fackler could start up a research operation such as the one he had at LAIR in today's politically-charged research science community.

[Zhukov]

What a bunch of whackos. I'm so glad they're saving the animals so that people can die instead.

I don't see what's wrong with using pigs. After they're put to sleep, you can BBQ the remnants!

[Glock17JHP]

Zhukov,

I'll bring the BBQ sauce!!!

[John_Wayne777]

In the research world of 2009, the practical, regulatory, and ethical convolutions one has to go through to use live animals in research has increased enormously, again in no small part due to pressure from animal rights activists and their propaganda which the mass media are all too eager to parrot.

This is true. The volume of paperwork a junior Biology major has to go through to do something as simple as study the effect of fertilizer on the growth of a species of newt is staggering.

[DarrinD]

Thank you all for taking the time to help educate me. At the moment, I remain agnostic about the issue as I feel I am still climbing the steep part of the learning curve. I read your stuff and you have me convinced. Then I read their stuff and I change my mind. And I go back and forth.

I am making efforts to contact those on the other side as well. I don't know where this will end up for me, but the journey is challenging and exciting.

Thanks again, and feel free to point me to resources that will help me in this effort.

I make all my decisions related to terminal ballistics on the outstanding research of the likes of DOCGKR. I believe it is true and forcing a bleed out is the only way to surely "stop" a BG. However, I can't say with 100% certainty that there is NOT a something else besides, say, psychological stops. When I represented Arizona law enforcement I saw a few GSW "stops" where the BG was not hit in a vital organ that caused massive blood loss. Some may say these are all psychological, but I remain puzzled by these rare stops and lack any evidence to explain them.

[Glock17JHP]

There are always 'fuzzy' things when dealing with GSW's, and an analogy that may help to understand it can be explained...

Sometimes a child needs an 'attitude adjustment' from a parent. Sometimes the 'adjustment' is more aggressive, yet the response is to tighten the lip and stand in defiance. The next time the 'adjustment' may be 'light', yet the response is quite 'dramatic'.

Think of the terms: FIGHT and FLIGHT...

In the examples above, the first response is FIGHT, the latter is FLIGHT. Humans can have a mindset (caused by anger, defiance, shock, drugs, etc.) that can cause (or prevent) the FIGHT response, and the reaction to being shot can appear to others as minimal. The physiological damage is there just the same, but the psycological resonse is not. In another seeming identical situation, the response can evoke a response that is very different. Think of someone cowering after being hit that is begging for their life... this is the FLIGHT response. This is the response that can make it look like a non life-threatening wound is having a HUGE impact physiologically. In reality, the response is mostly psycological.

This is why real-life shooting results can be quite misleading. Two near identical shootings can vary drastically in the response by the shooting victim.

This is just one more reason to be sure to have a 'warrior mindset' when defending a life (ie: SA Mireles, Miami 1986)...

[Soybomb]

I liked the post by Dr. Williams (http://www.tacticalanatomy.com) in the other thread (https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=28142&page=9):

Seeems accurate to me, last time I wasted my time with courtney it ended with him resorting to personal attacks on you. If he can't argue his material without resorting to that...