In reply to Hillwalker:
> I'm sorry Bootrock but some of that is pure nonsense.
Well please, let us discuss this.
> The European and UK Resuscitation Councils dictate how resuscitation should be carried out in all scenarios, first aid, in hospital, pre-hospital etc etc (and they do differ). What they make very clear is that anybody taught CPR should be taught to do both compressions and ventilations as that is the most effective, in some cases doing compressions only would be of little value. However, where one is unable (or unwilling) to provide ventilations, and only then, should you resort to compressions only.
I don't dispute your comment. I agree with it. However, Its better to do something, than nothing.
> Why you put the word 'legally' into the sentence is a mystery as it is not a legal matter.
It's not a mystery. Some of the questions I have had are about doing something, or making the situation worse, or worried they might get sued for getting something wrong.
Maybe legal isn't the right word, but the idea is still the same.
> Pocket masks are good, yes, so long as you have been taught how to use them and can perform the task with one, which isn't that easy. (Harder than without one for most people).
I concur. I find them better than the flimsy face shields thing, but again, something is better than nothing. And it's handy to carry in your wallet.
> Tourniquets are not a 'legal' grey area, they are not subject to any legislation at all, and there is quite explicit guidance concerning their use. The official guidance is that they should not be taught during 'ordinary' first aid courses, but may be included where there is specific demonstrable risk that may make them appropriate (e.g.: chain saw users etc). It goes without saying that training in their use is essential.
Agreed.
Again it all comes down to training. Training and competence. If you aren't trained on it, then Don't use it/carry it.
The legal aspect would be if you aren't trained on them but use one.
So I don't really think it's nonsense fella.