The Sidebar

WGN radio host Jonathon Brandmeier (source)

My father's never gotten proper credit as a master media manipulator who for decades used his charm to spin uninformed journalists.

As I told reporter Paul Teetor of the LA Weekly:

"My father is such a brilliant promoter, he could teach P.T. Barnum a few tricks."

But as a result of the dozens of media reports that exposed him as a career scammer -- for example, check out Chuck Goudie's tough ABC7 Chicago expose that aired over seven years ago -- presumably it's gotten more difficult for my father to find marks.

Also, who would consider my father -- a 94-year-old with a history of making delusional claims, who hasn't held a medical license since 2002, and who lives in a retirement community -- to be a medical authority?

Enter WGN Chicago talk show host Jonathon Brandmeier.*

Check out these clips I stitched together from Are you choking?! Dr. Heimlich is here, a March 12, 2014 interview Brandmeier and his second banana conducted with my father (with my brother Phil Heimlich on hand). In keeping with the show's yuckfest approach, I added clown horns where I spliced the clips.  




Briefly, after falling for my father's long-discredited hokum that rescuers should never use back blows to revive a choking victim, Brandmeier then imprudently advises WGN listeners to "forget the Red Cross" recommendations on how to respond to a choking emergency.

While you're at it, forget liability as well.

By the way, my father's claim that the American Red Cross is the only organization to recommend back blows is false. On the contrary, virtually every major first aid organization, including the Canadian Red Cross and the UK's St John Ambulance recommends performing back blows as the first response to choking.

In other words, Dr. Maneuver is clueless about his own claimed field of expertise.

And just after the 2:00 mark, my father recommends performing "the Heimlich maneuver" on choking infants. That treatment has never been recommended by any legitimate first aid agency because it may result in serious harm.

What if a WGN listener follows his advice and hurts a baby?

That's one of the questions I'll be asking the Tribune Company -- they own WGN.

They also own the Chicago Tribune which a few weeks ago published a well-researched first-person article by Ian Mitchell that included:

In a conscious choking emergency, where a person can't cough, speak or breathe, the Red Cross procedure is to ask the person if he or she is choking and get consent to give aid.

Then administer five strong back blows between the shoulder blades with the heel of your hand, "as forceful as you deem necessary to save that person's life," (Red Cross instructor Gabriele) Romanucci said.

The back blows are a less-invasive technique that might help clear the airway, so the Red Cross advises trying them first, he said.

"If that technique is not successful, then we would go to the abdominal thrust (aka Heimlich maneuver)," he said.

"Less-invasive" = Less potentially harmful.

What sort of potential harm?

See Case reports of complications from “the Heimlich maneuver,” a list I compiled of about 40 medical journal articles.

Finally, there's this clip in which Brandmeier & his sidekick guffaw about the hilarious concept:

What if the great Dr. Heimlich himself actually performed "the Heimlich" on a choking victim? Wouldn't that be a hoot?

When Brandmeier asks if that ever happened, my father replied, "I have not been in that position."




Punk'd by a nonagenarian!

Click here for the full article and other news outlets that ran with the story (BBC, New Yorker, etc.)

* CORRECTION (4/18/14): The audio of the interview is posted on the website of WGN-FM, so I assumed it aired on that station. After posting my item, I was informed by Tribune Radio Vice President Todd Manley that, in fact, the show aired on sister station WGWG-LP, 87.7FM. As of today, there's no indication of that on the website, hence my error.

Over the past couple of decades, if you came upon a choking child or adult, the Canadian Red Cross recommended that you perform a series of abdominal thrusts (aka the Heimlich maneuver).

As I reported in August (and today it became official), the CRC has updated its first aid training guidelines. They now recommend first performing a series of back blows. If that fails to remove the obstruction, rescuers are instructed to proceed with abdominal thrusts.

This information might make the difference between life and death or help prevent a choking victim from suffering brain damage.

But don't expect to read about it in the press or see the story on TV. The CRC wrote me that they have no intention of sending out a press release.

Here's another question. Five years ago, the American Red Cross made the same update. What took the CRC so long to catch up?

I've sent multiple inquiries to CRC officials, including  Conrad Sauvé, who heads the organization. I can't get him or anyone else to answer those questions. (See below for the correspondence.)

So at the moment, it appears the only way the public is able to obtain this potentially lifesaving information is by paying for a CRC training class - $160 according to this website - or by reading The Sidebar.

 
This item has been slightly updated for clarity.

(Based on some quick Googling, I think this a scoop. But if you know of a previous media report, e-mail it to me and I'll give credit where it's due.) 

After years of lagging behind the rest of the world, the Canadian Red Cross (CRC) is finally updating their choking rescue guidelines.

Hey, I didn't say it - they did:

In many countries, the combination of back blows and abdominal thrusts has been used since the 2005 guidelines. In North America, using only abdominal thrusts was decided upon as it was easier for the lay rescuer to remember, not due to supporting evidence. Evidence now supports the combination of techniques as more successful than using only one method.

More from a CRC statement published last October:

Airway obstruction – for adults and children (one year or older), if the person shows signs of mild airway obstruction, encourage continued coughing but do nothing else. If he or she shows signs of severe airway obstruction and is conscious, apply up to five back blows. If this fails, give up to five abdominal thrusts. If the obstruction is still not relieved, continue alternating five back blows with five abdominal thrusts.

So why is Canada late to the dance? I don't know, but for decades, most of the world's first aid organizations have recommended backblows as the first treatment response.

Here's another question. Why did the CRC decide to continue to teach abdominal thrusts (a/k/a the Heimlich maneuver) rather than chest thrusts, the preferred treatment in Australia and New Zealand?

The Aussies have a straightforward explanation for their position:

Stephen Dean, Assistant CEO, St John Ambulance Australia's Queensland branch: "In the US, they still advocate the Heimlich Manoeuvre for choking but in Australia, we believe the evidence shows it is dangerous and so our guidelines don't promote it."

That argument certainly seems to be backed up this information: 

For conscious (choking) victims, case reports have shown success in relieving FBAO (Foreign Body Airway Obstruction) with any one of several techniques, including back blows/slaps, abdominal thrusts and chest thrusts. Frequently, more than one technique is needed to relieve the obstruction. However, there have been reported life-threatening complications associated with the use of abdominal thrusts.

...Severe complications from the use of this technique have been cited in the medical literature. Desaiet al. reported a case of traumatic dissection and rupture of the abdominal aorta after a forceful Heimlich maneuver. In addition to this complication, these authors cite reports of other complications occurring with the use of the Heimlich maneuver. These injuries include retinal detachment, rib fractures, and ruptures of abdominal organs. Additional injuries included rupture of the diaphragm, jejunum, liver, esophagus and stomach. Other reported injuries of vascular structures consisted of aortic stent graft displacement, rupture of the aortic valve, acute aortic regurgitation, laceration of a mesenteric vessel, and acute aortic thrombosis in both an aneurysmal and non-aneurysmal aorta.

The above is from the 2011 international first aid and resuscitation guidelines of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies.

Now take another look at this sentence from the CRC statement posted at the top of this item:

In North America, using only abdominal thrusts was decided upon as it was easier for the lay rescuer to remember, not due to supporting evidence.

Am I missing something or is this a rationale for continuing to teach a potentially life-threatening procedure simply because they don't want to take on the job of re-training the population? 

An enterprising reporter could certainly ask the CRC to provide the supporting evidence that persuaded them to continue recommending abdominal thrusts rather than switching to chest thrusts.