Sounds like heresy I know, but hear me out...
..and Doc Rocket, now yer in Comanche country you need to listen up.....
This from an ER guy who walked the walk and talked the talk....
http://allthingsliberty.com/2013/05/battle-wounds-never-pull-an-arrow-out-of-a-body/Battle Wounds: Never Pull an Arrow Out of a Body.
Dr Joseph Howland Bill was originally from Philadelphia and attended Jefferson Medical College. After graduation he joined the U.S. Army, was commissioned 1st Lieutenant, and in 1860 was assigned to Fort Defiance, New Mexico. There he wrote his 22-page essay, “Notes on Arrow Wounds,” published in the American Journal of Medical Sciences, 1862....
Bill states arrows inflict wounds “with a fatality greater than that produced by any other weapons — particularly when surgical assistance cannot be obtained.”[3] Bill understood the importance of recording his observations for the Army and future settlers as well as documenting his experiences and findings, from both living and dead arrow wound victims, for history and medicine....
...when the arrow penetrated the body the arrowhead would loosen from its contact with blood and other bodily fluids. Dr. Bill explains the worst thing a friend could do was to try to remove the arrow by pulling on the shaft, which would cause the arrowhead to be left behind forcing the doctor to search for the projectile...
The problems came from the nature of arrow warfare and the shape and texture of the projectile. Dr. Bill estimates an “expert bowman can easily discharge six arrows per minute.”[8] In one of Dr. Bill’s cases three soldiers suffered a total of 42 arrow wounds between them. Although this number of wounds was extreme, Bill states he rarely saw someone with a single arrow wound.[9]
Further complicating the multiple wounds was that each arrowhead had to be removed. Unlike a gunshot wound, the arrowhead must be located and extracted. Arrowheads were rough and sharp. No tissue around the arrowhead could heal and in the body’s attempt to rid itself of the foreign object infection would rage forming an abscess. Every time the victim moved the arrowhead’s rough edges would inflame and aggravate the injury and eventually lead to a fatal infection or amputation...
In contrast a.... bullet did not have the sharp edges and could become encysted in tissue or encased in bone and safely remain in the body. The importance of removal is clear in Dr. Bill’s instructions: “We might as well cut the patient’s limb up until we do find the arrow-head.”[11]
Now the gravity of a friend’s attempt to pull the arrow from a wounded comrade becomes apparent. If the shaft was left in place, Dr. Bill’s treatment was to make an incision to enlarge the entry wound and slide a finger down the shaft to feel the depth of the wound and determine if the arrowhead is lodged in bone.[12] Without the shaft in place the doctor was forced to search for the arrow by making a larger incision, probing through tissue, causing more trauma, and taking more time. It was much easier for the doctor and patient if the shaft was left intact until a doctor could remove the head and shaft as one piece. Further, there was always the danger that the arrowhead could not be found leaving the “angular and jagged head… buried in bone to kill – for so it surely will.”[13] If, however, the arrowhead is removed properly, the wound was likely to heal naturally.[14]Next up: "Anesthesia: Is it worth the trouble?"
Birdwatcher
