Talk:Recovery position

message: Is it significant that the patient be on their left side (image caption). If not, perhaps remove the emphasis on that word.
: Yes it is. A pregnant woman can be killed if put on her right side, since the child might block the inferior cavea. Rama 14:48, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Left side? 

message: Ok, besides being drunk when is this method used?  And how useful is it when choking is not a problem?  -GChriss
Any time that a person is unconscious but not needing CPR, pretty much. Regardless of the cause, there is a high risk of airway compromise in the unconscious patient. -unsigned
:Much thanks for the provision of diagrams. I've wondered on this ever since I read a report on a child who drowned from a bleeding nose during unconsciousness due to the people around him being worried about moving him after his injury. It is good to know the safe way to rotate the person. -Fuzzy 13:53, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  When used? 

message: Should the majority of this article even exist? Wikipedia is not designed to be a how-to....--John24601 15:12, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: July 12th - on the same note, I propose to remove the "precautions" section (I'll transfer it to wikibooks on first-aid) because it seems all "how-to"; unless their is objection?  JamieJones  talk 04:52, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally I think it is very good to have a how-to section in the article due to the nature of the action. That is, that the recovery position can be an important and life-saving action.--157.157.117.34 01:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Except of course for liability reasons, so what if a situation leads to wiki being used as a "how to"? While there is no substitute for proper training and professionals in their respective fields, there may be scenarios where someone is in a life threatening situation and those near need an answer NOW. Let's say you're with a group of friends drinking at a river, and stupid drunk guy dives in and doesn't come up- he's dragged to shore and nobody knows if he's got a broken neck or if he's just had too much Jack Daniels. Someone says "I heard about the recovery position" and the EMT's are half an hour a way, and whaleboy isn't breathing. While someone's on the phone with 911 they also have a laptop. Having the procedure explained on the number one reference site on the internet seems like a good idea to me. Batvette (talk) 03:30, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Instructions? 

message: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/First_Aid:Ch12Sec0Rescue#Chapter_Twelve_-_Rescue.2C_Evacuation_and_Transportation
Wikipedia is a not a how-to.  Much of the how-to text of this page has been moved to wikibooks (above).  Use that for how-to.  Better still, join us in the wikipedia first aid project!
Wikipedia First Aid Project
:I disagree.  When someone is looking up information about first aid, we do not want to create any delays in getting them the "how to" information.  Especially for this article on the recovery position, the "how to" is the subject itself. Health and safety should trump semantic ideals of how to organize information.  r3 03:32, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Errr, I don't agree. This article could provide a useful source on the therapeutic benefit of the recovery position, its history, what it is etc. - but that is not the same as telling people what to do when somebody's unconscious. If that was really hapenning, anybody silly enough to start looking on wikipedia is probably beyond help anyway. That leaves those who just want to know for reference how it is done, which is what wikibooks is for. --John24601 13:33, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Whether the person is silly or not is no excuse. It is very important to have a how-to, since otherwise the article is pretty much useless. Who in hell would care about the history of the recovery position? It should be stated in the article how it is preformed.--157.157.117.34 01:25, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Policy, probably. — NovaDog —  (contribs) 22:02, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well if you're going to preclude this being used as a "how to", and move that section elsewhere, don't you think the consciencious thing to do would be to put a conspicuous link to that place at the top of this page, and the typical wikispeak babble like "this article is not a how-to for first aid, (its catagory!) that information can be found here (link) now hurry as we've hid it well, your friend has only minutes to regain breathing function or will be brain damaged or die."  You might also want to see what happens when entering "first aid" in a wiki search. Nothing helpful at all! People do carry laptops and phones with browsers. Some may call it silly but a few of us actually go to wikipedia first for information! Who knew? Batvette (talk) 03:44, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved how-to 

message: I'm just wondering, isn't it important to have the left arm underneath the head for support, especially for support for the neck and spine? If so, the image is very mis-leading. Please correct me if I'm wrong.--157.157.117.34 01:27, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: The article on tonic clonic seizure indicates: Contrary to popular belief, it is not possible for someone having a seizure to swallow their tongue. The frenulum of the tongue prevents this.
However this article states that the tongue can be swallowed.  It's been indicated to me by my doctor that the tongue cannot be swallowed. 
Nonsane (talk) 16:57, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tongue swallowing 

message: Should the phrase "If not, leave." be changed to "If not, leave or make the situation safe if it is safe for you to do so."?
Or similar.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.193.135.91 (talk) 15:20, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Putting a victim in the recovery position 

message: "Victims who are left in this position for long periods may experience nerve compression. Still, that is a more desirable outcome for the victim than choking to death." -- Surely, this last bit is quite inappropriate, even unnecessary given the context of the sentence? 92.1.77.221 (talk) 11:38, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a very appropriate way of phrasing this, is it? 

message: A few observations of ways the article could be improved and expanded:
*discussion and illustration of alternative positions (e.g. HAINES)
**Any differences for different age groups?
*key position features labelled in a diagram. 
*section on effectiveness for different situations
*contraindications
T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)talk 04:35, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some things that could be usefully added