Chico Personal Injury Lawyer - All Topics - Most Popular

Medical Helicopter Crashes: Turning Injuries into Fatalities

John Demas — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 14:30:29 GMT

Although the sounds of the circulating blades of an approaching medical helicopter are of great comfort to someone who’s been seriously injured, more and more of these flying machines are coming under greater scrutiny due to their increasing number of crashes. In February of 2009, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) held hearings for four days looking into this growing national problem.

During those hearings, the NTSB stated it had recently reviewed a specific twelve- month period when “nine fatal medical helicopter accidents . . .killed 35 people.” The NTSB went on to note that between January 2002 and January 2005, there were fifty-five deaths and eighteen serious injuries that could have been prevented if these helicopters had observed higher standards.

Numbers like these clearly indicate that there’s a need for new guidelines to govern when these helicopters may go out on rescue missions. Furthermore, they should also remind every injured citizen that he or she should have the right to choose emergency ground transportation instead. We’re not only losing or impairing the valuable lives of our everyday citizens, we’re also risking the lives of the highly trained professionals who fly these helicopters and stand ready to administer medical care aboard
them.

In light of the recent NTSB hearing testimony, both private and government-run medical facilities need to re-think a variety of factors before putting pilots, on-board medical personnel and all injured persons at further risk.

By carefully revising guidelines concerning each of the following factors, hopefully our government can start immediately decreasing all medical helicopter accidents.

• Strict logs should be kept noting the exact weather conditions existing at the proposed helicopter launching site – as well as those prevailing where the injured party is waiting. If both sets of weather conditions do not meet pre-set minimum standards, then emergency ground transportation should be sent as opposed to a medical helicopter.

• Only the most experienced helicopter pilots should be allowed to fly on these missions. They must meet a stringent, minimum number of flying hours before handling this critical service.

• When transport organs need to be flown to a waiting recipient and the weather conditions are very poor, that party may have to consider another donor organ from a different medical facility. Alternatively, perhaps a hospital employee could fly on a major airline with the organ, if it appears that the larger aircraft might be able to provide a more stable flight during sub-standard weather.

• Pilots must routinely submit to random alcohol and drug tests . Furthermore, they should not be allowed to fly for an excessive number of hours without rest. Fines should be imposed on all employers who try to force pilots to fly their medical helicopters for unreasonably long hours.

• Certain serious but non-critical injuries may need to be routinely handled by emergency ground transportation

• Strict medical helicopter maintenance records must be kept and subject to regular government review. Hospitals and other medical facilities should only be allowed to contract out their medical helicopter needs with companies that have already met stringent government standards.

Hopefully, if these and other factors are carefully considered, we will start to see an immediate decrease in the number of injuries being turned into fatalities by wayward medical helicopters. Both the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) need to work closely together to create proper standards for these critical flights. They should also offer to regularly consult with state and local governments that need help with drafting supplemental guidelines.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Demas

U.S. Attorney General Announces New Pot Policy

Amber Wheat — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 14:42:09 GMT

This has kind of become a pet issue of mine. Medical marijuana is legal in California, but under federal law, possession and sale of marijuana is illegal. Under the Bush administration, violators of the federal law were raided up and down the central district in California. Of the 75 raids that took place over the last three and a half years, only several people have been prosecuted (and those are the ones who supposedly violated state law as well as the federal law). But the medical marijuana dispensaries have no more need to fear (as long as they are operating legally within the state laws).

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the Drug Enforcement Agency will not target the dispensaries within states with medical marijuana laws as long as they are following their state laws. Many people have argued the federal government doesn’t have the right to interfere with medical prescriptions given by doctors. Others have said that federal law trumps state law and that state laws can be more restrictive than federal, but not less.

I have always advocated states’ rights and believe that our forefathers understood the benefits of a loose central government. The United States of America is a large country with very different environments. There is a huge difference between California and New York and what is good for one state is not necessarily good for the other. The name of our country is very indicative of our system as well. It says what we are and where! We are a nation of states! Yes we are united, but above all we are individual regions and each region should be run by the people who live there.

That is the opinion that has spurred this new policy. The medical marijuana program was voted into place by the people of California and the federal government shouldn’t undo or hinder our decisions when it comes to medical care of our citizens. I believe this policy will go a long way toward fairness and transparency in the law. It will be more clear as to which actions are legal and which actions will be prosecuted. Then owners and operators of such medical marijuana dispensaries can make informed decisions on how they do business.

What are your thoughts? Do you think this system will work? Will we see an increase or decrease in illegal sales through dispensaries?

For that matter, what do you think about states’ rights? I’m curious. I personally think the federal government should back off a bit and let us do our own thing, but I wonder what you think. Let me know!

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Amber Wheat

A Californian Assemblyman is Looking to Cash in on Pot

Amber Wheat — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:41:28 GMT

Tom Ammiano introduced a proposal on Monday to legalize marijuana and tax it. He wants the legal age to partake in marijuana to be the same as alcohol, 21 years. The proposal asks for a tax of $50 for the sale of every ounce of pot. He wants to see our retail stores with pot on the shelves.

There are so many complications with this issue. I have heard of marijuana being laced with other substances, so who would regulate the growth, processing, and packaging of marijuana? The FDA can’t do it, they are a federal agency and marijuana is still illegal under federal law. Will there be name brands on our convenience store shelves? Fields of marijuana crops?

The News10 article that broke the news has received many comments from members of the community and a few of their comments have made me worry. Of course driving under the influence will still be illegal, but our county doesn’t even have drunk driving under control, so why are we inviting more problems in? Another comment mentioned taking the revenue away from gangs and putting it into legitimate business, just who do you think is going to be selling the stuff legally? Retailers will have to buy it from somebody if they want to stock it and right now the only people who are growing it are doing it illegally or for medical purposes.

I previously held a stance that even medical marijuana should not be legal, that opinion changed thanks to this community and the information they imparted to me. So, I guess I am asking you again. What are the risks and benefits in this situation? When people are in pain and need relief from suffering that easily outweighs the risks associated with legalizing medical marijuana. When college students and parents just want to kick back and relax, is it really worth it?

What do you think? If it came down to a vote of the citizens in California would you vote for or against legalizing marijuana?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Amber Wheat

The FDA is Finally Taking Steps to Reduce Painkiller Abuse

Barbara Burks — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 18:15:29 GMT

The FDA is a strange best. Sometimes people have a hard time understanding their motives, as many of you may know from my assistant’s previous posts on the FDA. One thing that I know they are responsible for is the safety of drugs, but now, they are taking responsibility for the abuse of certain drugs.

I am torn on this issue at the moment and I would appreciate your input. Federal health regulators are requiring drugmakers to somehow reduce the misuse of the products they put out on the market. Now I have always believed that what you do with a product determines whether or not it is defective when someone is injured. If you are hanging a folding chair from a tree and trying to swing, you can’t sue the chair company for a defective product because they could not possibly foresee that use for the chair and protect or warn consumers against it.

So why is it the manufacturer’s responsibility if someone chooses to use it in a way it isn’t meant to be used. I assume if the FDA already approved the drug for sale in the U.S. that it has been rigorously tested and that complications such as addiction and potentially harmful side effects have been minimized as much as possible. Maybe I assume too much.

I really like the idea or tamper-proof painkillers like those King Pharmaceuticals and Pain Therapeutics are making, but those won’t work for everyone. Sometimes people can’t swallow pills and sometimes the duration of the patches is needed. How is a company supposed to reduce abuse in those instances?

How do you compromise between creating effective medicine and creating medicine that won’t work if you don’t use it just right?

If these high-dose opiate painkillers are killing people, then maybe the answer is not reducing their misuse by the medicating population (an impossible feat), but taking them off the market. Find new ways to combat the pain (or old ways, I’m told cannabis doesn’t kill people).

As long as these products are out there they are going to be abused. And not just by the prescription holder. More and more kids are getting a hold of their parents’ or grandparents’ medications. Putting the responsibility on the manufacturers is just going to make the medication cost more and make blaming the pharmaceutical companies easier. What ever happened to responsibility for one’s own actions?

What do you think? Comments are most appreciated. I am always looking for different points of view and counterpoints.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Barbara Burks

CHP "Zero Tolerance Day" Hopes to Make an Impact

John Demas — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 12:07:05 GMT

Yesterday was the California Highway Patrol's "Zero Tolerance Day". The CHP stopped motorists for everyday traffic violations like speeding, tailgaiting, and most recently texting. While these and other activities are against the law everyday, the CHP typically devotes their time and energy to stopping the more dangerous and reckless drivers on the road. But yesterday, strict enforcement was in effect. The CHP hopes to remind people that unsafe lane changes and not wearing your seatbelt, along with a multitude of common violations, can get you pulled over. This day has come and gone, but you never know when they will have another one or where it will be in effect. So be careful out there motorists!

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Demas

EU Warns Us About MP3 Dangers

Amber Wheat — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 17:29:45 GMT

A new study from the European Union Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks is very concerned about the future of hearing of it’s European citizens. The study focused on the volume and duration of use of MP3 players.

I know that this occurred overseas, but it is just as pertinent (if not more so) here in the U.S. We have all seen those people who drive down the street with there stereos blasting, the bass up so high, you can feel the vibrations two cars over. Can you imagine how high they keep the volume on their MP3 players?

I know of people who use MP3 players to drown out snoring or on airplanes to drown out the noise, but think of how loud the music would have to be to accomplish anything. Our ears are very sensitive devices. We have the ability to focus on specific sounds while ignoring others (anyone who’s tried to talk to someone while they’re watching tv can attest to that), we can pick up on a wide range of tones (though not as many as dogs), and we can even tell when pitch is ever so slightly off.

Yes, our ears are amazing, but they are delicate as well. A young woman in China recently lost part of her hearing just from kissing! The amount of noise entering your ear when listening to MP3 players has a long-term effect on your hearing abilities.

The EU study found that five to ten percent of European MP3 users have the volume so high that they are at risk for permanent hearing loss someday. I don’t think I would be out of line to suggest the American users are probably closer to the ten percent.

Hearing loss is not the only risk, tinnitis can occur if we don’t use MP3s responsibly. Tinnitus is a ringing in the ears. It is different for everybody, different tones, different duration, different beats, but they all suffer. For a real shock, check out what tinnitus can sound like. Then imaging living with that constantly for the rest of your life! There is no medical cure for tinnitus.

One of the keys to keeping your hearing safe is paying attention to duration. Even at the high volume level, somebody would have to listen to their MP3 for one whole hour everyday of every week for five years to lose their hearing. That’s not to say that you won’t damage your hearing if you take every other day off, it just means the damage is progressive. It won’t happen all at once. Your ears will get used to the loud volume then one day you’ll need to turn it up. The day after that you won’t be able to hear the tv. Then you’ll have to ask people to speak up while talking directly at you.

Soon you’re looking at buying hearing aids (not the cheapest thing in the world) and maybe even considering surgery. That comes with doctor’s visits and fees (does your insurance cover hearing loss?). But there is no cure for hearing loss and if you go deaf... you’ll never hear the music you loved ever again. Communication will be a chore and misunderstandings will be the norm.

It is a slippery slope, so please be careful. Music is wonderful, and listening can be a very relaxing past time, but please listen responsibly. A good rule of thumb: if you are listening to an MP3 player, the volume should be low enough that you can hear someone next to you clearly. If you have to ask them to repeat themselves, the music is too loud. If THEY can hear the music too, it’s WAY too loud (you know who you are).

Check out the tinnitus site... it will really change your perspective. Let me know what you think.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Amber Wheat

California Motorcylist Killed in Accident

Christina Cole — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 23:47:27 GMT

A 65-year-old California man lost his life this morning in a fatal motorcycle accident near the Mt. Rushmore monument after he lost control of his motorcycle and crashed head-on into an oncoming motorhome.

The accident happened at 10:25 a.m. on Highway 244, just three miles west of Mt. Rushmore, said South Dakota Highway Patrol.

Apparently, the motorcyclist failed to slow down for a curve and traveled into oncoming traffic, crashing a Texas man's motorhome. The motorcyclist had his helmet on but he died from fatal injuries sustained in the crash.

The victims name is being withheld pending family notification.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Christina Cole

Children's Puppet Theaters Recalled for Lead Hazard

Chrissie Cole — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 22:36:03 GMT

In cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) Guidecraft Inc. announced a voluntary recall of approximately 10,000 children's puppet theaters. The surface paint on the wooden panels of the puppet theater contains excessive levels of lead.

The recalled puppet theater has a chalkboard surface on the front and colored side panels. The puppet theater measures about 35 inches in length, 14 inches in width and about 52 inches in height.

Consumers are advised to take the recalled puppet theatres away from small children immediately and to contact Guidecraft for a free replacement or product of equal value.

Consumer Contact: For additional information, contact Guidecraft toll-free at (888) 824-1308 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. CT Monday through Friday, or visit the firm's Web site at www.guidecraft.com.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Chrissie Cole

Oroville Man Gets $1.4 Million from Malicious Trucking Firm

Amber Wheat — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 12:57:28 GMT

We have all heard the adage “Time is Money”. Unfortunately, a Dixon-area trucking firm, B.C. Leaseco took that advice too far. Their trucks are used by Button Transportation for transporting and pumping toxic chemicals into holding tanks. To save time, B.C. Leaseco removed a safety flapper valve on the truck’s pumping system.

This, of course, lead to a serious injury to a driver, Mr. Raymond Kean. On April 29, 2005, the highly corrosive aqueous ammonia liquid fertilizer he was pumping backed up and sprayed onto him. Luckily, a worker was there with a hose and got the chemical off of him immediately. But it wasn’t enough. Mr. Kean had already breathed in the chemical sustaining major damage to his eyes and respiratory system.

For trying to save time and money, B.C. Leasco now has to pay Mr. Kean $1.4 million. And because the jury found that the trucking firm acted with malice, they are subject to punitive damages which will be quantified next month. It doesn’t seem like enough, but at least it’s something. Mr. Kean will have to have both scarred lungs replaced.

In this economy, everyone is trying to save money here and there, but it is never okay to compromise the safety of others in the process. I am proud of the eight-person jury who found both B.C. Leasco and Button Transportation liable. The award is among the largest personal injury verdicts handed down in the Chico area.

Props to Kean’s attorney Mark Valez, and his wife, Karen Valez. Good Job!

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Amber Wheat

Artificial Turf Being Investigated By CPSC For Lead Concerns

Jenny Albano — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 17:19:02 GMT

The CPSC is looking into potential health hazards from lead in artificial turf on school stadiums and parks across the country.

So far two fields in New Jersey have already been closed because state officials found there were high levels of lead in the turf, up to 10 times the amount of lead that is allowed in soil on contaminated sites that are being turned into homes. The lead could potentially be inhaled or swallowed by athletes from dust on the surface of the artificial turf.

In the U.S. there are around 3,5000 synthetic playing fields and about 800 are installed in schools, universities, parks, etc. each year. The CPSC wants to make sure that children using these fields are not put at risk.

Pigment containing lead chromate is used in some surfaces to make the grass green and hold its color in sunlight. But it is not clear how widely the compound is used. The New Jersey Health Department found lead in both of the nylon fields it tested, but in none of the 10 polyethylene surfaces it examined.

Fibers and dust from the turf may become airborne from wear and weathering, which could then be inhaled or swallowed by athletes.

New Jersey's epidemiologist, Dr. Eddy Bresnitz, has ordered tests to find out how easily fibers from the artificial turf can be inhaled or swallowed. He stated that the risk of playing on fields full of lead was probably low, but to take precaution after playing by washing thoroughly and washing clothes separately.

According to the president of the Synthetic Turf Council, Rick Doyle, lead is fixed in place in the nylon and does not leach out, and thus poses no health risk.

Lead can cause brain damage, kidney damage, and other illnesses, particularly in children.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jenny Albano