NovelMenu







Saturday, December 21, 2013

Western Wounds: How Accurate is That? syndicated from @megmims




The following is syndicated from westernfictioneers.blogspot.com 
and is posted here with permission.

I've been mulling over all month about a topic. Western weather, and how brutal cattle drives and prairie farming must have been. Another real life western hero, or heroine... or a plug about my re-release of the Spur-Award winning Double Crossing. But then I thought about one of the most popular Western Fictioneer members, Dr. Keith Souter (w/a Clay More) and thought, "hey, he's a doctor. I have some questions about stuff I see in movies or books."

So that's what we're chatting about today, western wounds. The image to the left is an antique medical bag. Cool, huh? I love including photos on my blog posts. Okay, back to three types of common western wounds. Recovering, surviving, should-this-be-used-in-your-next-book kind of thing, which is called a genre trope. I call it a "how come they did that instead of ... " type of thing. I have a few beefs (or is that beeves?) about what I've read or seen in westerns.

Cover links to Amazon.com
We'll start with something simple and work our way up.

MEG:  Hey, howdy, Dr. Keith! Many thanks for agreeing to participate in "Ask the Expert" today. I've seen a few movies where either the western hero or an Indian *cuts palm* and then waits for the other guy to do the same so they can make a blood bond ... another friend HATES that and claims that injury is too severe, especially in a medieval when they'd pick up their sword or bow and arrow and try to use the weapon. So, maybe they should use their thumb instead?

Dr. Keith Souter:  Cutting the palm will produce a lot of blood, as anyone will know if they have cut themselves with a knife. A very superficial cut would be enough to allow for symbolic mixing of the blood. Of course, with our knowledge about communicable blood-borne diseases nowadays, one would realize that to become a blood-brother in such a ceremony, where severed surface was placed against severed surface, would have a very good chance of transmitting infection. But back then HIV had not developed.

A deep cut would endanger the superficial palmar arch, a ring of arteries formed from branches of the radial artery and the ulnar artery. I have attached a plate from Gray's Anatomy, which has been one the main textbooks of anatomy used by medical students and doctors since it was first published in 1859, by Henry Gray, of St George's Hospital in London. (There is a TV show called Grey's Anatomy, that is a play on the name - note the different spelling). A deep cut would risk arterial damage, which would cause spurting of blood. That would be a significant wound. There would also be significant danger of nerve damage. A superficial hand wound takes a week or so to heal. Deep wound could take weeks and even months, if there was a lot of damage.

However, nature is not so dumb, and we have a protective tissue called the palmar aponeurosis, which protects those deeper structures. That is important considering all the potential trauma that could happen to the palm. It is an extension of the palmaris longus muscle. It can be seen when you flex your hand, as the single tendon in the middle of the wrist. 

14 % of people do not have that single tendon, but they will still have an aponeurosis. I have attached another of Gray's illustrations of the palmar aponeurosis and you can see how it protects the arterial ring.

So, although nicking the thumb would seem adequate for the purpose, cutting the palm superficially would work. The depth of the palm wound would determine whether it could be used. For a simple superficial one, then yes you could use a sword, fire a gun and hold a bow. Wrap it up and grip. It would hurt, but it could be used. A deep wound with a sword or dagger could damage an artery or a nerve. That would not be so usable. And of course, if you breach the palmar aponeurosis and you cut through the muscles that operate the fingers and thumb, the hand will be useless.

Meg:  Wow, this is fabulous. Okay, question number two. In Hell on Wheels, the widowed wife of the surveyor is shot in the shoulder with an arrow. I've read tons of books where heroes are shot in the shoulder, too. I have a problem with them using that arm afterward, or staunching the bleeding and going on about their business. Just how credible is that?

Dr. Keith Souter:  You are quite correct. A shoulder wound is an awful thing to receive. You would have a large chance of smashing the humerus, or worse, damaging the joint itself. And then there is a huge chance of catastrophic bleeding and nerve damage. I have attached another of Gray's illustrations of the arteries and the nerves in the shoulder. This does not include the veins, of course, but they are in close proximity. The artery is in red and the nerves are in yellow. 

The nerve supply is called the brachial plexus. It is the M shaped grouping that you see. Essentially, nerve roots from the cervical part of the spine amalgamate to form the brachial plexus. The three branches of the M are respectively, the radial nerve, the median nerve and the ulnar nerve. Hit or damage any of them and you will produce paralysis of those parts of the arm and hand that they supply.  

Cover links to Amazon.com
Shoulder gunshot wounds are horrific and if you want  a wound that you can carry on with, it should be a flesh wound to the upper arm. Even that will be incapacitating, but it is more plausible.

Having said that, human beings are capable of amazing feats of endurance when they are in danger. But as for fighting with a shoulder wound? Not easy!


Now an arrowhead is a filthy thing. The arrowhead must be removed, but the yanking out that you see and read about will not work. It simply leaves the arrowhead in where it will fester. That could then develop into septicaemia and result in death. I have researched this and will quote Dr J.H. Bill from the American Journal of the Medical Sciences, 1862, a surgeon with real and extensive experience of treating arrow wounds. "An arrow is designed so that its head will detach. Generally, when an arrow is fired it is designed to kill, not to maim." Read myApril blog post, The Doctor's Bag, along with a few comments about poisoned arrow tips and how they made the poison.

Pistol balls would not travel as fast and made less of a mess than the Minie ball/bullet, which was used in the Civil War. It expanded and traveled faster and made more mess. But the thing about bullets is that they travel and get so hot they burn off microbes, so they are less liable to get infected than are arrow wounds. Shoulder gunshot depends on weapon caliber and if anatomical structures are damaged. If the bone is injured or nerves are damaged then it is useless and can't be used for a month or more and gradual recovery.

MEG:  Thanks for verifying, wow. I'll just grit my teeth if I see or read that kind of thing again. Since I'm fairly new to the western genre, I've been reading a lot of books where a character is "gut shot." I did not want to include a gut wound picture, because they are SOO GROSS! This will have to do, LOL. So does that mean - "you're dead?" How bad is being gut-shot? Can anyone survive or walk around with a wound in the gut?

Dr. Keith Souter:  Gut shots were always regarded as potentially fatal, but Dr George Goodfellow became the gunshot expert. I have talked about bullet wounds in my last blog. You had a chance of survival if it was a lower calibre weapon .32 or less, in the lower abdomen (below the umbilicus). Upper abdomen, or high calibre, very little chance. Check out the blog, Dig it Out, Doc - Part 2, Bullets, by clicking the link. Abdominal gunshots again depend on weapon caliber and site plus how much internal damage, depending on its direction - you could hit several vital organs, which could prove fatal. You would not be capable of fighting. Recovery would necessitate surgery and several months of healing. 

MEG:  Got it. Think LOWER when writing gunshot battles. Too much stuff in the upper area, I suppose, with the stomach, liver, spleen, etc...  Here's an encore question -- just because it's one of my favorite Clint Eastwood movies: How did good ole Clint survive the hanging in Hang 'Em High? I mean, he did survive and I believed it and figured it was accurate. But why? Just curious as to anatomy.

Dr. Keith Souter:  Hanging produces death either from breaking the neck, such as occurs on a gallows and there is a sudden drop, or from blockage of the airways, obstruction of the venous drainage in the brain by pressure on the jugular veins in the neck, or by obstruction of the arterial flow to the brain by pressure on the carotid arteries. It is also likely that the heart can suddenly stop as the result of vasovagal inhibition. 

In judicial hangings with a drop of six feet there is likely to be fracture dislocation at the level of the 2nd and 3rd cervical vertebrae or the 3rd and 4th vertebrae. This would tear the cord from the medulla of the brain. 

If someone is hoisted up from the ground, then the cervical fracture and dislocation and sudden death is less likely. The other causes mentioned above are likely eventually. In England in medieval days, the crime of treason was death by being hanged, drawn and quartered. The victim was hanged until he passed out, then he was cut down, revived and then the rest of the execution proceeded. Horrifically grisly, but they developed torture and execution into a fine art.

When people commit suicide by standing on a chair and then toppling it over, they usually do not break their neck (because the drop is not long enough) but will succumb by the other methods mentioned.

In a matter of life or death, people are able to do remarkable things - drag themselves around, stagger to safety. The fight or flight reaction comes into action and you pump up so much adrenaline that you can get extra strength to override the pain matrix. In addition, in battle - from studies in world War II - wounded soldiers often felt remarkably little pain even in the face of quite major trauma. According to the Gate Control theory of Melzack and Wall, put forward in 1965,  it is possible to close one or more of the gates in the transmission of pain from the site up to the brain. 

Meg: Interesting! Odd how that illustration shows the men with their mouths closed and eyes shut, where I would think they'd be gasping for breath. Hm. I'm so grateful to you, Doc, for chatting about such great western stuff! Thanks again. Readers can find Clay More's books here.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...