Like what? Call 112/911/999.. and then what? Car drivers here have to pass a first aid course, but that could have been decades ago. Except for waiting 10+ minutes for an ambulance, what do you expect people around the suffocating/dying/bleeding person to do?
Yes, youtube wasn't made for that, neither were phones made for watching videos, but since everyone has a phone and phones can show videos, and videos can show the "first aid with X" video, people will use them for just that.
yes, call your emergency services number, and they will instruct you on how to perform CPR if necessary and if you're willing. they'll also in many cases tell you not to do that, because performing unnecessary CPR has risks too, and just because you watched a youtube video on how to do chest compressions it doesn't mean the person in front of you needs chest compressions.
For the US, requiring a first aid course at all would be a good start.
To get any drivers license in Germany, you have to get first aid training. It is an ~8-hour, in-person class. It teaches the law (failure to render help is a criminal offense, as it should be), and a specific workflow. It does not start with calling emergency services; that's step 3). It does include checking vitals and when to do what. Every single student gets hands-on experience doing the stable lateral position, helmet removal an CPR (chest compression and mouth to mouth resuscitation).
No, unfortunately. In Germany, first aid training for the regular drivers license does not expire.
I would welcome mandatory refreshers every 5 years. Not just because people forget, but also because the best practices (legal and medical) can change over time and people should be kept up to date.
In California, DMV requires renewing the drivers license every 5 years, which requires a simple vision test and a knowledge test about the rules of the road. The knowledge test can now be substituted by a ~90 minute at home online training (short videos and quizzes). I think that would be a great model for first aid refreshers as well.
(On the other hand, to be fair, the mandatory trainings are mostly from an era where emergency services weren't always instantly reachable by anyone. And there isn't _really_ a reason why the drivers license in particular should require first aid training; accidents can happen anywhere.)
Unlike youtube, 911 is an emergency service. I used `etc` to describe other phone numbers that might be more appropriate for your country (999, for example).
> 911 etc will walk you through exactly what to do.
Assuming you can get connected. Youtube may well be more available depending on your location.
> Going to a site/app that rolls ads before videos should never be your first choice in an emergency situation.
People often panic in emergency situations and complex thinking goes out of the window. I don't blame anyone for needing to know how to do something quickly and reaching for the tool they use most regularly.
Since you call 911 anyway (hopefully) the person there is very likely trained in guiding you through the CPR / ventilation procedure - and will also be able to help you determine if you need to do chest compressions at all. I.e. the routine of "Check responsiveness, check pulse, check breathing (perhaps in an other order)
Check Pulse isn't a thing on any first aid course I've done in the last 10 years. Danger, Response, Airway, Breathing, then start pumping if they aren't breathing.
You can also install Red Cross First Aid application on your phone. (I am using Czech one so no specific recommendation.) I recommend doing it although I never had to use it.
It is amazing how many people spend most of their mental energy figuring out some way to defend the all powerful corporations. If as much mental energy were spent figuring out how to make the world better instead, then probably youtube could still make billions of dollars and figure out how to not delay CPR videos at the same time.
You’re the one putting them on a pedestal and calling them all-powerful. How much mental energy do people expend maintaining a hostile disposition to a legal fiction?
That kind of disposition is as bad for society as the kind that praises corporations and says they can do no wrong, and between the two types, you get a lot of truly terrible ideas that need countering on a recurring and frequent basis. In a competitive information environment, the side which refuses to defend what they deem to be “obvious” will erode over time.
Case in point: YouTube doesn’t even make the list for places I would recommend to learn CPR; it’s a for-profit entertainment website before it’s anything else–which is fine for what they want to be. The Red Cross is always at the top of the list though because they’re in the business of saving lives, which is what they want to be.
Third link on the homepage scrolling on my phone. That gives you some simple instructions on CPR, a video which isn’t playing for me because I can’t bring up the playback controls on my phone (they should fix that, it’s crap like this that makes people turn to YouTube in the first place), a zip code search field to find where you can get in-person training, and apparently there’s also an app which I went ahead and installed to my phone which provides you additional instructions and education on how to deal with various kinds of emergencies you might encounter.
It's amazing how many people are clueless about Math/Economics and the importance of profit generation that feed into next generation of innovation/employment.
A slippery slope towards what? Doing morally right things and making the world a better place? What next, the Heimlich Maneuver, dressing a wound, signs of heat stroke/treatment, etc.
The slippery slope is punishing YouTube for this, IMHO.
As soon as you require qualifications to help, you’ve now effectively outlawed good samaritans. I can see YouTube’s lawyers deciding to ban first aid advice on their platform if lawyers or regulators get involved (or even if the PR situation gets out of control).
And this isn’t some absurd hypothetical. At my work, they’ve gotten rid of all first aid kits in the buildings. You’re supposed to go to the clinic if you get hurt because they want to make sure the incident can have the correct paperwork done. This isn’t even a for-profit company that I work for, this isn’t to maximize profits or anything. It’s bureaucracy run amok, in the name of worker’s comp or OSHA safety or liability, the situation was made objectively less safe.
So don’t punish YouTube for this. Outrage at YouTube for this is going to make the problem 10x worse by cutting off first aid instruction on YouTube, and that’s not an exaggeration. Not every problem can be solved by drumming up outrage.
> The slippery slope is punishing YouTube for this, IMHO.
We are criticizing YT. Nobody is proposing "punishment."
> So don’t punish YouTube for this.
Wasn't suggested.
Seems like you're using this as a jumping off point to discuss other, largely unrelated, things. You're also using the term "outrage" in a way that makes me think it is a trigger word for some kind of in-crowd.
> As soon as you require qualifications to help, you’ve now effectively outlawed good samaritans.
Every Good Samaritan law I know of specifically says that we avoid punishing people trying to help provided they weren't trying to benefit. Try to help someone and make a mistake? Generally, AIUI (IANAL) you're unlikely to be held liable. Offer to help if they pay you and mess up? You get to be liable. Showing ads is a profit motive; if YT wants to be a Good Samaritan they can do it without ads.
Disclaimer: IANAL so I could be wrong about the legal bits, but I think the ethical basis works.
A slippery slope towards forcing private businesses that have no foot in the realm of healthcare to enact healthcare.
I have no idea how you're coming to the conclusion this is a morally justifiable action to take. It sounds like you just want a party to blame for your own ineptitude and lack of personal responsibility.
It's not the responsibility of a tech company to save your life, nor should it be. Mandating something like this is just asinine.
If my grandma would have waited till black fridays 50% off before choking to death maybe i would have had the money to save her, what an unconsiderate bitch.
Yes, if you can possibly save a life using Youtube, then there is a moral imperative pay for it so you won't be delayed by ads. I understand that maybe not all people have the means or are unbanked. The best route to universal Youtube is to fund it through government taxes.
I think they do recurring periodic subscriptions fees. It isn’t like a coin operated juke box. It is the healthcare duty to subscribe now before the emergency need.
Other procedures for single purpose use case often end up being inefficient, ineffective and expensive to maintain. Relying on existing infrastructure makes sense.
