Talk:First aid kit

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the First aid kit article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Add new text under old text. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Start a new topic Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Medicine: Emergency Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Emergency medicine and EMS task force (assessed as Low-importance). Packaging This article is within the scope of WikiProject Packaging, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of containers, packaging, and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PackagingWikipedia:WikiProject PackagingTemplate:WikiProject PackagingContainers First aid (defunct) This article is within the scope of WikiProject First aid, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.First aidWikipedia:WikiProject First aidTemplate:WikiProject First aidFirst aid

I've removed these two links:

• [http://www.first-aid-product.com/ First Aid Kits & Supplies]
• [http://www.cpr-training-classes.com/ American CPR Training - CPR & First Aid Training]

They were added by an anonymous user (68.7.15.227), removed by me, then added by the user again. As far as I can tell they are links to commercial sites and as the user has contributed only those links to wikipedia, I think they are just spam. If the user wishes to add them to the page again could they please explain here their justification for doing so? Tjwood 17:44, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I don't think ipecac is recommended by anyone anymore for a first aid kit. I believe it's considered dangerous. Will research this and follow up accordingly. allie 23:47, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

And why isn'tthe FEMA link on here? Is there a reason? allie 23:48, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC) what is this, the answer is not there.12:00, 15 Jan 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.252.251.198 (talk)

In the Life Saving section, I recommend adding antihistamine (e.g. Benadryl) along with the epinephrine injector. The way I understand it, the adrenaline delivered by an Epipen to a patient under anaphylactic shock will offset the deadly symptoms of anaphylaxis only for about 20 minutes. In the wilderness, or anywhere where paramedics are not expected to arrive in 20 minutes, histamine antagonists like Benadryl are given to the patient to suppress the deadly effects of his immune response to the allergen (and keep him alive after the adrenaline injection wears out). Anyway, I'm not 100% sure of this, and I just need someone to confirm this before I add it to the article.J y p (talk) 19:32, 2 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Epi works to stop the actual reaction that causes anaphylaxis, while antihistamines treat the symptoms of the reaction. That means epi is in effect a 'cure' while antihistamines are a symptomatic treatment. People who take epi pens after an exposure are told to go to hospitals, where they're observed for 4h to make sure the cause of the reaction doesn't outlast the epi. With that in mind (and without looking it up) I'd say epi lasts at least 4h then. Plus if you're curious there's 2 types of histamine receptors in humans, type I and II. Type I is found in non-GI areas and is approx 80% of all histamine receptors, while type II is found in the GI tract. You can have a true allergic reaction with 'just' nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain and no hives or swelling or breathing/swallowing problems (ie the allergen affected Type II receptors only for some reason). Benedryl and other 1st generation antihistimines (benedryl, atarax, etc) affect Type I receptors. Pepcid is an example of an antagonist for Type II reactions. Again, either Type I or Type II antagonists ('antihistamines') only treat symptoms and not the actual allergic reaction; you need epi for that. They are two different types of drugs that do two different things and have two different purposes for use. Antihistamines probably shouldn't therefore be listed under the Life Saving section, although they are a useful adjunct. And liquid forms are of more use for children, possibly the elderly, and people having trouble swallowing, but do necessitate use of larger volumes of the medication due to concentration differences. 66.216.195.214 (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Snakebite kit? Please, when will this ever disappear. I'll look at this, but the only reliable first aid treatment I am aware of is the Sawyer kit. --Gadget850 17:34, 5 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

For more info, see Talk:First aid JamieJones ^talk 22:35, 31 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

The recommendation in the first body paragraph is from the American Red Cross website, not the International Red Cross. Just justifying my revert. -- Mjwilco 02:44, 10 March 2006 (UTC)Reply

My first ever Wikipedia post. Please excuse/inform if I miss some protocol/standard.

While looking for a first aid kit for my office, I see that some are "unitized", it appears to be some sort of standard for packaging, though my initial attempts at researching the reasoning behind this standardization haven't turned up anything useful.

If somebody is looking for something to do, this could be an interesting point to include in this article. -Ryan

I'm not completely sure, but I beleive unitized just means that items are individually packaged in single dose or single-use units, i.e. packets of 2 aspirin or ointment packets as opposed to bottles or large tubes. They are available individually or in boxes containing more than one, or both, depending on where you purchase them.Outdoorvegan 01:19, 23 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

This isn't major, but someone recently added wet wipes or alcohol based hand cleaners as useful for cleaning wounds. These products are not designed for and may not be effective at disenfecting wounds, and may actually harm the sensitive tissues, especially in the case of alcohol containing ones. I corrected this, but I just wanted to mention this in case whoever made that addition wonders why I changed it.

Another thing someone added was disposable aprons nder personal protective equipment. Whoever put that clearly has lost some perspective - Yes an apron is useful piece of protective equipment, but noones is going to put it in a first aid kit, and it would be extremely impractical to do so. Some people, especially medical personal, have large duffel-sized kits, but these are not first aid kits, these are trauma bags, medical bags, or whatever you want to call it. Now that I think of it, I should remove the image of the flashlight, Since it huge and heavy and impractical for a kit as well(a penlight or small LED flashlight would make much more sense.

i agree with you on alc wipes, however if nothing else is available and the wound is at a serious risk of infection, they're better than nothing. i certainly don't use them (or plan on using them) for that purpose in my kit though. regarding the duffel bags vs. first aid kits - as the article states medpacks like that contain things that are beyond the average first aider (it's a useful part). flashlight? i guess it depends on the size of kit and where you'd be taking it. i agree with you there as well though, most folks use the compact version. SMC 13:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Besides the cross, is the half moon and the jewish symbol (not sure what that was) not acting as a replacement symbol due to the controversy surrounding the religious cross ? Thought there was a discussion on this, maybe consensus. Please add in article

The Green Cross shown in the article is now a common symbol for the medical cannabis community (in Southern California, USA) and may have lost it's original meaning in other regions. A similar one is used by the National Safety Council but it has a enclosing circle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Safety_Council — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jusgreat (talk • contribs) 00:35, 29 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

I've added some information on first aid kits in the workplace, as well as some (minor) information on historical first aid kits. It is fairly US specific, so additional information would be appreciated. If you can think of a better place for it, let me know. --Bosef1 (talk) 03:43, 29 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Star of David also appears on first aid kits in Israel and for Jewish medical services in Israel and the US. One of the best known of these is Magen David Adom (Red Shield of David). This should be added. I am sure that with the Red Crescent being the Muslim world's Red Cross section, there is probably something similar with their first aid kits. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 07:10, 6 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Have you got a reference for that? As with the Red Cross, use of the red Star of David or red crescent (or red crystal, red lion and sun etc.) to mark first aid kits would be illegal under international law, unless they are part of a protective symbol being used officially by a red cross society or the military, or it forms part of a small corporate marque (e.g. the red star of david next to the magden david alom type mark, to indicate that it is their product. The existence of the red cross as a first aid symbol is well documented, so it would be interesting to see proof that the other symbols might be misused in this way too. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 08:54, 6 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

I see it used around Israel in any place for First Aid on both stationary wall kits and medical items sold in pharmacies, whether the makers of such products (often the Life Company which does not use the star as part of their company logo, but does place it in the same way a cross symbol is placed) care about the law you are referring to or the Israeli government would allow them to be prosecuted for violation of that law is another, irrelevant, matter. I'll see if I can wrustle up the necessary sources. I see enough of them (logic dictates that people probably get the association from the ambulances of Magen David Adom, which is a member of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies since 2006), so there ought to be some reference to it. As for misuse, people figured that the Swiss Cross symbol had religious meaning and Muslims and Jews (as well as other groups) didn't like using them, so it makes sense from a cultural point of view, but that's more RD stuff. I will confess I never saw any first aid kits in Egypt, and that is the only Muslim-majority nation I have ever been to. Plus, it was for a short time. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 22:00, 6 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello, the last sentence under the section Appearance currently reads:

However, for very small medical institutions and domestic purposes, the white cross on a plain, white background is preferred.

I'm assuming that this is a mistake considering how difficult it is to make out a white symbol on a white background. 24.8.24.136 (talk) 05:44, 2 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

Has to mean ... green background ...? --GhostInTheMachine (talk) 11:34, 20 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

The second image states: "A small first aid kit, but in a non-recognised colour and bearing an equal white cross on a red background, illegal under the Geneva conventions". Fairly sure that there is nothing illegal about using a white cross on a red background - it is just the wrong symbol. Using a red cross on a white background for a general kit would probably be illegal. --GhostInTheMachine (talk) 11:51, 20 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

The Geneva conventions ban both red on white and the reverse. Any country signatory to the conventions should therefore be working to prevent this usage. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 12:28, 20 April 2012 (UTC)Reply