←back to thread

367 points DustinEchoes | 8 comments | | HN request time: 0.002s | source | bottom
Show context
pugio ◴[] No.45910134[source]
I can speak to this. I recently joined a community first responder association (I've always wanted to know what to do in case of a medical emergency) and was shocked to hear the members' horror stories of how long it can take an ambulance to arrive. Like the author, I grew up with the narrative "in trouble, call the ambulance, they'll scream through the streets to get to you in moments".

That might still be true where I grew up, in the US, but that's certainly not a guarantee in Melbourne, where I now live. On joining the local volunteer organization, I went from thinking "oh this will be a useful bonus for the community" to "wow, we can literally be essential". Since our org is composed of people living within the community, average response time to ANY call is <5 minutes (lower for cardiac arrest, when people really move). Sometimes one of us is right next door.

We can't do everything an ambulance paramedic can, but we can give aspirin, GTN, oxygen, CPR, and defibrillation. We can also usually navigate/bypass the usual triage system to get the ambulance priority upgraded to Code 1 (highest priority, lights + sirens, etc.) If for some reason the ambulance is far away (it backs up all the time), we can go in the patient's car with them to the hospital, with our gear, in case of further issues in transit.

I tell everyone now to always call us first (since our dispatcher will also call the ambulance) but while I feel more confident in how I'd handle an emergency, I feel less safe overall, with the system's faults and failings more exposed, and the illusion of security stripped away.

My condolences to the author.

In terms of updating - consider whether The System is really working. If not, what can you do yourself (or within your larger network) to better prepare...

replies(10): >>45910193 #>>45910456 #>>45910523 #>>45910594 #>>45910696 #>>45910715 #>>45910742 #>>45910916 #>>45910952 #>>45912479 #
gpt5 ◴[] No.45910952[source]
Melbourne has an excellent ambulance response time (defined from the moment 000 call is received to when the first ambulance resource arrives on scene):

* Average Code 1 response time: 12 minutes 47 seconds

* Code 1 responses within 15 minutes: 77.2%

* Number of Code 1 first responses: 12,375

This places Melbourne among the faster councils in the state, and well ahead of the statewide average response time.

Source: The Victorian Parliamentary Budget Office’s 2025 report: https://static.pbo.vic.gov.au/files/PBO_Ambulance-funding-an...

replies(2): >>45911088 #>>45911928 #
1. kelnos ◴[] No.45911088[source]
Perhaps my understanding here is lacking, but that doesn't sound good at all. Feels like if someone has some sort of cardiac event, or, worse, isn't breathing, by the time the ambulance gets there, they'll be dead, with too much brain death for any resuscitation effort to be worth it.
replies(4): >>45911491 #>>45911498 #>>45911665 #>>45912335 #
2. 747fulloftapes ◴[] No.45911491[source]
Yes, I believe your understanding is lacking. Ambulances are dispatched for other medical emergencies as well. Compared to many other parts of Australia and even the world, the response time statistics claimed are very good.

Sadly, A heart attack can be fatal even with immediate medical intervention at a hospital. A defibrillator can only correct certain kinds of abnormal heart electrical activity.

In my experience as soon as the dispatcher understands it's a medical problem, has confirmed the address and that the patient is not breathing, they will begin talking the caller through performing CPR.

I suppose if I was concerned about it, the burden would be on me to move somewhere closer to the hospital or wherever the ambulance stages between calls. Unfortunqtely, there's always a chance no ambulance is available or that an accident has blocked the road.

How soon do you believe assistance should arrive?

replies(1): >>45912005 #
3. seanmcdirmid ◴[] No.45911498[source]
Cardiac events don’t usually work like that. You could, for example, get permanent damage if your heart attack isn’t treated within 30 minutes (as a guideline, the circumstances vary heavily). Even an aneurism doesn’t often act quicker than 20 minutes. But ya, sub 10 minute response times only happen in a hospital, sub 1 minute response times in intensive care, etc…

Still, you feel like you are having a heart attack, call 911 (in the US) right away. The main time killer is probably just you recognizing that you need help (vs the time it takes to get help once called).

replies(2): >>45912024 #>>45913284 #
4. wredcoll ◴[] No.45911665[source]
How exactly do you expect an ambulance to be able to reach any part of a county in under 12 minutes??
5. jimmymcgee73 ◴[] No.45912005[source]
For reference in Los Angeles, a notoriously traffic filled metropolitan area, the average response time for a life threatening ambulance call is 6 minutes and 14 seconds and 98.8% in under 15 minutes
6. jimmymcgee73 ◴[] No.45912024[source]
The average response time is considerably shorter than 10 minutes in many metro areas. In Los Angeles the average is 6 minutes and 14 seconds, with 98.8% of responses in under 15 minutes.
7. quantumwoke ◴[] No.45912335[source]
As my medico wife explained it to me, you have about 1 minute after your heart stops before you start having permanent brain damage. Unless you live inside a hospital your risk of surviving a major heart attack at home is less than 20% at the best of times (and in fact seems to be about 10% or less in USA on average on some quick research).
8. arethuza ◴[] No.45913284[source]
Someone I used to know was found dead in bed with hid iPad showing he had been browsing for "what are the symptoms of a heart attack"...