Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Biotech Science

Shrimp Bandages Clot Blood Faster 384

Posted by CowboyNeal from the underwater-allies dept.
dwbryson writes "A new bandage technology uses ground up shrimp shells to instantly clot blood when applied to an open wound. These new bandages were developed and are being produced exclusively for the military (at $100 for a 4x4" square), but the company who makes them is hoping to mass market them to general consumers."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Shrimp Bandages Clot Blood Faster More

Shrimp Bandages Clot Blood Faster

Comments Filter:

  • Quote from TFA (Score:5, Funny)

    by lecithin ( 745575 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @10:39AM (#13081331)
    "Bleeding is the single largest cause of death on the battlefield," says Jim Hensel, President and CEO of HemCon.

    Oh... I thought it was bullets or bombs.

    • "Bleeding is the single largest cause of death on the battlefield," says Jim Hensel, President and CEO of HemCon. Oh... I thought it was bullets or bombs.

      Those are indirect causes.
    • Oh... I thought it was bullets or bombs.

      Modern bullets are designed to disable, but not kill people. The idea is that it takes fewer support troops to get rid of a dead soldier than it takes to transport and treat an injured soldier. As a result, armies want to maim their opponents, not kill them.
      • Furthermore, relaxing the requirement to atomize the opponent lets the rounds be smaller, translating into more shots per soldier for a combat load.
    • Well, the end result of getting hit with a bullet or a bomb is in fact massive blood loss.

      So yes, bleeding is the largest cause of death. :)

    • I'm not surprised bleeding is a problem, but will a clotting agent stop it?

      I would think once you open up an artery or three, clotting is beside the point.

  • Zoidberg! (Score:3, Funny)

    by rob123 ( 889566 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @10:39AM (#13081333)
    Will the only doctor qualified to use these be Doctor Zoidberg?

  • 2.5 year old article? (Score:5, Informative)

    by drewbradford ( 458480 ) <drew@drewbradford.com> on Saturday July 16, 2005 @10:41AM (#13081342) Homepage
    I was all excited to see the headline, thinking that it was finally within our reach, and then I saw that it was the same article (over two years old) that I read long ago.

  • Too pricey for general use (Score:5, Informative)

    by patio11 ( 857072 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @10:41AM (#13081345)
    There are two uses for bandages: one is primary treatment of minor skin wounds, and the other is stabilizing a major wound until real treatment can be given to it. At $100, this is too pricey for a first-aid kit unless you're in a really high-risk situation for major trauma -- the only place outside of the military which strikes me as obvious is a construction site. Its not the sort of thing you can justify putting in the school room first aid kit. There's no real reason to give them to hospitals, since anyone requiring wound healing urgently enough to go to a hospital likely has other problems and has other, more HMO-approved solutions (like regular bandages, which work just fine at preventing you from bleeding to death when administered properly and not overwhelmed by the trauma).
    • But how much are they overcharging the military for these things?
      • But how much are they overcharging the military for these things?
        What's "overcharging"?
      • $100 for the military probably translates to about a 25 cent cost, $75 in bribes and campaign contributions (is that redundant?), and $24.75 in profit.

        I would bet that after the initial novelty wears off, they'll probably cost about as much as those silver bandages Curad makes.

    • Give them to EMTs (Score:2, Insightful)

      by vrimj ( 750402 )
      Given what you said about the cost it seems like something ideal for the back of an ambulance. Pricy, but urban ERs see a lot of major trama, I belive that is were battlefield surgeons frequently train. Then again you are talking about using a pricy item in a situation where people are less likely to be able to pay....
      • Aw, hell - it wouldn't surprise me to see "Bandage - $100.00" on a hospital invoice anyway, these days, shrimp flavour or not.

        You seen what they charge for an ibuprofen or two?

    • It is, however, pretty standard military pricing. You can save a life for less than half the cost of a toilet seat!
    • At $100, this is too pricey for a first-aid kit unless you're in a really high-risk situation for major trauma -- the only place outside of the military which strikes me as obvious is a construction site.

      What I wonder (I don't have a biology degree, and I'm actually really bad at it) is would this help hemophiliacs? Their blood doesn't clot nearly fast enough to seal an injury, but I wonder if this would help? Hemophiliacs don't necessarily lack the clotting agent, but are sometimes (often?) just deficie
    • Maybe not in every classroom, but certainly in every nurses office. Right next to the defibrulators.
      • Dude, I don't know what kind of financial situation your school is in but some of the ones I've been in and taught at have difficulties with procuring chalk. You think we're going to spend a couple hundred dollars against the off-chance some six year old has a cardiac infraction? Though, honestly, most of them would put a bullet wound as a risk realistic enough to take steps to mitigate, sadly...
    • the only place outside of the military which strikes me as obvious is a construction site.

      Let's see... Hunting, mountain climbing, oil rigs, cargo ships... basically anywhere where medical aid is hard to get to, and the chance of serious injury is high. They might also be useful for paramedics and air ambulance crews to have.
    • With the current bent, you can justify putting anything in a school first aid kit. Why do we have defibs in all the schools now? How many lives does that save, one or two a year? But it's for the children, so make the taxpayers spend all this money with minimal return

      Monies would be better spent to drill into the kids some sense of traffic saftey or somesuch.
    • A friend gave me a couple of these in 2004, and I added it to my camping/hunting supplies. Thought he was joking when he said they retailed for about $100 each, but put one in my med kit that I pack into the woods with me. Unfortunately, I had the opportunity to use it.

      A couple days into the BWCA, one guy slips off a slope and takes a good size chunk of meat out of his leg due to a branch. Applied pressure and used a t-shirt to try to stop the bleeding, but recognized we were in serious trouble since we
  • Doesn't this seem kind of morbid to anyone? I know we eat the little guys, but grind them up to use as bandages?

  • PETA's going to have a cow (Score:3, Funny)

    by Trailer Trash ( 60756 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @10:43AM (#13081356) Homepage
    Well, they won't have the cow, they'll treat it nicely. Or something.

  • and what about us vegitarians? (Score:5, Funny)

    by maryjanecapri ( 597594 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @10:45AM (#13081367) Homepage Journal
    do they have a tofu shrimp bandage we can use?

  • Hmm.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by HungWeiLo ( 250320 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @10:46AM (#13081374)
    Sounds a little fishy to me.

  • I'll take a box! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CrazyTalk ( 662055 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @10:46AM (#13081377)
    As someone who has been on blood thinners (due to a blood clot in my leg) for the past two years, exessive bleeding is always danger if I get cut. Bandages like these could literally be a lifesaver. I hope they make it to civilian applications soon.
    • I'm not sure how much help this would be for you.

      While it would be just the thing for a scratch of shallow cut, if it were applied to a deeper cut you might only manage to seal off the blood loss to the outside world, and continue hemorrhaging internally.

  • Tough Choice (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tribentwrks ( 807384 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @10:47AM (#13081382)
    Do I die a slow, fearful death from blood loss, or a slow bloated death from shellfish allergies. I'll be heading to Walgreens to get one of those cheap "I'm allergic to ..." medical tags just in case they start using them in Ambulances any time soon.
    • It may not trigger shellfish allergies. You talk as if it's a done deal.
      fta:

      Chitosan is a ubiquitous substance. It's the second most abundant substance on the planet. Chitosan is found in the shells of other crustaceans besides shrimp, and also in insect shells.

      It's only the shells and you may only be allergic to the meat.

      Chitosan can be taken as dietary fibre supplement [slashdot.org]. With the warning:

      "Those with shellfish allergies should exercise caution in taking chitosan supplements."

      I read that as

  • I'm going straight to the source... (Score:3, Funny)

    by HerculesMO ( 693085 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @10:54AM (#13081429)
    Next time I cut myself, I'm going to rub myself with shrimp.

    If it doesn't clot blood... I am sure I will smell lovely as I'm wheeled into the ER.

  • Dupes (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 16, 2005 @10:54AM (#13081434)
    The news from the fine 2003 article has been posted here before:

    from 2003
    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/01/31/205724 4&tid=126 [slashdot.org]

    from 2004
    http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/08/2 8/1834222&tid=191&tid=14 [slashdot.org]

  • $100 a pop!? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Rosco P. Coltrane ( 209368 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @10:57AM (#13081448)
    The company freely admits that the bandage is composed of a very ubiquitous shrimp-derived compound and vinegar. So why $100 a bandage? Either because:

    1 - Their product is difficult to manufacture
    2 - They give money back to the Wild Shrimp Rights Society
    3 - They have a patent
    4 - Their customer is the military, and they don't care paying up the wazoo for that sort of thing, because their money is free (i.e. yours, the taxpayer's)

    Two of these four possibilities seem correct to me...

    • Re:$100 a pop!? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Detritus ( 11846 )
      1. Getting FDA approval for anything is very expensive.

      2. Setting aside reserves for the inevitable lawsuits.

    • Don't forget

      5 - They spent four billion dollars researching how to make the bandage and need to recoup their research costs.

      Granted, I don't think 5 is the case here, but be fair and include it.

    • Re:$100 a pop!? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by the pickle ( 261584 )
      I mostly agree with you there. I wouldn't rule out the costs of manufacture, though; it appears chitosan [wikipedia.org] is currently produced by de-acetylation of natural chitin, which can't be all that cheap if they're using crustaceans for their supply.

      p
    • I agree that seems a bit high .. but you have to remember, before you can make a bandage out of shrimp and vinegar, YOU HAVE TO FIGURE OUT YOU CAN MAKE A BANDAGE OUT OF SHRIMP AND VINEGAR.

      • Re:$100 a pop!? (Score:4, Funny)

        by patio11 ( 857072 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @11:44AM (#13081687)
        Exactly. Can you imagine their R&D logs?

        Trial 19438563945. Shrimp and banana. Total bust. Trial 234545345234. Shrimp and strawberry slurpy. Tasty, no observable wound clotting properties. Trial 3452342345. Shrimp and vinegar. Minor clotting effect observed, worth a more formal look. Trial 2345234532. Shrimp and prune juice. Spilled on my lab coat, impossible to get out. Might be useful as a new kind of permanent ink? Or not, it still smells like shrimp and prune juice.

    • Re:$100 a pop!? (Score:3, Informative)

      by jcwren ( 166164 )
      http://www.hemcon.com/list_Price.html [hemcon.com] says they're $113/ea, and a box of 100 is $11,300. Nice discount. And after 2+ years, no less.

    • Why so expensive? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by titzandkunt ( 623280 ) * on Saturday July 16, 2005 @12:10PM (#13081824)

      Since the article is recycled, allow me to recycle my post from the last time this exact same subject was discussed on slashdot.

      Read about some of the reasons why meds are so expensive [yarchive.net].

      Apologies for the length of this quote from the above link, but I think it's worth reading (Steve Harris MD on medical costs and litigation):

      "...You [Steve's correspondent] were complaining about the cost of American medical care not long ago. You are clueless as to the connection here. Drugs cost more here. Medicine costs more here. A lawyer costs more here. An artitect costs more here. Each of these things has reasons. Until you step away from medicine and see the big picture, you'll never figure it out...

      ... And that's not even the worst part. The worst part is what you don't see. The products that are never developed, or developed too late to help people, because everyone is afraid that somebody will get hurt, and sue. In the case of vaccines it got so bad that without DIRECT government intervention to hamstring the civil litigation process, you would not today be able to buy a dose of vaccine in the United States for love or money. The very last couple of makers were getting set to leave the U.S. market and sell only overseas, before the government stepped in and stopped an out of control civil litigation process...

      ...For less obvious things than vaccines and aircraft, FYI, the government does not step in, and the product you don't know about simply ceases to exist. If you need a lung lavage of fluorocarbon to save your life if you have lung damage from a fire or shock, you're not going to get it. 3M, which makes most of these chemicals, quite deliberately got out of the medical market years ago, after the Dow Corning Silicone suit. So you're out of luck. You won't know why, but that won't change a thing. If your heart valve fails, you'll never know that it might not have, if the suture 3M made for that purpose, in a little tiny subdivision of the company, was still available. But it's not, since a giant company like 3M has deep pockets, and they don't need the medical market liability grief. Now, it's YOUR problem."

      T&K.

      • Litigation, profit, and human lives (Score:5, Informative)

        by raygundan ( 16760 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @01:39PM (#13082354) Homepage
        Not only is the litigation off-the-deep-end crazy here, but drugs that are necessary but less profitable than things like Viagra sometimes simply disappear off the market.

        Take Eflornithine, the best drug available for treating Sleeping Sickness [wikipedia.org]. Obviously, Sleeping Sickness is not a big problem in the US, where we all have lots of money to buy drugs. It's a problem in Africa, where they don't. So what did Aventis, the manufacturer do? They stopped making it in 1995. It took SIX YEARS for the WHO to manage to talk Aventis into letting someone else manufacture it in 2001.

        To recap: a drug company SAT ON A VITAL DRUG for SIX YEARS because they didn't find it "profitable enough," yet wouldn't let anybody else manufacture it to save lives.

        The other drugs for treating Sleeping Sickness are nearly as bad as the disease. A huge fraction of the people treated with melarsoprol die when it causes reactive encephalopathy (convulsions, coma, etc...) and those that live often have brain damage.

        Of course, the second Aventis discovered (recently) that the drug can be used to remove unwanted facial hair in women (now THERE is a profitable use for a drug!) they cranked right back up into production. Saving lives? Not profitable enough-- we won't make it. Facial hair removal? Crank up the factories!!

        It appears since this fiasco that Aventis has cleaned up their act and is donating $5M a year worth of the drug to Doctors Without Borders-- but how many died unnecessarily?

        And on the litigation front, I know an EM resident who is being sued by the sons of a patient (all three are lawyers). They are upset because the hospital wanted to move the woman, whose condition was stable, out of the ICU and into long-term hospice care. These assholes are why your medical costs are so high.

        Sorry for the rant-- this stuff makes me incredibly angry.
  • A new bandage technology uses ground up shrimp shells to instantly clot blood when applied to an open wound.

    ... With the added bonus that your wounds will be delicious.

    Hospitals are going to need some of those plastic cones which are used to stop dogs licking their sores.
  • At last, a serendipitous discovery that moves medicine forward. And to think, it was discovered by accident during during one of those Saturday night brawls in the kitchen at the "Red Lobster" in Hackensack.

  • Ouch... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by MSDos-486 ( 779223 )
    the article says the bandage chemically binds to the blood and skin. That must really be a B*t** to get off.
    • >> the article says the bandage chemically binds to the blood and skin. That must really be a B*t** to get off.

      I had a semi-serious wound when I was a kid. They left the dressings on a *little* too long once and nice new pink flesh grew through and around the gauze in the first layer of the dressings. Getting the gauze out of my flesh was pretty painful.

      If this "bonds" to flesh the same way, you won't like the removal process too much.

  • My uncle who grewup on a dirt farm in Carolina told me to shake black pepper onto a wound to expedite clotting.

    And I won't charge you $100 per 4x4 patch for that info.

    Save the shrimp for the MRE.

  • Fruit of the Sea . . . (Score:4, Funny)

    by Dausha ( 546002 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @11:14AM (#13081533) Homepage
    Anyway, like I was sayin', shrimp is the fruit of the sea. You can barbecue it, boil it, broil it, bake it, sautee it. Dey's uh, shrimp-kabobs, shrimp creole, shrimp gumbo. Pan fried, deep fried, stir-fried. There's pineapple shrimp, lemon shrimp, coconut shrimp, pepper shrimp, shrimp soup, shrimp stew, shrimp salad, shrimp and potatoes, shrimp burger, shrimp sandwich. That- that's about it.

    No, Bubba, now there's Shrimp Band-Aids.

  • Aren't they already using this? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by nrlightfoot ( 607666 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @11:19AM (#13081555) Homepage
    I'm pretty sure that they have been using these things in Iraq for a while.
  • with allergies to shellfish.

    Just a thought.

  • What about those allergic to seafood / shellfish? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by illc0mm ( 899856 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @11:21AM (#13081570) Homepage Journal
    I wonder how this will affect those allergic to seafood or shellfish? I know a few people that that are deathly allergic to shrimp, would the military one be able to use this on those that have been screened? Could it cause more harm that good? The technology sounds very interesting though.

  • Shellfish allergies (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mindslip ( 16677 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @11:42AM (#13081678)
    My wife is deathly allergic to shellfish... even a drop of oil flicked off a lobster claw cracking open across the table will give her huge hives if it hits her skin.

    Obviously she wears a Medical Alert bracelet for this... what are the effects of this bandage on allergies? Since it goes directly on a wound/into the blood, I'd assume it could be near-instantly fatal to some.

    mindslip

    • Re:Shellfish allergies (Score:4, Informative)

      by duffahtolla ( 535056 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @12:36PM (#13081993)
      From here [aaaai.org]

      "The safety of chitosan for individuals with shrimp allergy is a bit questionable. The chitosan comes from shrimp shells and from lots of different suppliers. Some product may be free of allergen, but I cannot vouch for the safety of all chitosan from all suppliers. I would advise all shrimp-allergic individuals to avoid these chitosan bandages.

      "Of course, individuals allergic to crab, lobster, and crayfish should also avoid this product because chitosan can be made from wastes of these shells also and because cross-reactions usually occur between shrimp, crab, lobster, and crayfish."

  • $100 is not that expensive for a critical product (Score:3, Insightful)

    by vijayiyer ( 728590 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @11:56AM (#13081754)
    Most people are willing to pay $100 if their car breaks down for a tow. Is $100 that much for something to save your life? That's half a days salary at a decent job. Equipping every active US soldier with one of these would cost maybe $10M. Not a big deal in the defense world.

  • Combining this with the synth steak announcement.. (Score:3, Informative)

    by Schol-R-LEA ( 247704 ) on Saturday July 16, 2005 @11:58AM (#13081764)
    Interesting stuff, chitosan. It's a family of oligosaccarides, not a single chemical, and until recently was mostly consider a waste product. Leately though, it's apparently become some sort of fad diet aid as well, one of those alleged 'fat blockers' that are probably total BS. It also used as an emulsifier (an additive which keeps different liquid parts of the food from separating), as a livestock feed. In addition to the clotting action, it supposedly has some anti-bacterial and anti-fungal properties, though how much so isn't said.

    While it is mostly derived from seafood shell left from food processing, it can also be extracted from certain fungi, which actually produce it in much larger quantities. This means that it probably will be cheaper in the long run to synthesize it industrially using the fungi rather than harvesting it from shellfish, though unless the market for (or populations of) shrimp and crab suddenly nosedives, they'll probably keep doing that as well (they have to do something with the shells, after all).

  • No Price (Score:2, Insightful)

    by differentiate_this ( 773934 )
    There is no price that is too much for human life.

Slashdot Top Deals

Single tasking: Just Say No.

Close