Claim: Fake CPR at Ottawa Shooting Proves Hoax

CaptainBeefheart

New Member


Okay, his gloves are white because he was shot in the back. Anybody know enough about the gun used? I'm guessing the bullet didn't exit his chest, hence why there is no blood on his gloves

Regarding proper CPR procedure, is it true that they should have put his arms at his side? I know that, yeah, you're not supposed to do compressions and mouth-to-mouth at the same, but I'm guessing shock and emotion trumped reason... or are things different when it's a gun-shot wound? And why are his feet prompt up like that?

I guess there's a lot wrong with this CPR procedure, but considering the circumstances (the lady doing mouth-to-mouth looks like a civilian that just happened to be passing by, not a medical professional), this is not the "smoking gun evidence" these conspiracy theorists are claiming.

However, one of the people trying to save Nathan Cirillo's life was a nurse.

But, wouldn't an actual false-flag look more professional? Wouldn't "they" make the CPR look legit rather than full of mistakes that could be "debunked" on Youtube?

This one is equally stupid:

But at 2:42, you can see the real paramedics that have taken over, and the cops have cleared the area (which is evidence for a conspiracy, for some reason).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For anyone who wishes to discuss it:

The claim is that since his hands are folded over his stomach, the CPR must be fake, since CPR can only be done with the the arms at the side of the recipient. Seems pretty thin. Lie on your back with your arms at you side, then fold your hands over your stomach, and see what difference it makes as to your breathing and heartbeat.
 
For anyone who wishes to discuss it:

The claim is that since his hands are folded over his stomach, the CPR must be fake, since CPR can only be done with the the arms at the side of the recipient. Seems pretty thin. Lie on your back with your arms at you side, then fold your hands over your stomach, and see what difference it makes as to your breathing and heartbeat.

Why can CPR only be done with the arms by the side? It's the first I have heard and I am a nurse and former army medic.
 
The point of CPR is to prevent brain death, from lack of blood going to the head. Arm position and leg position is frankly trivial as long as this objective is met. With his leg propped up, it's probably better for the blood flow to achieve this end too. Normally it's done for the purpose of shock.

The people performing the CPR may not have done it "properly" as you see it in a classroom first aid course, but life saving is really the heat of the moment thing, and they may not have been trained.
 
Even if it's true, what should that prove? It's a stressful situation, somebody used the wrong technique, does that prove anything? It could even be somebody with very little experience in CPR. I must admit, I can't see how this in any way can bust anything 100%.
 
Having been a lifeguard during my high school years (a little over 10 years now), and a "first responder" where I work, I've kept up with CPR and other things. I've had to perform CPR and the only reason to move the arms would be to just to get them out of my way. I would put them close to the body just so the arms wouldn't be in the way if I had to move. It wouldn't matter to me if the person's hands were on his/her body, as long as they weren't in the way of giving CPR. In the end, the position of the arms isn't what will be the deal breaker.

It hard to see exactly where the hands are to me in the video. It doesn't look like the are performing CPR in the proper way. I didn't watch the entire video linked here, but from what I could tell, it was just a short clip of what was going on. As has been pointed out, we don't know the people in the video performing CPR. We don't know what training they have had. If they had never actually done it on a person before, mistakes are more likely. Despite all the classes I had, it was still scary to have to do CPR on a real person and I'm sure I didn't do it by the book my first time out.

Anyway, to me, there are to many unknowns to declare it fake.
 
For anyone who wishes to discuss it:

The claim is that since his hands are folded over his stomach, the CPR must be fake, since CPR can only be done with the the arms at the side of the recipient. Seems pretty thin. Lie on your back with your arms at you side, then fold your hands over your stomach, and see what difference it makes as to your breathing and heartbeat.

Okay, a couple of things:
First, whoever made the video keeps saying that we see the victim's hands crossed on his chest.
No, we see his right hand about where his right nipple would be...not across his chest.
To say that the white object below is the victim's left hand, is just a guess.

But here's my bigger problem with the "You can't do CPR without the victim's hands at his sides" theory:
If it's true--and as important as claimed--why the Hell hasn't anybody told the people who draw up "how to" CPR guides?

I decided to see how emphatically current guides stress this (allegedly) vital point:
When the first 10 illustrated guides I looked at did not say one word about this "crucial" point...
I called it "debunked" and gave up... (all 10 are thumbnails, you should be able to click on to make more readable)

How to perform CPR Guide A.jpg

How to perform CPR Guide B.jpg

How to perform CPR Guide C.jpg

How to perform CPR Guide D.jpg

How to perform CPR Guide E.jpg

How to perform CPR Guide F.jpg

How to perform CPR Guide G.jpg

How to perform CPR Guide H.jpg

How to perform CPR Guide I.gif

How to perform CPR Guide J.jpg

It goes without saying that the most obvious pose to illustrate, is a "victim" on their back,
arms at their sides...but if you do not encounter a victim in that exact pose, how vital is it
to put their arms at their sides? Evidently, not at all...
 
CPR , when I was taught it, its a last resort. It is done on someone with no pulse. Done properly or improperly the point is you are trying to help someone who will, no uncertainty about it, die , if you don't try.

I too noticed that AR was being done as well as cardiac compressions and that that is no longer considered correct. OTOH the first time I took the course, AR was integrated with CPR.

These deniers make me feel literally physically ill.
 


Okay, his gloves are white because he was shot in the back. Anybody know enough about the gun used? I'm guessing the bullet didn't exit his chest, hence why there is no blood on his gloves

Regarding proper CPR procedure, is it true that they should have put his arms at his side? I know that, yeah, you're not supposed to do compressions and mouth-to-mouth at the same, but I'm guessing shock and emotion trumped reason... or are things different when it's a gun-shot wound? And why are his feet prompt up like that?

I guess there's a lot wrong with this CPR procedure, but considering the circumstances (the lady doing mouth-to-mouth looks like a civilian that just happened to be passing by, not a medical professional), this is not the "smoking gun evidence" these conspiracy theorists are claiming.

However, one of the people trying to save Nathan Cirillo's life was a nurse.

But, wouldn't an actual false-flag look more professional? Wouldn't "they" make the CPR look legit rather than full of mistakes that could be "debunked" on Youtube?

This one is equally stupid:

But at 2:42, you can see the real paramedics that have taken over, and the cops have cleared the area (which is evidence for a conspiracy, for some reason).

It is a gun often used in deer hunting and the bullet could be expected to pass right through him. That said if the Corporal went down fast, hit in the heart or head, he may have been insensate before he could clutch at his wound.
 
Here's an interesting article about the people in the video and the moments straight after the shooting

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...g-nathan-cirillo-bystanders-save-soldier-life

Just to clarify the raised legs question, this is standard for people in shock, it is however incorrect to do it to someone with a gunshot wound above the waist as it can increase bleeding and complicate the situation.

It's also incorrect to assume that because he was shot in the back that the exit wound would be in the chest. A friend of mine was shot in Afghanistan. The bullet entered his back hit a bone then travelled down his leg and came out just above the knee. (He was ok!). The point being bullets do wierd things depending on what they hit.
 
Last edited:
I would think by looking at the many diagrams posted above that the reason the arms should be at the sides is to keep them out of the way of the person doing CPR. That seems obvious, unless it's just as useful when doing CPR to do the compressions way off to one side, up at the neck, or down on the stomach.

I hadn't seen this video but it is kind of mysterious as to where the guy doing the compressions might actually have his hands.
 
...keep them out of the way of the person doing CPR...mysterious...where the guy doing the compressions might actually have his hands.
As I said in post #7, I can see no good reason to believe--from this angle, anyway--that the victim's hands are
actually in the way of the center of the victim's chest, where the compressions would be expected to be being done.
 
You think his right hand is resting where his right nipple is. I suppose that would be ever so slightly out of the way of where the compressions would have to take place. Where do you think that the man who is doing the compressions has his hands, then? If the victim's hand is on his nipple then we should see the hands of the man doing the compressions right next to his glove. His arms appear to be reaching much further forward than that.

In the videos of Cirillo being taken to the ambulance does he have a mask on? I haven't seen the footage.
 
nevermind my last question... I just looked. he doesn't but in that vid the chest compressions are obviously being done in the correct place. (and his arms are at his sides.) :)
 
The video clutches at "points" such as:
"there's no sense of urgency on the part of the medics" - I'm not sure what policy of paramedics might be in canada, but down here (Australia) paramedics don't run about for several reasons, as they're likely to drop fragile, heavy and expensive equipment if rushed. Also something to do with occupational safety.
"The guy doing CPR is just like..pump..pump..again no urgency" - I have to requalify for CPR every year and I'm fairly confident those compressions weren't too far off (I'm no expert though). Not sure how this compares to others experience in training? Also, CPR is tiring, even after a few minutes of compressions he's bound to slow a bit.
 
The video clutches at "points" such as:
"there's no sense of urgency on the part of the medics" - I'm not sure what policy of paramedics might be in canada, but down here (Australia) paramedics don't run about for several reasons, as they're likely to drop fragile, heavy and expensive equipment if rushed. Also something to do with occupational safety.
"The guy doing CPR is just like..pump..pump..again no urgency" - I have to requalify for CPR every year and I'm fairly confident those compressions weren't too far off (I'm no expert though). Not sure how this compares to others experience in training? Also, CPR is tiring, even after a few minutes of compressions he's bound to slow a bit.

I agree.

Once again though, CTs fail to take account of the stress of the moment, and consider any mistake or 'odd' behaviour to be 'suspicious' and supporting their assertion.

As an aside, Occam makes an excellent point about occupational safety and not rushing. In 2007 I witness an experienced medic who had already saved countless lives and had a reputation as an extremely competent pair of hands, have to treat one of his own medic colleagues who been an IDF victim, and in the adrenaline and drama of the moment was doing CPR on top of the victims level 4 ballistic plate. This meant that the CPR was having no effect until the body-armour is removed. A simple error in the heat of the moment by as good a medic as one could ever hope to have in that situation.

So, how does the average civilian fair when in a situation they had expected in a million years when they woke up that morning? Seems to me that they did exceptionally well in the circumstances.

(Edited, as I erred in my initial post writing IED, when I meant IDF - Indirect Fire)
 
to me it's another example of someone who is giving their "expert" opinion on something they have never done.
 
Back
Top