Ballistic Pressure Wave Theory Confirmed in Human Autopsy Results

[9MMare]

So if this is visible in these (small number of) cases, why isnt it indicated in people who have been wounded?

And especially, wouldnt this show up in people who are shot point blank and wearing kevlar/protective vests? The impact is still there, even if no penetration.

Can this only be detected in autopsies? (And is it significant?)

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Well, dissecting the brain is best only done in an autopsy. So I don't know how you would detect such microbleeds otherwise given the magnification most commonly needed to see them, but now read that it can be done with some MRI scans, though I don't know just how microscopic they can go. Obviously, Krajsa didn't do anything other than autopsies, so the issue was not discussed of whether or not it could be determined in living folks by him.

Is this significant? From the aspect that typically shot with handgun rounds in the torso typically don't keel over immediately unless with a CNS shot or sometimes a heart shot, then yeah, it would be significant because this amount of micro damage to the drain isn't something the body has trouble handling. Concussions produce a lot more damage than these microbleeds and they certainly don't always produce incapacitation.

Wouldn't this still show up in people shot point blank and wearing protective vests? Sure. That is why Krajsa excluded people from the study that had any sort of other injuries that might result in blood pressure spikes. I mentioned above about getting hit with a baseball, for example.

For example, head and eye petechiae can occur as a result of a person being given CPR. This are pinpoint ruptures of the capillaries that come with blood pressure spikes.

 

[NMGonzo]

I believe that people are looking too much into something that is not relevant.

Put holes on bad guy.

Bad guy still standing.

Put some more holes.

Repeat till desired effect.

 

[Mandolin]

What's the point? is it that even chest shots damage the brain? Great, now I can claim head shot where I realy hit the chest. If you put multiple rounds of anything intothe chest, brain damage ceases to be relavent. There're dead, and some brain bleding is irelevant. Nobady cares, unless you can get government money to study this.

 

[BADUNAME37]

So, now I know what happened to that woodchuck that I vaporized.

 

[gunnie]

..."Blood pressure is a tricky thing, in that it's a closed system."...

yes, a closed system. but unlike a hydraulic system, the "hoses" are VERY flexible. this makes the fact that water [read: blood] will not compress almost a non-issue except right on the wound channel.

gunnie

 

[tipoc]

heres my question, if this is such a huge phenomenon, why hasn't it been confirmed before now, I mean I can just picture my drill with that vein bulging in his forehead telling my it's where you hit em that counts...

The phenomena was observed and studied by the U.S. military following the second world war. It's with rifle rounds and shrapnel that it shows up most consistently.

A good deal has been written about it. But there is also a good deal that is inconclusive. This is because there are many variables to GSWs in general and specifically to the factors that influence "pressure waves" or hydrostatic shock.

tipoc

 

[Double Naught Spy]

And pressure waves or hydrostatic shock should not be confused with blood pressure spikes. There is no indication that hydrostatic shock actually caused brain damage here, and what little of it that there is. The damage was believed to be due to pressure spikes where fluid in one part of the body is put under pressure via the impact of the bullet. It isn't that the pressure wave traveled up to the brain and produced microbleed. You have a closed system and pressure increase in one area wlll produce pressure increases in another.

 

[DAVIDSDIVAD]

I wonder if this pressure could have any effect on the blood Brain barrier

 

[Beagle-zebub]

heres my question, if this is such a huge phenomenon, why hasn't it been confirmed before now, I mean I can just picture my drill with that vein bulging in his forehead telling my it's where you hit em that counts...

Funny thing is, he didn't fall over from that pressure...

Are you TRYING to make milk shoot out of my nose?

 

[JTQ]

A hidden advertisement?

When you look at these two line graphs, does it appear as if they may been produced by "Double Tap" Ammo.

Apparently, "Double Tap" is the only ammo that is likely to produce a round that would make "brain injury probable", if of course you believe the theory is a legitimate one.

 

[JohnBT]

"These haemorrhages are caused by sudden changes of the intravascular blood pressure as a result of a compression of intrathoracic great vessels by a shock wave caused by a penetrating bullet."

I see no proof that there was a shock wave, much less one caused by a penetrating bullet. Yes, the person was shot, so there was a bullet, but I do not see proof of the cause and effect. It's too easy to assume a relationship where none exists. Just because it seems to make sense doesn't make it a fact.

They could have died from a fright-induced blood pressure spike, for all we know, at the prospect of being shot. Or any number of other scenarios including pre-existing damage.

Just because they were shot doesn't necessarily mean the bullet was responsible for anything or everything found in the autopsy.

And the sample size is insignificant.

Has anybody tried this on goats yet?

John

 

[MCgunner]

FYI http://www.ballisticstestinggroup.org/ballistics.htm

 

[medmo]

We have "basal ganglias" in our heads? I wonder what that "pons" thing does in there...

 

[JohnBT]

Somebody believes there were goat tests??? I'll have to explore that link later, but I see goat tests referenced.

Google turned this up on the goat tests:

Fackler, Martin L., M.D.:

"The 'Strasbourg Tests:' Another Gunwriter/Bullet Salesman Fraud?" Wound Ballistics Review, 1(4): 10-11; 1994.

Dr. Martin Fackler, IWBA president, reviews the authorless "Strasbourg Tests," a purported study of the reaction of several hundred live unanesthetized "human-sized" goats that were allegedly shot to test the "one-shot stopping power" of various handgun cartridges. Fackler explains the many incongruities, inconsistencies and absurdities which lead him (and most other wound ballistics experts) to conclude that the "Strasbourg Tests" are a hoax.

Fackler concludes: "The only people who believe the 'Strasbourg Tests' are real are the usual crowd of crackpot 'magic' bullet believers and the pathetically incompetent editors of consumer gun magazines like Guns & Ammo.""

 

[Pasteur]

So if this is visible in these (small number of) cases, why isnt it indicated in people who have been wounded?

There have been a few published cases of remote injuries from handgun bullets, including remote neural injuries. One line of thinking on why these reports are not more common is that if remote brain injuries require a hit to the major vessels with an energetic handgun round then most people meeting the selection criteria for remote brain injury are more likely to bleed out and end up at the morgue than in the recovery room. A second line of thinking is related to the difficulty in detecting mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). How many patients with energetic handgun wounds to the center of the chest are thoroughly evaluated for mTBI with the most sensitive available techniques such as diffusion tensor imaging or the military acute concussion evaluation? A third line of thinking is that neurological deficits following a well-placed handgun wound are commonly attributed to ischemia/reperfusion which is known to be a common TBI mechanism.

And especially, wouldnt this show up in people who are shot point blank and wearing kevlar/protective vests? The impact is still there, even if no penetration.

The pressure/stress waves in the thorax are much lower when a bullet is stopped by armor than when it penetrates because most of the impact energy is absorbed by the armor. Studies in pigs have documented remote cerebral effects (even death) in cases of .308 rifle bullets stopped by body armor. Energy transmission (and remote effects) depend on the amount of backface deformation of the armor at impact. Armor that deforms 40mm when hit with a .308 allows much greater injury than armor that deforms 24mm when hit by a .308.

Can this only be detected in autopsies? (And is it significant?)

Dectection of TBI is much easier at autopsy, but in vivo techniques are slowly improving in detection sensitivity with tools like diffusion tensor imaging, the military acute concussion evaluation, and biochemical techniques. For example, a paper by Wang et al. in 2004 detected remote brain injury in dogs shot in the thigh by biochemical analysis of cerebrospinal fluid. The brain injuries were later confirmed at necropsy.

I wonder if this pressure could have any effect on the blood Brain barrier.

Two studies published in J. Trauma in the late 1980’s found blood brain barrier damage to pigs shot in the thigh.

 

[DAVIDSDIVAD]

Two studies published in J. Trauma in the late 1980’s found blood brain barrier damage to pigs shot in the thigh.

This is very interesting.

 

[MCgunner]

Fackler vs. reality, whatever. Yes, there were goat tests. They didn't shoot 'em from black helicopters, either.

Kinda reminds me of the global warming thing. If you believe in big and slow and can't win on the merits of your arguments, just call all the detractors idiots and flat earthers.

 

[ArmedBear]

There would be NO reason whatsoever for the "goat tests" NOT to exist.

Why?

18 Delta medic course for Green Beret Medics and SEAL Corpsmen, aka "Goat Lab."

Look around for info if you care.

Information is sparse. But let's just say it gets a lot more detailed when you spend an evening at a bar with a retired SEAL corpsman and a lot of booze, and he tells you about his training. Quiet guy, usually, worked civilian EOD at the time. I didn't meet him at the bar; I knew him and what his experiences were. I just didn't know about his training until that night.

The Goat Tests would have been little different from routine, at least at one time, just with different data collection. Don't know what they do now, and with PETA et al. I'm sure they talk about it even less, but the US military has shot a lot of goats.

WRT ballistic pressure wave, the one thing about it that seems to come through is that its effects are not consistent. And the "goat test" report that has surfaced warns that "stopping power is a myth" near the beginning.

 

[MCgunner]

WRT ballistic pressure wave, the one thing about it that seems to come through is that its effects are not consistent. And the "goat test" report that has surfaced warns that "stopping power is a myth" near the beginning.

I think the main argument against pressure wave is from the 1911 .45ACP flag waving Jeff Cooper worshipers that can't see why the military wouldn't use the 1911 on the starship Enterprise. After all, phasers can't kill cause energy doesn't kill. It's mostly a superfluous academic debate, though. What they don't seem to understand, though, is in +P loads, the .45 had over 500 ft lbs of energy! Yeah, it's a good service caliber, but the gun is just too large for every day civilian carry.

In the real world, you carry as much as you can comfortably put up with 24/7. That's why I carry 9x19 and .38 special regularly and not .357 magnum or .45ACP. I don't feel I give much up in "stopping power", whatever that is, and I'll have the gun with me when needed. No, I don't carry a 1911 and sleep with it, hell no. It's 40 plus ounces, it's too big for a pocket, and it ain't much better than a 9x19 in a gun fight, I don't care what Jeff Cooper says. But, if you need to have some mythical reason to carry that beast, go ahead and knock yourself out. There are .44 magnums that don't weigh what a 1911 does. I don't carry one of them, either.

I just find the pressure wave stuff interesting as in terminal ballistics as in how it works. I do like the 9 better than a .380 because there's twice the energy there and both are easy to carry all day long in a pocket. But, I don't need a bigger gun and there aren't any TRUE pocket .45s, don't care much for the Kahr offering. Hell, many millions of cops and soldiers have carried the Smith and Wesson M&P .38 over the years and THAT with the old round nose load! Put a modern +P hollowpoint in a .38 and why do I need anything else, for self defense, anyway?

 

[ArmedBear]

I occasionally carry a 39.5 oz. .44 Magnum, but I don't live in Texas so I can carry it in a comfortable holster where everyone can see it. It's not what I carry when I go to the grocery store, usually, though.

I don't buy into the belief that energy is everything, no matter which side of the equation it comes from. Simple math will demonstrate why.

Since energy rises as the square of velocity, it also FALLS as the square of velocity. A leather jacket will eat up a lot of energy, from a fast, light bullet. It won't eat up nearly as much of the energy in a big, slow one, which won't lose as much velocity and therefore won't lose nearly as much energy.

Energy is important, but energy that comes from the bullet weight is "better" energy in this situation.

However, I carry a .38+P most of the time. I'm sure that a 405 grain .45-70 would knock someone down quicker, but a .38 fits in my pocket. Modern .38 will perform adequately (there's plenty of evidence that the old round nose bullets often did not).

In order to make a trade-off, one needn't deny that such a trade-off exists. It does. There's such thing as a SMART trade-off. One needn't convince himself that a .380 is "as good as" a .45+P, to decide that a .380 is a good choice for his carry gun, with certain clothing, etc.

(I'm not saying that you are denying it. I think that others do. And I also don't quite "get" the 1911 as a preferred carry gun, due to its weight, manual of arms, and low capacity. It's nice and flat, though.)

 

[Kevin77]

So if I understand the study it basically says that after I shoot someone in the chest there's a good shance they could have a stroke. Why does this matter? If they don't have a stroke and keep coming at me I will shoot them again.

 

[Bluenote]

Look Courtney, we see folks shot all the time with handgun calibers who don't get incapacitated. These tiny brain bleeds are inconsequential. You drop a pebble in the pond and the ripple waves make it to the far shore and disturb some of the flotsam, but they don't tear out the dam.

So how come you are posting under a new moniker now?

And in the context of 'hydrostatic shock , we saw this all the time in the '60 and '70s ( and since) with whatever new super-duper high velocity rifle wildcat or magnum was the 'flavor of the week' , hit 'em in the leg and they'll die of shock ,I've hunted extensively with various magnum rifle calibers and handgun calibers , and with a slew of other folks who utilise them , nor out of a high velocity round such as the .220 swift or .22-250 , how many of you folks have watched a coyote just run on off when hit with a 3700fps .22-250 round too far back?

Want to drop any given target on the spot? The hit it squarely in a vital area. Until I see substantive proof based upon a MUCH larger sample size than 33 incidents I'll continue to view it as a lot of smoke and not much fire. And that is of course without taking into account the other obvious problems with the cited study that folks here have already addressed.

 

[Bluenote]

I think the main argument against pressure wave is from the 1911 .45ACP flag waving Jeff Cooper worshipers that can't see why the military wouldn't use the 1911 on the starship Enterprise. After all, phasers can't kill cause energy doesn't kill. It's mostly a superfluous academic debate, though. What they don't seem to understand, though, is in +P loads, the .45 had over 500 ft lbs of energy! Yeah, it's a good service caliber, but the gun is just too large for every day civilian carry.

In the real world, you carry as much as you can comfortably put up with 24/7. That's why I carry 9x19 and .38 special regularly and not .357 magnum or .45ACP. I don't feel I give much up in "stopping power", whatever that is, and I'll have the gun with me when needed. No, I don't carry a 1911 and sleep with it, hell no. It's 40 plus ounces, it's too big for a pocket, and it ain't much better than a 9x19 in a gun fight, I don't care what Jeff Cooper says. But, if you need to have some mythical reason to carry that beast, go ahead and knock yourself out. There are .44 magnums that don't weigh what a 1911 does. I don't carry one of them, either.

I just find the pressure wave stuff interesting as in terminal ballistics as in how it works. I do like the 9 better than a .380 because there's twice the energy there and both are easy to carry all day long in a pocket. But, I don't need a bigger gun and there aren't any TRUE pocket .45s, don't care much for the Kahr offering. Hell, many millions of cops and soldiers have carried the Smith and Wesson M&P .38 over the years and THAT with the old round nose load! Put a modern +P hollowpoint in a .38 and why do I need anything else, for self defense, anyway?

Some folks need to read what you wrote , and then reread it again , and then again. And I'm both a fan of the 1911s in .45 acp and a Gunsite graduate. But then I'm a curmudgeonly old geezer who deosn't really think that there's any 'magic' bullet either.

And for carry I do favor .45 acp in a semi-auto , or .357 mag or .44 special in a revolver , unless it's backwoods ,backpacking or wilderness work at which time the Redhawk or a much loved 4 5/8s Blackhawk in ( both in .44 mag) is what I utilise.

And perhaps it's all in what you're used to and have an affinity for. I like all the above ,I reload for them and I'm just hidebound enough to stick with what has worked for me.

Folks need to learn that there is *no* panacea as regards a given caliber or type of firearm.

 

[Bluenote]

So, now I know what happened to that woodchuck that I vaporized.

well that will teach me to drink coffee while I'm reading this forum , at least the monitor screen is clean now.