Three out of four operations in field hospitals were amputations. Bullets from weapons did such damage, amputation was the only real hope of saving a life. Even then, because of the lack of understanding at the time of the causes and spread of infection, many wounded soldiers later died as a result. Amputation had to be done within 48 hours, or else the patient would die.
Weapons of war had progressed to the point that injuries to the bone would fracture it into many little pieces, seldom a clean break. Doctors did not have either the skill or the time to reconstruct the bones. And any attempting to reconstruct them increased the likelihood of infection and death. Doctors discovered that if they cut off the injured limbs that the person would be much more likely to survive. And in other cases, the wounded had been exposed to the elements and battlefield for days prior to being brought in for treatment. In those cases gangrene and infection may have already set in. Most of the muzzle loading rifles used were .58 caliber. During early 1800's, gun powder was not very powerful. In order to have more knock-down power, the size of the bullet was made larger. This made the bullet travel slow but they struck with a lot of energy. These slow, large bullets tend to fracture bones. Whereas, high-speed, small bullets will penetrate without fracturing. Bigger bullets tend to have a higher probability of hitting more bones. Also, these bullets were made from pure Lead (not a lead alloy like modern guns). The soft lead would deform and flatten out, causing more internal damage or a larger exit wound. The medical technology at that time could not repair these fractured limbs so they had to be amputated---as stated above. The wounds produced by these bullets also cause more infection. The bullets traveled slow and therefore did not heat up---which would kill some of the bacteria on them. They were also known to tear clothing material and pull pieces of it into the wound. Really nasty. it is when part of the body has been taken off for several reasons. 240,000 British soldiers suffered total or partial leg or arm amputations as a result of war wounds. Most of these men were fitted with artificial limbs
Amputations during the Civil War were preformed right off the battlefield using unsterilized equipment including "meat" saws. No one had any idea about bacteria or antibiotics at the time and so no one around the area used antiseptic techniques. Flies were not controlled and most of soldiers operated on did not live.
Damaged ones: fingers, toes, hands, feet, arms and legs.
The body of the deceased minus a few body parts that were removed during the embalming process.
you can use your palm,handspan, and fore arm lenght
The Justinian code was one of the four parts which made up the collections of books which was called Corpus Juris Civilis (Body of Civil Law)
hh
King Edward sent his body to the different parts of Scotland to tell the Scot's not to mess with the english.
I have read it was legs. There were piles of legs.
Very bad. They would amputate your body parts if you were shot there, and they wouldn't clean the knifes every time they amputated, so a lot of soldiers died from disease and germs.
Arms, legs, hands, feet, fingers, and toes can be amputated. Most amputations involve small body parts such as a finger, rather than an entire limb.
people ate them.duh!
your heart stops , forstbite , legs fingers feet could get amputated . you die
a number of specialties can collaborate to treat patients who have limbs or other body parts; under certain circumstances, amputated parts can be reattached, or another body part can be replanted
Justinian's Body of Civil Law consisted of 4 parts.
Justinian's Body of Civil Law consisted of 4 parts.
the fingers where the most comon because there where always getting cuts and blisters that got infected.
They urinate a lot, and drink a lot of water, they may have some parts of their body amputated and they may have an open wound.
No you can have any part of the body amputated at any timr during your life. The question is though why should you remove a useful healthy part of the body?
Four