# Study Finds Heart Disease An Epidemic For Firefighters



## VentMedic (Mar 17, 2009)

*Study Finds Heart Disease An Epidemic For Firefighters*

*Tuesday, March 17, 2009*
*http://www.emsresponder.com/article/article.jsp?id=9174&siteSection=1*



> ATLANTA , March 17 /PRNewswire/ -- H. Robert Superko , MD, principal investigator in the landmark FEMA-sponsored study of firefighters aged 40 and over conducted at Saint Joseph's Hospital in Atlanta , released preliminary findings in the world's first study of first responders at risk of suffering sudden death or other significant cardiac events. Firefighters are known to have a *three hundred percent increased risk* for cardiac disease as compared to other segments of the population.


 
*Ex-firefighter recalls missed warnings of heart problems*

*March 04, 2009*
*http://www.ems1.com/ems-products/health-wellness/articles/458051-Ex-firefighter-recalls-missed-warnings-of-heart-problems*


> PONTIAC, Ill. — John Rodino thought he was doing everything right.
> A *39-year-old* firefighter, he ran and lifted weights every day and ate fruits and vegetables.


 


> But the lifelong Pontiac resident didn’t have his cholesterol checked. That was his first mistake.
> 
> When he began having a heart attack, he went into denial and didn’t immediately call 911. That was his second mistake.
> His life hasn’t been the same since that first heart attack seven years ago. Now *46,* Rodino has had a second heart attack, has had an amazing *18 stents inserted into blood vessels to keep them open and has undergone double-bypass heart surgery.*


 
*Study Targets Firefighters' Heart-Attack Risk*

*Aug 25, 2008* 
http://firechief.com/news/heart_attacks_0825/





The study also found that: 




> Firefighters' hearts react immediately to changing conditions. Heart rates spiked when a dispatcher informed firefighters that a family was trapped in a burning house.</I>
> The risk of heart attack remains high for several hours after a fire.
> Among the tasks a firefighter performs, rescuing a victim is the most strenuous. Fighting a fire puts the second-most strain on his or her heart.
> The job taxes hearts even when firefighters are not working. Firefighters sleeping at the fire station had higher heart rates than when they slept at home.
> ...



*IAFF Heart Manual:*
*Recognition and Prevention of Occupational Heart Diseases*
http://www.iaff.org/hs/PDF/IAFF%20Heart%20Manual.pdf


----------



## AJ Hidell (Mar 17, 2009)

I'm pretty sure there is something to this.  My cholesterol was high when I was in the fire service.  I haven't had a problem with it sense.  But hey, the more of them that drop dead, the fewer of them we have to pay retirement to, so I'm not complaining.


----------



## VentMedic (Mar 17, 2009)

AJ Hidell said:


> I'm pretty sure there is something to this. My cholesterol was high when I was in the fire service. I haven't had a problem with it sense. But hey, the more of them that drop dead, the fewer of them we have to pay retirement to, so I'm not complaining.


 
You put South Florida as your location...

This statement applies to EMS regardless of where they work.

From the first article:



> "Imagine being awakened from a dead sleep by a loud, shrieking siren several times during the night, responding through the rush of adrenaline, carrying a hundred pounds of equipment on your back, and meeting people at the very worst possible moments in their lives every day and you can begin to understand the toll it takes on the first responders,"


----------



## AJ Hidell (Mar 17, 2009)

I just don't think it has much to do with alarm bells and broken sleep as it has to do with the sedentary lifestyle and three fattening meals a day.  Real EMS has a greater variation of schedules and station life, so the conditions do not apply across the board to us as they do to firemen.


----------



## Aidey (Mar 18, 2009)

AJ Hidell said:


> But hey, the more of them that drop dead, the fewer of them we have to pay retirement to, so I'm not complaining.



I _really_ hope you are kidding here. If not, this is probably the most distasteful, abhorrent thing I've seen on this forum.


I'm honestly not shocked by the results, and I wouldn't be surprised if many EMS people have nearly the same risks. The majority of the people I have worked with don't bring their lunches; they eat out on a regular basis, drink a lot of coffee and smoke.


----------



## mycrofft (Mar 18, 2009)

*I sem to recall a University of Iowa study in the '70's about FF'ers and smoke*

If I recall, they were looking into long term effects of repeated exposures to fire gasses and smokes; not only was recurrent frequent exposure to CO, CO2 and toxic gasses per se felt to contribute to long term cardiopulmonary effects, but also the special aspect of smoke whereby the wafting particles, many of which are small enough to be drawn deeply enough into the bronchial tree to be phagocytized, had adsorbed toxic components which were thereby introduced into the linings of the bronchioles and alveolii, with localized and systemic results.
Plus going from pizza and TV or asleep (zero) to driving an emergency vehicle code three (sixty) in nothing flat does a job on you especially as you get older.


----------



## enjoynz (Mar 18, 2009)

AJ Hidell said:


> I'm pretty sure there is something to this.  My cholesterol was high when I was in the fire service.  I haven't had a problem with it sense.  But hey, the more of them that drop dead, the fewer of them we have to pay retirement to, so I'm not complaining.



I hope your house never catches fire, with statements like that AJ!:glare:

Enjoynz


----------



## JonTullos (Mar 18, 2009)

AJ Hidell said:


> I'm pretty sure there is something to this.  My cholesterol was high when I was in the fire service.  I haven't had a problem with it sense.  But hey, the more of them that drop dead, the fewer of them we have to pay retirement to, so I'm not complaining.



I respect you and your opinions but I don't think that statement was cool at all.  So wrong on so many levels.


----------



## AJ Hidell (Mar 18, 2009)

It's not me you have to worry about.  It is all those employers -- government entities included -- that think exactly that way.  Do you think that AMR doesn't know that 12 hour system status management shifts burn people out quickly?  Of course they know.  They don't care.  They want you to burn out so you don't stick around for twenty years and take a retirement.  Same thing with cities that stick the fire service with EMS.  Don't shoot me.  I'm just the messenger.


----------

