There seems to be confusion in some of these posts about the complexity of a psychomotor skill and the risk/benefit of a given intervention.
Most of the psychomotor skills commonly used in EMS are not that complex. The biggest exception is probably intubation which requires a fair amount of practice.. Things like placing NG tubes, IOs, EJs, the act of starting the LP12 pacer, obtaining a 12-lead, giving an IM injection, for 90% of patients, IV initiiation, so forth, are not some sort of magic that takes 3 years to learn how to do.
But let's be clear here --- if I teach a 10 year old child how to place the precordial leads and press 12-lead --- this doesn't make them a paramedic, any more than me knowing how to RSI makes me an anesthetist, or doing a cricothyrotomy makes me an EENT surgeon, or doing an ABG makes me an RRT. The skills are useless without the necessary background to understand when, how and why to use them. To take the 12-lead ECG example, to do this well probably takes the same or more time as a 100 hr EMT training program.
Both paramedic and EMT education are woefully inadequate, as they stand. I say this having taken a 6 month EMT course that included 200 hours on the ambulance, and a 2-year paramedic program with over 1000 hours of ambulance practicum and 400 hours in the ER. In my opinion, we should fix these inadequacies as our first priority, otherwise this field will never become a profession.
I don't see the push for giving narcan to basics, but maybe that's because most of my career has been working in regions with a low level of narcotic wabuse. Inappropriate / unskilled narcan use has potential pitfalls, which the EMT is poorly prepared to manage, e.g. pulmonary edema, unmasking the symptoms of a coingested agent, seizure activity, etc. While some systems support narcan cancellations, in many systems most of these patients will be transported anyway, and their airways can be managed with basic maneuvers. I don't see the reasoning behind giving this skill to basics. There's a stronger argument for D50W.
ASA makes sense. While it might not be the best thing to give to someone with a thoracic aneurysm, or active ulcer disease, the risk benefit is pretty good. I can't get behind NTG. It makes the most sense for life-threatening acute pulmonary edema, but this is a very small percentage of the population. Indiscriminately giving it to potential MIs seems to be a problem waiting to happen, as underlined by the large number of posters who don't seem to be able to differentiate a patient giving self-administering their own nitro for previously diagnosed stable angina, and an EMT / Paramedic giving it to someone whose hemodynamics have just been altered by an MI. The 12-lead seems reasonable, if we're then going to do something with it, e.g. ER prenotification, ER bypass to cathlab, rendezvous with a paramedic crew that can thrombolyse, or do one of the above, etc. Glucagon seems like largely a waste of time, unless you then have treat and refer criteria in place -- dextrose solutions seem like a better option here. Epinephrine may be helpful in clear presentations, but carrys the potential to cause other problems the EMT can't manage. Ventolin has some potential benefit, and limited downside, but the ability to give nebulised ventolin alone doesn't make someone capable of managing the acutely deteriorating asthmatic appropriately.