Just curious about the wounded soldiers in Iraq...

[Javaman]

Due to modern medicine and the advancements made since Viet Nam, how many, roughly, would the number of dead be if we were still working with 1960-70 medical technology?

[RaleighNCDUer]

1. IIRC, in Vietnam the ration of dead to wounded was something like

1:2.75. Today it's something like 1:6. And it would be far worse than VN, because the body armor today means that there are proportionately more head wounds than before, which in those days would have been fatal. So with modern armor, but 70's medical/evacuation capabilities, I'd bet it would be more like 1:2. We'd have 20,000+ dead at this point.

But I don't really know, so actually I'm just talking out my ass. Or, putting it nicely, speculating.

[Buzz Clik]

3. Well, just using your ratios: we'd have 6,720 killed thus far

With 3600 dead in Iraq and a ratio of 6:1, that would give us 21,600, or a total of 25,200 wounded plus killed.

With the Vietnam ratio of 1:2.75, we'd have 6,720 killed. That, of course, doesn't account for the other differences you mentioned.

[CottonBear]

2. Many wounded trrops survive due to advanced body armor and gear

but they have devastating injuries (missing limbs, multiple missing limbs, brain injuries, spinal injures and blindness).

In Vietnam, many of the same injures would hae resulted in death.

[mentalsolstice]

4. Probably different priorities in triage

Decisions during triage is probably different now than it was during VN. Fewer "hopeless" cases...

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

5. I suspect the major difference...

is because troops in Iraq get to hospital much faster than troops in Vietnam. They're out on the roads in convoys instead of several day marches out in the jungle.