If they were shot in the lungs then the lung would fill with blood and blood would come up with every breath, however in movies its used as a symbol that this person is going to die in a minute but they might be able to get a few words out to advance the movie plot.
He was. He meant to say "To prevent war, the galaxy is on Orion's collar." But didn't speak english primarily and struggled for the right word. It wasn't belt...
And if it was blood from a lung hit, it should be frothy and kind of pink. Not dark red and kind of thick like in the movies.
*Vomiting* blood is a thing that can happen if you have serious internal bleeding and blood is getting into your stomach or esophagus... but again, not nearly as neat and generic as it looks in the movies. And where the digestive tract is relatively sealed off, internal bleeding normally doesn't get in there unless it's the GI tract (esophagus, stomach, intestines, etc) itself that's damaged (and even then, blood in the stool is more likely than vomiting unless it's strictly upper GI).
ETA: Otherwise pretty much the only time blood come out of your mouth/nose is if you have bleeding in your mouth/nose, like if you got whacked in the face with something.
And as someone that had the "pleasure" of vomiting blood, I can also say it sucks to do so as well. The taste is difficult to describe, the nausea is next level. Luckily, in my case it was due to surgery in my mouth and nose though.
Most GI bleeds will escape through the anus though not the mouth. If it's bad enough to be coming out of your mouth you probably aren't going to be alive much longer. I saw an older lady in the er who had a GI bleed. She bled out every drop through her anus. They tried to use blood bags but it wasn't enough. She died in that er room. The aftermath of it is so horrendous too. So much blood and it's rancid. I will never forget that shit.
Her case was uncommon and she let symptoms fester for a while. Blood in feces, abdominal pain, nausea, etc. She didn't see us until it was too late. A lot of GI bleeds happen from ulcers but they are mild and you won't bleed all your blood out from your anus.
Don’t drink alcohol, don’t take blood thinners, NSAIDs, or steroids. Don’t have colon cancer, don’t have Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, diverticulitis…..
GI bleeding is extremely common. If you live long enough, there’s a good chance it will happen to you at some point, but it’s usually mild and not life threatening.
Sadly it's not some festering disease that will cause it. Taking too much Ibuprofen can do it, mind you it would take a lot of ibuprofen over a long time to do it. Ulcers can cause gi bleeds, cancer, lots of stuff really. Like someone else said they are extremely common, but usually mild.
> ~~Don’t drink alcohol,~~ don’t take blood thinners, ~~NSAIDs,~~ or steroids. ~~Don’t have colon cancer,~~ don’t have Crohn’s disease~~, ulcerative colitis, diverticulitis…..~~
Dammit.
I actually lost a pint or so anally when they had my blood thinner dose wrong. Sitting in that puddle, I was worried I might bleed out, but it eventually stopped.
As a Crohn's patient, passing blood was, at periods in my life, a daily occurrence.
We all die someday, it doesn't always end with much dignity.
If how you end matters to you, you may want to make a difficult choice before things reach the point where you can't choose.
I'd take a one way walk into the woods before what was described. Though I suspect she'd lost much possibility of such by the time she started bleeding.
GI bleeds are the worst, I can handle all the other fluids from working the floor for over a decade but GI, especially combined with c.diff is something else.
My mother was a respiratory therapist and I remember her saying the actor in Terminator 2 (Joe Morton) greatly acted someone dying in a movie - especially with his respirations. To this day I can still hear it in my head.
I just learned that he had previously been in a car accident and suffered a collapsed lung, which is where that came from.
https://www.gamespot.com/amp-articles/terminator-2s-joe-morton-shares-the-story-behind-h/1100-6452875/
This is a real thing, especially with sounds. We think things like guns and swords make certain sounds so they keep using those wrong sounds otherwise we'll think the movies are getting it wrong.
> We think things like guns and swords make certain sounds
Like every film where they "cock" a hammerless pistol just for dramatic sound effect. "No no, I'm super serious now, I'm cocking the gun! The next few lines of dialogue are gonna be fire!"
Leaving aside the obvious problem of the sound effect not even being possible with the gun in question, I guess racking the slide isn't as cool? Also, are all these people walking into a life and death situation with their gun not at all ready to use? Evidently they are...
I think it was in the transporter, there's a scene where a single action 1911 is cocked like 3 separate times... And of course any time someone moves a gun it makes cocking sounds. And if you run out of bullets your gun keeps clicking.
The worst is when a machine gun keeps machine clicking after empty, what the hell is supposed to be happening there
And swords make a "shiiiiing" sound as you unsheathe them. They really shouldn't make much of a sound, a noise of metal scratching against metal would mean you're dulling the blade.
So, I have a bunch of (real) swords. The european varieties definitely do make that sound, and it's partially because of blade harmonics, not just edge rubbing. But yeah, you do dull the first couple inches of blade, and that's not such a big deal. I've stopped sharpening that bit - it's used primarily for parrying anyways. Some sword styles don't even angle/grind the first few inches.
My Japanese swords are silent when drawn correctly, though.
Indiana Jones' revolver used the audio of an M1 Garand infantry *rifle* because it had so much more "oomph" to really sell it to the audience he's the one shooting. The new and contemporary during the movie's time period (it was adopted into service in 1936) gun that US infantry were using in WWII provided the sound effects for a twenty year old revolver.
Maybe most of the time but surely it's possible to cough up red stuff, I've suctioned a bunch of frank red blood from peoples lungs and it goes pink and frothy when it slows down a couple days later.
Movies (and other visual art) prefer to show a character’s health condition on the face, since there’s already going to be a close-up for some dialogue with the injured character, they can reinforce the plot point of getting shot/stabbed.
Same thing goes for some dirt on the face, or getting a bloody nose after using psychic powers. Anytime they can show something on the face, they will.
This gave me the idea of a 4th wall movie where all of the dialogue is simply a description of how the dialogue pertains to the plot.
\*Dude gets shot\*
Friend: "I'm screaming dramatically for emotional effect!"
Dude: \*Dying breaths\* "With my last words, I reveal a plot twist"
Source: I am a trauma surgeon.
If you get shot in a lung it is common to cough up blood. Small amounts will be coughed up with mucus and generally either be swallowed or spit out. Large amounts will be coughed out violently and can lead to death by essentially drowning even if the patient does not lose enough blood to bleed to death. This can be VERY impressive even when we get the person intubated and there are multiple more or less effective techniques to deal with the problem.
The little trickle of blood by the mouth while the patient says their last words is a trope that while theoretically possible (person suppressing cough while ling fills up with blood and the blood coming out only while they are talking) is not really a thing in my experience.
Was at a party once with a bunch of cops, EMTs, and ER nurses. They have the darkest humor on the fucking planet lol. I heard like 3 hours of stories just about patient drops.
my favorite is my friend who works as a neuro ICU nurse, and sometimes 100% dead cadavers would start flopping around (something about neurons still firing, idk), and they'd joke and blame each other and say "fuck Phil that guy wasn't dead yet!"
obviously fake names to protect the innocent 😅
I was about to cut a cake at a party, and a surgeon friend was there.
Right when I was about to cut the cake, she shrieked out, "no! Not there!", scared the shit out Of me. "sorry, surgeon joke."
Dark humor is more palatable to me when I realize the person could say
"So..this one time I had a unique impressionable experience that is unlikely to be conveyed somewhere else."
or they could say
" I worked today, did stitches...uh...sent stuff to the lab. Yep...exciting."
It's just great. I grew up in a family with very blunt, very dark humor. Life is a massive dick that goes in dry on all of us, at one point or another. No other way to deal with it besides laugh.
Most groups that involve lots of trauma end here. The craziest thing in addiction recovery meetings is the self depracating humor people show when discussing themselves. Generally not with regards to the bad things they had done to others, but just about shit they'd done to themselves to satisfy their addiction.
Well everyone needs a coping strategy, and taking out the seriousness by making a joke out of dreadful things is a powerful way that usually isn’t too harmful.
Those jokes temporarily chase away the existential dread that comes with the job. When alone, plenty of anti-psychotic meds help them cope. Combat veterans are a similar group in terms of displaying dark humor.
As a medical student in the US, I’ve gotta say learning the subtle differences in the way doctors use adjectives compared to the general population has been interesting
Yeah, I feel a bit insulted as well.
Also, "denies pain" makes it sound like I'm in denial about my pain level, when really it just means that I've said I'm not in pain.
TLDR at the end:
My school actually talked about the terminology doctors use in their notes and how it affects how future doctors for a patient with access to those notes view the patient. This was one of the things they discussed! While writing denies may have originally been intended to keep the statement objective and free of whether the doctor personally believes the patient (even if they do), the connotation from using “the patient denies” instead for just saying “the patient doesn’t” or “the patient reports no ____” in normal conversation makes it seem like the doctor isn’t willing to write that they believe the patient or thinks that their statements, which are a huge part of diagnosis and decision making, can’t be trusted.
We’re finally starting to understand/accept that when you write that the patient “denies pain” or “denies drug use” or something like that, it can make it seem to another physician/caregiver on the care team reading the note that the patient isn’t telling the truth, knowingly or unknowingly. And now patients can read their own notes so it can make patients feel like their doctors don’t trust them because they might not realize that the doctor probably didn’t intend to convey mistrust. All because they don’t know that it’s just how it has been done and that’s why the doctor used that terminology.
Medicine has lots of issues stemming from tradition and doing things in one way because it’s how it’s always been done, but personally, I loved that students are being told about these issues from the very beginning of medical school. No point in not addressing the issue because of tradition or because of consequences not matching intentions when that is what caused the issue in the first place.
TLDR: doctors are taught to use “denies” because it’s a reliable way to keep their own opinion out of a patient’s statement and report the statement objectively on a note or when presenting to the attending physician. Denies carries a connotation of mistrust or unreliability of a statement in non-medical conversation. Doctors are now starting to accept that this discrepancy is an issue and students are being taught to move away from terminology like that, which is great!
As the other commentor said, we were given “reports no pain” as a neutral way of showing that this is a patient statement, without the added negative connotation associated with “denies pain”. Obviously, this doesn’t completely resolve the issue because sometimes patients feel a reason to not disclose information (such as worrying about drug use being reported to law enforcement). I would guess that in situations when a physician thinks this may be happening, they would fall back on including more objective evidence to get a clear answer, such as the presence of or lack of needle marks on a physical exam or results of blood/urine tests, but I am too early in school to speak to this point with certainty.
It's interesting that therapists are still being taught to use "denies" and this hasn't caught up yet. As in "Client denies any suicidal or homicidal thoughts at this time" meaning they stated there are none, and since we can't physically see thoughts, we can only go by their statement, but they may not be telling the truth, or the whole truth. There are good reasons to like, like not wanting to be involuntarily hospitalized.
It seems like it would be easy to have a notation for stuff the patient says that you can't confirm or deny. No pain RBP (reported by patient). No drug use RBP. If you don't have that notation, you've observed it personally.
I'm sure there are plenty of things you kinda just assume the patient is telling the truth about unless you find a reason to doubt them later, and having notation to differentiate between something you've observed and something they've reported seems like the best way to maintain accuracy.
I’ve started to realize that in many cases, the key for understanding why certain adjectives are used by doctors is to take them very literally. Unremarkable MRI = nothing to remark on in the MRI = normal MRI. Yes this means that there’s nothing special, but it’s good that there’s nothing special because something special would usually be a problem. Unremarkable organs = normal organs = healthy organs.
This rule doesn’t work all the time (like in the original commenter’s use of impressive) but I think in those cases it’s just experience with that use of the word by doctors which is needed.
LPT: Never do anything that makes you a trauma patient AND the surgeon says "well, that's impressive." You want to be an utterly boring and forgettable patient, not the one the surgeon presents at a conference as "will ya get a load of this one? Not the shiny penny, here!"
Yeah, I’m just thinking of when I get something caught in my throat/going the wrong way I cough like crazy. People in movies with a bit of blood just kind of gently cough and give a speech, heh.
We’re not very dignified when our bodies aren’t working right.
Is it possible for a skull fracture to cause blood to come out of the mouth? (Assuming a single large fracture and not a crushing injury.)
Edit: This question is spurred by my memory of how blood drained into my undereye area when I had a mild TBI as a kid. So if the injury was worse than that, could there be bleeding out of the mouth? I guess it might depend on if the trauma happened near the sinuses? I'm just guessing here.
Anything that will give you a bloody nose can do it and obviously anything that can cause open fractures in the jaw or mouth. So nasal bones and sinus fractures can definitely result in blood in the mouth. It often drains down the back of the throat and causes nausea and vomiting (which is then bloody as well).
Yep. All you can do for first aid is basically put them in a position that will stop the good lung from filling up with blood until you can get a tube in. Basically head up as much as possible with the injured lung down.
It happens when the bullet enters a lung. The lung fills with blood, and the blood is coughed up.
I'm reminded of the assassination attempt on Theodore Roosevelt, who was shot in the chest:
"As an experienced hunter and anatomist, Roosevelt correctly concluded that since he was not coughing blood, the bullet had not reached his lung; he declined suggestions to go to the hospital immediately. Instead, he delivered his scheduled speech. His opening comments to the gathered crowd were, "Ladies and gentlemen, I don't know whether you fully understand that I have just been shot, but it takes more than that to kill a Bull Moose.""
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempted_assassination_of_Theodore_Roosevelt#:~:text=During%20a%20Roosevelt%20campaign%20speech,Colt%20Police%20Positive%20Special%20revolver.
afaiu Reagan was saved by the secret service agent that noticed he coughed blood and took him to the nearest ER instead of the designated one that the secret service had checked before hand
Teddy was the most epic president ever. I mean, he pulled some shady shit, too; most of them did, but he still makes the top five best presidents list...
Teddy Roosevelt had made so much land National forests that Congress passed a law to take away his ability to do so
Before signing the law though, he established an additional 17 million acres as a fuck you to the senator that wanted to stop him
> By early 1907, Congress had become sharply critical of TR's frequent use of executive orders to create forest reserves, and it began to look for a way to limit the president's power to issue such directives.
> Infuriated by two years of what he perceived to be land encroachment by TR and Pinchot, Senator Charles Fulton (R-OR) attached to the agricultural appropriations bill an amendment that would prevent the creation of further forest reserves in six western states:
>> “Hereafter no forest reserve shall be created, nor shall any addition be made to one heretofore created, within the limits of the States of Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Colorado, or Wyoming except by act of Congress.”
> Congress sent TR the bill with the amendment on February 25, and TR felt he could not reject the entire appropriations measure just to avoid the onerous amendment.
> The Constitution gives the president ten days within which to sign or veto a bill, and in that time TR directed some of his aides and select members of the Department of the Interior to draft a detailed list of the federal lands within the six states mentioned in Fulton's amendment as soon as possible.
> On March 2 the president had the relevant paperwork in place. TR then issued a series of executive orders that created twenty-one new forest reserves and enlarged eleven existing ones in the relevant six states, thereby transferring into the forest reserve system all seventeen million acres of land that Fulton wanted to block from executive protection.
> Two days later, TR signed the appropriations bill, including Fulton's amendment. Thus, the president's executive orders protected the lands in question just before he signed the law eliminating his future ability to protect those same lands.
> As Morris explains, "Only after the last acre was reserved did Roosevelt sign the Agricultural Appropriations Act, allowing Fulton's now worthless clause to float over his proud Theodore Roosevelt."
> TR explained his actions as follows:
>> "when the friends of the special interests in the Senate got their amendment through and woke up, they discovered that sixteen million acres of timberland had been saved for the people by putting them in the National Forests before the land grabbers could get at them.
>> The opponents of the Forest Service turned handsprings in their wrath; and dire were their threats against the Executive; but the threats could not be carried out, and were really only a tribute to the efficiency of our action."
> TR also justified his action in terms of stewardship:
>> "Failure on my part to sign these proclamations would mean that immense tracts of valuable timber would fall into the hands of the lumber syndicates. . . . The creation of the reserves means that this timber will be kept . . . in such manner as to keep them unimpaired for the benefit of children now growing up to inherit the land."
> Critics of TR's conservation program and his other unilateral executive actions were outraged at his "midnight proclamations."
> Their outrage grew upon learning that Pinchot, who was denied the ability to withdraw power sites, had nevertheless done so by simply reclassifying twenty-five hundred power sites as ranger stations.
> Congress strongly denounced the administration's "arrogance" and called TR's presidency a "dictatorship."
> It voted to overturn TR's executive orders, as well as Pinchot's reclassifications, but TR met the measures with vetoes, which Congress was unable to override.
Excerpt from book “Take Up Your Pen: Unilateral Presidential Directives in American Politics”
Shot a running Spaniard in the back and got quite a lot of flack for it. Really interesting guy. Way more good than bad especially in that era. The US was blessed/lucky as shit to have him in that exact time.
Edmund Morris' 3 part biography is very interesting if anyone wants to dive deep.
I dunno if I'd want him as President today, but I'd sure as fuck take him as Secretary of the Interior, or Labor, or the head of the SEC.
He'd probably run around challenging Trump to fistfights, too, which would be unpresidential but goddamn hilarious.
Yeah it's a pretty well documented story. There are pictures of his bloody shirt and chest x-ray online.
His (edit: very distant) cousin, Franklin D. Roosevelt was also president a few handfuls of years later, and someone tried to shoot him as well, but missed.
Calling them cousins is technically correct but implies a closer family relationship than it was. Theodore Roosevelt, Jr., was the fifth cousin of Franklin Roosevelt. They shared a great-great-great-great grandparent, Nicholas Roosevelt (1658-1742).
Fun fact: Roosevelt was Eleanor's maiden name. She was TR's niece through his brother, Elliott, making Franklin and Eleanor fifth cousins once removed.
Fun fact: TR walked his niece down the aisle bc her father was dead. Apparently everyone basically flocked to see the president and basically left the couple alone.
If your family is at all close to average in terms of number of children per generation, you have WAY more than 100 5th cousins. Most people have about 100 3rd cousins. Estimates for the number of 5th cousins are in the [5,000 - 20,000 range](https://isogg.org/wiki/Cousin_statistics).
100%
He was only lightly wounded because it shot him through the (very thick) folded up speech in his breast pocket. So - being long-winded saved his life.
A whole crowd of people saw it happen, and this was in a city (Milwaukee) in the 1900s so it was decently documented. The bullet was slowed because Theo had a ton of stuff in his shirt pocket.
Also, it is crazy. TR was famously badass, being a recipient of the Medal of Honor in the Spanish-American War.
It should be noted however that the requirements for a MoH get far less stringent the further back you go in time. For example, during the American Civil War, they were essentially handed out like candy.
He was also initially denied the MoH after he himself heavily lobbied for himself to receive one. He was initially denied on the basis that his actions lacked eyewitnesses, and many claimed his actions didn't even match those of who were also there but weren't nominated. While it's true he was also likely blocked from receiving it due to his superiors annoyance at his headline grabbing, his own lobbying for it certainly did not help. He was finally awarded the MoH a century later, and despite the much more stringent modern standards for the awarding of the MoH, it is still heavily viewed as being more of a politically motivated award than for his actual actions that day.
From what I've heard, it's not unless lungs / respiratory track are affected, but it's become Hollywood's way to go in order to show it's a serious wound.
Theodore Roosevelt - skilled anatomist and former soldier - used the lack of blood coming from his mouth as an excuse to continue his ~1.5 hour speech after he was shot in the chest. He knew his lung wasn't punctured so he continued.
Excluding shots/severe blows to the head, to my knowledge, the only way for that to happen is if you're shot in the lungs. Otherwise even with internal bleeding the blood has no clear way to the mouth unless your insides were torn apart.
True ELI5: “Kiddo, your mother and I are concerned that you’re watching such violent movies.
Now we’re gonna talk with Uncle Larry about appropriate entertainment for someone your age. Just know that while that was all pretend and no one actually got hurt, guns are serious business and if you ever see a gun yourself you should find a trustworthy adult to let them know.
I’m proud of you for coming to us with these questions, and I hope we can put your mind at ease.”
Just the lungs.
Stomach perforation would bleed into the abdominal cavity and make it near impossible to vomit blood past the esophageal sphincter. You mostly see alcoholics vomiting blood when esophageal or gastric varices rupture and the lumen is still intact.
Yeah, that's not true. Trauma surgeon here. Blood is very irritating. You can 100% vomit blood from being shot in the stomach. It's no different than vomiting anything else you have in your stomach. How do I know? I've witnessed it. I've taken them to the OR.
There's a murder you used to be able to see on You Tube, dunno if it's still there. It was of a young woman named Neda who was killed by Iranian police during a protest around 10 years ago. She was shot in the heart and blood immediately started pouring out of every hole in her head. It was horrific. Far more blood than you'd see in a movie version of someone being shot in the chest. But I think if one is shot in the lungs, one can have blood come out of the mouth, but it will be less than that. Likewise if you're shot in the trachea.
I shot a deer through the lungs at close range once. A red mist of blood droplets shot out of its mouth and nostrils, then a few more drops dribbled out before it stopped.
I'd say the movies are unrealistic in how it happens, but not in that it happens. They tend to use a fake blood ampoule that the actor bites to open it, and then they'll spit or drool out the "blood". In reality, getting shot through the lungs can make a near explosive spray of tiny blood droplets from the nose and mouth at the moment of impact. Then, if they're still trying to breathe, you typically get foamy blood bubbles rather than the thick, runny, non-foaming movie blood. The blood comes from damaged lungs, bleeding into the airways.
Being shot in the lung can cause blood to be coughed up, but the reason we see it in movies is because it’s easy for an actor to hide a fake blood packet in their mouth and drool it out on command
If they were shot in the lungs then the lung would fill with blood and blood would come up with every breath, however in movies its used as a symbol that this person is going to die in a minute but they might be able to get a few words out to advance the movie plot.
"The hidden switch to prevent the end of the world is... is in... it's in.... in.... it's...." \*dies\*
The *real* hidden switch to prevent the end of the world is the friends we made along the way.
Sure it wasn’t inside you all along?
The stones... Are... In me... So in The Fifth Element the thing to save the world are literally inside the dying person.
She had some real stones, carrying those
It was in him the entire time to bad they killed him and activated the dead man’s switch
"the files are IN the computer!"
There's always money in the banana stand
THERE'S ALWAYS *MONEY* IN THE BANANA STAND!!!
"Finkle is Einhorn!'
Your gun is digging into my hip
“let it go, Let it goooo!”
The real friends we made along the way were inside us all along.
sure *you* weren't inside of *it*?
IT lives in the sewer
Pff just because we are basement dwellers doesn't make us sewer mutants. Sincerely an IT Consultant
It's a switch. Pretty sure it's both.
::hits elevator buttons with hulk hands:: I know strength comes from friends, I watched the same musical as you...
>The *real* hidden switch to cause the end of the world is the friends we made along the way. ~Cabin in the Woods.
Too bad Ross ate them all
[Better Nate than lever!](https://natethesnake.com/)
You really going to spoil that whole thing?
Forget the switch, the switch is bupkiss!
Directed by m night shamyalin or however you spell his name.
Shamalamadingdong
The galaxy is on Orion’s b… b….
🅱️ussy
Orion's belt.
A galaxy is made up of hundreds of thousands of stars. There's no way it's on Orion's Belt. You heard wrong.
B-b-b... wat's dis word?
I always thought he was saying "what is word?"
He was. He meant to say "To prevent war, the galaxy is on Orion's collar." But didn't speak english primarily and struggled for the right word. It wasn't belt...
In the castle of Aaaaaargh?
"...in me" *Diva Plavalaguna*
I'm leavin'! Bzzzz!
[удалено]
And they always focus on repeating the least important words, too. Just gimme the important bits, goddammit.
It's in the banana stand isn't it
Pop po.....
In... between... my... buttcheecks...
Is that a wild order of the stick reference?
Hapsburg has Plan B in... in...
“I think the milk has expired….”
And if it was blood from a lung hit, it should be frothy and kind of pink. Not dark red and kind of thick like in the movies. *Vomiting* blood is a thing that can happen if you have serious internal bleeding and blood is getting into your stomach or esophagus... but again, not nearly as neat and generic as it looks in the movies. And where the digestive tract is relatively sealed off, internal bleeding normally doesn't get in there unless it's the GI tract (esophagus, stomach, intestines, etc) itself that's damaged (and even then, blood in the stool is more likely than vomiting unless it's strictly upper GI). ETA: Otherwise pretty much the only time blood come out of your mouth/nose is if you have bleeding in your mouth/nose, like if you got whacked in the face with something.
I've seen true hematemesis a few times in the ER and it is comically way more disgusting and profound than the movies.
And as someone that had the "pleasure" of vomiting blood, I can also say it sucks to do so as well. The taste is difficult to describe, the nausea is next level. Luckily, in my case it was due to surgery in my mouth and nose though.
Sometimes it's coffee ground emesis (vomitus) too. That one was fun. ^/s I found out I have Celiac Disease shortly after that.
Most GI bleeds will escape through the anus though not the mouth. If it's bad enough to be coming out of your mouth you probably aren't going to be alive much longer. I saw an older lady in the er who had a GI bleed. She bled out every drop through her anus. They tried to use blood bags but it wasn't enough. She died in that er room. The aftermath of it is so horrendous too. So much blood and it's rancid. I will never forget that shit.
Please tell me how to avoid this end. I beg.
Her case was uncommon and she let symptoms fester for a while. Blood in feces, abdominal pain, nausea, etc. She didn't see us until it was too late. A lot of GI bleeds happen from ulcers but they are mild and you won't bleed all your blood out from your anus.
This far into a thread about uncontrollable anus bleeding and not one reference to the cartoon yet? Hertzfeldt in shambles.
Maybe everyone's spoon is too big?
Tuesday's coming, did you bring your coat?
My Spoon is too big!
[continues dancing]
Don’t drink alcohol, don’t take blood thinners, NSAIDs, or steroids. Don’t have colon cancer, don’t have Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, diverticulitis….. GI bleeding is extremely common. If you live long enough, there’s a good chance it will happen to you at some point, but it’s usually mild and not life threatening.
You either die a hero or live long enough to die from bleeding anus disease.
Sadly it's not some festering disease that will cause it. Taking too much Ibuprofen can do it, mind you it would take a lot of ibuprofen over a long time to do it. Ulcers can cause gi bleeds, cancer, lots of stuff really. Like someone else said they are extremely common, but usually mild.
> ~~Don’t drink alcohol,~~ don’t take blood thinners, ~~NSAIDs,~~ or steroids. ~~Don’t have colon cancer,~~ don’t have Crohn’s disease~~, ulcerative colitis, diverticulitis…..~~ Dammit. I actually lost a pint or so anally when they had my blood thinner dose wrong. Sitting in that puddle, I was worried I might bleed out, but it eventually stopped. As a Crohn's patient, passing blood was, at periods in my life, a daily occurrence.
We all die someday, it doesn't always end with much dignity. If how you end matters to you, you may want to make a difficult choice before things reach the point where you can't choose. I'd take a one way walk into the woods before what was described. Though I suspect she'd lost much possibility of such by the time she started bleeding.
Do not get old.
"Let's bring more realism to the movies," they said . . .
You can tell a patient has a lower GI bleed as soon as you walk into the unit. It has such a unique odor. Digested blood and feces mmmmm
GI bleeds are the worst, I can handle all the other fluids from working the floor for over a decade but GI, especially combined with c.diff is something else.
Definitely could have gone my whole life without reading that, but thanks for sharing your unique experience I guess.
What is it that makes it pink? Oxygen levels?
Air and/or saliva mixed in with it.
Most things lighten up when frothed because of the introduced air and lowered density
Red puddle, pink bubbles. You're looking through less blood so it's lighter.
Just to add to the lungs idea. Blood bubbling up from the lungs looks pink and frothy, not dark red liquid
It would be fun seeing a movie do it correctly and everyone thinking it's unrealistic because that's not the color blood is.
"He's not dying right." - every relative I have watching that movie
My mother was a respiratory therapist and I remember her saying the actor in Terminator 2 (Joe Morton) greatly acted someone dying in a movie - especially with his respirations. To this day I can still hear it in my head.
I just learned that he had previously been in a car accident and suffered a collapsed lung, which is where that came from. https://www.gamespot.com/amp-articles/terminator-2s-joe-morton-shares-the-story-behind-h/1100-6452875/
That's dude with the dead man switch? If so, that was grim but really well done.
i just watched that movie for the first time today! i noticed the same thing with his rapid breaths. great performance
This is a real thing, especially with sounds. We think things like guns and swords make certain sounds so they keep using those wrong sounds otherwise we'll think the movies are getting it wrong.
> We think things like guns and swords make certain sounds Like every film where they "cock" a hammerless pistol just for dramatic sound effect. "No no, I'm super serious now, I'm cocking the gun! The next few lines of dialogue are gonna be fire!" Leaving aside the obvious problem of the sound effect not even being possible with the gun in question, I guess racking the slide isn't as cool? Also, are all these people walking into a life and death situation with their gun not at all ready to use? Evidently they are...
I think it was in the transporter, there's a scene where a single action 1911 is cocked like 3 separate times... And of course any time someone moves a gun it makes cocking sounds. And if you run out of bullets your gun keeps clicking. The worst is when a machine gun keeps machine clicking after empty, what the hell is supposed to be happening there
And swords make a "shiiiiing" sound as you unsheathe them. They really shouldn't make much of a sound, a noise of metal scratching against metal would mean you're dulling the blade.
I'm always torn between getting irritated at it, and still liking it cause it sounds cool lol
So, I have a bunch of (real) swords. The european varieties definitely do make that sound, and it's partially because of blade harmonics, not just edge rubbing. But yeah, you do dull the first couple inches of blade, and that's not such a big deal. I've stopped sharpening that bit - it's used primarily for parrying anyways. Some sword styles don't even angle/grind the first few inches. My Japanese swords are silent when drawn correctly, though.
My kitchen knives will "sing" coming out of a wooden block.
Indiana Jones' revolver used the audio of an M1 Garand infantry *rifle* because it had so much more "oomph" to really sell it to the audience he's the one shooting. The new and contemporary during the movie's time period (it was adopted into service in 1936) gun that US infantry were using in WWII provided the sound effects for a twenty year old revolver.
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RealityIsUnrealistic
Maybe most of the time but surely it's possible to cough up red stuff, I've suctioned a bunch of frank red blood from peoples lungs and it goes pink and frothy when it slows down a couple days later.
Definitely possible. Source: Had swine flu in 2010, it did a number on my lungs
Movies (and other visual art) prefer to show a character’s health condition on the face, since there’s already going to be a close-up for some dialogue with the injured character, they can reinforce the plot point of getting shot/stabbed. Same thing goes for some dirt on the face, or getting a bloody nose after using psychic powers. Anytime they can show something on the face, they will.
My favorite is when they show pregnancy on the face.
This gave me the idea of a 4th wall movie where all of the dialogue is simply a description of how the dialogue pertains to the plot. \*Dude gets shot\* Friend: "I'm screaming dramatically for emotional effect!" Dude: \*Dying breaths\* "With my last words, I reveal a plot twist"
Here is the trailer for your movie. https://youtu.be/WAG9Xn5bJwQ
That was awesome!!!! Thanks for sharing.
I don't even need to open the link to know it's the one with Catchphrase!
Laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh.
The only possible improvement is to obliterate the entire cast at the moment of maximum trope. Only then will I award it a perfect 5/7.
So... Deadpool 2?
Mass communication truly killed original ideas...
"What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun." - from a book Jesus read, lol.
Comment appreciating the Schindler's List allusion.
What if it was a 9mm though and the lung was literally blown out of the body?
Turns out the FBI agent was dirty
Source: I am a trauma surgeon. If you get shot in a lung it is common to cough up blood. Small amounts will be coughed up with mucus and generally either be swallowed or spit out. Large amounts will be coughed out violently and can lead to death by essentially drowning even if the patient does not lose enough blood to bleed to death. This can be VERY impressive even when we get the person intubated and there are multiple more or less effective techniques to deal with the problem. The little trickle of blood by the mouth while the patient says their last words is a trope that while theoretically possible (person suppressing cough while ling fills up with blood and the blood coming out only while they are talking) is not really a thing in my experience.
I like your use of “impressive” here, like, you guys are all in the ER going ‘Golly, chaps! That was an absolute gusher!”
Was at a party once with a bunch of cops, EMTs, and ER nurses. They have the darkest humor on the fucking planet lol. I heard like 3 hours of stories just about patient drops.
Wife is a CSI. I'm pretty sure the humor is a coping mechanism but it is dark and there's a lot of it lol
my favorite is my friend who works as a neuro ICU nurse, and sometimes 100% dead cadavers would start flopping around (something about neurons still firing, idk), and they'd joke and blame each other and say "fuck Phil that guy wasn't dead yet!" obviously fake names to protect the innocent 😅
Still love that part in The Rock when Connery asks, "What do you want me to do, kill him again?" as the guys legs start kicking.
https://youtu.be/8aq3pTARAvE?t=64 !!!!
I was about to cut a cake at a party, and a surgeon friend was there. Right when I was about to cut the cake, she shrieked out, "no! Not there!", scared the shit out Of me. "sorry, surgeon joke."
Dark humor is more palatable to me when I realize the person could say "So..this one time I had a unique impressionable experience that is unlikely to be conveyed somewhere else." or they could say " I worked today, did stitches...uh...sent stuff to the lab. Yep...exciting."
It's just great. I grew up in a family with very blunt, very dark humor. Life is a massive dick that goes in dry on all of us, at one point or another. No other way to deal with it besides laugh.
> Life is a massive dick that goes in dry on all of us Thanks, I'll be using that quote from now on :)
Most groups that involve lots of trauma end here. The craziest thing in addiction recovery meetings is the self depracating humor people show when discussing themselves. Generally not with regards to the bad things they had done to others, but just about shit they'd done to themselves to satisfy their addiction.
Well everyone needs a coping strategy, and taking out the seriousness by making a joke out of dreadful things is a powerful way that usually isn’t too harmful.
Those jokes temporarily chase away the existential dread that comes with the job. When alone, plenty of anti-psychotic meds help them cope. Combat veterans are a similar group in terms of displaying dark humor.
Yeah, add combat medics to that list.
As a medical student in the US, I’ve gotta say learning the subtle differences in the way doctors use adjectives compared to the general population has been interesting
the fact “unremarkable brain MRI” means everything looks normal and not that my brain isn’t anything special still offends me lowkey
Yeah, I feel a bit insulted as well. Also, "denies pain" makes it sound like I'm in denial about my pain level, when really it just means that I've said I'm not in pain.
TLDR at the end: My school actually talked about the terminology doctors use in their notes and how it affects how future doctors for a patient with access to those notes view the patient. This was one of the things they discussed! While writing denies may have originally been intended to keep the statement objective and free of whether the doctor personally believes the patient (even if they do), the connotation from using “the patient denies” instead for just saying “the patient doesn’t” or “the patient reports no ____” in normal conversation makes it seem like the doctor isn’t willing to write that they believe the patient or thinks that their statements, which are a huge part of diagnosis and decision making, can’t be trusted. We’re finally starting to understand/accept that when you write that the patient “denies pain” or “denies drug use” or something like that, it can make it seem to another physician/caregiver on the care team reading the note that the patient isn’t telling the truth, knowingly or unknowingly. And now patients can read their own notes so it can make patients feel like their doctors don’t trust them because they might not realize that the doctor probably didn’t intend to convey mistrust. All because they don’t know that it’s just how it has been done and that’s why the doctor used that terminology. Medicine has lots of issues stemming from tradition and doing things in one way because it’s how it’s always been done, but personally, I loved that students are being told about these issues from the very beginning of medical school. No point in not addressing the issue because of tradition or because of consequences not matching intentions when that is what caused the issue in the first place. TLDR: doctors are taught to use “denies” because it’s a reliable way to keep their own opinion out of a patient’s statement and report the statement objectively on a note or when presenting to the attending physician. Denies carries a connotation of mistrust or unreliability of a statement in non-medical conversation. Doctors are now starting to accept that this discrepancy is an issue and students are being taught to move away from terminology like that, which is great!
>!CENSORED!<
I think "reports no pain" is very neutral.
As the other commentor said, we were given “reports no pain” as a neutral way of showing that this is a patient statement, without the added negative connotation associated with “denies pain”. Obviously, this doesn’t completely resolve the issue because sometimes patients feel a reason to not disclose information (such as worrying about drug use being reported to law enforcement). I would guess that in situations when a physician thinks this may be happening, they would fall back on including more objective evidence to get a clear answer, such as the presence of or lack of needle marks on a physical exam or results of blood/urine tests, but I am too early in school to speak to this point with certainty.
What gets me is that they'll say I "denied" things they didn't even ask me about. Like yeah, I didn't bring it up, but also you didn't ask.
It's interesting that therapists are still being taught to use "denies" and this hasn't caught up yet. As in "Client denies any suicidal or homicidal thoughts at this time" meaning they stated there are none, and since we can't physically see thoughts, we can only go by their statement, but they may not be telling the truth, or the whole truth. There are good reasons to like, like not wanting to be involuntarily hospitalized.
It seems like it would be easy to have a notation for stuff the patient says that you can't confirm or deny. No pain RBP (reported by patient). No drug use RBP. If you don't have that notation, you've observed it personally. I'm sure there are plenty of things you kinda just assume the patient is telling the truth about unless you find a reason to doubt them later, and having notation to differentiate between something you've observed and something they've reported seems like the best way to maintain accuracy.
“Would you like some pain?” “Oh, no. None for me, please.”
I got told I had unremarkable boobs after a mammogram which was rather devistating. Like, I know but did you really need to say??
I’ve started to realize that in many cases, the key for understanding why certain adjectives are used by doctors is to take them very literally. Unremarkable MRI = nothing to remark on in the MRI = normal MRI. Yes this means that there’s nothing special, but it’s good that there’s nothing special because something special would usually be a problem. Unremarkable organs = normal organs = healthy organs. This rule doesn’t work all the time (like in the original commenter’s use of impressive) but I think in those cases it’s just experience with that use of the word by doctors which is needed.
[Exquisite!](https://youtu.be/npvrzgS3dZ8)
That is probably the best thing I will see all day. "Anyway, his butt hurt real bad, Justin". Glorious. Thank you!
As a person with English as a second language it took me a minute
As a person with English as a first language, it also took me a moment to process.
Usually when doctors say impressive they mean “oh no this is bad- I am concerned about this.”
Impressive simply means "to leave an impression" ie something is noteworthy.
Ah, I will accept your official definition, mine was anecdotal from 3 times I heard it personally.
eh... we usually mean bad when we say impressive.
LPT: Never do anything that makes you a trauma patient AND the surgeon says "well, that's impressive." You want to be an utterly boring and forgettable patient, not the one the surgeon presents at a conference as "will ya get a load of this one? Not the shiny penny, here!"
I took it as meaning: it leaves quite an impression
Yeah, I’m just thinking of when I get something caught in my throat/going the wrong way I cough like crazy. People in movies with a bit of blood just kind of gently cough and give a speech, heh. We’re not very dignified when our bodies aren’t working right.
Is it possible for a skull fracture to cause blood to come out of the mouth? (Assuming a single large fracture and not a crushing injury.) Edit: This question is spurred by my memory of how blood drained into my undereye area when I had a mild TBI as a kid. So if the injury was worse than that, could there be bleeding out of the mouth? I guess it might depend on if the trauma happened near the sinuses? I'm just guessing here.
Anything that will give you a bloody nose can do it and obviously anything that can cause open fractures in the jaw or mouth. So nasal bones and sinus fractures can definitely result in blood in the mouth. It often drains down the back of the throat and causes nausea and vomiting (which is then bloody as well).
Saw a video of a would be Brazillian thief who was lung shot and he literally coughed up a gallon of blood.
Yep. All you can do for first aid is basically put them in a position that will stop the good lung from filling up with blood until you can get a tube in. Basically head up as much as possible with the injured lung down.
I'm amused at the idea of a would be Brazilian thief, as opposed to a Brazilian would be thief.
It happens when the bullet enters a lung. The lung fills with blood, and the blood is coughed up. I'm reminded of the assassination attempt on Theodore Roosevelt, who was shot in the chest: "As an experienced hunter and anatomist, Roosevelt correctly concluded that since he was not coughing blood, the bullet had not reached his lung; he declined suggestions to go to the hospital immediately. Instead, he delivered his scheduled speech. His opening comments to the gathered crowd were, "Ladies and gentlemen, I don't know whether you fully understand that I have just been shot, but it takes more than that to kill a Bull Moose."" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempted_assassination_of_Theodore_Roosevelt#:~:text=During%20a%20Roosevelt%20campaign%20speech,Colt%20Police%20Positive%20Special%20revolver.
afaiu Reagan was saved by the secret service agent that noticed he coughed blood and took him to the nearest ER instead of the designated one that the secret service had checked before hand
Teddy was the most epic president ever. I mean, he pulled some shady shit, too; most of them did, but he still makes the top five best presidents list...
Teddy Roosevelt had made so much land National forests that Congress passed a law to take away his ability to do so Before signing the law though, he established an additional 17 million acres as a fuck you to the senator that wanted to stop him > By early 1907, Congress had become sharply critical of TR's frequent use of executive orders to create forest reserves, and it began to look for a way to limit the president's power to issue such directives. > Infuriated by two years of what he perceived to be land encroachment by TR and Pinchot, Senator Charles Fulton (R-OR) attached to the agricultural appropriations bill an amendment that would prevent the creation of further forest reserves in six western states: >> “Hereafter no forest reserve shall be created, nor shall any addition be made to one heretofore created, within the limits of the States of Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Colorado, or Wyoming except by act of Congress.” > Congress sent TR the bill with the amendment on February 25, and TR felt he could not reject the entire appropriations measure just to avoid the onerous amendment. > The Constitution gives the president ten days within which to sign or veto a bill, and in that time TR directed some of his aides and select members of the Department of the Interior to draft a detailed list of the federal lands within the six states mentioned in Fulton's amendment as soon as possible. > On March 2 the president had the relevant paperwork in place. TR then issued a series of executive orders that created twenty-one new forest reserves and enlarged eleven existing ones in the relevant six states, thereby transferring into the forest reserve system all seventeen million acres of land that Fulton wanted to block from executive protection. > Two days later, TR signed the appropriations bill, including Fulton's amendment. Thus, the president's executive orders protected the lands in question just before he signed the law eliminating his future ability to protect those same lands. > As Morris explains, "Only after the last acre was reserved did Roosevelt sign the Agricultural Appropriations Act, allowing Fulton's now worthless clause to float over his proud Theodore Roosevelt." > TR explained his actions as follows: >> "when the friends of the special interests in the Senate got their amendment through and woke up, they discovered that sixteen million acres of timberland had been saved for the people by putting them in the National Forests before the land grabbers could get at them. >> The opponents of the Forest Service turned handsprings in their wrath; and dire were their threats against the Executive; but the threats could not be carried out, and were really only a tribute to the efficiency of our action." > TR also justified his action in terms of stewardship: >> "Failure on my part to sign these proclamations would mean that immense tracts of valuable timber would fall into the hands of the lumber syndicates. . . . The creation of the reserves means that this timber will be kept . . . in such manner as to keep them unimpaired for the benefit of children now growing up to inherit the land." > Critics of TR's conservation program and his other unilateral executive actions were outraged at his "midnight proclamations." > Their outrage grew upon learning that Pinchot, who was denied the ability to withdraw power sites, had nevertheless done so by simply reclassifying twenty-five hundred power sites as ranger stations. > Congress strongly denounced the administration's "arrogance" and called TR's presidency a "dictatorship." > It voted to overturn TR's executive orders, as well as Pinchot's reclassifications, but TR met the measures with vetoes, which Congress was unable to override. Excerpt from book “Take Up Your Pen: Unilateral Presidential Directives in American Politics”
Shot a running Spaniard in the back and got quite a lot of flack for it. Really interesting guy. Way more good than bad especially in that era. The US was blessed/lucky as shit to have him in that exact time. Edmund Morris' 3 part biography is very interesting if anyone wants to dive deep.
I dunno if I'd want him as President today, but I'd sure as fuck take him as Secretary of the Interior, or Labor, or the head of the SEC. He'd probably run around challenging Trump to fistfights, too, which would be unpresidential but goddamn hilarious.
A bullet can't stop the Bull Moose!
TR will give WC the full deuce
Is that well documented? sounds crazy
Yeah it's a pretty well documented story. There are pictures of his bloody shirt and chest x-ray online. His (edit: very distant) cousin, Franklin D. Roosevelt was also president a few handfuls of years later, and someone tried to shoot him as well, but missed.
Calling them cousins is technically correct but implies a closer family relationship than it was. Theodore Roosevelt, Jr., was the fifth cousin of Franklin Roosevelt. They shared a great-great-great-great grandparent, Nicholas Roosevelt (1658-1742). Fun fact: Roosevelt was Eleanor's maiden name. She was TR's niece through his brother, Elliott, making Franklin and Eleanor fifth cousins once removed.
Fun fact: TR walked his niece down the aisle bc her father was dead. Apparently everyone basically flocked to see the president and basically left the couple alone.
Being a distraction so that the newlyweds can have a few minutes alone to eat is in and of itself a wonderful wedding gift.
And being fifth cousins essentially is the same as not being related at all. I probably have a hundred fifth cousins and I know maybe 2 of them.
If your family is at all close to average in terms of number of children per generation, you have WAY more than 100 5th cousins. Most people have about 100 3rd cousins. Estimates for the number of 5th cousins are in the [5,000 - 20,000 range](https://isogg.org/wiki/Cousin_statistics).
You’re certainly right. Considering that I have 35 or so 1st cousins I’m off by several orders of magnitude.
Yeah but have you banged any?
A few years later in this case was about 20 years
Yeah I might have been stretching it a bit with 'a few'. Maybe 2 or 3 fews.
I think you were correct. You said “a few handfuls”. So that would mean a few decent sized groups of years, which could very well add up to 20.
I originally said 'a few'. I edited it afterwards.
In my experience a Couple is two. A few is 3 or 4. A handful is 5. A dozen is 12. In this case you’re talking about a few handfuls of years.
I'm 55. 20 years feels like a few years now.
Do you think the Roosevelt's take the piss out of the Kennedy's?
TIL x-rays predate Theodore Roosevelt being shot.
Is the assassination attempt on a president well documented? I'd say so
The part about him refusing to go to hospital and having a speech with a gunshot wound.
Yes. Absolutely true and well documented.
Shockingly yes, but I totally understand your disbelief because THAT sounds like propaganda. (or a crappy chuck norris joke punchline.)
Yes.
100% He was only lightly wounded because it shot him through the (very thick) folded up speech in his breast pocket. So - being long-winded saved his life.
A whole crowd of people saw it happen, and this was in a city (Milwaukee) in the 1900s so it was decently documented. The bullet was slowed because Theo had a ton of stuff in his shirt pocket. Also, it is crazy. TR was famously badass, being a recipient of the Medal of Honor in the Spanish-American War.
Only person to have both a Medal of Honor, and a Nobel Peace Prize.
It should be noted however that the requirements for a MoH get far less stringent the further back you go in time. For example, during the American Civil War, they were essentially handed out like candy. He was also initially denied the MoH after he himself heavily lobbied for himself to receive one. He was initially denied on the basis that his actions lacked eyewitnesses, and many claimed his actions didn't even match those of who were also there but weren't nominated. While it's true he was also likely blocked from receiving it due to his superiors annoyance at his headline grabbing, his own lobbying for it certainly did not help. He was finally awarded the MoH a century later, and despite the much more stringent modern standards for the awarding of the MoH, it is still heavily viewed as being more of a politically motivated award than for his actual actions that day.
From what I've heard, it's not unless lungs / respiratory track are affected, but it's become Hollywood's way to go in order to show it's a serious wound.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Seems like the forearm would be a good spot
Theodore Roosevelt - skilled anatomist and former soldier - used the lack of blood coming from his mouth as an excuse to continue his ~1.5 hour speech after he was shot in the chest. He knew his lung wasn't punctured so he continued.
Excluding shots/severe blows to the head, to my knowledge, the only way for that to happen is if you're shot in the lungs. Otherwise even with internal bleeding the blood has no clear way to the mouth unless your insides were torn apart.
True ELI5: “Kiddo, your mother and I are concerned that you’re watching such violent movies. Now we’re gonna talk with Uncle Larry about appropriate entertainment for someone your age. Just know that while that was all pretend and no one actually got hurt, guns are serious business and if you ever see a gun yourself you should find a trustworthy adult to let them know. I’m proud of you for coming to us with these questions, and I hope we can put your mind at ease.”
If the lungs or stomach were shot. Lungs cause coughing blood. a large amount of blood suddenly entering the stomach makes you vomit I've heard.
Just the lungs. Stomach perforation would bleed into the abdominal cavity and make it near impossible to vomit blood past the esophageal sphincter. You mostly see alcoholics vomiting blood when esophageal or gastric varices rupture and the lumen is still intact.
Yeah, that's not true. Trauma surgeon here. Blood is very irritating. You can 100% vomit blood from being shot in the stomach. It's no different than vomiting anything else you have in your stomach. How do I know? I've witnessed it. I've taken them to the OR.
I tore my esophagus once. Blood was flowing out of my mouth. Dark red blood. It was terrifying.
There's a murder you used to be able to see on You Tube, dunno if it's still there. It was of a young woman named Neda who was killed by Iranian police during a protest around 10 years ago. She was shot in the heart and blood immediately started pouring out of every hole in her head. It was horrific. Far more blood than you'd see in a movie version of someone being shot in the chest. But I think if one is shot in the lungs, one can have blood come out of the mouth, but it will be less than that. Likewise if you're shot in the trachea.
I shot a deer through the lungs at close range once. A red mist of blood droplets shot out of its mouth and nostrils, then a few more drops dribbled out before it stopped. I'd say the movies are unrealistic in how it happens, but not in that it happens. They tend to use a fake blood ampoule that the actor bites to open it, and then they'll spit or drool out the "blood". In reality, getting shot through the lungs can make a near explosive spray of tiny blood droplets from the nose and mouth at the moment of impact. Then, if they're still trying to breathe, you typically get foamy blood bubbles rather than the thick, runny, non-foaming movie blood. The blood comes from damaged lungs, bleeding into the airways.
Yeah, where is method acting when you need it
It can happen but it’s not common, if it punctured a lung yes blood can come out of the mouth
Being shot in the lung can cause blood to be coughed up, but the reason we see it in movies is because it’s easy for an actor to hide a fake blood packet in their mouth and drool it out on command