Been watching this awesome Smithsonian series on Netflix...Aviation disasters or something...look it up, won't be disappointed....

Got me thinking back to the early 90's when I trained and how there was so much equivalency being drawn by heavy hitters in anesthesia to aviation. Something about that had my BS monitors going off, but being a student, I couldn't put my finger on it. Common sense dictated that they were both high risk, but that's where the comparison ended. Aviation was always presented as a way for anesthesia to become safer.

It's pretty much apples to oranges, but hour for hour, anesthesia/surgery is more lethal than flying. So when all is said and done, we, arguably, are more experienced in disasters than they are. And it's not for lack of tutoring from aviators. A dubious distinction, I know.

I'm not trying to be naīve...there are parallels I know but there are some pretty major departures that make what we do and aviation totally unrelated. I've never heard of an anesthetist dying along with his or her patient. Nor is there any type of formal NTSB sort of organization that reconstructs a disaster second by second in anesthesia (maybe there should be). Joan Rivers aside, our disasters, by and large end with the funeral and settlement/judgement. They are not anywhere near the public spectacle a plan crash is.

Sometimes the real story is never made public, unlike air disasters.

Any way, that's just a long winded way of saying that the comparisons of anesthesia and aviation are BS, IMHO.

So there.