58-year-old Dies while Mountain Biking!

In article ,
Mike Vandeman wrote:

On 4 Sep 2006 07:05:10 -0700, "CanopyCo" wrote:

Mike Vandeman wrote:
More evidence that mountain biking's alleged "health benefits" are
exaggerated. If you die, where is the net benefit???

He died of a heart attack.
That can happen during any kind of exercise.

But it didn't. He didn't die from running marathons. He died from
MOUNTAIN BIKING. Face the facts!

Mike, you are ignoring the root cause of his death, which is a heart
attack of some form.

Otherwise per your logic, we can equally say that guy died of LIVING ON
EARTH. Yep, net benefit is dust to dust...
--

Mike Vandeman wrote:
On 4 Sep 2006 07:05:10 -0700, "CanopyCo" wrote:


Mike Vandeman wrote:

But it didn't. He didn't die from running marathons. He died from
MOUNTAIN BIKING. Face the facts!


Is this what you've come to Mike?
You've finally reached a new low.....
You know you're wrong, and your "word play" is something I would expect
out of a teenager, not someone who proclaims to have a PhD.

Mike Vandeman wrote in
:

More evidence that mountain biking's alleged "health benefits" are
exaggerated. If you die, where is the net benefit???

Mike



If this is an example of your logic, then you are no scientist, and can
never claim that anything you have ever said (wriiten) has a basis in
science.


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 14:21:52 -0400, pmhilton wrote:

Mike Vandeman wrote:
It's OBVIOUS!


Your opinion that a given conclusion is obvious is very nearly worthless
as an assumption uless some form of mental rigor is brought to bear. In
this instance, you have brought nothing to the discussion but a single
hastily formed opinion.

CONSPICUOUSLY ABSENT is YOUR assessment of why he died. OBVIOUSLY, you
are afraid to ADMIT that he died from mountain biking, which he
OBVIOUSLY did.

Make all the claims you wish. In support of that
opinion you must offer objective data & logically sound reasoning. You
have offered neither.

Seems to me this fundamental lack, along with your monomaniacle
androgeny has been mentioned hundreds of times by scores of posters.

PH
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 21:53:43 GMT, Artoi wrote:

In article ,
Mike Vandeman wrote:

Simply asserting that doesn't make it true. Prove that there is a NET
benefit from mountain biking (that couldn't be gotten by hiking or
other exercise)! You CAN'T. That's because mountain biking is one of
the most dangerous activities. People die or get seriously injured
from it all the time.

He didn't die of specific mountain biking related activity

Prove it. Liar.

but an
intrinsic cause. He could have died the same way if he sat there and
found out his share portfolio just crashed 90%.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 14:25:22 -0400, pmhilton wrote:

Mike Vandeman wrote:


But it didn't. He didn't die from running marathons. He died from
MOUNTAIN BIKING. Face the facts!


Even though he died DURING mountain biking, there is no proof that he
died FROM mountain biking. Many THOUSANDS of individuals engage in all
levels of mountain biking; while a handful may have died DURING that
activity there is no proof that the activity itself was to blame.

But it is BY FAR the most likely explanation. Of course, you avoid
giving an alternative explanation, because it's OBVIOUS that he dies
from mountain biking.

PH
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 17:29:25 -0400, Environ
wrote:

Mike Vandeman wrote:
On 4 Sep 2006 07:05:10 -0700, "CanopyCo" wrote:

Mike Vandeman wrote:
More evidence that mountain biking's alleged "health benefits" are
exaggerated. If you die, where is the net benefit???

Mike

He died of a heart attack.
That can happen during any kind of exercise.

But it didn't. He didn't die from running marathons. He died from
MOUNTAIN BIKING. Face the facts!


And if he died hiking, swimming, cutting the lawn or having dinner with
his family therein *we* may ascertain *you* would consider those
activities negative activities... interesting how to attempt to link
things negative to the mountain bike sport.

He didn't. He died from MOUNTAIN BIKING.

But you do indeed accept there are some health benefits to riding a
mountain bike

Yes, but no NET benefit. In otherwise, the disadvantages far outweigh
the advantages.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 22:00:03 GMT, Artoi wrote:

In article ,
Mike Vandeman wrote:

On 4 Sep 2006 07:05:10 -0700, "CanopyCo" wrote:

Mike Vandeman wrote:
More evidence that mountain biking's alleged "health benefits" are
exaggerated. If you die, where is the net benefit???

He died of a heart attack.
That can happen during any kind of exercise.

But it didn't. He didn't die from running marathons. He died from
MOUNTAIN BIKING. Face the facts!

Mike, you are ignoring the root cause of his death, which is a heart
attack of some form.

Yes, DUE TO MOUNTAIN BIKING.

Otherwise per your logic, we can equally say that guy died of LIVING ON
EARTH. Yep, net benefit is dust to dust...
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 21:57:32 GMT, Artoi wrote:

In article .com,
"CanopyCo" wrote:

Mike Vandeman wrote:
More evidence that mountain biking's alleged "health benefits" are
exaggerated. If you die, where is the net benefit???

He died of a heart attack.
That can happen during any kind of exercise.
I presume that you are a fat turd that never exercises?
If so, then you also can die due to the excess fat.
If not, then you also can die from a heart attack while doing your
exercise.

Some of your posts make you look like an idiot.
That will not help your cause.

Correct, or even acute mental stress just sitting at a desk can start a
so called heart attack.

But it didn't. He died from mountain biking. You are just afraid to
admit the truth!
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 14:25:22 -0400, pmhilton wrote:

Mike Vandeman wrote:


But it didn't. He didn't die from running marathons. He died from
MOUNTAIN BIKING. Face the facts!


Even though he died DURING mountain biking, there is no proof that he
died FROM mountain biking. Many THOUSANDS of individuals engage in all
levels of mountain biking; while a handful may have died DURING that
activity there is no proof that the activity itself was to blame.

PH

Dear PH:

Haven't you realized yet that arguing with idiots is pointless?



jeverett3ATearthlinkDOTnet http://home.earthlink.net/~jeverett3