Bicycle accident = glad i had my Helmet on this time

On Aug 20, 2:10*am, Phil W Lee wrote:
James considered Wed, 18 Aug 2010 21:57:52
-0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:

On Aug 19, 10:22*am, Tim McNamara wrote:
Of course, this is not
a random sample of brain injuries but only those sent to nursing homes
where I practice.

I've heard the saying practice makes perfect, but it worries me when a
person in the medical profession calls their work "practice". *Do I
want someone tweaking bits under my bonnet who's still practicing? *No
thanks.

I take it you would rather use someone who is out of practice?

What I would prefer is someone who has practiced enough to know their
trade.

JS

On Aug 20, 9:54*am, Phil W Lee wrote:
James considered Thu, 19 Aug 2010 15:44:30
-0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:



On Aug 20, 2:10*am, Phil W Lee wrote:
James considered Wed, 18 Aug 2010 21:57:52
-0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:

On Aug 19, 10:22*am, Tim McNamara wrote:
Of course, this is not
a random sample of brain injuries but only those sent to nursing homes
where I practice.

I've heard the saying practice makes perfect, but it worries me when a
person in the medical profession calls their work "practice". *Do I
want someone tweaking bits under my bonnet who's still practicing? *No
thanks.

I take it you would rather use someone who is out of practice?

What I would prefer is someone who has practiced enough to know their
trade.

What you need is to study a dictionary.

Or you need to lighten up and notice the tongue in cheek.

JS.

On Aug 20, 3:40*am, James wrote:
On Aug 20, 9:54*am, Phil W Lee wrote:





James considered Thu, 19 Aug 2010 15:44:30
-0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:

On Aug 20, 2:10*am, Phil W Lee wrote:
James considered Wed, 18 Aug 2010 21:57:52
-0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:

On Aug 19, 10:22*am, Tim McNamara wrote:
Of course, this is not
a random sample of brain injuries but only those sent to nursing homes
where I practice.

I've heard the saying practice makes perfect, but it worries me when a
person in the medical profession calls their work "practice". *Do I
want someone tweaking bits under my bonnet who's still practicing? *No
thanks.

I take it you would rather use someone who is out of practice?

What I would prefer is someone who has practiced enough to know their
trade.

What you need is to study a dictionary.

Or you need to lighten up and notice the tongue in cheek.

JS.

Ah, I was just about to ask you if I could have one of your mint
imperials. Or are they mint humbugs? Or licorice bullseyes?

Without meaning to be pedantic, and without studying the dictionary (I
don't have one), I think the old English practice (sorry!) of
separating nouns and verbs as in "practice" and "practise" might have
avoided Phil's confusion. Some of these American spelling practices we
all indulge in now (licorice above is another suspect) obscure more
than they simplify.

Andre Jute
English is the mother of all tongues

On Aug 20, 1:06*pm, Andre Jute wrote:
On Aug 20, 3:40*am, James wrote:



On Aug 20, 9:54*am, Phil W Lee wrote:

James considered Thu, 19 Aug 2010 15:44:30
-0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:

On Aug 20, 2:10*am, Phil W Lee wrote:
James considered Wed, 18 Aug 2010 21:57:52
-0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:

On Aug 19, 10:22*am, Tim McNamara wrote:
Of course, this is not
a random sample of brain injuries but only those sent to nursing homes
where I practice.

I've heard the saying practice makes perfect, but it worries me when a
person in the medical profession calls their work "practice". *Do I
want someone tweaking bits under my bonnet who's still practicing? *No
thanks.

I take it you would rather use someone who is out of practice?

What I would prefer is someone who has practiced enough to know their
trade.

What you need is to study a dictionary.

Or you need to lighten up and notice the tongue in cheek.

JS.

Ah, I was just about to ask you if I could have one of your mint
imperials. Or are they mint humbugs? Or licorice bullseyes?

Without meaning to be pedantic, and without studying the dictionary (I
don't have one), I think the old English practice (sorry!) of
separating nouns and verbs as in "practice" and "practise" might have
avoided Phil's confusion. Some of these American spelling practices we
all indulge in now (licorice above is another suspect) obscure more
than they simplify.

Andre Jute
English is the mother of all tongues

Ok. Rewind...

Phil, it bothers me that a medical professional should still be
practising at his practice. By the time I see a doctor, I hope all
the practising has been done and the flaws are polished out. After
all, why do we practise if not to reach an acceptable level of
perfection?

(Damn this editor doesn't like me to practise. Keeps telling me to
practice.)

On Aug 19, 10:22 am, Tim McNamara wrote:
Of course, this is not
a random sample of brain injuries but only those sent to nursing homes
where I practice.

Assuming the USA spelling, this can be interpreted that Tim is not yet
polished in his art, but still practising (UK), and hopefully
improving. Maybe he's a disciple of CI (Continuous Improvement).

I guess perhaps Tim could have written "..where I have a practice" or
"..where my practice is".

But then, having a practice could be construed to meaning a sort of
jam session, in musician talk. Again, disturbing if the doctor is
jamming on a live one.

Andre, better?

Regards,
James "Kept awake at night by silly thoughts. Too much Python".

On Aug 20, 4:53*am, James wrote:
On Aug 20, 1:06*pm, Andre Jute wrote:





On Aug 20, 3:40*am, James wrote:

On Aug 20, 9:54*am, Phil W Lee wrote:

James considered Thu, 19 Aug 2010 15:44:30
-0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:

On Aug 20, 2:10*am, Phil W Lee wrote:
James considered Wed, 18 Aug 2010 21:57:52
-0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:

On Aug 19, 10:22*am, Tim McNamara wrote:
Of course, this is not
a random sample of brain injuries but only those sent to nursing homes
where I practice.

I've heard the saying practice makes perfect, but it worries me when a
person in the medical profession calls their work "practice". *Do I
want someone tweaking bits under my bonnet who's still practicing? *No
thanks.

I take it you would rather use someone who is out of practice?

What I would prefer is someone who has practiced enough to know their
trade.

What you need is to study a dictionary.

Or you need to lighten up and notice the tongue in cheek.

JS.

Ah, I was just about to ask you if I could have one of your mint
imperials. Or are they mint humbugs? Or licorice bullseyes?

Without meaning to be pedantic, and without studying the dictionary (I
don't have one), I think the old English practice (sorry!) of
separating nouns and verbs as in "practice" and "practise" might have
avoided Phil's confusion. Some of these American spelling practices we
all indulge in now (licorice above is another suspect) obscure more
than they simplify.

Andre Jute
English is the mother of all tongues

Ok. *Rewind...

Phil, it bothers me that a medical professional should still be
practising at his practice. *By the time I see a doctor, I hope all
the practising has been done and the flaws are polished out. *After
all, why do we practise if not to reach an acceptable level of
perfection?

(Damn this editor doesn't like me to practise. *Keeps telling me to
practice.)

On Aug 19, 10:22 am, Tim McNamara wrote:
Of course, this is not
a random sample of brain injuries but only those sent to nursing homes
where I practice.

Assuming the USA spelling, this can be interpreted that Tim is not yet
polished in his art, but still practising (UK), and hopefully
improving. *Maybe he's a disciple of CI (Continuous Improvement).

I guess perhaps Tim could have written "..where I have a practice" or
"..where my practice is".

But then, having a practice could be construed to meaning a sort of
jam session, in musician talk. *Again, disturbing if the doctor is
jamming on a live one.

Andre, better?

Holy ****, how should I know? You're trying to confuse me!

Regards,
James "Kept awake at night by silly thoughts. *Too much Python".

Yup, and there's your confession.

I wouldn't trust Tim McNamara to treat a three-day old corpse that's
already been through the incinerator; any psychologist with that many
blustering certainties should look for another line of work in a big
hurry. But you can put your trust in me. I practiced on hundreds of
millions of young housewives, and they all gave me their money. If
course, you mustn't expect individual attention...

Andre Jute
Recanted mass marketer

On Aug 8, 4:52*pm, SMS wrote:
On 08/08/10 2:15 PM, incredulous wrote:

snip

Against the American experience, we ought to find more about and
consider the Dutch experience: Lots of daily riders, almost none of
them in kit or helmets, and so many at risk to falling in dense mixed
auto and bike traffic while moving at the slow speeds which conform to
the bike-helmet safety model. Why aren't the Dutch reducing morbidity
and mortality with mandatory helmet laws? Are they just accepting high
levels of public harm, the way accidental gun-related injuries are
likely accepted in the US South, an acceptable cost of freedom? I
doubt it.

This is covered in myth #29 at
"http://sites.google.com/site/bicyclehelmetmythsandfacts/".

Myth 29:

No one wears helmets in the Netherlands, and they have lower rates of
injuries and fatalities. That proves that helmets don't work, and may
even actually cause more injuries and fatalities.

Fact 29:

The cycling environment is very, very different in the Netherlands,
compared to almost any other country. From the attitude of motorists
towards cyclists, to road design, it is not logical to compare the
Netherlands to the U.S., U.K., Australia or most other countries. It
would be great if other countries followed the example of the
Netherlands when it comes to cycling infrastructure. As Peter French,
co-convenor of CBD BUG, an Australian advocacy group which focuses on
bike use issues within the CBD (Central Business District) stated: "If
you look at the countries where there's really high levels of cycling,
such as the Netherlands and Denmark, they have much smaller proportions
of people being killed or injured over there, even though they don't
wear helmets. It is because their governments have focused on safety
programs which target traffic speeds and separating cyclists from fast
moving traffic." Hmm, why didn't he say "it's because helmets are
magical foam hats that don't serve any purpose?"

John Forrester, author of Effective Cycling, writes: "The maximum safe
speed for Dutch voonerven has been given as 8 mph. Average travel speeds
on Dutch urban bikepaths are universally described as very slow,
probably below 10 mph. On the other hand, speeds of American bicycle
commuters, now easily measured with electronic speedometers, typically
are in the 16-22 mph range. Dutch cyclists tolerate their low speeds for
two reasons: travel times are not great because they travel short
distances and motoring is so inconvenient that it would probably take
longer. American cyclists would not tolerate Dutch speeds because of the
longer distances they must travel. The facilities, traffic rules and
speed-controlling attitudes that are acceptable to one nation are
obviously unacceptable to another" (underlining mine).

If you've ever ridden in the Netherlands or China, you'll understand
that it's not the pavement or the bicycle that's limiting the speed to 8
mph, it's the mass quantity of bicycles sharing the road or path,
especially at rush hours. Until you accept the slow speed, and go with
the flow, it can be maddening if you're trying to ride at the typical
speed a bicycle commuter in the U.S. rides at. You quickly learn to ride
at the same speed at everyone else and not make any sudden turns or
sudden stops. On the plus side, with slow speeds, separate lanes for
bicycles, and the attitude of the vehicle drivers, the chance of a
collision where you get seriously hurt is much smaller.

None of this is relevant to the protection the bicycle helmet is
designed for: a fall from about two meters. The Dutch and Danes fall
from their bicycles, unhelmeted. There should be monstrous levels of
death and debilitating head injuries. They are riding on hard-paved
streets.
The odds of collision or fall are also irrelevent. The protection is
conditional on a fall or crash and the number of riders is much
greater.

Do you claim helmets offer exceptional protection from fall they are
not designed to protect against?

Harry Travis
Pine Barrens of NJ
USA

On 8/16/2010 12:10 PM, MikeWhy WHO? ANONYMOUSLY SNIPES:
[...]
Let's be very clear about the brain injury you will receive if you tried
putting words in my mouth in person. Bring a hat when you come to visit,
you hear? I'm more than happy to demonstrate for you helmet efficacy in
impact events. I think a before and after test is appropriate.
[...]

Please post your physical address so we can consider taking you up on
this offer.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 8/17/2010 11:12 PM, Kevan Smith wrote:
[...]
It's worn to be in style. You can't just show up to a serious ride
wearing just anything! For example, the newest Giro ionos cap paired
with a decent pair of Rudy Project glasses and a decent team kit ( not
stuff like that horrible Footon-Serveto crap) might get you accepted for
a ride with people who don't suck. And you'll look great drinking your
espresso afterward.

Fabrizio Mazzoleni lives?

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 8/27/10 12:07 AM, Tom Sherman °_° wrote:
On 8/17/2010 11:12 PM, Kevan Smith wrote:
[...]
It's worn to be in style. You can't just show up to a serious ride
wearing just anything! For example, the newest Giro ionos cap paired
with a decent pair of Rudy Project glasses and a decent team kit ( not
stuff like that horrible Footon-Serveto crap) might get you accepted for
a ride with people who don't suck. And you'll look great drinking your
espresso afterward.

Fabrizio Mazzoleni lives?

That was the idea of it.