Dr Ferrari's Camper Van (off-topic discussion)

Lumen

ThisRegard wrote: »

Trees, gondola posts and other people are the problem

Trees and gondola posts are the ski-hazard-equivalents of parked cars and bus stops.

As for the people issue, that's a tricky one. I'm not relishing the prospect of sharing the slopes with a bunch of helmeted gapers* who require physical protection from trees. :pac:

I suspect a safety industry marketing conspiracy.

(* Gaper=Snowsports Fred, apparently)

petethedrummer

Lumen wrote: »

I suspect a safety industry marketing conspiracy

Everyone else in my ski group had them on last week. Photos are crap and its hard to pick your buddies out with everyone looking like Alpine Power Rangers.

doozerie

ThisRegard wrote:

Trees, gondola posts and other people are the problem. Last time I went skiing I wore a helmet, never had done so any other time previously. Maybe it's the combination of stories I've read of people who have died from head injuries from skiing accidents and the fact that I now have a kid that makes me less of a risk taker ?

There's the question though, are you *actually* less of a risk taker now or is it just that your perception of risk has changed (i.e. did you consider it a risky activity before but chose not to wear a helmet anyway, or have you only recently come to consider it a risky activity)? Basically, is it actually a risky activity for the average person (I'm excluding both thrill seekers and complete morons here, for the most part they are not average and the risks for them are therefore not typical either) or is it that you've only now started to believe that it is risky because of sometimes subtle social pressure to do so?

The same question could be applied to a multitude of things, of course - do less kids cycle to school because of actual increased danger or just because of a perception of increased danger?; will we really die horribly if we don't eat our "5 a day"?; are we terrible people if we don't douse our entire household in neat disinfectant at least once a day?; etc., etc.

Some risks are certainly measurable, others are far more vague, it seems like the boundaries between the two categories are getting blurred more and more over time, personal safety when involved in sporting activities being one notable area where this arises. It's an odd development. It doesn't mean that people are wrong to protect themselves in whatever way they see fit, but as a society generally we seem less inclined to question whether it's really necessary, and that's the bit that I find a bit disturbing.

ThisRegard

Lumen wrote: »

Trees and gondola posts are the ski-hazard-equivalents of parked cars and bus stops.

As for the people issue, that's a tricky one. I'm not relishing the prospect of sharing the slopes with a bunch of helmeted gapers* who require physical protection from trees. :pac:

I suspect a safety industry marketing conspiracy.

(* Gaper=Snowsports Fred, apparently)

LOL. I'm tempting faith here but the last time I came off my bike I was a teenager but I know if I do I'll stop within a relatively short distance with some sort of control over my slide.

Whereas some gaper (sounds very pornographic !) who has no idea how to stop will only become a hurtling out of control missile, and those with some semblance of control will probably else aim for the softest thing to stop them, people over trees.

Last year the number of people wearing helmets far outweighed those without them on the slopes I was on.

Edit, just spotting Doozeries comment

doozerie wrote: »

There's the question though, are you *actually* less of a risk taker now or is it just that your perception of risk has changed (i.e. did you consider it a risky activity before but chose not to wear a helmet anyway, or have you only recently come to consider it a risky activity)? Basically, is it actually a risky activity for the average person (I'm excluding both thrill seekers and complete morons here, for the most part they are not average and the risks for them are therefore not typical either) or is it that you've only now started to believe that it is risky because of sometimes subtle social pressure to do so?

Now when I'm doing something that could be possibly damaging to myself I'll think of how will I be able to play or manage with my daughter with a broken leg/arm whatever for a few weeks, so yeah, the thought does flash across my mind say if I'm about to take on a steep descent for example be it on a bike, running or skis.

I don't actually see the activity as any more riskier than I did when I was carefree, but I now think of the consequences if said activity goes wrong.

I'd equate myself to how Maverick felt after Goose died.

doozerie

@ThisRegard, I can certainly appreciate that angle on risk assessment. I know that many years back I became more conscious of the consequences of a bad fall while mountain biking when I started to think about the fact that if I was out of work for any length of time I couldn't afford my rent. These days that concern still applies to a whole bunch of things that I do, but it's a greater concern since I now have a family to provide for too.

That kind of fear is very insidious though, and can grow unchecked if let - I have to remind myself occasionally that the facts don't always justify the fear, and it feels a bit ridiculous to be arguing to myself. It's not helped at all by what seems like a social trend towards categorising generally safe stuff as being dangerous so we are constantly being prodded, sometime subtly sometimes less so, towards maintaining a fear of perfectly normal activities.

tomasrojo

doozerie wrote: »

It's an odd development. It doesn't mean that people are wrong to protect themselves in whatever way they see fit, but as a society generally we seem less inclined to question whether it's really necessary, and that's the bit that I find a bit disturbing.

It certainly is an odd one. I think John Adams wrote something once about the trend towards helping people risk their lives in greater safety (I think he used climbing the Himalayas as an example). In other words, we have begun to think that the process of reducing risk in all activities is the besr route. So we permit people to partake in very risky activities provided they take prescribed but not terribly effective precautions, while brow-beating people who are taking moderate or low risks.

ThisRegard

doozerie wrote: »

That kind of fear is very insidious though, and can grow unchecked if let - I have to remind myself occasionally that the facts don't always justify the fear, and it feels a bit ridiculous to be arguing to myself.

I agree. You know in cartoons when you have a devil appearing on one shoulder saying go ahead, you'll be grand, and on the other, the angel advising not to. Well I get the metaphorical angel appearing every time I head out in the form of my wife telling me to be careful and safe, understandable I suppose.

Would I call it a fear though, I don't think so. I'm no more afraid of it happening than I was before, my skill set didn't shrink with the birth of a child.

petethedrummer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybFvomdhW2Y

doozerie

ThisRegard wrote:

Would I call it a fear though, I don't think so.

I've wondered what to call my reluctance to do certain things now that I was happy to do a few years ago, and "fear" seems the most appropriate word in my case. I don't want to label it as fear, and it makes me feel quite stupid to consider it as fear, but I can't find any better word to describe it.

As one example, many years ago I considered it relatively safe to cycle off-road, and mucking about on steps/drops/etc on my MTB all seemed fine too - I picked up some minor injuries along the way, which left me more cautious for a while afterwards, but my basic view of these activities as being fun outweighed any concerns about the risks involved. I haven't been off-road for many years now and in that time the balance in my perception has shifted from it being fun to it being dangerous. I can try to convince myself that there are good reasons for my reluctance to consider mountain biking as a fun activity nowadays but the reality is that it's fear of harm, and its consequences, that is at the root of this reluctance.

Or to take another example, I've not been on a plane for 4 years or more, and when I consider going anywhere by plane now I have to first remind myself that sitting in a metal tube high off the ground is quite safe in reality. Flying no longer seems a "normal" activity to me so I have to remind myself that is really is.

Those examples represent quite a ridiculous mindset on my part, but ironically at least some of the people that would laugh at me for being "so stupid" would themselves almost certainly maintain their own ridiculous fears without acknowledging them as such, such as assuming that cycling is inherently dangerous, or assuming that it's not safe for kids to run in a playground, etc. It makes sense to minimise risk where necessary, and it needn't always be a burden to do so, but it seems like as a society we are being encouraged to actively fear risk and to adapt our behaviour accordingly and we seem to swallow this attitude readily. So we don't stop to question whether we really need, for example, a helmet to cycle or to go skiing as at some level we simply accept that the risk is scary enough to warrant it. Of course, the manufacturers of helmets won't label this as fear, they'll label it as "precautionary" or "plain common sense", since alerting us to the fact that we are scared isn't a great sales strategy (they don't want to scare us into doing some other activity where they can't make money) whereas pandering to our egos by telling us that we are being very sensible is.

This is all very philosophical for a Monday morning, my head hurts now. …oh no, maybe I have a TUMOUR and I'm going to DIE!!! Someone, please sell me a drug to save me!

Dermot Illogical

doozerie wrote: »

This is all very philosophical for a Monday morning, my head hurts now. …oh no, maybe I have a TUMOUR and I'm going to DIE!!! Someone, please sell me a drug to save me!

Here, have some nurofen plus. It's like an internal helmet.

doozerie

Dermot Illogical wrote: »

Here, have some nurofen plus. It's like an internal helmet.

Does it have rounded edges? And a slippery coating to make it easy to swallow without catching in my throat? I don't want to choke. And should I drink water or something else to help wash it down? Oh god, I don't want to choke. And maybe I need to wear my own helmet in case I spill some water in my panic and slip on it? Oh god, oh god, OH GAWWDDD!! I DON'T WANNA DIE!!!

petethedrummer

doozerie wrote: »

I've wondered what to call my reluctance to do certain things now that I was happy to do a few years ago,

I stuck a knife in the toaster this morning. It felt good to live on the edge.:cool:

Actually it felt more like a game of operation with potential consequences.

ThisRegard

Plug it in next time, I can guarantee it will be a much more exciting game.

Dermot Illogical

petethedrummer wrote: »

I stuck a knife in the toaster this morning.

Do NOT try this at home folks!

Go do it in someone else's house cuz it can get very messy.

petethedrummer

ThisRegard wrote: »

Plug it in next time, I can guarantee it will be a much more exciting game.

It was toasting bread at the time.

seamus

The majority of deaths through electrocution actually occur because the victim gets a shock and falls over (often off a ladder) and hits their head.

So you should wear your helmet when attempting to do anything with plugged-in appliances.

Mycroft H

Just changed from 25mm Marathons to 32mm Panaracers. Instant upgrade in comfort. It's amazing what a fatter lower pressure tyre can do for ride and no noticeable difference in speed between the two.

buffalo

seamus wrote: »

The majority of deaths through electrocution actually occur because the victim gets a shock and falls over (often off a ladder) and hits their head.

So you should wear your helmet when attempting to do anything with plugged-in appliances.

Is that still technically electrocution?

Lumen

petethedrummer wrote: »

I stuck a knife in the toaster this morning. It felt good to live on the edge.:cool:

I do this almost every day. Not dead yet.

</tempts fate>

doozerie

petethedrummer wrote:

I stuck a knife in the toaster this morning.

Was it asking for it? My toaster is like that, it sits in the corner giving me the evil eye whenever I walk into the kitchen. I've tried threatening it, but it keeps doing it. I may have to resort to stabbing it, but staged to look like it was a toast-rescuing intervention gone tragically wrong.

Ole Rodrigo

For snowboarders (outside of learning classes ) wearing a helmet is a status thing - its says your good enough to take on the half pipe, or will be going off piste. Not so sure about skiers though, aside from the competitive ones.

petethedrummer

ror_74 wrote: »

For snowboarders (outside of learning classes ) wearing a helmet is a status thing - its says your good enough to take on the half pipe, or will be going off piste. Not so sure about skiers though, aside from the competitive ones.

It's the political correctness gone mad that has caused the uptake among skiiers at the moment. Last time I qas skiing was 2 years ago. Maybe 5% wore helmets. Seemed more like 60-70% now.

Interestingly one of my group wasn't wearing a helmet and hit his head pretty badly. He wasn't skiing at the time. He was walking drunk. I'm never walking drunk without a helmet again.

Ole Rodrigo

petethedrummer wrote: »

It's the political correctness gone mad that has caused the uptake among skiiers at the moment. Last time I qas skiing was 2 years ago. Maybe 5% wore helmets. Seemed more like 60-70% now.

Unless the ski schools require them for insurance reasons ? You tend to see lessons conducted on the lower slopes, which is often where faster runs pass through, creating a bottleneck full of unpredictable beginners. Bit like Drumcondra bridge at rush hour.

petethedrummer wrote: »

Interestingly one of my group wasn't wearing a helmet and hit his head pretty badly. He wasn't skiing at the time. He was walking drunk. I'm never walking drunk without a helmet again.

Proper pub shoes - overlook that bit of kit at your peril

petethedrummer

ror_74 wrote: »

Unless the ski schools require them for insurance reasons ?

Ah no, the ski schools don't necessitate them, or the insurance or the resorts. People are just wearing them out of choice. My mates that wear them "feel safer"* with them on.

*:rolleyes:

Captain Havoc

I'm now working part-time, one of the ways part-timers get to feel the pinch is by not making work weekends to allow the full-timers earn commission. In March I have every weekend off, woop, woop.

RobertFoster

petethedrummer wrote: »

It's the political correctness gone mad that has caused the uptake among skiiers at the moment. Last time I qas skiing was 2 years ago. Maybe 5% wore helmets. Seemed more like 60-70% now.

Interestingly one of my group wasn't wearing a helmet and hit his head pretty badly. He wasn't skiing at the time. He was walking drunk. I'm never walking drunk without a helmet again.

I've only gone skiing once, twelve years ago this month actually. No one wore helmets from what I remember, in fact, I've never associated helmets with skiing until this thread. I did face plant some stadium steps while watching others ice skating on the same trip. I've not been to Croke Park or the Aviva since without a helmet.

iregk

seamus wrote: »

So you should wear your helmet when attempting to do anything with plugged-in appliances.

Fully agree with this. I won't watch fair city without my helmet on, occasionally ill wear body armour just to be extra safe.

Mr. Grieves

I'm shocked people would ski or snowboard withouth a helmet. Where do they mount their GoPro?

AstraMonti

There are 45,000 rhinestones per wheel, and an unknown quantity covering the frame, handlebars, and fork. The only parts left in tact are the vintage Campagnolo "Delta" brakes and the saddle.

seamus

Aside from the ginormous belly and the runners, I think the worst parts are the star of david on the headtube and the fact that the black circle isn't centred on the wheel *twitch*