"If you suspect the mountain biking is extraordinarily dangerous, you're probably right"



M

Mike Vandeman

Guest
From the nsmb.com bb
rcoope
Registered User

[]

Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 133
[] Offline
Extraordinarily Dangerous

If you suspect the mountain biking is extraordinarily dangerous, you're probably
right. I was disucssing this with a doctor at the whistler clinc after breaking
my finger at the end of 2003. His statistic was that for skiing, the
hospitalization rate is about 8 per 1000 skier days. In the bike park it was 8
per 1000 RUNS! You can estimate that this is about 25x more dangerous than
skiing. I pointed out to the doctor that this meant that you'd see ~80 bike
victims in hospital on a saturday, and he seemed to think this was reasonable. I
also know that lions gate hospital issued some sort of formal protest about the
bike park, but evidently it's still going.
One anedotal point that reflects the statistics is that almost everyone I know
got injured in whistler in 2003. The crazy out of control people got hurt more
and worse, but even the highly skilled and careful people got hurt. It doesn't
matter if you ride within your limits, you will still get hurt. I actully
wouldn't be surprised if the park was a bit safer in 2004 (I didn't ride much
last year). The upper trials are probably little less extreme, and I'll bet that
the standard of riding may have actually gone up, since the whole bike park
thing is still relatively new and people are still learning.
A big problem in whistler is of course the numerator in the fraction. You take
15 runs a day, instead of one or two on the shore, so you have that many more
chances to get hurt. I'll bet the shore is more dangerous on a per run basis
though.
When we had this conversation last year, a lot of people were saying that you
just have to accept the risk blah blah. Well you do, but you should be aware
that riding in a bike park is about the most dangerous recreational activity you
can pay to do.
===
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.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
And Mikey chases bikes while new buildings are covering what once was
wildlife habitat. Same story - only the names have been changed.

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> From the nsmb.com bb
> rcoope
> Registered User
>
> []
>
> Join Date: Nov 2002
> Location: Vancouver
> Posts: 133
> [] Offline
> Extraordinarily Dangerous
>
> If you suspect the mountain biking is extraordinarily dangerous, you're
> probably
> right. I was disucssing this with a doctor at the whistler clinc after
> breaking
> my finger at the end of 2003. His statistic was that for skiing, the
> hospitalization rate is about 8 per 1000 skier days. In the bike park it
> was 8
> per 1000 RUNS! You can estimate that this is about 25x more dangerous than
> skiing. I pointed out to the doctor that this meant that you'd see ~80
> bike
> victims in hospital on a saturday, and he seemed to think this was
> reasonable. I
> also know that lions gate hospital issued some sort of formal protest
> about the
> bike park, but evidently it's still going.
> One anedotal point that reflects the statistics is that almost everyone I
> know
> got injured in whistler in 2003. The crazy out of control people got hurt
> more
> and worse, but even the highly skilled and careful people got hurt. It
> doesn't
> matter if you ride within your limits, you will still get hurt. I actully
> wouldn't be surprised if the park was a bit safer in 2004 (I didn't ride
> much
> last year). The upper trials are probably little less extreme, and I'll
> bet that
> the standard of riding may have actually gone up, since the whole bike
> park
> thing is still relatively new and people are still learning.
> A big problem in whistler is of course the numerator in the fraction. You
> take
> 15 runs a day, instead of one or two on the shore, so you have that many
> more
> chances to get hurt. I'll bet the shore is more dangerous on a per run
> basis
> though.
> When we had this conversation last year, a lot of people were saying that
> you
> just have to accept the risk blah blah. Well you do, but you should be
> aware
> that riding in a bike park is about the most dangerous recreational
> activity you
> can pay to do.
> ===
> 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.)
>
> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
"Just a reminder that the trend in injuries last season was the same as in
years previous: off-river hiking injuries were by far the biggest problem,
not river-related stuff."

Pulled from a river touring site.


"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> From the nsmb.com bb
> rcoope
> Registered User
>
> []
>
> Join Date: Nov 2002
> Location: Vancouver
> Posts: 133
> [] Offline
> Extraordinarily Dangerous
>
> If you suspect the mountain biking is extraordinarily dangerous, you're
> probably
> right.

clipped
 
On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 01:14:11 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote:

..From the nsmb.com bb
..rcoope
..Registered User
..
..[]
..
..Join Date: Nov 2002
..Location: Vancouver
..Posts: 133
..[] Offline
..Extraordinarily Dangerous
..
..If you suspect the mountain biking is extraordinarily dangerous, you're probably
..right. I was disucssing this with a doctor at the whistler clinc after breaking
..my finger at the end of 2003. His statistic was that for skiing, the
..hospitalization rate is about 8 per 1000 skier days. In the bike park it was 8
..per 1000 RUNS! You can estimate that this is about 25x more dangerous than
..skiing. I pointed out to the doctor that this meant that you'd see ~80 bike
..victims in hospital on a saturday, and he seemed to think this was reasonable. I
..also know that lions gate hospital issued some sort of formal protest about the
..bike park, but evidently it's still going.
..One anedotal point that reflects the statistics is that almost everyone I know
..got injured in whistler in 2003. The crazy out of control people got hurt more
..and worse, but even the highly skilled and careful people got hurt. It doesn't
..matter if you ride within your limits, you will still get hurt. I actully
..wouldn't be surprised if the park was a bit safer in 2004 (I didn't ride much
..last year). The upper trials are probably little less extreme, and I'll bet that
..the standard of riding may have actually gone up, since the whole bike park
..thing is still relatively new and people are still learning.
..A big problem in whistler is of course the numerator in the fraction. You take
..15 runs a day, instead of one or two on the shore, so you have that many more
..chances to get hurt. I'll bet the shore is more dangerous on a per run basis
..though.
..When we had this conversation last year, a lot of people were saying that you
..just have to accept the risk blah blah. Well you do, but you should be aware
..that riding in a bike park is about the most dangerous recreational activity you
..can pay to do.
..===
..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.)
..
..http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

From a reader: "Is there any data suggesting concussions sustained by mountain
bikers improves their intelligence?"
===
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.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
You poor fella. Broke a finger. Big deal. I've broken more of my
fingers than you, ya wuss. Tom
 
The Gist wrote: Mike Vandeman has been exposed as a professional and
personal failure.
Vandeman is a cultist(synanon) and, in general, a pseudo-scientific
usenet kook.
I kinda figured. Tom
 
On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 01:14:11 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote:

More of the usual context-free **** pretending that mountain biking is
inherently and unusually dangerous.

Meanwhile, back in the real world:

Fatalities per Million Exposure Hours
Skydiving 128.71
General Flying 15.58
Motorcycling 8.80
Scuba Diving 1.98
Living 1.53
Swimming 1.07
Snowmobiling .88
Motoring .47
Water skiing .28
Bicycling .26
Airline Flying .15
Hunting .08

Mikey, shall I set the followups to the skydiving, flying,
motorcycling, scuba diving, living, swimming, snowmobiling, motoring
and water-skiing groups for you?

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
 
On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 04:11:30 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote:

>all of which applies equally or moreso to mountain biking.


Give the man a peanut. There is, as you suggest, no relevant or
significant difference between the two.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
 
"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 21:48:50 -0400, "S Curtiss" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> .Hidden dangers of hiking: book link:
> .http://www.worldcatlibraries.org/wcpa/ow/ca774fff2d717f80a19afeb4da09e526.html
>
> ... all of which applies equally or moreso to mountain biking.

Then why don't you say so when you post death and injury associated with
just one activity?
> ===
> 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.)
>
> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
On 7 Jun 2005 00:02:59 -0700, "tom" <[email protected]> wrote:

..You poor fella. Broke a finger. Big deal. I've broken more of my
..fingers than you, ya wuss. Tom

I don't know whom you are talking to, but accidents are a sign of incompetence,
not something to be proud of! DUH!
===
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.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
On Thu, 9 Jun 2005 11:00:27 -0400, "S Curtiss" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>your posts do nothing but show your own
>incompetence in proving any point you present.

^^^^^

ITYM "pointless" ;-)

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
 

Similar threads