Posts by misanthropic

well my situation has developed a bit, any advice appreciated.. their has been a gradual building up of pressure ever since i stood down as an elder about 6 months ago.. i have been telling my wife about my doubts but have continued to attend "some" meetings.. as time has progressed i have become more open with my criticism of the org.. i mentioned the un scandal, molestation trials, false prophecy ect etc.. interestingly she does not deny these facts and yet still wants to continue as a jw.. i told her that god is not happy with people knowingly being part of a false prophet (deut 18 - etc) - starting to lay the groundwork for my exit.. she appreciates the difficult situation doubters are in - they cannot openly express their feelings for fear of jcs.. anyway, a few weeks ago we moved house which meant changing congregation.. but i felt it would be best if i did not attend meetings " at all" at the new cong so my fade could be easier.. but i could not have predicted my wifes response - when i told her it was an explosion of emotion, i mean real heartbreaker stuff.. she seems depressed at the prospect, perhaps the reality is finally hitting home.. last night, about 3a.m.

i noticed that she was not in bed.

i went downstairs and she was sobbing away to herself.. "i can't go to that hall myself!

misanthropic

I know what I would do but you have to do what is right for you. Please let us know what you decide and how it goes. Best of luck.

87

~ Your feelings on aging ~

by FlyingHighNow in

jw
friends

so, we aren't going to stay young and never die.

how do you feel about aging, especially those of you that are over 35?

aging poses some concerns for me, especially since i am 49 and pretty much single.

misanthropic

I'm not in that age bracket quite yet but I'm embracing getting older. I know as far as being comfortable in my own skin; I feel secure with myself now much more then I did as a teenager or my early 20's.
There's a certain confidence life experience gives that you can't get without aging. I don't necessarily dread getting older- not wasting the time I have left is what I think about most.

4

H4O's new do !

by caliber in

so how do you all like her new hairdo ?

so when she ask me about it , i say well, i've loved you through blond.

brunette, frosted ..... it's just another color !.

misanthropic

Okay- I was confused what this thread was about until Hope posted.
I like it! Very sultry

33

Anyone here into vegetarianism?

by DazedAndConfused in

jw
friends

this trying to become somewhat of a vegetarian is hard.

i can look up anything on the net and find out how to do anything, including how to make a devastating nail bomb to making ricine (sp) to kill people but i can't seem to find out the nutritional values a person needs.. what i worry about most is the protein that we need on a daily basis.

right now i am eating everything that has the highest content of protein i can find in the cupboard.. i am not trying to go vegetarian because of peta, although i have watched the video's (eeeeewwwww).

misanthropic

I am interested in is some good vegetarian recipes for Main dishes

The Food Network has a ton of recipe's for vegetarian dishes (most have ratings by users so you can decide which you want to try). I love this website since I found it I've had so many new things to make.
http://www.foodnetwork.com/food/lf_hl_vegetarian/0,2661,FOOD_21216,00.html

106

Wear Your Motorcycle Helmet

by Justitia Themis in

never mind.

i can't get the picture to post.

if an administrator would like to delete this thread, that would be great.. .

misanthropic

Mis. I've YET to see the study that said that per X number of participants motorcycling is more dangerous than other things. You've shown that head injuries are worse when a helmet's not worn you have NOT shown that accident rates for motorcycles and expenses from said are higher than say boating or skydiving or horseback riding or driving in a car. The statics would have to be something like per 100k riders X number were in accidents X number where wearing helmets X number were not. Cost per person per hundred thousand participants is X. The fact is that horseback riding is one of the most dangerous sports on the planet per person who does it and there are NO laws regarding that. Boating and jet skiing are also HUGELY dangerous much more so than motorcycling. So is driving a car! Hell more people die in car wrecks every year than died in Vietnam!

This is the breakdown of costs showing the percent of these expenses being attributed to motor vehicle accidents (that include all motorized vehicles). After this I'll post the breakdown of costs and percentages of the costs done in several places comparing the rate of charges and injuries of a helmeted versus a unhelmeted rider including the source the information can be found.

About two million head injuries of all types (including skull and facial fractures) occur each year in the U. S.
Another 300,000 individuals suffer brain injuries severe enough to require hospitalization, with 99,000 resulting in a lasting disability. A total of 56,000 people die each year as a result of trau-matic brain injury.
*source - Kraus, J. F, and MacArthur, D. L. (1996) Epidemiologic Aspects of Brain Injury. Neurologic Clinics, 14(2): 435-450.

An estimated 62.3 per 100,000 adults age 15 and over are living in the community with enduring functional impairments due to TBI (excludes most survivors of mild TBI).
* source - Moscato, B.S., Trevisian, M. & Willer, B. (1994) The Prevalence of Traumatic Brain Injury and Co-Occurring Disabilities in a National Household Survey of Adults. Journal of Neuropsychiatry, 6(2): 134-142.
[Note:based on U.S. Census data for 1994 using 192,322,000 adults age 18 +]

The direct and indirect costs of traumatic brain injury in the U. S. have been estimated to be $48.3 billion annually. Survivor costs account for $31.7 billion and fatal brain injuries cost another $16.6 billion (1991 dollars).
* source - Lewin-ICF (1992) The Cost of Disorders of the Brain, Washington DC: The National Foundation for Brain Research. [Updated figures based on $44 billion in 1988 dollars as estimated by: W. Max, E.J. MacKenzie & D. P. Rice (1991), Head Injuries: Cost and Consequences. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 6: 76-91]

The lifetime costs for one person surviving a severe TBI can reach $4 million.
* source - National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (1989, February) Interagency Head Injury Task Force Report. Bethesda, MD.

Motor vehicle accidents account for an estimated 28% of traumatic brain injuries; sports/physical activity account for 20%; assaults are responsible for 9%; 43% are due to "other" reasons. However, when considering those brain injuries severe enough to require hospitalization, virtually half (49%) are caused by motor vehicle accidents.
* source - Sosin, D.M., Sniezek, J.E., & Thurman, D.J. (1996) Incidence of Mild and Moderate Brain Injury in the United States, 1991. Brain Injury, 10(1): 47-54.

Now in reference to motorcycles alone:

Studies indicate that the risk of brain injury in hospitalized motorcyclists is nearly twice that for unhelmeted motorcyclists and that unhelmeted drivers had acute care costs three times ($30,365) that of helmeted drivers
* sources -
Rutledge, R. & Stutts, J. (1993) The Association of Helmet Use with the Outcomes of Motorcycle Crash Injury When Controlling for Crash/Injury Severity.Accident Analysis & Prevention, 25(3): 347-353.
Shankar, B.S. et al. (1992) Helmet Use, Patterns of Injury, Medical Outcome, and Costs Among Motorcycle Drivers in Maryland. Accident Analysis & Prevention)

In California, the first year's implementation of the 1992 helmet law resulted in a 37.5% decrease in statewide motorcycle crash fatalities over the previous year; those likely to sustain TBI-related impairments decreased 34%. California has demonstrated a more than 99% compliance rate in helmet use. This suggests that, with adequate enforcement, unrestricted helmet laws can achieve nearly 100% compliance.
* sources -
Kraus, J.F., Peek, C., McArthur, D.L., & Williams, A. (1994). The Effect of the 1992 California Motorcycle Helmet Law on Motorcycle Crash Fatalities and Injuries. Journal of the American Medical Association, 16, 272(19): 1506-1511.
Peek-Asa, C. & Kraus, J. F. (1997) Estimates of Injury Impairment After Acute Traumatic Brain Injury in Motorcycle Crashes Before and After Passage of a Mandatory Helmet Use Law. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 29(5): 630-636.
Kraus, J. F., Peek, C. & Williams, A. (1995) Compliance with the 1992 California Motorcycle Helmet Use Law. American Journal of Public Health, 85(1): 96-99

What this boils down to is this activity has been singled out for enforcement. There is a REASON that helmet laws are being overturned in one state after anther!

Here are the studies done by The General Accountability Office, regarding injury cases and costs during the law fluctuation in these Legislative History flipflops over the helmet laws:

As part of the 1991 ISTEA legislation, Congress required NHTSA to study the effects of safety belt and motorcycle helmet use in crashes. NHTSA conducted the analysis using its Crash Outcome Data Evaluation System (CODES) data system, in which 7 States linked data from their police crash reports, emergency medical services, hospital emergency departments, hospital discharge files, claims, and other sources. NHTSA's 1996 Report to Congress found that “motorcycle helmet effectiveness ranged from 9 percent in preventing any kind of injury to 35 percent in preventing a fatality.” “The average inpatient charge for motorcycle crash victims receiving inpatient care was $14,377 for those who used helmets, and $15,578 for those who did not” (NHTSA, 1996). The CODES data showed that helmet use for motorcycle riders involved in crashes ranged from 80 to 98 percent in 3 CODES States with all-rider helmet laws and from 30 to 49 percent in 3 CODES States without all-rider laws. Helmets were estimated to be 67 percent effective in preventing brain injuries in a crash (NHTSA, 1998).

Bigelow (2001) examined CODES data from 18,394 motorcyclists involved in crashes in the State of Wisconsin. Helmeted riders were less likely to have sustained traumatic brain injury across a variety of crash related factors including crash type, speed limit, highway type, and alcohol involvement. The average hospital charge for the brain injury cases was almost $28,806 and the average length of stay was 10.6 days.

Finison (2001) examined CODES data from 806 motorcyclists involved in crashes in Maine during 1995 and 1996. Riders not wearing helmets were found to be 3 times more likely to have head injuries requiring EMS transport, hospitalization, or resulting in death than motorcyclists who were helmeted. Hospital charges were higher for those with head injury than those with other injury. Also, among the head injury cases, those who were helmeted had shorter hospital stays (4.2 days versus 9.3 days for the not helmeted) and lower treatment charges ($14,639 versus $33,443).

Shankar et al., (1992) linked all Maryland police motorcycle crash reports, hospital emergency department data and trauma registry data for a 12-month period to examine head injury and treatment cost as related to helmet use. They found that non-helmeted motorcycle operators were twice as likely to have sustained head injury and had acute care costs 3 times that of helmeted operators injured in crashes.

Max et al., (1998) examined the effects of California's 1992 adoption of its all-rider helmet law on injury costs. They found that the rate of motorcyclist hospitalizations per registered motorcycles declined by 25 percent comparing 1993 with 1991. The rate of hospitalizations for head injuries declined by 48 percent. Total hospitalization cost for motorcycle injuries declined by 35 percent comparing 1993 with 1991. Approximately three-quarters of the decline was attributed to reduced costs for patients with head injuries.

Rutledge and Stutts (1993) used the North Carolina Trauma Registry to examine the relationship of crash injury outcomes and helmet use. They compared helmeted and unhelmeted riders who were admitted to a hospital for at least a 24-hour period and found that when overall degree of injury is equalized among cases, hospital charges; length of stay; and other measures of resource utilization did not differ, but the risk of head injury was twice as high for unhelmeted riders as it was for those who were helmeted. They note that the equal resource utilization was due to the high costs of treating very severe injuries to the extremities.

The studies since the 1991 GAO report overwhelmingly confirm GAO's conclusions. All available studies indicate that universal motorcycle helmet laws raise helmet use to 90 percent or higher from pre-law levels of 50 percent or lower. Conversely, repealing all-rider laws results in substantially reduced helmet use. All-rider laws are shown to reduce motorcycle fatalities, fatality rates, and severe head injuries. The studies also confirm that helmets reduce the probability of injury, of head injury, and of fatality for crash-involved motorcyclists. States that repealed all-rider helmet laws in recent years have experienced declines in helmet use and increases in fatalities and fatality rates.

106

Wear Your Motorcycle Helmet

by Justitia Themis in

never mind.

i can't get the picture to post.

if an administrator would like to delete this thread, that would be great.. .

misanthropic

Since this is the comment of mine that you responded to I'm going to reply.

You both seem to be more theoretical when it comes to your thoughts/opinions on the matter.
Hey guess what YOUR arguments are NOT from a medical EITHER both of you are arguing from a philosophical prospective.
How so? Because no one is questioning the FACT that if you get in an accident with a helmet on your going to come out a lot better off. Since no one is QUESTIONING it then you stating a bunch of facts in support of that proves NOTHING because NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT POINT! What we ARE arguing is that the FACT that accident injury and increased damage some how give you the RIGHT to make us wear helmets. That is a philosophical argument ONLY! The FACT that if I get in an accident I might be hurt worse because I'm not wearing a helmet does not give you the right to force me to do anything.
Your argument is based on ignorance (non inclusion of ALL dangerous sports or activities just singling out ONE) and arrogance (assuming that you have the right to tell me another ADULT what to do... FYI you DON'T).

Now we're getting somewhere and this is what I've been trying to tell you. I never claimed my arguments were anything other than conclusive studies done, factual evidence on the differences between wearing a helmet versus not wearing a helmet. You feel that this shouldn't make a difference- I believe it makes all the difference. Lets take this post of yours from earlier:
"This argument that 'you should wear a helmet because I think you should' is so unbelievably offensive to bikers..."
If you want to try to reiterate what I'm saying, please at least get it correct first. There are laws in effect in most states already because of these studies that you somehow feel have no impact on this argument. That is where I don't understand your logic.

The FACT that if I get in an accident I might be hurt worse because I'm not wearing a helmet does not give you the right to force me to do anything.
Your argument is based on ignorance (non inclusion of ALL dangerous sports or activities just singling out ONE) and arrogance (assuming that you have the right to tell me another ADULT what to do... FYI you DON'T).

So I'll state this once more...
Riding without a helmet does not only effect the motorcyclist if and when there is an accident- It costs taxpayers millions of dollars every year-which you also thought was irrelevant. Now this is where I don't understand you. I've shown you studies that prove the tax payers pick up the slack that personal insurance doesn't cover. At this point it gives me and every single tax payer out there to use our own discernment on enforcing a helmet law on public roads. That's just the way it is.
I'm not going to even consider sporting events and other dangerous activities. What I'm concerned about is the amount of accident damage being minimized and tax dollars that pay for rehabilitation being kept down all because someone puts on a helmet rather than not. Since 50% of costs in these types of injuries are from motor vehicle and motorcycle accidents that is where my concern is. If skydivers, water skiers and other activities had a high rate of accidents and death then I would be all for safety guidelines for those as well.