Do not read this either!

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Daniel Auger
news.bbc.co.uk3307953.stmOpen ↗

gtf, i cant believe that these doctors would waste their time compiling such a report!

Quoted message said:

news.bbc.co.uk3307953.stmOpen ↗

It does say the research was tongue-in-cheek ;-)

Cheers, helen s

--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam-- to get correct one remove dependency on fame &
fortune h*$el*$$e**nd***$o$ts***i*$*$m**m$$o*n**s@$*$a$$o**l.c**$*$om$$

In a theme park in a dusty corner of The InterWeb, there was a discussion on
this kind of thing a few months ago. Edited highlights may be found here:

legslarry.8bit.co.ukSheep.htmOpen ↗

--

Dave Larrington - legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uklegslarry.beerdrinkers.co.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
bhpc.org.ukbhpc.org.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================

dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers said:

Quoted message said:

news.bbc.co.uk3307953.stmOpen ↗

It does say the research was tongue-in-cheek ;-)

But the nursery rhyme is suitably disconcerting - though the use of the word "helmeted" makes it
sound like something bad done to the child.

- Richard

--
_/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ Richard dot Corfield at ntlworld dot com _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/ _/ _/ Time is a
one way street, _/ _/ _/_/ _/_/_/ Except in the Twighlight Zone.

Dave Larrington said:

In a theme park in a dusty corner of The InterWeb, there was a discussion on this kind of thing a
few months ago. Edited highlights may be found here:

legslarry.8bit.co.ukSheep.htmOpen ↗

Excellent. Bookmarked.

Re The InterWeb: You're not a closet Top Gear viewer, Dave, are you? I thought I was the only one
hereabouts.

James

--
"Sorry mate, I didn't see you" is not a satisfactory excuse.

James Hodson said:

Re The InterWeb: You're not a closet Top Gear viewer, Dave, are you? I thought I was the only one
hereabouts.

I am an /admitted/ Top Gear viewer, having been reading / watching / not taking seriously Clarkson
since he used to write for "Performance Car" many years ago. And have been occasionally referring to
The Internet[1] as "The Interweb" for rather longer than they have.

1 - sometimes known as ThntrnteIee

--

Dave Larrington - legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uklegslarry.beerdrinkers.co.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
bhpc.org.ukbhpc.org.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================

Dave Larrington said:

James Hodson said:

Re The InterWeb: You're not a closet Top Gear viewer, Dave, are you? I thought I was the only
one hereabouts.

I am an /admitted/ Top Gear viewer, having been reading / watching / not taking seriously Clarkson
since he used to write for "Performance Car" many years ago.

I find him the most seriously annoying and irritating 'personality' around and totally unwatchable.
I quite enjoyed top gear for the two series he was off it, but I don't watch it now. He is the most
complete prat - yes, I know it's an act, I know he's probably quite different in real life, but as
compelling television viewing he rates well below the testcard.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) jasmine.org.uk~simonOpen ↗

[ This .sig subject to change without notice ]

In "]news:[email hidden],
Dave Larrington <[email hidden]> typed:

Quoted message said:

James Hodson said:

Re The InterWeb: You're not a closet Top Gear viewer, Dave, are you? I thought I was the only one
hereabouts.

I am an /admitted/ Top Gear viewer, having been reading / watching / not taking seriously Clarkson
since he used to write for "Performance Car" many years ago. And have been occasionally referring
to The Internet[1] as "The Interweb" for rather longer than they have.

He didn't write for "Performance Car". He was doing some crappy work for local newspapers and then
the Top Gear editor found him on a plane to a car launch. I heard him say so on Desert Island
Discs. The liar.

"Daniel Auger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

news.bbc.co.uk3307953.stmOpen ↗

In fairness to people on dial-up connections it's only reasonable to say that the article is about
the risks to children of nursery rhymes such as 'Jack and Jill' and 'Humpty Dumpty'. It includes the
following:

Medically correct nursery rhyme

Little Johnny rode his bike, No helmet on his head. He took a fall and split his skull, His mother
feared him dead. She rushed him to the ER, Where they checked his neuro signs. They noted a blown
pupil And inserted IV lines. They called the neurosurgeon, Who came in and drilled a burr. Now
Johnny's fine; he rides his bike, But he's helmeted, for sure
___
Michael MacClancy

Michael MacClancy said:

In fairness to people on dial-up connections it's only reasonable to say that the article is about
the risks to children of nursery rhymes such as 'Jack and Jill' and 'Humpty Dumpty'. It includes
the following:

Medically correct nursery rhyme

Little Johnny rode his bike, No helmet on his head. He took a fall and split his skull, His mother
feared him dead. She rushed him to the ER, Where they checked his neuro signs. They noted a blown
pupil And inserted IV lines. They called the neurosurgeon, Who came in and drilled a burr. Now
Johnny's fine; he rides his bike, But he's helmeted, for sure

I still don't understand why, when he was taken in for a cycling accident, he should come out
circumcised. Is that standard ER practice these days? ;-^)

Tony

Michael MacClancy said:

"Daniel Auger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0312110831450.1249-
[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

news.bbc.co.uk3307953.stmOpen ↗

In fairness to people on dial-up connections it's only reasonable to say that the article is about
the risks to children of nursery rhymes such as 'Jack and Jill' and 'Humpty Dumpty'. It includes
the following:

Medically correct nursery rhyme

Little Johnny rode his bike, No helmet on his head. He took a fall and split his skull, His mother
feared him dead. She rushed him to the ER, Where they checked his neuro signs. They noted a blown
pupil And inserted IV lines. They called the neurosurgeon, Who came in and drilled a burr. Now
Johnny's fine; he rides his bike, But he's helmeted, for sure
___
Michael MacClancy

Little Johnny may be fine, but whoever wrote this doggerel betrays a total want of ear and lack of
comprehension of scansion.

Anthony
--
Using Linux GNU/Debian - Windows-free zone acampbell.org.ukacampbell.org.ukOpen ↗ (book reviews and articles)
Email: replace "www." with "ac@"

Anthony Campbell said:

Little Johnny may be fine, but whoever wrote this doggerel betrays a total want of ear and lack of
comprehension of scansion.

That bit of text can hardly be said to flow.

Tony ;-)

"Tony Raven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Anthony Campbell said:

Little Johnny may be fine, but whoever wrote this doggerel betrays a total want of ear and lack
of comprehension of scansion.

That bit of text can hardly be said to flow.

Tony ;-)

Well, they're all medics, so what do you expect? ;-) Doctors were told to contribute to the
construction of a new wing at the hospital. What did they do?

The allergists voted to scratch it.

The dermatologists preferred no rash moves.

The gastroenterologists had a gut feeling about it.

The neurologists thought the administration had a lot of nerve.

The obstetricians stated they were laboring under a misconception.

The ophthalmologists considered the idea short-sighted.

The orthopedists issued a joint resolution.

The pathologists yelled, "over my dead body!"

The pediatricians said, "grow up."

The proctologists said, "we are in arrears."

The psychiatrists thought it was madness.

The surgeons decided to wash their hands of the whole thing.

The radiologists could see right through it.

The internists thought it was a hard pill to swallow.

The plastic surgeons said, "this puts a whole new face on the matter."

The podiatrists thought it was a big step forward.

The urologists felt the scheme wouldn't hold water.

The cardiologists didn't have the heart to say no.

Michael MacClancy <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

In fairness to people on dial-up connections it's only reasonable to say that the article is about
the risks to children of nursery rhymes such as 'Jack and Jill' and 'Humpty Dumpty'. It includes
the following: .........

Thank you

It's interesting that the C+ forum, despite the fact that you have to be connected to read it,
doesn't seem quite so infested with the belief that everyone is logged on all the time and that
a link with no other comment is adequate. All that's needed is a couple of lines, similar to
the above. As it is, I end up ignoring the thread, which could be why I read the C+ forum more
these days.

Andrew