Backpacking Kit

I never said the MRT would be for it. I said I would!

At last... someone with common sense

thats exactly my point.

The message <[email hidden]>
from "http://www.thehelmets.co.uk" <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

The sooner it becomes compulsary to have insurance on the mountains the
better - with a bit ogf luck this will (a) enable better funded MRT's
and (b) compel people to carry the correct kit
(http://www.lamrt.org.uk/staysafe.html) or face the financial
consequences.

I am not sure I am seeing all of this thread and it is not made any
easier by this person never quoting any context but I have seen enough
to conclude that it is either a troll or the rantings of a control
freak. Perhaps a passing walker will shortly knock him on the head and
drop his body down a redundant mine shaft (where all his safety gear
will do him no good whatsoever) when challenged about his supposed lack
of equipment.

--
Roger Chapman

" little realised fact about seatbelts is they haven't actually
made much difference to overall casualties, because drivers have tended

to compensate for the benefits and drive worse (see Reinhardt-Rutland
A
H. Seat-belts and behavioural adaptation. Safety Sci 2001; 39:
145-155.) "

Twoddle....

urlhttp://www.thehelmets.co.uk/url said:

Do you bother with a first aid kit or survival bag?
I've certainly never NEEDED either of them I never WANTED to carry
them....

So don't cary them. What do you think a survival bag will actually do
for you? Nothing much extra that suitably warm clothes and waterproofs
won't. Or wrapping yourself up in your tent flysheet or sticking your
pack liner over your head if you get really desperate. I don't carry
one backpacking when I've got a tent and for day walks would only
bother in winter conditions in remote hills.

I won't repeat what Pete said about first aid kits. The only specific
first aid item I've taken to carrying is tweezers for tick removal. I
did find the WANT to carry moisturising cream for my feet during 2
months constant sandal wear.

urlhttp://www.thehelmets.co.uk/url said:

" little realised fact about seatbelts is they haven't actually
made much difference to overall casualties, because drivers have tended

to compensate for the benefits and drive worse (see Reinhardt-Rutland
A
H. Seat-belts and behavioural adaptation. Safety Sci 2001; 39:
145-155.) "

Twoddle....

Oh /right/ you've read it all already then? No? Thought not...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

urlhttp://www.thehelmets.co.uk/url said:

I never said the MRT would be for it. I said I would!

So if you're conceding their opinions are not the last word, why do
quote what they say on something else as if it is?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

urlhttp://www.thehelmets.co.uk/url said:

At last... someone with common sense

Roos is my partner and the other person on that walk and that ski tour
was me. I think it's fair to say we're in broad agreement with what we
found intelligent and necessary to have with us.

You don't do consistent logic too well, do you?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

no.... i havent and wont be. but i can tell you know that seatbelt laws
have saved lives. fact.

nope - reread the post.

peter... roos post made perfect sense - and i agreed with her. the
whole point has been with the same consistency and logic throughout.

what relevance is the fact the roos is your partner? do i have to agree
with both of you or neither?

http://www.thehelmets.co.uk said:

Do you bother with a first aid kit or survival bag?
I've certainly never NEEDED either of them I never WANTED to carry
them....

The only use my survival bag has ever had is as a sit mat on wet
ground. I keep a stash of toilet paper in my 1st aid kit and that has
had some use.

urlhttp://www.thehelmets.co.uk/url said:

what relevance is the fact the roos is your partner?

It isn't particularly relevant that she's my partner, but that does give
me a very good basis to see that she appears to be more in agreement
with my outlook on the relative necessity of FAKs and bivvi bags in
different situations than yours. I'm quite sure she'll tell us if
that's not the case.

Quoted message said:

do i have to agree with both of you or neither?

If we agree with one another (ICBW, but I believe we do) then you can't
reasonably only agree with one of us.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

urlhttp://www.thehelmets.co.uk/url said:

no.... i havent and wont be. but i can tell you know that seatbelt laws
have saved lives. fact.

So show us the figures that demonstrate that. While it is known that in
otherwise identical collisions a seatbelt wearer is more likely to come
out okay than a non-seatbelt wearer, the point is that the collisions
did not remain identical. See
http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/332/7543/722#130868 for a more
succinct summary.

The UK was most unusual in any blip in casualties occurring as they
didn't appear to help even briefly anywhere else, though the fact that
much tougher drink-drive legislation was enforced in the UK at the same
time gives a plausible reason.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesus!

how about "Maybe statistics can make a difference. According to Dr.
Erwin Hirsch, director of trauma surgery at the Boston Medical Center
there would be 75-100 fewer deaths each year and 15,000 fewer injuries
if all drivers in Massachusetts wore their seat belts. But according to
the National Highway Safety Administration, only 51 percent of the
drivers in Massachusetts wear their seatbelts, and of them, only 35
percent of 16-19 year olds buckle up. "

I suppose traffic lights at busy junctions also increase accidents?

Just because someone has writtena letter to the BMJ does not mean it is
correct...

You'll start quoting arguments for and against the combined MMR jab
next....

I hope you're on holiday today because the Univ. of Dundee are not
getting good value...

Yes but seem to forget TYAFC?

Quite corerect Roger, you've not read the whole of the thread.

urlhttp://www.thehelmets.co.uk/url said:

Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesus!

how about "Maybe statistics can make a difference. According to Dr.
Erwin Hirsch, director of trauma surgery at the Boston Medical Center
there would be 75-100 fewer deaths each year and 15,000 fewer injuries
if all drivers in Massachusetts wore their seat belts. But according to
the National Highway Safety Administration, only 51 percent of the
drivers in Massachusetts wear their seatbelts, and of them, only 35
percent of 16-19 year olds buckle up. "

How about the difference between a predicition which takes no account of
risk compensation and looking at what has *actually happened* when
seatbelt wearing has been enfoced, and shown no net casualty benefit?

Quoted message said:

Just because someone has writtena letter to the BMJ does not mean it is
correct...

But the lack of any retrospective data showing any benefit against a lot
of predictions for benefits before the laws were passed does give a
pretty sound basis for Dr. Hirsch to be entirely mistaken.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Roos Eisma said:

A couple of days before on a ski tour of the Carngorm plateau we did carry
a lot more stuff, including first aid, shelter, and avalanche related
stuff, because that is what "prepared" meant in those conditions.

I forgot 2 important words: "for us". It is very acceptable and likely
that other groups will have come to different conclusions. Our choices
were also based on our skills (I'm not a very experienced and confident
tour skier), our level of fitness, our familiarity with this area (if we
were more familiar with how this area responds to different weather and
snow conditions we may very well have left the avalanche pingers behind),
etcetera.
I think it's the rigidity of statements like "always carry this or that"
that rubs people the wrong way, as it takes away the flexibility of basing
your decisions on your personal situation.

Roos