Australia and New Zealand · Public discussion

insurance

Started by charles · · Last activity · 32 posts · 1,600 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Australia and New Zealand
Published
15 March 2007
Last activity
17 March 2007
Original author
charles
Posts
32
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,600
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 21–32 of 32
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. In aus.bicycle on 15 Mar 2007 18:36:28 -0700

    Quoted message said:


    So if I'm understanding this correctly, the only way to get the
    equivalent of third party property insurance for bicycling is to join
    Bicycle NSW? I've often wondered what would happen if I was in an at
    fault accident with a car while on a bicycle. Assuming I'm not turned
    into road pizza, I've always supposed I'd have to cough up for repairs
    to the car.

    Not sure if it is the only one, but it is the one I know about.

    Check with your home insurance though - mine doesn't cover me for
    anything to do with riding the bike as far as I know, but some might.

    The BNSw stuff is at
    http://www.bicyclensw.org.au/Membership.asp
    which links to
    http://www.cyclecover.com.au/webcontent19.htm

    Zebee

  2. Zebee Johnstone said:

    My guess is that most of them class it as "used on the road therefore
    related to car crash stats but they don't have VIN markings, and you
    can't panelbeat them but must always replace, not worth it."

    Replacing the frame, wheels, whatever is just spare parts.
    Just like repairing your great grandmother's axe.

  3. Zebee Johnstone said:

    In aus.bicycle on 15 Mar 2007 18:36:28 -0700

    Quoted message said:

    So if I'm understanding this correctly, the only way to get the
    equivalent of third party property insurance for bicycling is to join
    Bicycle NSW? I've often wondered what would happen if I was in an at
    fault accident with a car while on a bicycle. Assuming I'm not turned
    into road pizza, I've always supposed I'd have to cough up for repairs
    to the car.

    Not sure if it is the only one, but it is the one I know about.

    Check with your home insurance though - mine doesn't cover me for
    anything to do with riding the bike as far as I know, but some might.

    The BNSw stuff is athttp://www.bicyclensw.org.au/Membership.asp
    which links tohttp://www.cyclecover.com.au/webcontent19.htm

    Zebee

    Excellent, thanks. I'll check it out even though it's not much of an
    issue at the moment with my stuffed knee, but I'm assuming it'll get
    better.

  4. Quoted message said:
    Zebee Johnstone said:

    In aus.bicycle on 15 Mar 2007 18:36:28 -0700

    Quoted message said:

    [email hidden] <[email hidden]> wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    So if I'm understanding this correctly, the only way to get the
    equivalent of third party property insurance for bicycling is to join
    Bicycle NSW?  I've often wondered what would happen if I was in an at
    fault accident with a car while on a bicycle.  Assuming I'm not turned
    into road pizza, I've always supposed I'd have to cough up for repairs
    to the car.

    Quoted message said:

    Not sure if it is the only one, but it is the one I know about.

    Quoted message said:

    Check with your home insurance though - mine doesn't cover me for
    anything to do with riding the bike as far as I know, but some might.

    Quoted message said:

    The BNSw stuff is athttp://www.bicyclensw.org.au/Membership.asp
    which links tohttp://www.cyclecover.com.au/webcontent19.htm

    Quoted message said:

    Zebee

    Excellent, thanks.  I'll check it out even though it's not much of an
    issue at the moment with my stuffed knee, but I'm assuming it'll get
    better

    it will if you let little marty w suck it - he like doing that just
    ask he dog.

  5. Pedal Power ACT also provide third party coverage as part of their
    membership benefits. $60 per year provides newsletter, insurance etc.
    http://www.pedalpower.org.au/

    In fact they provide this insurance through Cyclecover
    http://www.cyclecover.com.au/

    I have my home and contents with Cyclecover. YMMV but they where cheaper
    (and with better coverage) than my previous insurer. I have just renewed
    and the annual cost went DOWN despite them automatically indexing the
    house and contents coverage UP. Can't beat that!

  6. In aus.bicycle on 15 Mar 2007 20:14:34 -0700

    Aeek said:
    Zebee Johnstone said:

    My guess is that most of them class it as "used on the road therefore
    related to car crash stats but they don't have VIN markings, and you
    can't panelbeat them but must always replace, not worth it."

    Replacing the frame, wheels, whatever is just spare parts.
    Just like repairing your great grandmother's axe.

    YOu know that, I know that, to an insurance company (like to the
    government) everything's a car.

    Zebee

  7. Zebee Johnstone said:

    YOu know that, I know that, to an insurance company (like to the
    government) everything's a car.

    Some insurance companies treat bodybuilders and sportsmen and women in
    the same category as obese people, due to the BMI.

    "Statistically, someone with your BMI is greatly at risk for a myriad of
    health problems, such as type 2 diabetes, IHD [...] you are a bad risk".

    Russ.

  8. In aus.bicycle on Fri, 16 Mar 2007 23:17:45 +1100

    Russ said:
    Zebee Johnstone said:

    YOu know that, I know that, to an insurance company (like to the
    government) everything's a car.

    Some insurance companies treat bodybuilders and sportsmen and women in
    the same category as obese people, due to the BMI.

    "Statistically, someone with your BMI is greatly at risk for a myriad of
    health problems, such as type 2 diabetes, IHD [...] you are a bad risk".

    So does the Navy. I recall a newspaper article about some sailors who
    were prevented from ship duty for "obesity" because they were
    bodybuilders and their BMI was high. THey were stunned, their doctors
    were stunned, the Navy had "no comment".

    Sorta like "give someone a hammer and everything looks like a nail",
    but in this case, "give someone a simple number to demonise others
    with and they'll use it instead of their bloody eyeballs."

    http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/ has some interesting information
    about the obesity scare and the bad stats involved.

    Zebee
    - who has changed shape but not weight and therefore has the same BMI
    (And the same good marks in the blood test) as she's had for years.

  9. Zebee Johnstone said:

    In aus.bicycle on Fri, 16 Mar 2007 23:17:45 +1100

    Russ said:

    Zebee Johnstone wrote:

    Quoted message said:

    Some insurance companies treat bodybuilders and sportsmen and women in
    the same category as obese people, due to the BMI.

    So does the Navy. I recall a newspaper article about some sailors who
    were prevented from ship duty for "obesity" because they were
    bodybuilders and their BMI was high. THey were stunned, their doctors
    were stunned, the Navy had "no comment".

    Sorta like "give someone a hammer and everything looks like a nail",
    but in this case, "give someone a simple number to demonise others
    with and they'll use it instead of their bloody eyeballs."

    Yup, and common sense.

    Quoted message said:

    http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/ has some interesting information
    about the obesity scare and the bad stats involved.

    Interesting site, and I liked some of the information they had on the
    history of diet marketing. But unfortunately the site as a whole
    supports my belief that skeptics are just another kind of zealot.

    They talk about the need to reexamine beliefs, provide evidence, and
    read the fine print. They also have the casual arrogance of a
    "myth-buster" in their demonising of others' "junk" science.

    However from reading their articles, they seem to throw around enough
    "junk" science articles of their own:

    http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0813/is_n2_v15/ai_6482599/print

    The article recommends people eat hydrogenated soybean, corn &
    cottonseed oil, as well as margarine. It also recommends avoiding animal
    fat, palm, and coconut oil. Lastly it says to decrease total fat. (I'm
    not going to go into the science of hydrogenated fats, as admittedly I
    don't know enough!)

    There are too many things wrong with those recommendations. In other
    words, it's a 'How To' guide for developing heart disease. Apologies for
    the length, it is hard to be brief when going against popular belief :p

    Saturated fat:
    1) The mistaken belief that /fat/, especially saturated fat is bad for
    you only leads to insane calls for low fat diets for children and
    babies, despite the evidence that low fat intake is well associated with
    failure to thrive in babies. Saturated fat is our primary fat type,
    needed for our bodies to function correctly - being the preferred fuel
    source of the heart among other things.

    Cholesterol:
    2) Cholesterol makes the bile that digests saturated fat, is needed for
    production of necessary hormones, and strengthens arterial walls to
    prevent haemorrhage. An increase of cholesterol above normal is a
    mechanism to protect weakened arteries - and the most likely (in terms
    of evidence) reason for this may explained by the vitamin C hypothesis
    (see Linus Pauling). Although LpA levels are far better than
    cholesterol, as they have the strongest positive correlation with heart
    attacks.

    Polyunsaturated fat:
    3) The polyunsaturated fats are well known to increase your oxidative
    load, in part due to the damage caused in the refining process - and
    this free radical damage is strongly associated with a large number of
    diseases, including cardiovascular disease;

    4) Polyunsaturated fat forms the highest proportion of "clogged
    arteries" (where one Lancet study show saturated fat to only make up
    about 25% when they physically examined arteries);

    5) Polys lower both 'good' and 'bad' cholesterol (you need to ask the
    question of why cholesterol levels rises in the first place);

    6) Polys increase your needs for omega 3s, through an imbalance of omega
    6's - omega 6s produce substances that promote inflammation, which in
    itself is part of the process of developing cardiovascular disease.

    Saturated fat/cholesterol causing heart disease?
    7) The link between saturated fat/cholesterol and heart disease is quite
    poor, and the research in that original study was high in selective
    bias. Basically, it included the data that fit, and ignored the data
    that didn't - hardly at all the scientific process! Therefore should be
    discounted.

    Cardiovascular disease is new - refined oils/carbs are new:
    8) Given that saturated fat has been high in our diets for centuries,
    and cardiovascular a relatively new occurence - wouldn't it make sense
    to look at /what has changed/? The emergence of novel foods, the refined
    carbohydrates and refined vegetable oils has occurred alongside the rise
    in cardiovascular disease.

    Real world effect of low saturated fat, high polyunsatured diets:
    9) There are many studies (surveys, clinical studies, etc) which tried
    to demonstrate that a supposedly heart healthy diet was actually
    healthy. They would compare those on a high polyunsaturated diet, with
    another group on the "bad" high saturated fat diet. Invariably (except
    in some cases where there was poor study design, and the conclusion
    pre-ordained no matter what the results) the poly group would fare worse
    in indicators such as body fat, cardiovascular disease, and overall
    morbidity and mortality. There were a number of studies that showed the
    saturated fat group had better cholesterol levels than the poly groups.

    And margarine? Margarine is associated with increases in mortality and
    morbidity, such has doubling the risk (compared to butter eaters) in
    developing heart disease, and in doubling the occurence of heart attacks.

    The funny thing is, coconut oil is particularly healthy. Lowers the bad
    cholesterol, raises the good. Kills intestinal parasites. Would appear
    to improve skin quality. It even purportedly helps people lose weight,
    based on the story of cattle producers trying to fatten up their
    livestock with coconut oil, only to find it lead to lean, healthy cattle.

    I've read a fair bit over the years, trying to understand the saturated
    fat/cholesterol thing as it didn't make sense to me - only to find that
    it was all completely made up, and in fact the opposite of the truth.

    Much of what I've said (and far more) is discussed below in these
    articles. They also contain references, which I have neglected to
    provide in my post :p

    The articles are by a Mary Enig, considered a leading lipid biochemist.
    I haven't examined every article, nor every claim on the site, but
    regardless the information on fats and oils is quite comprehensive and
    eye opening.

    http://www.westonaprice.org/knowyourfats/skinny.html [excellent rebuttal
    of the diet-heart hypothesis]
    http://www.westonaprice.org/knowyourfats/index.html [the index]

    Russ, who has been called both fat and skinny over his life.

    Quoted message said:

    Zebee
    - who has changed shape but not weight and therefore has the same BMI
    (And the same good marks in the blood test) as she's had for years.

  10. In aus.bicycle on Sat, 17 Mar 2007 19:03:51 +1100

    Russ said:

    Interesting site, and I liked some of the information they had on the
    history of diet marketing. But unfortunately the site as a whole
    supports my belief that skeptics are just another kind of zealot.

    Yup. I think it's impossible to find anyone truly even handed because
    it's such an emotive issue.

    The junkfood site tends to say "there is no point, nothing you can do
    will make a difference" as a counter to "it's all your own fault" I
    think.

    Zebee

  11. Zebee Johnstone said:

    In aus.bicycle on Sat, 17 Mar 2007 19:03:51 +1100

    Russ said:

    Interesting site, and I liked some of the information they had on the
    history of diet marketing. But unfortunately the site as a whole
    supports my belief that skeptics are just another kind of zealot.

    Yup. I think it's impossible to find anyone truly even handed because
    it's such an emotive issue.

    The junkfood site tends to say "there is no point, nothing you can do
    will make a difference" as a counter to "it's all your own fault" I
    think.

    Yep, and that would be one point I found I disagreed with. Also the
    implication that obesity was an intrinsic characteristic of people.

    There is always something that can be done, it is just a matter of
    finding it.

    Russ.

  12. In aus.bicycle on Sat, 17 Mar 2007 21:23:49 +1100

    Russ said:
    Zebee Johnstone said:


    The junkfood site tends to say "there is no point, nothing you can do
    will make a difference" as a counter to "it's all your own fault" I
    think.

    Yep, and that would be one point I found I disagreed with. Also the
    implication that obesity was an intrinsic characteristic of people.

    Which seems to me to be one of those things that so far is not proven,
    but neither is it disproven.

    So far in all the things I've seen, the long term prognosis is on the
    side of people having setpoints.

    Quoted message said:


    There is always something that can be done, it is just a matter of
    finding it.

    And that's just faith. It may not be true. Like cold fusion it won't
    be found it people are not looking for it, but it also might never be
    found.

    Zebee

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.