|
camoaero
Jun 15, 2003, 3:19 AM
Post #101 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2002
Posts: 48
|
Doctor,
What exactly are you trying to accomplish? Are you just sticking up for all the helmetless climbers out there? Or are you trying to dissuade other climbers who feel the need to protect themselves whenever possible.
You seem like a fairly intelligent and well informed individual, although you sometimes try and prove everyone otherwise. You can't take a few pieces of anecdotal evidence and use them to label the norm. All climbers are different; just because you've witnessed a few ignorant climbers with helmets, does not mean all fall within those lines. It seems rather ironic you've not mentioned any of the very skilled and respected helmet toting climbers I'm sure you must have come across in your what, 31 years of climbing.
On the other hand, if you're just continuing this subject for the sake of debate, then by all means: thread on man, thread on.
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Jun 15, 2003, 3:32 AM
Post #102 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
camoaero
read the thread, he has said it at least a dozen times in different ways.
also check mine and curt's among others if you still don't get it.
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Jun 15, 2003, 3:36 AM
Post #103 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
duplicate
|
|
|
|
|
drkodos
Jun 15, 2003, 3:38 AM
Post #104 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 21, 2002
Posts: 2935
|
In reply to: It seems rather ironic you've not mentioned any of the very skilled and respected helmet toting climbers I'm sure you must have come across in your what, 31 years of climbing. On the other hand, if you're just continuing this subject for the sake of debate, then by all means: thread on man, thread on.
I'm not sure what your question to me is on that first part.
regarding the latter: I am trying to only spectate from here on out in this thread. But like a crack addict, I always need one more hit. Hard to not respond to direct inquireies of me....
If you asked me to talk of the skilled helmet toting climbers I met? I'd mention that Jim McCarthy wears a helmet in the photos I've seen of him in the Bugaboo's and has never worn a helmet when I've seen him in the flesh at the Gunks and Adirondaks. I don't know very many climbers that wear helmets on a regular basis.
I stay clear of those that do. That is the truth.
People with a real reason to wear helmets don't bother me.
People with psuedo reasons scare the heck out of me.
My point again is this:
The helmet issue is usually not decided by the individual. Larger forces are at work. Economic forces. People think they make decisions based on facts, when i realty, most of these "facts" are nothing more than propaganda to increase sales revenue. Disguised propaganda, masquerading as "tech Tips" and other over simplified nonsense.
My goal is this:
To get poeple to question why they do things. And to continue to question. And then question again.
My theory is this:
Most people don't really understand why they do things, such as wear a helmet. They cling to preconceived ideas and rationalizations. When asked why? They spew forth with regurgitations of company propaganda. Just seeing the same rhetoric over and over again as to why people wear helmets must be a clue to someone other than three of us here that most of these poeple cannot, will not and don't think for themselves.
Not all, but most.
With regards to where climbing is headed:
This is a threat because it leads to less individuality and greater regulation, control and priviledge to do so, only through the augmentation of larger institutions (Access Fund, et al.)
People read these assisinine "Tech Tips" in a magazine and then think they've learned something. "Tips for better bouldering" or whatever.
"Ten tips on how to rationalize being a good father, yet never being home because you are always climbing." by drkodos
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Jun 15, 2003, 3:49 AM
Post #105 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: Anyway, I just paged through the recent R&I about free soloing....and there's Mr. Alex Huber free soloing some 18 pitch 5.12....with a helmet. I suppose one could bring up that sponsorship thing here, since he is a sponsored climber, but still...interesting nonetheless. Now I realize that Huber wasn't just cragging here, it was a serious and extremely commiting climb.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
brianthew
Jun 15, 2003, 4:07 AM
Post #106 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 1820
|
In reply to: Well, here is a case where a helmet makes perfect sense. If Alex were to fall off the 17th or 18th pitch and land on his head, he would really be in trouble without the helmet.
No kidding! Not to mention risk of meteor strikes and wayward cruise missiles. Personally, I wear a flak vest as well when I climb. :D
sarcasm!!!!11
|
|
|
|
|
csoles
Jun 15, 2003, 5:07 PM
Post #107 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2002
Posts: 329
|
ROTFLMAO! You had to go back ten years to find something I wrote to pick on?! And it turns out the piece you selected was actually about working to maintain access for climbers on federal lands. Amazing that you remember meeting me at the Gunks 25 years ago (any reason I should recall you?).
Of course you're too blinded by your dogma to realize I wrote far more informative and critical reviews than anybody, much to the chagrin of many companies and the mag's ad people. Always felt an educated consumer could make the best choice for themselves so my articles were usually 2/3 info and 1/3 review, without product awards that are just meant to sell. (Tech Tips was the other mag btw.) Since you've already decided I'm part of the evil conspiracy, it's as pointless to debate you as teaching a pig to sing.
Back to topic: Doesn't appear you've ever known a good friend who has suffered a serious brain injury; it's ugly. I wouldn't wish that on anyone but it might change your perspective. Even a slight reduction in the severity of a brain injury is a major benefit of a wearing a helmet. Are you really a doctor or just a quack? Why don't you rant on the dangers of using bouldering pads? We certainly never had those back in the day and now look at all the injured climbers. Pure consumerism, that's all they are.
Keep the flames coming, you're too funny! But don't expect me to wait here breathlessly for your long-winded reply...at least one of us has a life. Of course, you can claim victory at having defeated me if I don't bother to answer your diatribe. Whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
drkodos
Jun 15, 2003, 5:46 PM
Post #108 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 21, 2002
Posts: 2935
|
Mr Soles.
Thank you for the cogent and well stated reply.
I am not trying to win.
And yes, I have known freinds, and a family member tha HAS suffered irreversible brain damage. That point is moot. I operate out of logic, not PERSONAL and EMOTIONAL needs.
Sorry to go back ten years, I don't have all the recent mags. I stopped purchasing them because they have turned into rags. I do have more recent stuff, tho.
You challenged me to at least entertain you and I have done that.
Are you still disappointed in my intellect? Or can you at least admit that I have one, even though it may differ than yours?
Have fun.
Peace,
and beleive it or not: No hard feelings.
I never take anything away from these boards into the real world.
Again, thanks for the reply.
|
|
|
|
|
smiley
Jun 15, 2003, 6:05 PM
Post #109 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 9, 2003
Posts: 249
|
Csoles, as in *the* C. Soles? This is so cool!!! I love your mag.
|
|
|
|
|
deleted
Deleted
Jun 15, 2003, 6:13 PM
Post #110 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
dont bother
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Jun 15, 2003, 6:18 PM
Post #111 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
drkodos, the most entertaining thing you have said is that you operate from a logical base, when you have made so many logical errors that it would take at least an hour to detail and explain them all.
But to remain on topic, you do have one valid point, and that is that safety equipment is not a substitute for safe behavior.
OK, you have two valid points. Climbing mags pretty much suck. But that's another thread.
|
|
|
|
|
takeme
Jun 15, 2003, 7:56 PM
Post #112 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 7, 2003
Posts: 367
|
The anti-helmet delegation has some good points. I do believe that plenty of people where helmets in lieu of the more difficult tasks of learning how to fall safely, resisting the temptation to climb under other parties on loose routes, etc.
However it seems that people on both sides are missing some important points. The thought has been expressed repeatedly by "drkodos" and "curt" in particular that one can and should choose to climb in areas that don't have loose rock. I find this laughable. I don't think I have ever climbed in an area that didn't have loose rock. Even Lumpy Ridge, possibly the cleanest area I've ever been, has occasional looseness. My favorite climbing areas include such places as the high country of RMNP, Eldorado Canyon, the Black Canyon, and various desert areas. The best climbing I've ever done, and loose rock is a fact of life at all these places. Eldo in particular is a "cragging" area, and offers some of the cragging anywhere in the world, yet rotten bands and loose flakes area everywhere.
I'm not saying that anyone who doesn't wear a helmet is unsafe--on the contrary, it is certainly true the many of the safest climbers I know never wear helmets. Several of my regular partners don't--they are safe and I've got no problem climbing with them at all. I didn't used to wear a helmet myself, but now I've got one of the new-fangled light ones and I wear it most of the time. I barely even notice it. I know of more than one occasion where it has saved a friend or acquaintance from head injury in a lead fall.
In particular I have a good friend who guides for Colorado Mountain School, one of the country's leading guide services, who is a very skilled and experienced climber. He's been climbing 15 years, has taken many lead falls and finally took one completely unexpectedly last year on El Cap, flipped upside down, and hit his head. His helmet probably saved his life. He certainly knows how to fall safely, and he is certainly not the first highly skilled and experienced climber to have something like this happen. To say that it could never happen to you is folly. Climbing is unpredictable no matter how skilled and experiences you are. I go back and forth on this issue, as there are in fact some good reasons for not wearing a helmet (something many people who do wear them are unwilling to admit). But that doesn't mean that there aren't experienced climbers that have made the choice to wear one, and are safer for it.
Charles
|
|
|
|
|
drkodos
Jun 15, 2003, 8:07 PM
Post #113 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 21, 2002
Posts: 2935
|
In reply to: drkodos, the most entertaining thing you have said is that you operate from a logical base, when you have made so many logical errors that it would take at least an hour to detail and explain them all. But to remain on topic, you do have one valid point, and that is that safety equipment is not a substitute for safe behavior. OK, you have two valid points. Climbing mags pretty much suck. But that's another thread.
Dirtineye,
please educate me. Show me the flaws in my logic.
I have a Master's degree in Rhetoric (Temple University). A Phd in philosophy (U Penn) and a law degree (Boyd).
You will have a better chance in finding flaws in the logic of Mr Spock.
My point may be incorrect (they're not).
You may disagree with the hypothisis.
You may disagree with the thesis.
You may disagree with the conclusion.
But the logic is not flawed.
One of the problems is that no one else is actually applying true logic.
I repeat: There are only two states of safety.
Safe or not safe.
I never said there was something in climbing that is absolutely safe.
At least Mr Soles (whom I actually respect, I just needed to smudge him alittle in an overexageratted diatribe to prove a point....that most people get their info from sources that have a vested interest is SELLING THEM STUFF!) argues from a point of knowledge. And although he really hasn't proven me wrong, he has forced me, with his excellent post, rhetoric and style, to accept and respect his position.
dirtineye, you are still not there.....
keep trying.
now run along, and see if you can't find us a Unicorn.
|
|
|
|
|
sandbag
Jun 15, 2003, 9:46 PM
Post #114 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 12, 2003
Posts: 1443
|
Ive got the solution! Im developing a completely enclosed climbing suit similar to the type used for undersea deep diving and will only add about 5-600 lbs to the gear already used. It will come equiped with an ejection seat so if the dislodged projectiles are large enough to destroy the unit, youll safely reach the ground after a little ride in the nylon elevator. whew!
:lol:
|
|
|
|
|
vertical_planar
Jun 15, 2003, 9:56 PM
Post #115 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 320
|
I admit that I am not going to read the whole thread but here are my thoughts on the subject:
I have found that helmets can/have saved people from minor/major injuries. They wont help you from large size stones but they can spare you from a smaller size/higher speed stones.
I cannot forget the pieces of limestone that are permanently stuck inside a friend's helmet after a rockfall in the dolomites.
Rockfall has also been the indirect cause of many accidents (when loss of consiousness occurs etc)
My attitude towarads helmets was formed after studding a tome published by the German Climbing association. It was a description of climbing accidents of all sorts accompanied by an analysis of the causes. According to this collection of data, a siginificant amount of accidents could have been avoided by wearing a helmet. On the other hand, I can only recall one type of accident caused because someone weared a helmet. Helmet untied slipping from the head of the leader and hitting the second. [..]
I understand that commercialisation that hits climbing is frustrating. But lets not start arguing that we should not use seat belts on cars because they can prove fatal in case of fire...
And please, if you wish that "more people were dying in climbing" please take a positive step and go kill yourself
(thanks again for bearing my poor English) :)
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Jun 15, 2003, 10:46 PM
Post #116 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
God save us, a lawyer AND a phlosopher!
Rhetoritiian = persuader with out concern for truth.
Lawyer = Rhetoritician who gets paid well.
Phoilosopher = one seeking to justify their rhetoric.
Now I see why you have so much trouble with logic. If you had a degree in math, I'd be worried.
I don't want or need your respect. You lost mine about 8 pages ago.
Show you where you are wrong? If you knew as much about logic as you think you do, you could figure that out for yourself. You'll have to pay me to do it for you. Besides some others have already pointed out a few of your errors. Go study their posts like a good lad. Come back when you understand your mistakes.
Whatever you do, keep posting, I'm having a good laugh.
And by the way, Mr Spock was a fictional character, but his written-by-script-wrriters-without-a-clue logic is just about at the level of yours, so I completely understand why you chose Spock as an axample.
|
|
|
|
|
hooker
Jun 15, 2003, 11:06 PM
Post #117 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 22, 2003
Posts: 173
|
True story.
I was belaying a climber on a route: Son of Easy O.
There was a young woman belaying a leader on the route to my left: Baby.
The leader dislodged a rock and yelled: "ROCK !!!
The belayer looked up, and the rock wacked her in the cheekbone. She may have needed sutures, possibly even fractured the bone. She stayed in good spirits and the injury wasn't life threatening. There was a lot of blood, and a nasty gash that to this day I don't know if it left her scared, or not.
She was wearing a helmet the whole time.
There is a big difference between these next two statements:
1) Helmets make you safer.
2) Helmets MAY make you safer.
If you do not wish to recognize the subtle, yet distinct difference between these two, then that is a bridge that cannot be crossed through any form of communcation. There is a major difference between the philosophies & behaviors that arise from how one incorporates the meaning of these statements into a climbing paradigm.
Have fun,
Be SAFE in whatever form you may find appropriate to your individual needs.
And most of all:
......play nice :D
Suzanne
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Jun 16, 2003, 12:01 AM
Post #118 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
In reply to: reno: the number of people with over five-years climbing experience having bad accidents is at an all time high. It is not just newbies. Don't misconstrue the point. Here it is: Climbing is being sold as something that can be made safe.
Dr. Kodos:
First, please call me Jeff. "Reno" is a nickname I use only because "Jeff" was already in use. :)
I think you are sending a different message than what you are REALLY trying to say. You seemed to imply that helmets do not offer any measure of safety, rather than what I *think* you are trying to say: Climbing is dangerous, regardless of helmet use.
Now then... I disagree that climbing is being sold as something that can be made "safe." Rather, I think the equipment and gear sold to climbers promotes an increase in the safety margin. This is not the same as "safe." Every piece of gear/equipment/guidebook/magazine/journal/etc. I've ever seen regarding to climbing always makes the claim that climbing is dangerous, you can be hurt or killed, etc. Granted, part of this is an attempt at legal protection (misguided or futile as it may be, but that's another discussion,) but part of it is simply fact: Climbing IS dangerous. We all agree on that.
Yet who is to say I am wrong for attempting to mitigate those dangers as best I can, given what options exist? Driving a car is dangerous. Yet we don't totally eliminate the activity and walk everywhere. Rather, we make improvements: Better auto design, seatbelts, airbags, etc. Despite these advances, we still have a measure of risk when we drive (trust me... I see dead people from auto wrecks regularily.)
Climbing is no different: There is an inherent danger, but taking steps to mitigate the risk is not wrong: T'were things otherwise, we'd not have improved the construction of ropes, carabiners, protection, etc. We'd still be climbing on twisted hemp ropes wearing swami belts and hoping the leader does not fall.
Helmets *DO* offer protection from injury. They *DO* make climbing safer. The degree to which they perform this task may be subject to debate, but the simple fact that they do perform the task is not.
Respectfully,
Jeff B.
|
|
|
|
|
weedy
Jun 16, 2003, 12:45 AM
Post #119 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2003
Posts: 33
|
I alwas wear a helmet. When you smoke lots you never know where your head will be and it could hit some rocks and get messy. Plus you can stash papers and matches up there for the belay ledges.
|
|
|
|
|
djmacedonas
Jun 16, 2003, 2:42 AM
Post #120 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 11, 2002
Posts: 84
|
LOL Weedy:
Dr Kodos, I agree with the majority of your points, but, really, your logic is flawed:
You claim that you hate absolutes such as:
"Climbing helmets make you safer"
Yet you make some "absolute" statements yourself:
e.g.
"Wearing a helmet while cragging is idiotic"
"wearing a helmet makes a statement about what kind of climber you are"
It would be illogical in my opinion to make assumptions about ones climbing ability, knowledge, or safety based on the hat they choose to wear.
Later, you state that most climbing accidents are avoidable, except for random rockfall. True, I agree with you, but so much at the crags is beyond our control. A friend of ours once showed up to a crag in Utah... a little slab area called "the slips", essentially an 80-foot 5.6-5.8 wall. He had a new climber with him... and she climbed quite well for a noob... but he never instructed her that she had to yell "rock" if she knocked anything loose. That little ping-pong ball sized rock actually made a whizzing noise before it hit (the first time I was alerted to it's presence). It hit a boulder, whizzed past me missing me by about two feet, then whizzed inches from my friends head. I have no doubt that he would have been seriously injured or killed had it hit him, even though he was about 20 feet from the plumb-line that rock initially took. For the record, none of us were wearing helmets, though that event really made us consider them, and for the first time I realized how dangerous rockfall can potentially be, even at a "crag".
So here's the point. If you were there, maybe with your experience you would have insured that the girl your friend brought new all the climbing commands. I doubt it, but I may be wrong. For arguments sake, let's just assume you wouldn't have. Let's also assume that you sensed some danger with this newbie, and you sat on that log 20 feet away to take your shoes off and move on to another route (which is what my friend was doing)... Now, there are all these chains of events that our no longer in your control... Lack of proper instruction for the noob-- her kicking a rock off at the top... not having the sense to yell something... a rock hitting a 45 degree perfectly angled boulder at the base of her climb 20 feet away from your perch... you sitting, bent over, untying your rock shoes, a rock now hurdling toward your head:
Now, how is wearing a helmet "idiotic"? What might you have done differently, assuming you're not wearing a helmet.
Really, those are my only concerns with your arguments. For the record, I still rarely wear a helmet at well traveled crags (mostly for the reasons you stated...and it comes down to risk assesment, how likely is an event like the above described event? Not very likely, usually, IMO.)
I agree with you, that a lot of gear is being sold for the WRONG reasons. To give people a perception of safety...and maintain "perceived" risk. Ski gear is another biggie. Did a lot of telemark skiing and some backcountry in Utah... Avy gear is a big seller there. Avy gear is great, but no replacement for using your mind in the first place... one product in particular scares the crap out of me: The Avalung... This is a device that requires you to successfully negotiate a number of steps to get a mouthpiece into your mouth while being pureed by an avalanche so that you can breathe through the snow and your body and your friends have more time to dig you out. Scary as hell, because I'm afraid such a device will give people the false sense of security and the license to be stupid. SUVs are another biggie (and no, I don't want to start an SUV argument in this forum)... Waaaaaay to many people use them to replace their brains, especially when driving in the snow... Air bags, anti-lock brakes, seat belt tensioners, 4-wheel drive, NONE of that crap can help you more than not getting yourself in an accident in the first place, and so many idiots drive these tanks like nothing else matters, because they are so well protected (so they think- I know 7 people who have rolled their SUVs in the last decade, two of them with fatal consequences.)
Perception sells... I just moved back to New Jersey after spending 8 years in graduate school in Utah (don't ask me why I did such a stupid thing, I'm not long for this place... I'll probably climb the gunks in the fall, then move back out west... Stooopidity runs way to rampant over here.) Anyway, I've seen more Hummers and H2s here than ANYWHERE out West. What gives? Everything in NJ is PAVED people... INCLUDING THE FREAKING HIKING TRAILS!!!! (Although after hitting a few NJ potholes with a Bilstein shock equipped VW Golf, I may become a convert to the whole Hummer Thang...). I remember when "Cliffhanger" came out, friends who worked in a NJ climbing store said they were inundated with yuppies coming in and asking for that "bolt gun sylvester stallone used in that movie" But I digress...
A couple more points:
RE: actuarys... can it be that people who are wering helmets are more likely to be alpinists (mountaineers), a subgroup of climbers more likely to be injured?
As for helmets being pushed by the climbing 'rags', maybe true, but then how do you explain the fact that 99% of rock climbers in those magazines aren't wearing helmets?
Finally, though I agree with you on much of what you said (as if you care) I can't agree on one thing: No matter how stupid a noob is, no matter what vehicle they choose to drive to the crags, or what hat they wear... I would really never ever hope they "Die to thin the gene pool"... :?
djm
|
|
|
|
|
sonso45
Jun 16, 2003, 2:45 AM
Post #121 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 1, 2002
Posts: 997
|
I like to stash my silk balaclava in there; my hankie too, for hard scary climbs so I can wipe the tears off my stubbly cheeks.
|
|
|
|
|
sindbad
Jun 16, 2003, 12:28 PM
Post #122 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 13, 2003
Posts: 3
|
In reply to: My point may be incorrect (they're not). You may disagree with the hypothisis. You may disagree with the thesis. You may disagree with the conclusion. But the logic is not flawed. One of the problems is that no one else is actually applying true logic.
Logic itself doesn't make you right (although I pretty much agree on your safety opinion).
I always wear a helmet at my local crag - mainly because it is right down to the sea, and tourists at the top have a nasty habit of throwing rock in the sea. Sometimes they dont throw hard enough. The only time I actually notice I'm wearing it, is when I bump it against the rock, forgetting that my head is 2" taller. :wink:
Be safe - wear a condom.
sindbad
|
|
|
|
|
ljthawk
Jun 16, 2003, 1:26 PM
Post #123 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2002
Posts: 245
|
Thread is too long to read, but I do have one question I doubt has been asked.
Of those who are pontificating helmets are useless and shouldn't be worn, I'm interested in finding out what medical, first aid, or rescue training you have. Such training usually raises the awareness of what can happen and what such safety devices are good for or what they aren't good for.
L.J.
P.S. I like the air bag climbing suit idea.
|
|
|
|
|
rockunderfoot
Jun 16, 2003, 1:49 PM
Post #124 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 28, 2001
Posts: 82
|
Anyone happen to mention things like beer bottles?
I've seen plenty of them laying around smashed at
the bottom of crags where highways run past above
them. I think an aimlessly tossed bottle shattering on
a helmet, or even shards raining down from a bottle
that smashed higher up, would tend to draw less
blood.
Falls don't scare me, but other humans do.
If there's a chance someone's gonna chuck
something my way, the helmet goes on.
|
|
|
|
|
neadamthal
Jun 16, 2003, 1:54 PM
Post #125 of 160
(11346 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2002
Posts: 245
|
In reply to: Don't misconstrue the point. Here it is: Climbing is being sold as something that can be made safe.
i'm probably asking for trouble here, but that isn't THE point - it is A point (though, admittedly, widely held).
i agree that companies are trying to convince us that we can make our time on the rock 'safer', but i don't think (or haven't really taken notice of) companies that actually say 'use our helmet and you WILL be safe - regardless of what you are doing while wearing it'. maybe some co's are saying this - fraudulent advertizing if you ask me - but i haven't seen/noticed it.
i agree with you drkodos, that an activity can be described as either safe or unsafe. climbing is inherently an unsafe/risk-filled activity. however we all take precautions against those known risks. the rope and harnesses being the primary instances of this. the helmet (again, just another precaution) doesn't remove those risks (as some climbers seem to believe - when they're doing stuff they wouldn't without a helmet) but possibly reduces the severity of the outcome of a dangerous situation. that's why i wear one at least - to better my chances in the case of an accident/falling rock/etc.
let's see how long we can keep this thread going! 10 pages, bah, i wanna see 20 by week's end!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
