Re: Security measures?
 

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 08:31:04 -0700, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)"
<[email protected]> wrote:

    >Mxsmanic wrote:
    >> EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) writes:
    >>
    >>
    >>>I doubt it! (Even Disneyland isn't as much of an "enchanted
    >>>kingdom" as it was when Disney himself was alive.)
    >>
    >>
    >> Disney has been surviving on inertia created by Walt ever since his
    >> death. Nobody has ever really been able to fill his shoes. If only
    >> he had not been a smoker!
    >Then something else would have killed him. (Nobody lives
    >forever, in case that fact had slipped your notice.) ;-)

Old age. Walt was born in 1901. Bring back Howard Hughes!
--
Martin

Re: Security measures?
 

Martin writes:

    > Bloody difficult in a cryostat.

Walt was cremated.

    > He'd be 104?

He would have lived to be a lot older than 66.

Re: Security measures?
 

Mxsmanic wrote:

    > Martin writes:
    >
    >
    >>Bloody difficult in a cryostat.
    >
    >
    > Walt was cremated.
    >
    >
    >>He'd be 104?
    >
    >
    > He would have lived to be a lot older than 66.

Why? Many supposedly healthy people don't, even if they are
non-smokers!

Re: Security measures?
 

EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) writes:

    > Why? Many supposedly healthy people don't, even if they are
    > non-smokers!

He died of lung cancer, and he was a heavy smoker. Nearly 95% of all
lung cancers are related to smoking (most of the rest are due to radon
poisoning or genetic predispositions).

Re: Security measures?
 

Asbestosis, Mesotheliomia,... You don't know WTF you're talking about
again. Both of those are environment causes of lung cancer far more
common than Radon induced tumors.

Quack, quack, quack...Walk like a duck, 'doc'.

Tim K

"Mxsmanic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) writes:
    > > Why? Many supposedly healthy people don't, even if they are
    > > non-smokers!
    > He died of lung cancer, and he was a heavy smoker. Nearly 95% of all
    > lung cancers are related to smoking (most of the rest are due to radon
    > poisoning or genetic predispositions).

Re: Security measures?
 

Timothy Kroesen writes:

    > Asbestosis ...

... is not a type of cancer.

    > ... Mesotheliomia ...

Mesothelioma is most common in people who have had heavy or prolonged
exposure to asbestos dust--and who smoke.

    > You don't know WTF you're talking about again.

Are you sure?

    > Both of those are environment causes of lung cancer far more
    > common than Radon induced tumors.

They are not causes of cancer, they are diseases. Asbestosis is a
type of fibrosis caused by (substantial) exposure to asbestos dust.
It is not a form of cancer, nor is it an environmental characteristic.

Pleural mesothelioma is associated with asbestos exposure (most people
who develop it have been exposed to asbestos), but smoking
dramatically increases the chances of developing mesothelioma if one
has already been exposed to asbestos (as much as 90 times the baseline
for unexposed non-smokers). It's a rare form of cancer in any case,
although it is invariably fatal. Asbestosis is not a prerequisite to
mesothelioma, and most people who have asbestosis will not develop
mesothelioma.

Re: Security measures?
 

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 20:19:55 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:

    >Martin writes:
    >> Bloody difficult in a cryostat.
    >Walt was cremated.

I remember reading in a US newspaper around the time of his death,
that he was to be stored in a cryostat, to await a miracle in medical
science.
It seems to be just the usual journalistic crap
http://www.snopes.com/disney/info/wd-ice.htm

    >> He'd be 104?
    >He would have lived to be a lot older than 66.

but not to 104?
--
Martin

Re: Security measures?
 

Timothy Kroesen wrote:
    > I'm curious; what do you find "painful" in a ride that is
    > inherently smoother and by modern engineering and design standards
    > safer and less stressful on the body?

Over The Shoulder Restraints are the culprits. The worst in my
experience is the blue thing at Magic Mountain called something like
Z-Force. It gave me the worst headache of my life and I fear it might
have caused an aneurysm that might reveal itself some day.

The Great American Revolution, also at Magic Mountain, was designed
and built without OTSRs but it has them now. Quite painful.

    > NOthing beats you up like rattling around in an old woodie...<g>

With the exception of Coney Island's Cyclone that beats you up anyway
(once, apparently with new brakes, it cracked one of m'ribs), the
fault lies with the new trains. Most of the original trains were
fully articulated and beautifully upholstered (you can see a typical
example at Mission Beach in San Diego, identical to what we had here
and in Santa Cruz). The new trans have hard plastic seats and,
unclear on the concept of being a teen-ager on a 'coaster, seat
dividers. It's not the ride, Tim, it's the new trains.
__________________________________________________ _________________
A roller-coaster freak in San Francisco.
< http://geocities.com/dancefest/ >-< http://geocities.com/iconoc/ >
ICQ: < http://wwp.mirabilis.com/19098103 > ---> IClast at SFbay Net

Re: Security measures?
 

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Mxsmanic) wrote:

    > *From:* Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
    > *Date:* Thu, 11 Aug 2005 20:19:55 +0200
    >
    > Martin writes:
    >
    > > Bloody difficult in a cryostat.
    >
    > Walt was cremated.
    >
    > > He'd be 104?
    >
    > He would have lived to be a lot older than 66.

He was 65 when he died BTW.


----------------------------------------------
The poster formerly known as [email protected].
My new email address is that one, with the first digit of years in the
current century placed after the first word.

Re: Security measures?
 

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
(Martin) wrote:

    > *From:* Martin <[email protected]>
    > *Date:* Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:59:13 +0200
    >
    > On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 07:01:20 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) writes:
    > >
    > >> I doubt it! (Even Disneyland isn't as much of an "enchanted
    > >> kingdom" as it was when Disney himself was alive.)
    > >
    > >Disney has been surviving on inertia created by Walt ever since his
    > >death. Nobody has ever really been able to fill his shoes.
    >
    > Bloody difficult in a cryostat.

Suspended animation in every sense. ;)

----------------------------------------------
The poster formerly known as [email protected].
My new email address is that one, with the first digit of years in the
current century placed after the first word.

Re: Security measures?
 

In article <1123846997.a722b75518a18ef31cd1609dc4568031@teran ews>,
Icono Clast <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Timothy Kroesen wrote:
    > > I'm curious; what do you find "painful" in a ride that is
    > > inherently smoother and by modern engineering and design standards
    > > safer and less stressful on the body?
    >
    > Over The Shoulder Restraints are the culprits. The worst in my
    > experience is the blue thing at Magic Mountain called something like
    > Z-Force. It gave me the worst headache of my life and I fear it might
    > have caused an aneurysm that might reveal itself some day.
    >
    > The Great American Revolution, also at Magic Mountain, was designed
    > and built without OTSRs but it has them now. Quite painful.
    >
    > > NOthing beats you up like rattling around in an old woodie...<g>
    >
    > With the exception of Coney Island's Cyclone that beats you up anyway
    > (once, apparently with new brakes, it cracked one of m'ribs), the
    > fault lies with the new trains. Most of the original trains were
    > fully articulated and beautifully upholstered (you can see a typical
    > example at Mission Beach in San Diego,

Giant Dipper roller coaster at Belmont Park.

jay
Fri Aug 12, 2005
mailto:[email protected]




    > identical to what we had here
    > and in Santa Cruz). The new trans have hard plastic seats and,
    > unclear on the concept of being a teen-ager on a 'coaster, seat
    > dividers. It's not the ride, Tim, it's the new trains.
    > __________________________________________________ _________________
    > A roller-coaster freak in San Francisco.
    > < http://geocities.com/dancefest/ >-< http://geocities.com/iconoc/ >
    > ICQ: < http://wwp.mirabilis.com/19098103 > ---> IClast at SFbay Net

Re: Security measures?
 

Mxsmanic wrote:

    > EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) writes:
    >
    >
    >>Why? Many supposedly healthy people don't, even if they are
    >>non-smokers!
    >
    >
    > He died of lung cancer, and he was a heavy smoker. Nearly 95% of all
    > lung cancers are related to smoking (most of the rest are due to radon
    > poisoning or genetic predispositions).

So? My reply was a comment upon your assertion that "He
would have lived to be a lot older than 66". You have no
way of knowing that - something else might well have killed
him at that age, if he had NOT developed lung cancer! (LIFE
is essentially a fatal disease - what actually causes one's
departure is largely in the hands of fate.)

Re: Security measures?
 

EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) writes:

    > So? My reply was a comment upon your assertion that "He
    > would have lived to be a lot older than 66". You have no
    > way of knowing that - something else might well have killed
    > him at that age, if he had NOT developed lung cancer! (LIFE
    > is essentially a fatal disease - what actually causes one's
    > departure is largely in the hands of fate.)

Not knowing how long one will live is hardly a reason to kill oneself
at an early age.
--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Re: Security measures?
 

Mxsmanic wrote:

    > EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) writes:
    >
    >
    >>So? My reply was a comment upon your assertion that "He
    >>would have lived to be a lot older than 66". You have no
    >>way of knowing that - something else might well have killed
    >>him at that age, if he had NOT developed lung cancer! (LIFE
    >>is essentially a fatal disease - what actually causes one's
    >>departure is largely in the hands of fate.)
    >
    >
    > Not knowing how long one will live is hardly a reason to kill oneself
    > at an early age.


Define "early age". People may live longer nowadays than
when Social Security set "retirement age" at 65 (which many
people did not live to see, at that time), but it's still
considered old enough so death is not entirely unexpected!
(And FWIW, for most of Disney's life, most adult males
somoked, since the studies connecting it to lung cancer
weren't published until long after WW2.)

Re: Security measures?
 

EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) writes:

    > Define "early age".

Any age before death.

    > People may live longer nowadays than when Social Security set
    > "retirement age" at 65 (which many people did not live to see,
    > at that time) ...

People have been living to much older ages for thousands of years.
Infectious illnesses, accidents, and malnutrition sometimes prevent
people from reaching their genetic ages, but death in their 60s is not
necessarily normal for most people.

    > ... but it's still considered old enough so death is not
    > entirely unexpected!

It seems unexpected to me.

    > (And FWIW, for most of Disney's life, most adult males
    > somoked, since the studies connecting it to lung cancer
    > weren't published until long after WW2.)

The first worries about the health effects of tobacco smoking date
from roughly the mid-nineteenth century. The link between smoking and
lung cancer was known by at least 1950 (only a few years after WWII).
The Surgeon General of the United States formally announced this link
in 1964 (my grandfather quit smoking cold turkey on the same day, and
he did not die of lung cancer).

Since lung cancer is a fast-moving disease, Disney almost certainly
did not have the disease in 1964. Had he also stopped smoking on the
day of the Surgeon General's announcement, he might never have died of
lung cancer.

Smokers have known for many decades that smoking causes cancer, but
many choose to continue to smoke. They roll the dice and sometimes
the dice come up with cancer.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.