riddler

Would that comprise a iatrogenic death? Nowhere in the article do they say that all septic deaths are iatrogenic. But what if they were? What if you eliminated all septic deaths from the numbers? The third leading cause of death would still be iatrogenic. The first cause is listed as failure to rescue. If that person were elderly, and it looked like they were on the cusp anyway, and a doctor decided to make them last in the triage, would we not count that as a failure? I would. And I would encourage the AMA to list it as a failure, rather than throw it into some disease-related category. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

I don't think this article, or any statistical survey is complete and accurate. What if it's not? What if you factored out - say half of the deaths - just to be on the safe side. (Factor of 2, can you tell I'm an engineer? ). Many physicians are claiming these numbers are already on the low side, but we'll go the other way cut them in half. That would eliminate iatrogenic sepsis completely, if you wish, even though many of those deaths are still preventable. What then? Iatrogenic deaths would compromise a little under 100,000, and still be the third leading cause of death. That describes the magnitude of the problem. If this problem is so large, why doesn't the AMA admit to it? Why don't they publish as the third leading cause, before alcohol? Doctor's have real choices to make, including the life and death of patients, and they have the courage to do that. That is the responsibility they take. Why doesn't the community have the courage and the moral responsibility of admitting to their mistakes as a whole? Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Many insurance companies have a very different idea of honesty than most people. Maybe you need to speak to them on their level Seriously, if you're a really honest person, maybe it's best that you don't get this job. I've taken jobs that I didn't really care for from the interview ($$$), and they were just as bad as I thought they would be. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

I wasn't able to make it to the boogie last weekend. The off-airport landing would be unusual for Colorado. I think I've heard it done at Hollister? or other DZs in other states. But I've never hear of it done in Colorado. Maybe some CO jumpers with more experience than me could relate any stories. More importantly for Colorado jumpers: Randy has already announced the return to Brush airport. Will this end the return of Brush as a viable dropzone for us? Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Your example wouldn't fall into the category of iatrogenic. Making the best choice out of a lot of poor choices would not qualify. However, deciding to administer Heparin and administering Hexamethylenetetramine by mistake, leading to her death would compromise iatogenic. This article isn't about best guesses and near misses. It's about overt errors that could have been prevented. I encourage reading the article: And I don't think a doctor would try to hide that if it did happen. This isn't a criticism of doctors. It is a criticism of the medical culture and community. I'm not even advocating changing anything at this point. I'm only advocating that the AMA needs to take responsibility for their actions by very publicly making the statement, and not just discussing it within smaller circles. At the point that they do (if ever), then they can address it and decide the most appropriate actions to take. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

It's fair to say every patient in a hospital is already sick. But "already sick" or "pretty old" or "getting ready to die anyway" are not categories of death in the JAMA Journal. If a 79 year old man with lung cancer dies, they don't get lumped into the statistic of "already dying"; they get lumped into "tobacco". But if that same man dies because he was mistakenly given an appendectomy, he still gets lumped into "tobacco". I see this as an issue in that the medical community does not recognize that they are a big part of the problem. They think "these patients are sick anyway, and we are only trying to help them." But they make errors. A significant amount of errors to compromise the third leading cause of death. And they don't admit to it. JAMA produces smaller, more individual assessments, such as this one But they don't want to make an assessment on the grand scale - they type that gets reported in the media - to show that their mistakes cost 195,000 lives each year. For me, it's not that hard to do. Just step up and say "we make mistakes; enough to be an epidemic in this country. We're going to try to fix that". Even GWB did that after Katrina. Why does the medical community want to tone down their responsibility? Edit to add: for the purposes of this article, iatrogenic DOES mean mistake. From the article: Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

I believe that everyone in the medical community thinks about it. I don't believe that anyone admits to it. Why doesn't JAMA publish the numbers? Only when the AMA admits to a problem publicly, and with solid statistical evidence, will they take the needed measures to correct it. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

But it looks like some people are still denying it Hmm - I still think that a dislodged reserve pin may not be caught by the jumper. It's possible to do slowly without realizing. Bending one is now out, because you would definitely feel the whack that would cause it to bend. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Word of the day. Iatrogenic means "induced inadvertently by a physician or surgeon or by medical treatment or diagnostic procedures". A significant number of deaths in the U.S. each year are caused by mistakes made by doctors in hospitals. How big is this problem? According to a recent report by HealthGrades, iatrogenic deaths accounted for 195,000 American lives in each of the years 2000, 2001, and 2002. That places it in in the top three leading causes of death. According to JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association, arguably, the most noted health care publication in this country), the leading causes of death in 2000 were tobacco (435,000 deaths; 18.1% of total US deaths), poor diet and physical inactivity (400,000 deaths; 16.6%), and alcohol consumption (85,000 deaths; 3.5%). If one is to believe these statistics, then the third leading cause of death in the US, is in fact, iatrogenic death. Why don't you see this number in the JAMA results? Could it be that the medical profession doesn't want you to know that they make mistakes? I think every doctor will tell you that they make mistakes. But what if the mistakes are so prevalent as to become the third leading killer in the US? Would JAMA be just as hard on themselves as they are on the tobacco and alcohol industries? Moreover, many experts are looking hard at the numbers, and believe the statistics to be underestimated. These numbers only account for deaths in-hospital. They do not account for outpatient treatments resulting in death, or adverse drug reactions from even properly prescribed drugs. It's tempting to start talking about alternatives to modern medicine and modern healthcare at this point, but I will refrain Just getting the American people to become aware of this problem, and the AMA to admit to it would be a huge step forward. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Now we're getting to parts that I don't understand, since I don't swoop. What do you mean by "true swoop"? From a pure physics standpoint, it should be possible for forward speed to exceed any previous horizontal speed; with enough time you can build up the energy, then plane it out for some immediate horizontal speed. But that wouldn't exactly be a hookturn. By true swoop, do you mean a hookturn? Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Heart qualifies as all-girl, because no one can name the other guys (I mean WITHOUT Google ) Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Some of my friends love to chase girls. After they're successful, they lose interest and dump them. For them, the chase is more fun than the relationship. If you like guys that chase you, you're risking a short term relationship. I feel like I'm supposed to be posting this in the women's forum or something. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

What? No Heart? Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Nope. If she's not interested, I'm not gonna try to convince her. It wouldn't make for a good relationship, IMO. I think relationships need to have desire and motivation from both sides to work. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

A few smaller (Cessna) dropzones require AADs as well, depending on the DZO. My girlfriend's father owns a DZ, and he requires AADs. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

http://www.rosemcgowanonline.com/ "Dude - can I ask your sister out?" Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

This isn't a forum for speculation and second-hand account ... Wait. I guess it is the forum for rumor and second-hand account Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

I don't think he was sick. The paintings strike me as someone who is a true atheist and is mocking religion and emphasizing humanity's struggle with inevitable death. Shotgun - if you ever find yourself in the Tampa/St Petersburg area, check out the Dali museum there. It is amazing! Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

How was the boogie? Did anyone go? I would've liked to come, but I took my mom to Oktoberfest on Sunday (my normal jumping day), and has to work the other days. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

270 jumps and looking to get a second rig. *Sigh* They grow up so fast Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Talk like a pirate day reminds me of the macarena. It's mildly entertaining when it's vogue, but in a few years, we'll all be embarrassed that we ever did it. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

I'm going to try to keep the thread about redesigning AADs. There are other threads to discuss whether AADs are necessary, even for swoopers. I think if AADs were redesigned with swoopers in mind, then the reason to use them might change. So if the AAD were redesigned for swoopers, would you use it? Good point about the waterproof. The CYPRES-2 has water protection to 10 feet, and the CYPRES 1 has a waterproofing kit. The Vigil is not waterproof. Any swooper's AAD would need that Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Note that if you have a computer with an infra-red port, you can download and update the firmware yourself. http://www.alti-2.com/Neptune_Owners_Pages/neptune_updater.htm I've done this with a few different Neptunes already, and I won't recommend it for people that are computer illiterate. It's not exactly "one-click" software If you like Linux, you'll love this stuff - there are quite a few steps. BTW - if anyone in the Denver area has a Neptune and wants an update, send me a PM - I've got a laptop with IR that I can bring to the DZ to help you do it. Once you do it a few times, it's not that bad. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Recent events make me think that AADs should be redesigned to accommodate swoopers. Swooping is not going to go away and AAD manufacturers cannot ignore this important market segment. Swoopers are continuing to push limits - going faster and further - possibly too fast for current AAD algorithms. My guess is there are plenty of swoopers that refuse to use AADs, as well as plenty more that prefer to use them. Some dropzones require the use of AADs for all jumpers. How could swoopers be accommodated in AAD usage without compromising safety for non-swoopers? There's probably no perfect answer, but here's some ideas (feel free to add your own): 1. Special AAD configurations for swoopers. Seems like Vigil would have the least amount of redesign effort here. Their AADs can be configured via the software interface to accommodate Pro, Student or Tandem, so they could add a "HPL" setting that disables the AAD below a desired altitude. Airtec might have a little more work to do, but might accommodate with a special controller - make a new button (maybe a black one with a cool "X" in it, for you extreme junkies ). Or Airtec might just add the ability to deactivate below a certain altitude - they already have a way to reset the ground elevation for different LZs; adding a new function for swoopers to disarm below a certain altitude should be possible. 2. Automatically disable the activator below a certain altitude for all "expert" AADs. The CYPRES already does this; from the original CYPRES manual "Below 130 feet AGL opening is no longer useful. For this reason, CYPRES ceases operation below apx 130 feet AGL." The Vigil manual makes no mention of low-altitude deactivation. If the Airtec determined that it would be safe to raise this altitude from 130 feet to something higher for "experts", it might accommodate swoopers. It also might compromise safety for non-swoopers. If the Vigil does not already deactivate a low altitudes, they would have to redesign the firmware. Having a high deactivation altitude seems less safe, but easier for jumpers (since there is no product selection and no manual switching). It's tempting to say something like redesign the technology, using GPS or something else, but that effort might take too long to bring to market. I am not a swooper, so I am probably not the best person to start this thread. But that's also the reason I'm asking. What do swoopers think? Should AADs be redesigned or not? Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

That's a lot of qualifications, so I wouldn't expect as many "yes" as I see in the results so far. "Could've been caught on the ground" - this precludes things like misrouted bridles (which I've seen), that are due to the jumper's own lack of training. I think part of the pin check is to make sure people aren't doing something stupid, either a one-time mistake, or something out of ignorance. "Or by the jumper themselves" - pretty much excludes the main pin. I check my main pin myself by removing one glove and reaching around to check it with my finger - I learned that from you. I can feel the pin and the closing loop underneath the protective flap, and I usually check it about 9,000 feet. Like you, I don't trust people to touch my gear. In my mind, that really only leaves the possibility of something happening to reserve pin. Either it gets dislodged on the plane, it gets bent on the plane, or somehow the closing loop gets frayed or cut on the plane. Getting dislodged is less likely with modern gear - the protective flaps have reduced the chances (although it can still happen). The reserve pin getting bent is probably the most likely - a good whack against a sharp edge inside the plane would do it. At Mile Hi, there is a bench on the King Air, and the people that sit on the floor at the end of the bench sometimes sit hard against the edge right where their reserve pin is. It makes me cringe. As far as the closing loop, I've never spotted a frayed or broken loop on the reserve - even on the ground. I don't ask for a pin check - I refuse them when offered to me. I trust myself and my own gear check more than someone I don't know fiddling around back there. When I jump with a student (pre-license), the USPA IRM requires that coaches "Perform a complete pre-boarding equipment check on the student" (IRM 2002, CRC, 8.E.2). For me this includes doing a pin-check on the ground. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD