The Glade 4.0

... he said, using CODE tags...

_________________
Sail forth! steer for the deep waters only!
Reckless, O soul, exploring, I with thee, and thou with me;
For we are bound where mariner has not yet dared to go,
And we will risk the ship, ourselves and all.

Don't know what you mean, my quotes look beautiful.

Really? Explain this then:





Nor am I.












So what're you're basically saying is nanny state?

Seriously though, how do you propose this? If you say warning labels are required the FDA has to enforce it. If you're saying PSA, literature or other means of education then who will fund it?

_________________

Arathain, you may think you're not expressing a desire to see them mandated, but it runs counter to you getting exasperated over us decrying OTHER people (like in the OP's article) calling for government regulation.

That's obviously where this apparent miscommunication lies.

We're saying people are stupid for wanting the government to pass legislation requiring warning labels or whatever.

And you're telling us it's obviously needed because we don't know they're dangerous based on us saying that.

You're either
a) missing that we do know they're dangerous, but think the education is adequate for anybody interested in seeking it, as they should responsibly do as parents, or
b) claiming that such education isn't enough (because we don't know) and that government should mandate it (while saying that government shouldn't mandate it)

Forgive us for not having any idea what the **** you want.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades

I said warning labels are appropriate. I also said Vindi's pamphlet, if widely distributed, would also be appropriate.

As far as funding and enforcement, that's a bit trickier. It should be part of any parenting or CPR program, as a standard, but pamphlets? Depends on whose, I guess. Obviously, warning labels would be provided by the manufacturer.

My exasperation comes from the replies to my posts and the knee jerk reactions to them (which is fairly typical for this board).

You can say something 20 different ways, but people only see what they want.



No forgiveness necessary, I'll keep explaining until people actually read the posts.

Arathain, there are millions of copies of that pamphlet all across the country - in clinics, hospitals, child care centers...
That's why people don't understand your argument.
This information is freaking everywhere if people would only care to look.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

But do they all specifically say the words "surprisingly dangerous"?

ehl oh ehl

Dammit, they only say "deceptively dangerous".

I concede.
/bow

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

We've been reading the posts, you're just contradicting yourself. This has been demonstrated multiple times in the past 7 pages.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

False - I just showed you quite a few posts that demonstrate how false that is. You're just not paying attention.

Arathain:

I've actually read your posts, and I still have no idea where you come down on this. You're either not completely expressing the thoughts in your head; or you're being ambivalent.

_________________

http://www.stats.org/stories/2010/choki ... 23_10.html



I don't think we need warning labels for something that causes 1.6 deaths per year at 26 hospitals. If 1.6 is enough, why not have warning labels for cookies as well? They're .6.

If you have a specific question, I'll be happy to answer it.

A) You haven't showed that hot dogs are "surprisingly dangerous". We all know that hot dogs are not dangerous. I think you meant "surprisingly more dangerous than expected". If you meant this, you need to show that most parents don't know about the common sense choking risks of hot dogs.

B) You haven't showed that warning labels on hot dogs will make any statistically meaningful difference.

"Surprisingly more dangerous than expected" is a redundant statement. If it's surprising, it's unexpected. Likewise, if it were common sense, it would not be surprising.



Since I wasn't making that argument, I don't need to. I don't have enough data to make that statment, and neither does anyone else. In fact, you can't make that measurement until you try it out. Furthermore, I don't think it's worth the expense of making that measurement, but that's irrelevant.

Any other questions?

It's not redundant. "Surprisingly more dangerous" alone doesn't mean anything. You could for example say "Surprisingly more dangerous than hamburgers", but having "than expected" at the end clarifies what its referring to. "Surprisingly dangerous" means that hot dogs could be as dangerous as a knife.




So you want costly labels put on all hot dog packaging before any data is taken to show they are effective? That is very premature. You can try it out on a small scale before putting it on all hot dog packaging.

Arathain:

What, exactly, are you advocating here?

_________________

Surprisingly more dangerous than expected is redundant nonsense. I agree that "surprisingly more dangerous" alone doesn't mean anything. That's why I said:























This is one of the reasons why I love this board....



I'm not sure that simply adding a couple of lines of text on a hot dog package would be "costly", but who knows? As for a pilot study, I really don't think that's necessary, but have at it.

Nothing I haven't said a hundred times. Let me say it again:

Hot dogs are a surprisingly dangerous choke food when compared to other foods typically given to children. The skin serves to bind the food together, which is a fact that is not know to many parents. This information should be made widely available. One such method that would be appropriate would be a warning label on the package.

It is widely available. We've had a pamphlet posted that demonstrates this. I don't think you've shown that it's not known to many parents, though.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades

Arathain:

All you have is a bare assertion fallacy. Your repeated statements that something is dangerous, or even surprisingly so, do not overcome the reality of Corolinth's math: even if we attribute every choking death in the United States to Hot Dogs, it's less than 1 per million.

_________________

In order for something to be "surprisingly dangerous" the following things have to happen:

1) It has to pose a significant health risk.
2) It has to pose a health risk that is significantly higher than "other foods typically given to children."
3) "Children" must be defined.
4) "Surprising" must be defined.

Then, once you've demonstrated that, you need to address the following facts:
1) Choking risks are readily educatable knowledge.
2) This is particularly true for parents.
3) The OP article indicated a belief in a government regulation of labels regarding choking risks.
4) You've been defending that stance for at least 4 pages now.
5) Even if you haven't been trying to defend that stance, you're using the verbiage that education should be on hot dog packaging.
6) "Should" is directly indicative of governmental policy.


Stop talking out of both sides of your mouth and trying to look superior. You're not. You're either unclear or ridiculously (perhaps purposefully) obtuse.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

Would anyone be opposed to spending the money to teach all parents the heimlich? This would severely reduce choking in all ages for all risk (surprising or not).

_________________