Too Old?

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
Jim Logajan wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote:
1) No one becomes "immediately incapacitated", whatever that means,
from smoking.

Depends on what you mean by that. Smoking will exacerbate any situation
where breathing sails close to the edge, like a sudden loss of
pressurisation or if the individual has been comprimised and breathing
becomes difficult. Like someone who has been badly inured and is
comatose. All other factors being equal, if the individual has been
pushed to the edge in a situation like this, a history of smoking will
push them over it.

ALERT THE PRESS! THE END OF THE WORLD IS NEAR! BERTIE HAS WRITTEN IN
SUPPORT OF A STATEMENT MADE BY MXSMANIC!!!!!

Nope. Don't give a **** what he says and what I said is quite different to
what he said in any case.

All of the statement above is based on personal experience, wheras
Anthony's **** comes from the usual sources.




Ahhhh! WE ARE ALL DOOMED!!!!!!


Well of course!

Bertie

Fine, prove it.

writes:

1) No one becomes "immediately incapacitated", whatever that means,
from smoking.

A heart attack is immediately incapacitating, and smoking dramatically
increases the likelihood of a heart attack (something that the FAA ignores).

2) If smoking were "immediately incapacitating" from an altitude change,
every ski resort would be littered with bodies.

High-altitude ski resorts have their share of problems with people who develop
altitude sickness, and many people without frank symptoms of illness still are
far from being in top form at altitude.

3) Everyone becomes oxygen starved as altitude increases. For the average
heavy smoker that will happen at a lower altitude than for the average
non-smoker.

Yes. And so will the consequences.

4) Oxygen starvation doesn't result in medical problems, it causes
phyisological problems that are eliminated by increased oxygen.

Same thing. Not all of the problems can be fixed by increased oxygen, but
usually that helps.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
writes:

1) No one becomes "immediately incapacitated", whatever that means,
from smoking.

A heart attack is immediately incapacitating, and smoking dramatically
increases the likelihood of a heart attack (something that the FAA
ignores).

2) If smoking were "immediately incapacitating" from an altitude change,
every ski resort would be littered with bodies.

High-altitude ski resorts have their share of problems with people who
develop
altitude sickness, and many people without frank symptoms of illness still
are
far from being in top form at altitude.

3) Everyone becomes oxygen starved as altitude increases. For the average
heavy smoker that will happen at a lower altitude than for the average
non-smoker.

Yes. And so will the consequences.

4) Oxygen starvation doesn't result in medical problems, it causes
phyisological problems that are eliminated by increased oxygen.

Same thing. Not all of the problems can be fixed by increased oxygen, but
usually that helps.

Nonsense, you're just a dumb ass, headed of on one of your usual trolls.
Nothing here relates to the original intent of your statement.

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

1) No one becomes "immediately incapacitated", whatever that means,
from smoking.

A heart attack is immediately incapacitating, and smoking dramatically
increases the likelihood of a heart attack (something that the FAA ignores).

Smoking increase the likelihood of a heart attack after decades of smoking,
by which time such effects will show up on the medical.

Decades is hardly "immediately".


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Let's all remember that Anthony is not a physiologist and knows nothing
cardiology, let alone flying.

On Sep 5, 7:19*pm, "Viperdoc" wrote:
Let's all remember that Anthony is not a physiologist and knows nothing
cardiology, let alone flying.

It's unlikely he stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night, either,
all the more reason to ignore him.

BobR writes:

Your knowledge of this subject is so seriously limited that you really
need to drop out of the discussion before you make yourself look
really stupid. The people of Peru who live at high altitudes have
become acclimated to the altitude and are not as subject to altitude
sickness as those who live at lower altitudes.

Beyond a certain altitude, human beings can never adapt fully to the thinner
air.

Smoking has the direct
effect of diminishing the ability of the lungs to absorb oxygen which
becomes especially critical at higher altitudes.

Yes.

Smokers who are not
acclimated to the altitude and who take off from lower altitudes and
asscend to altitude can easily become oxygen starved resulting in
numerous possible medical problems.

Yes.

In rec.aviation.owning Mxsmanic wrote:
BobR writes:

Your knowledge of this subject is so seriously limited that you really
need to drop out of the discussion before you make yourself look
really stupid. The people of Peru who live at high altitudes have
become acclimated to the altitude and are not as subject to altitude
sickness as those who live at lower altitudes.

Beyond a certain altitude, human beings can never adapt fully to the thinner
air.

And Mr. State the Bleeding Obvious chimes in with an irrelevancy.

And what would that altitude be?


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

More ignorant nonsense; if it were true about half the population of Peru
would be incapacitated.

Above a certain altitude, the population _is_ at least partially
incapacitated.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
writes:

More ignorant nonsense; if it were true about half the population of Peru
would be incapacitated.

Above a certain altitude, the population _is_ at least partially
incapacitated.

That's where you have the advantage, you're incapacitated at any altitude.