Too Old?

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
"Lonnie" @_#~#@.^net writes:

5) FAA minimums on Ox usage are conservative enough to acomodate even heavy
smokers.

Perhaps they are conservative enough to keep smokers from dying, but not
conservative enough to shield smokers from the effects of altitude. Heavy
smokers can hardly increase in altitude at all without suffering the effects
of altitude, beginning with vision impairment, usually.

Funny, I'm a heavy smoker by anyone's definition, live at 1300 feet, and
at 8500 feet there is no effect on my vision.

Once at 7500 feet at night things got a little blurry and I became
concerned it might be oxygen effects, so I dropped down lower and
nothing changed even after I landed, so I chalked it up to being
tired that late at night.

Maybe your black and white, one size fits all, blanket statements just
aren't true for everyone.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

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.

"Lonnie" @_#~#@.^net wrote in :


"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
"Lonnie" @_#~#@.^net writes:

5) FAA minimums on Ox usage are conservative enough to acomodate
even heavy
smokers.

Perhaps they are conservative enough to keep smokers from dying, but
not conservative enough to shield smokers from the effects of
altitude. Heavy smokers can hardly increase in altitude at all
without suffering the effects
of altitude, beginning with vision impairment, usually.

No ****, when was the last time you flew a cabin load of heavy smokers
to altitude?

When's the last time you flew, Maxwell?


Bertie

"Lonnie" @_#~#@.^net wrote in :


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...

Well, there are a lot of private pilots operating airplanes at high
altitudes these days.
Leaving that aside, my intention as to highlight the damage done and
how that can comprimise someone operating at or near their limit.
It's something else stacked against you in a bad situation. .

What do peruvian mountain dwellers have to do with private pilots?

Point missed completely.


Yes, I know. Read it again.


You're a dumb ass, and you're trolling, and doing a **** poor job of
both.


Nope. I was offering my POV based on knowledge and some personal
experience.


But I could troll you if you like.





Bertie

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

"Lonnie" @_#~#@.^net wrote in news

"Jim Logajan" wrote in message
.. .

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

Ahhhh! WE ARE ALL DOOMED!!!!!! :-)


My guess would be a little to much ant poison in the chardonnay.



Of course it is, Maxine. Why would you guess anything else?


Berite

"Lonnie" @_#~#@.^net wrote in :


"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.

And you're a dick.


Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

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.


You are an idiot.


Bertie

"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.

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
"Lonnie" @_#~#@.^net wrote in :


"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.

And you're a dick.


Bertie

So now you are taking up for Anthony as well.