Nigelcorn
Yeah, but we we don't run around saying that everything we personally disagree with is a "well documented" risk.
I would say that politics and politicians are not included in your definition of "we"! Think Secretary of State, under Bush, Colin Powell, etc... (Entire foreign policies have been run this way.)
I ask you Nigelcorn, just what is your question here?
You started this thread asking for documentation (post 1):
My questions is, where is this documentation? Seriously, I would love for somebody to show me the reference (preferably to a refereed medical journal) showing some of these documented risks.
later to admit that your criteria might be a bit extreme (post 12):
What do you say if we lighten up the requirements a little bit? I admit that a published peer-refereed journal article on this most likely doesn't exist.
You also state (post 22):
That isn't exactly the well-documented sources I had in mind.
and banter with a moderator (post 30):
John- You realize you are asking me to prove a negative, right? Care to explain how that is possible?
(with a little calculus and argumentation skills)
KyJim (post 53) sums up some of the other posts with six examples:
I do not know what the OP's definition of "documented evidence" is, but it seems that this thread revealed several instances which might fit the bill.
From luvsasmith, "I know a former Fairfield,OH Police Officer who was put on disability because he fell backwards onto his handcuff case. It caused nerve damage around his spine and he could no longer function as a Police Officer."
From PBP, "Our next door neighbor is an LEO on disability because he fell and his leg fold up behind him and he landed spine first on the heel of his own shoe."
From Fastbolt, "I've known the occasional cop who complained of pain after falling down with something similarly carried on a gun belt against the lower back."
From Socrates, "Our local gunshop owner is still on crutches, lucky to be walking. He flipped his car, carrying a Glock center of back, and, his spinal cord was partially severed."
From BikerRN (in another thread cited), "My Brother had a partner that carried his Handcuffs SOB. The day came when a felon picked him up and threw him down a flight of stairs. Twenty years later he is lucky to be able to walk with the aide of a Walker.
From Rantingredneck, "When I had my accident my hunting pack was across my lower back. 18 ft fall onto it and I burst fractured L1."
Now, this is anecdotal evidence but anecdotal evidence is called something else in medicine -- case studies.
Which you respond to in post 55:
The only problem with case studies (which is why they are considered one of the lower levels of evidence) is that they are one example with no type of control.
Then we get to the heart of the matter in your post 66:
All I did was ask where the documentation is. Time and time again people say that you shouldn't carry SOB because it is "well documented" that it will cause spinal cord injury. The point is that it is not well documented. It is opinion.
Emphasis by AZAK
To which I added in post 71:
All documented "facts" are just opinion.
If you don't think so... Well the Earth is the center of the Universe; just ask the Catholic Church several hundred years ago; think Galileo. Just how many planets are in our solar system these days? Check your science books; remember to check the publishing dates.
Ruthless4christ hits the nail on the head in post 76:
we can all think of really stupid stuff that has not been docuemented.
Sturmgewehre asks a very pertinent question (post 89):
What does Nigelcorn feel is "well documented" from his perspective?
you later state (post 101):
I purposely haven't said what my full opinion is (and the reasoning behind it) because I get the impression that nobody is interested in hearing others' opinions.
Emphasis by AZAK
AFshooter in post 102 suggests this synopsis:
You come here speaking your uber-intelligent sounding doctorese, demanding that everyone provide documented medical journal evidence for what is a pretty common sense carry no-no.
But of course, it's peon uneducated non-medical journal common sense, so it's null and void.
with reservations? (post 104):
It was an exaggeration. The whole post was. Anyone who took that serious.....
and you state in post 108:
From a different thread (and I know it doesn't say "well documented" but the opinion is presented in the form of one backed by documentation):
Emphasis by AZAK
Again I ask you to state,
with defined limits on your criteria for an "appropriate/correct" answer,
just what is your question? (Especially in light of your post 101 on this forum.)
)