[Villages PL]

Originally Posted by Mudder

VillagesPL, it would be more understandable if you wanted to compare lives saved from smoke/fire alarms with lives saved by the use of seat belts wouldn't it? Heart attacks are a stretch for that comparision.

I guess you're right but if it made perfect sense, it wouldn't have been as interesting. Besides, I was trying to think of something that TV safety department encourages us to do.

Our house was hit by lightning last summer, the dectector went off. As it was 8 PM or so we were awake, BUT unaware of the smoke pouring from our attic over the garage. When w e heard it we knew something was wrong, exited the house, called fire department.

That's a good story. I'm glad you all got out safely. That's a good reason for having a smoke detector. With that story, I'll be very likely to shop for some new batteries soon.

.......eat all the rich artery clogging food you want and don't wear a seat belt either. Good luck to you.

You have the wrong idea on those two because I don't eat processed foods and I do use my seat belt.

[Pturner]

Originally Posted by Villages PL

You made me laugh because I figured that might be a problem. Is it too much of a stretch? How about if we were to look at all causes of death. I'm not sure how the rankings would go because I haven't researched this. I just started this thread on impulse. You might say I was being spontaneous.

There would be a long list of various causes of death. Let's say heart attacks and strokes would be on top of the list. Then perhaps cancer etc..
How far down the list would we find deaths due to house fires? I suspect it would be way way way down near the bottom. Yet the reminders we get, to take precautions, often have a sense of urgency that you rarely find applied to anything else, like heart attacks and strokes.

Keep in mind that we are talking about lifestyle choices. Putting oneself at high risk for a heart attack or stroke is a lifestyle choice. And not putting fresh batteries in your smoke detector is also a lifestyle choice.

Do you get my drift?

Um... not really.

[Villages PL]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

Villagepl. I would like it if you had a smoke detector. I like your posts and had been hoping to really get to know you.

Thank you, graciegirl. I have just been procrasinating but I intend to get some new batteries soon. I'm usually very conscientious about everything else. But somehow, the standard method of replacing batteries doesn't quite make sense to me.

I have 3 detectors: Two are for smoke and one is for carbon monoxide. I never seem to be synchronized with the Villages advice to throw them all out at the same time and I don't like to be wasteful of a good battery(s). Also, from my experience, these batteries are made to last at least 2 to 3 years. So why replace them yearly? Why not let them last as long as they will last? They are designed to start beeping when the battery goes dead. When one smoke alarm goes dead I usually wait until the other one goes dead too so I can replace both of them at the same time. So that way I still have one working. Now they are both used up and I can put two new ones in. And the one for carbon monoxide is still working so I'll replace that one separately when it goes.

[Pathel]

always-Always-ALWAYS better to be: MORE SAFE THAN SORRY.

[Villages PL]

Originally Posted by Pturner

Um... not really.

Well, The Villages has a Public Safety Department and a health alliance with USF. But, so far, I don't see any comprehensive strategy to make this America's healthiest hometown. We have the yearly reminder to throw out batteries that are only half used up but what else do we really have?

Yes we need the smoke alarms and we need to fasten our seat belts. But, other than that, where's The Villages comprehensive plan to make this America's healthiest hometown? It certainly isn't going to come from the The Villages newspaper or radio station because they can't completely take the side of health and be mindful of commercial interests at the same time. So where does that leave us? Where is the comprehensive plan for a healthy community?

USF is busy with focus groups and I was in one of them. They're asking questions to see what Villagers are interested in. Most of the talk was about the fact that TV is an active community. Okay, we already know that. What's new? I was the only one to raise a question about the importance of eating a healthy diet and it fell flat with the others in the group. So, if Villagers are not interested in a lifestyle that includes healthy eating, it looks like it won't be a significant part of TV/USF program.

[Villages PL]

Originally Posted by mikeod

Your comparison with heart attacks is not applicable, Heart attacks occur due to genetic and environmental (lifestyle) factors. House fires are not. Anyone who has a medical exam will be alerted to the risk factors they possess that could lead to a heart attack and thus take precautions (I hope).

Thanks for your thoughtful post which motivated me to give this subject more thought. And thanks for your concern; I will keep my smoke detectors functioning.

This thread turned out to be a lot more difficult than I ever expected because I kept feeling like I couldn't quite come up with a clear explanation for my decision to compare fires with heart attacks & strokes. So, I'm here today to give it one more shot.

Let's say that your job is to save lives by any means having to do with lifestyle. So, on that basis, you come up with two things to compare:

1) Lifestyle precautions to help prevent death by fire.

2) Lifestyle precautions to help prevent death by heart attack or stroke.

Yes, one is a disease and the other is not. However, what they share in common is the fact that lifestyle precautions can help prevent death.

Also, what they share in common is the fact that one can check national statistics to see which one costs more lives per year:

Number of yearly deaths do to house fires: about 3,000

Number of yearly deaths do to heart attacks and strokes. about 800,000
(And the HHS Secretary has said that most could be prevented with basic health care.)

If you're in the prevention business, which one would you focus more effort on? Which one has the potential to yield the greatest payoff, as far as saving lives?

Note: The HHS Secretary said most heart attacks and strokes could be prevented with basic "health care". I would just add that basic health care begins at home with diet, exercise and stress control. And being that 63% of the population is overweight or obese, it seems that some extra reminders may be in order. Doctors alone can't do it so I believe it's important for the community to create an atmosphere conducive to cardiovascular health. For example, I think a reminder (by TV media) before Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Year's and other food-holidays might be a good idea.

[Mikeod]

OK, I'll take a shot. With heart attacks and strokes, the majority of victims will be in their adulthood, and usually past 40-50 years. Genetic dispositions can skew this to younger ages, but that range is generally true. So these victims have been exposed to the lifestyle changes/patterns that would minimize their risk. Whether they take heed is a personal choice.

However, house fires are not fussy about the age of their victims. Young or old, it doesn't matter. I always think it is especially tragic when I read of toddlers and infants dying in house fires, since their lives are so dependent on the adults with whom they reside.

I suspect the lower number of victims of house fires is partially due to the years that smoke and CO detectors have been available at reasonable cost and, in some cases, required by code.

[bigalibaba]

Originally Posted by Villages PL

I moved to the villages in 1999 and have yet to hear that a smoke alarm saved anyone's life. What I have read about in the newspaper is that a lot of people were helped by neighbors who spotted their roof on fire. On rare occasions, a roof will be hit by lightning and the resulting fire doesn't set off any smoke alarm, at least not for a while. It always seems to be neighbors who save the day by warning residents to get out of the burning house.

Has anyone ever heard of a smoke alarm saving a life? I have lived most of my life without a smoke detector, so it seems strange that so much attention is now paid to having a working smoke alarm.

To put this in perspective, heart attacks are much more common but I don't see any commensurate level of worry. It would be interesting to know how many times greater your chances are of dying from a heart attack.

Suggest you remove your smoke alarms as there is a good chance they won't work properly after 10 years. I'd also be concerned that the loud noise from a smoke alarm, if it does go off while you're sleeping, may cause you to have a heart attack. Don't take a chance, get rid of them.

[/QUOTE]

[Villages PL]

Originally Posted by mikeod

So these victims have been exposed to the lifestyle changes/patterns that would minimize their risk. Whether they take heed is a personal choice.

However, house fires are not fussy about the age of their victims. Young or old, it doesn't matter. I always think it is especially tragic when I read of toddlers and infants dying in house fires, since their lives are so dependent on the adults with whom they reside.

I suspect the lower number of victims of house fires is partially due to the years that smoke and CO detectors have been available at reasonable cost and, in some cases, required by code.

Do we need to weigh one against the other? The number of children that die in fires every year is about 800. While the number of deaths due to heart attacks and strokes is 800,000. How many adults does it take to equal one child? Just because it's tragic when a child dies doesn't mean we shouldn't value older people. And I'm sure you do; I don't doubt that.

An older person may be someone's spouse, father, grandfather, valued employee, or president of the United States. (Bill Clinton had coronary artery disease.)

I think a life is a life and all life is precious.

Do you think we should take the attitude that adults should know better, so, essentially, let them get the health they deserve? Maybe so, but who do you think will end up paying their health care tab? That's another issue we need to think about. In 2008 the total health care cost in the U.S. was about 2.4 trillion. I remember not that long ago warning people that it would soon be 2 trillion. Now the warning is that it will soon be 3 trillion in a few years. As baby boomers age, it will be 3 trillion and then 4 trillion.

[Villages PL]

Originally Posted by bigalibaba

Suggest you remove your smoke alarms as there is a good chance they won't work properly after 10 years. I'd also be concerned that the loud noise from a smoke alarm, if it goes off while you're sleeping may cause you to have a heart attack. Don't take a chance, get rid of them.

I'm posting the above quote from you to let others know that you were the one who said, "Don't take a chance, get rid of them". In your post, you ran my words together with your own. Are you new here?