Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Broken legs and ankles heal better if you walk on them within weeks

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 342 posts

Re: Broken legs and ankles heal better if you walk on them within weeks

#51

Post by philwelch »

doix wrote: post #33
4ggr0 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing which comes to mind is - why should we stop at sports, then? we'll immediately be at the point where smokers, alcoholics, obese people etc. should pay more, after all, their way of life statistically causes higher costs. (i don't think either of those things should result in higher insurance prices, just continuing the thought.)

> we'll immediately be at the point where smokers, alcoholics, obese people etc. should pay more, after all, their way of life statistically causes higher costs. Wait, do they not? I genuinely assumed they did. I remember when I got private insurance through my work I had to fill in some questionnaire. It was "free", but it was a taxable benefit so you knew how much you were costing the company and me and my friends…

Health insurance premiums used to be different based on whether or not you smoked; maybe they still are. It would still be nice if you could lower your health insurance premiums by losing weight or buying a policy that didn’t cover mountain bike injuries or whatnot.

Re: Broken legs and ankles heal better if you walk on them within weeks

#52

Post by SomaticPirate »

edwcross wrote: post #20
ehnto wrote: post #3

The pathology for broken collar bones was changing right as I took up mountain biking, and subsequently shattered my collarbone. It was hotly debated at the hospital, if my specific case should be operated on or not. Each time I had a checkup, one doctor would say "wait and see" while the other was saying "I can't believe we didn't operate on this". At any rate, the outcome was as good as if they had operated on it,…

Given the amount of injuries related to mountain biking, is there some specific insurance needed for it? It seems one of those "net-negative for the society activities", like trampolines.

By this logic, most software engineers would also be considered high risk since they work a sedentary job and have higher risks for heart disease and obesity (which likely leads to higher healthcare costs over the long term)

Re: Broken legs and ankles heal better if you walk on them within weeks

#53

Post by _Algernon_ »

Daneel_ wrote: post #29
edwcross wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the amount of injuries related to mountain biking, is there some specific insurance needed for it? It seems one of those "net-negative for the society activities", like trampolines.

No? I’ve been mountain biking for over 20 years and never any broken bones or had to go to hospital as a result, despite doing downhill, trials, and dirt jumping. And I have 20 years of fitness to show for it - that’s about as positive as it gets.

Get 8 billion people to flip a coin 30 times in a row, and one is likely to get heads 30 times in a row. It means nothing.

Re: Broken legs and ankles heal better if you walk on them within weeks

#54

Post by TomK32 »

filoleg wrote: post #44
TomK32 wrote: post #32

Oh this is so bad: > In the 19th century German surgeon and anatomist Julius Wolff recognized that healthy bones adapt and change in response to the load placed on them. That is why everyone—but especially women, who are more susceptible than men to osteoporosis—should lift weights as they age No, weight lifting won't improve bone density, it's running that will edit: https://theros.org.uk/information-and-support/bon…

Source? Because I found plenty of studies on the topic, and there seems to be a fairly universal consensus that goes the exact counter of what you claim. I.e., studies state that weight and resistance training helps with improving bone density significantly, while aerobic exercise (walking/cycling/etc.) doesn’t. Here are excerpts from one of the papers[0], but you can find many more agreeing with that take: “Prolonge…

Your last quote throws bones and muscles into one. Just so you know.

The Royal Osteoporosis Society recommends "Short bursts of activity are ideal for bones. For example, running then jogging, or jogging then walking." https://theros.org.uk/information-and-support/bone-health/ex...

Btw, don't confuse weight-bearing activities with the weight-lifting that I did quote previously. Resistance training alone, as for example cyclists do, has shown to not improve bone density as pre this meta study https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1741-...

Re: Broken legs and ankles heal better if you walk on them within weeks

#55

Post by mathieuh »

dfxm12 wrote: post #11
faitswulff wrote: post #6

If anyone's heard of RICE (Rest, Ice, Compression, Elevation) for healing joints, the new guidance is called POLICE: Protect, Optimal Load, Ice, Compression, and Elevation. The key differences being Protect and Optimal Load, meaning don't re-injure it and expose it to some level of weight-bearing or usage.

Anyone can RICE their joints. It's foolproof, more or less objective and requires no monitoring from a professional. What defines optimal load? It sounds impossible to gauge, unless maybe if you're working with a physical therapist. Then, what happens if load more than the optimal level? Is the outcome worse than if you just stuck to RICE? I think these are things that have to be considered for medical protocols.

I broke my elbow last year (in a very minor way but still), when I was in the A&E the doctor told me to keep moving it and that I wouldn't be able to move it in a way that would affect negatively affect recovery. Within about 10 days it was markedly better and within 21 days I was back riding my bike, and now a year later as far as I can tell it's as good as new.

I didn't need physio or anything, the doctor just told me to keep using it as normally as possible.

Re: Broken legs and ankles heal better if you walk on them within weeks

#56

Post by kqr »

alistairSH wrote: post #28
edwcross wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the amount of injuries related to mountain biking, is there some specific insurance needed for it? It seems one of those "net-negative for the society activities", like trampolines.

I don't know that "normal" mountain biking is any worse than cycling in general, or sports like tackle football. A lot of the injury risk when mountain biking is reasonably easily mitigated by controlling your speed and walking the bike through terrain that's above your skill level. There was a report out of British Columbia a few months ago about injury rates, and they were high, but BC is also a major downhill trai…

Another factor worth considering is that being physically active also prevents other ailments, so (even downhill) bikers may still be more profitable for insurance companies!

Re: Broken legs and ankles heal better if you walk on them within weeks

#57

Post by TomK32 »

WithinReason wrote: post #35
TomK32 wrote: post #32

Oh this is so bad: > In the 19th century German surgeon and anatomist Julius Wolff recognized that healthy bones adapt and change in response to the load placed on them. That is why everyone—but especially women, who are more susceptible than men to osteoporosis—should lift weights as they age No, weight lifting won't improve bone density, it's running that will edit: https://theros.org.uk/information-and-support/bon…

source?

https://theros.org.uk/information-and-support/bone-health/ex...

Re: Broken legs and ankles heal better if you walk on them within weeks

#58

Post by shermantanktop »

miketery wrote: post #14
dfxm12 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone can RICE their joints. It's foolproof, more or less objective and requires no monitoring from a professional. What defines optimal load? It sounds impossible to gauge, unless maybe if you're working with a physical therapist. Then, what happens if load more than the optimal level? Is the outcome worse than if you just stuck to RICE? I think these are things that have to be considered for medical protocols.

Optimal load is right before it starts hurting. You progressively load, and when it starts hurting you unload. Your body will send pain before there is damage to be done. Edit: in fact some discomfort or right kind of pain is good. Else you give to atrophy.

That’s not how pain works. Pain is a noisy and error-prone signal that gives you a good approximation for “stop doing that.” But the edge of pain sensation doesn’t indicate what is or isn’t a good idea during recovery. It’s not a bad place to start, but everyone has different pain tolerances, some injuries are in nerve-poor areas, and repetitive stress or tendinitis are definitely not going to appreciate getting lit up right away.

Re: Broken legs and ankles heal better if you walk on them within weeks

#59

Post by parineum »

ghaff wrote: post #24
edwcross wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the amount of injuries related to mountain biking, is there some specific insurance needed for it? It seems one of those "net-negative for the society activities", like trampolines.

In general, "society" deciding what activities are too dangerous to routinely allow is a really nasty slope. Yes, there's some special insurance offered through private organizations for things like higher altitude mountaineering. But it's not that big a step to rule that any contact sport, for example, should require special insurance. I'm sure the insurance companies wouldn't mind.

I play recreational hockey. All of the rinks around here (and most of the US) require membership to USA Hockey which, among other things, provides some kind of insurance to both the rinks and the players.

https://www.usahockey.com/insurancemanagement

Re: Broken legs and ankles heal better if you walk on them within weeks

#60

Post by Zanfa »

4ggr0 wrote: post #30
ghaff wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general, "society" deciding what activities are too dangerous to routinely allow is a really nasty slope. Yes, there's some special insurance offered through private organizations for things like higher altitude mountaineering. But it's not that big a step to rule that any contact sport, for example, should require special insurance. I'm sure the insurance companies wouldn't mind.

One thing which comes to mind is - why should we stop at sports, then? we'll immediately be at the point where smokers, alcoholics, obese people etc. should pay more, after all, their way of life statistically causes higher costs. (i don't think either of those things should result in higher insurance prices, just continuing the thought.)

Some countries tax tobacco, alcohol and sugar at higher rates to offset the costs incurred to society?
Post reply on HN