Re:Please don't let gaming consume your life
by cjy on Monday May 21, 2012 @08:28PM
(#4005648)
You shouldn't compare the benefits of getting exercise from rock climbing to the chances of dying from it. The choice isn't rock climb or be totally sedentary. You can get exercise in ways where you can't fall and die. What you should compare is the marginal benefit of the additional exercise you end up doing because you enjoy rock climbing more than the next best activity. And, then compare that to the death rate.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Please don't let gaming consume your life
by humbledrone on Monday May 21, 2012 @08:41PM
(#4005687)
So, if you look at the numbers, the risk of death from climbing is very, very low. Really, it's extremely low. You'd have to go on two outings a week for 3,200 years for the probability of your death to have an expected value of 1.0. Or, if you stick to top ropes, a lot longer than that.
Compared to how much you can benefit from the exercise, the risk of falling and dying is really insignificant, to the point that I don't think it's worth debating between climbing and any other common form of exercise.
[EDIT]: Fix an incorrectly worded statement about expected value.
You keep mentioning death, but death is just the worst possible outcome. What about maiming, paralysis, broken bones, etc.?
My uncle played football in high-school, broke his knee and it's bothered him ever since. He didn't die.
Everything we do has risk, and we shouldn't let it consume us. But I'd also not focus on death in isolation.
Probability of 1.0? Are you sure you're doing the right math? What's the probability after 6,400 years? 2.0?
Re:Please don't let gaming consume your life
by humbledrone on Monday May 21, 2012 @09:20PM
(#4005797)
I meant expected value, but I wrote "expected probably".
Re:Please don't let gaming consume your life
by SamReidHughes on Tuesday May 22, 2012 @01:25AM
(#4006381)
That's still wrong. If you have x chance of surviving each day of rock climbing then you have an x^n chance of surviving n days of rock climbing, not a 0 chance of surviving.
OK, by now we all know that GP meant expected number of fatal accidents.
The author's making a slightly different point to the one you're trying to argue:
> the benefits of exercise massively outweigh the risks of even a dangerous activity like climbing.
In other words, the risks of heart attack, diabetes and other diseases are worse than rock climbing, even if you go climbing twice a week.