Who was that masked man?

 aflanigan wrote: 
I think that's pretty common. Barring sudden deceleration due to unexpected coniferous impediment, most falls at speed tend to be glancing and skidding. The worst injuries I've encountered personally have been on (1) Skier standing still on hard pack fell to the side and broke a hip. (2) Snowboarder tipped over backwards, two dinner forks. That guy was pretty tall tho.

 Steely_D wrote: 
The amount of damage you sustained from a simple fall from a standing position does not surprise me.

My last fracture was of the humerus just below the joint. No dislocation or damage to the socket that they could see, apparently the bone snapped near the top of the humerus and all the energy of my fall just mashed the broken parts together.

I was getting too cute in the terrain park and bit off more than I could chew, specifically a feature that was a large diameter metal pipe.

I tried to land on it to slide down, and skis must have instantly slipped off the pipe. An instant later I was dazed and sitting on the ground with a funny feeling in my arm/shoulder. Very little speed or vertical distance involved in the failed maneuver.

Like you, they said there was no need to operate or put it in a cast. I wore a sling for a few weeks. Took four months of therapy and lots of golfing and sailing to get rid of the adhesive capsulitis and get essentially full range of motion back. 

 
(artists' rendering of my intended execution)
 

(actual outcome) 

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
Yep, but getting a decent video of a true "yard sale" takes more patience than I have.

 

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
Bean counters!

And I'm actually fine. They were right. Weird how people who research things, and gather data, and go against common expectations - can be right. 

 Steely_D wrote: 
My DB had the opposite problem - they didn't replace her hips because she was too young and they might wear out before she died. So wait until you are too old to have an active lifestyle, then get the surgery? 

 Steely_D wrote: 
That's a little odd, I think. As your age goes up, I think they consider risk/reward, and they must have known you'd do fine without the cutting, right? Or would it have been better if they'd gone in?
 
Those knuckle-draggers will be the end of us all. 

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
Well, there's my trouble. Not that I ski anymore (I laughed when the weather announcer here said one of the ski areas in the "Australian Alps" got a dumping of snow - 30 cm). Anyone want to buy a pair of ski boots? How about a pair of snowshoes?

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
About 7 years ago, standing still on skis while my wife finished her run, I turned to the left to begin and fell sideways to my right.
I threw up my arm to stop the fall but when I hit it dislocated. Turns out I crushed the top of the humerus and some of the socket, partially tore my rotator cuff and labrum, and didn't enjoy it very much.

I put it back in, skied to the bottom, and reassured my wife. After the MRI, I asked my orthopedist when would we operate. Then, the BAD news: "we don't operate on people your age." (Because I was 51)
I just about hit him with my good arm.

But, with 4 months of rehab, it's doing fine. There are a couple of things that make me grimace - like seeing videos like this one where folks fall. I think I'll have to take up cross-country, because those damned out of control snowboarders could take me out without any warning. *shakes gloved fist* 

 aflanigan wrote: 
There is little about that that doesn't remind me of me.

Notice how it was his inside ski (the one that usually just tags along thru the turn) that betrayed him? *schtoink!* 
 
Not technically a yard sale because he retained possession of at least one pole as well as his hat. It's a real yard sale when you have to pick up gloves, chapstik, goggles,...

 kurtster wrote: 
getting glasses in December when my bennies will let me get a pair 

 kurtster wrote: 
Will do.

 aflanigan wrote: 
 If you only need glasses to read, do consider the office / computer lenses.  With my eyes fixed for distance after cataract surgery, they are all I really need.

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
Once again, yeah its normal.  The reason you can't read without help with your contacts in now is yer getting older and presbyopia has caught up with you.  Taking out your CL's is the same as taking off your glasses to read when you are nearsighted.  Your eyes do not do anything special cuz since you're nearsighted already.  

Short lecture coming @meowie ... you do need to get glasses in order to keep your eyes used to seeing through them.  There will be a time when you might not be able to wear them anymore (usually because your eyes get too dry to wear them, cuz yer getting older) and more than a few people I know who have been in your situation have some difficulties using them when the time came and especially the bifocal part.

@ scott ...  mono vision ... one eye sees far and one eye sees near ... kills depth perception, as you found out while skiing.  Commercial airline pilots are not allowed to use mono vision for that reason.

And bi focal contacts have only about a 50% fitting success as a rule and it also depends on who is doing the fitting. 

Good luck ! 

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
You definitely need sharp depth perception on skis, particularly at speed in the bumps or trees.
#yardsale 

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
I'm ok with the readers right now. I like them and SeanE thinks they're Sexah

 meower wrote: 
I'm going to say it's a normal part of aging, and that you can get bifocal contacts, which I tried and didn't like, or get used to using readers from here on out. When I have my contacts in, yes I have to use readers.
 
I tried skiing one day with just one contact in. I like to be able to see off to the horizon, because it's pretty, but also need to read forms and stuff because it's the job. So one in for distance, one out for up close.  It really messed up my skiing. Reading was good tho. 

I know that this is addressed below, or actually I think that it is, but that I'm just not that quick.....

Want to make sure that you all know that I don't have a pair of glasses (long story..) I have contacts or no contacts. So, when I do not have my contacts in (and no glasses,) I can read just fine. But, and this is recent, I cannot read without readers if I have my contacts in.

 

 kurtster wrote: 
Thanks, very informative! I need to go see an optometrist, as I think my need for more powerful reading glasses has increased from the last time I was examined.

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
Didn't think I was going to have to think this hard this early in the day but here goes ...

Presbyopia is the correct name for the condition, an unavoidable condition of the eye that begins around age 40 and really begins to kick in strong around 50.  It does not change how you see at distance, it affects how you see close, regardless of being near or far sighted.

Wearing reading glasses with contacts is very normal, if you have both eyes corrected for distance only with your CL's.  Mono vision with CL's is where one eye is corrected to see near and the other eye is corrected to see far, making reading glasses unnecessary if it works and if it does work, reading glasses will not work because they are designed to work with eyes that have the same focal point in space (distance).

Those who are moderately nearsighted can and usually do take off their glasses to read or just read tiny print.  As we age, the crystalline lens in the eye stiffens making the ability to focus near (with or without glasses) more difficult and the range where one can focus up close smaller (shorter).  This is where the expression your arm's aren't long enough to see close comes in to play.  That is why Scott moved his monitor farther away, which was the correct direction, all things remaining the same.  There will be a time though when Scott's desk isn't long enough either ...

One thing to remember, with single vision (SV) reading glasses, is that there is only a range of about 6 inches where similar sized things are in focus.  The stronger the correction, the closer the focal point.  For example, with +1.50 readers you may find that things are in focus 18 to 24 inches out, with a +2.00 reader, that will change to 12 to 18 inches out.  So you have to find the right strength that makes you comfortable and able to read in the distances that you are accustomed to.  It is subjective.  The next time you have an eye exam, make sure that you bring something along that you read on a regular basis so that who ever is doing the exam can see where you hold things and give you the appropriate add power for your needs.  Otherwise, you will be assigned one, in so many words.

If you have reached the age where progressives or bifocals are indicated, do not put them off.  Sooner or later they become unavoidable and the longer you wait, the harder it becomes to adjust to the inevitable.  I know there is a tremendous sticker shock involved, but it is what it is.

Lastly, here's some things to know and that I share with my customers.  A factoid I learned many years ago and before I became an optician is that your eyes consume up to 70% of your daily energy reserves.  Your eyes are involved in every activity you perform. The more you strain to focus, the more energy you consume.  Reading or close up work is the most demanding of all vision.  Your eyes converge or turn inward (cross eyed) and the internal eye muscles of which there are 6 per each eye, not to mention the hundreds of little cilliary muscles attached to the crystalline lens that make it change shape so you can see up close work very hard to make your eyes not look and focus beyond 20 feet (6 meters for our foreign readers) which is the distance standard and where the infinity point for distance vision begins.  While you do no actual harm to your eyes, you simply wear yourself out sooner in the day and maybe get headaches from all the straining.

A mechanic is only as good as the tools in their box.  If you do close up work all day or live on a computer, then having glasses for that need makes it a tool.  Once you get above a +2.00 add, progressives really become difficult on a computer with that sweet spot becoming harder to find and makes your neck hurt trying to hold your head in that very limited position.  Office lenses or computer lenses become the tool or supplement for the progressives and make a quality of life improvement.  You don't have to lift your chin to find that spot, you just look straight ahead like you would do ordinarily and the side to side space is huge and comfortable compared to progressives, eliminating the need to to turn your head from side to side as you read.   Over the counter reading glasses do not help and can actually cause problems as they get stronger.  They do not take into consideration how far apart your eyes are and any differences that your two eyes may have.  In other words there is no one size fits all solution.  Someone with narrowly set eyes will find that readers will pull their eyes outward (wall eyed) the opposite direction needed for reading and cause even more muscle strain.

Generally speaking, office or computer lenses are not easily found or understood by the chains.  You really need to find an optician who knows what they are doing.

HTH.   Any further questions welcomed.  

y'all