(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

New Michigan organ donor program

MarkB_MI

MarkB_MI

Well-known Member
Location
Motown USA
A lot more organs are going to be available for transplants, thanks to a law signed last week by Governor Snyder. Great job, Lansing!
 
Question is,is it for real this time? What's this,about the third time they've claimed to have repealed it?
 
My first wife (BSRN Retired RN after 35 years practice) tells me organs arent quite as good if taken from a dead person so its better (far as quality of the organ) if they "harvest" them while the donor is still alive YIKES I guess a peson needs to read that new law you speak of to be better informed

John T
 
Well, John, this new law helps out there by improving the odds the donor is dead from the neck up, even if he's still in good shape further south.
 
Thanks for the info, gee no wonder I get sort of nervous when I watch the old original Frankenstein movies and now it may get worse lol

When we get into cloning and harvesting organs and fetal tissue and stem cells I also get nervous

John T
 
What he's referring to is a partial repeal of the motorcycle helmet law. Motorcyclists with a certain level of experience, and with a extra insurance package can risk their lives without a helmet now. Expecting a spike in the number of fatalities, and serious brain injuries in the next few years, until we weed out the stupid ones.
 
I wish they had increased the insurance requirement. 20K extra insurance won't cover a day of emergency medics.
 
From any statistics I've read - there has been no increase in accident survival in states with helmet laws. In one state, the rate of death went up when helmets became a requirement (Maryland).

It all seems pretty silly to me. If someone wants to ride a bike with no helmet and take his/her chances - how is it anyone else's business? And yeah, I've heard the lame argument about the cost to taxpayers and society. Well if true - I guess none of us should get to eat what we want, drink, smoke, drive fast cars, date fast women, shoot firearms, drive old tractors - or do anything that anyone can perceive as risky.
 
Ron Paul and I totally agree. You should be allowed to ride your big powerful Harley without a helmet.

However, when you turn yourself into a drooling, brain dead, vegetable society should unplug you and let you go. If it is obvious that you will be a vegetable, society should let you die in the ditch like a road killed dog. You are a tough, he-man, you can handle it.

And all you machismo men, society should not be required to feed, clothe, house and educate your girlfriend and children after you are dead, just because you were an irresponsible jerk....while alive.
 
Michigan done away with helmets once or twice around 1977.
I took a hit on my bike at 55 MPH with no helmet on. Very lucky to be alive.
Young and dumb.
 
Nobody's going to buy the 20K coverage, because there's no requirement to carry proof of personal injury insurance. I saw guys and girls riding helmetless before Snyder's ink was dry; how many of them called their agents Friday morning and said "bump up my injury insurance to 20K 'cuz I want to ride without a helmet"?
 
Well, LJD, I suppose when you see a guy on a 150 HP crotch rocket clad in shorts, t-shirt, tennis shoes and no helmet, you say "there goes a young fella looking to have a good time". Not me; I say, "Hey, there goes that new pancreas I've been wanting!"
 
Jde. It sure isn't any ones business how we treat our bodies ,whether we put em in jeopardy on our own. See lots of text messages being used by drivers that not only put us in jeopardy, but will do so to our family, friends,.So what if a crotch rocketg rider wears only an athletic supporter,dumps his bike, lives out the rest of his life in an institution or on life support?I'm not the safety police for those who choose to do dangerous things. I agree with you 100/o
Regards LOU
 
Do any of you know what the motorcycle licensing laws are in Japan? You start with a moped and maybe, just maybe, some day before you grow old you will have taken and passed enough tests to be licensed for a big bike. If you do pass the test for the biggest bike, you are a very, very good rider. Maybe we should have those kind of laws here. I have a motorcycle license and have put on a few miles in the past but I don't do that now. Jim
 
here in Ohio ,i do not understand the thinking. no helmet required here , but you better not get caught without a seat belt in a car. in a car you do not have a choice.
 
Helmet laws and seat belt laws fall into on class. Any body can wear them and be safe or not and still be safe depending on who what when and where. I have had a motorcycle license since 1972 or so and have put close to half a million miles on 2 wheels some with and some with out a helmet and am still here. I have also witnessed a guy cut in half by a seat belt so it is not what you do or do not wear as to what is safe but how you do thing
 
My mom always said the only reason you wear a helmet on a motorcycle was so you could have an open casket funeral.

Have had a few friends pass on to the other side while riding cyles and a few more that are lucky to still be here.

Rick
 
Being on the receiving end of a kidney transplant 20 years ago I do speak with a little authority.

Motorcycle accident victims do not make good organ donors. Too much trauma to the organs.

Gene
 
Back in the days of ABATE they tracked motor cycle accidents per 100 registered bikes. When states repealed helmet laws many were provisional, meaning that if there was a significant rise in fatalities helmets would again become mandatory. The numbers borke down that per 100 motor cycle accidents the death rate stayed about the same but the number of accidents per 100 regestered bike went down. The guys on the bullet bikes speeding, passing on the wrong side, moving between cars and doing stunts are much more likely to wind up dead that a guy riding a cruiser at the speed limit without a helmit........and most of those clowns wear helmets!

Rick
 
Call'em what you want.... helmets or whatever. What they really are are brain buckets. If you have any brains and ride a bike, you'll have one on. If you don't have any brains you don't need one. I'd like to introduce all you helmet free dudes to a good friend of mine. He had a minor bike accident.... no helmet on... and is now in a home and will be the rest of his life while his wife and two young daughters are trying to live a normal life without him. Had he had a helmet on he could of got back on his bike and rode it home (800 miles). Oh yes, we're all paying for that plus our insurance is higher also. He told me he liked to feel the wind blowing thru his hair. You might want to call him a wuss. Well, the truth was he could hold his own with any two of you and most of us three wouldn't even be even. Forget the financial end of it, just think about what his family is going thru. YES, we need strict and enforced helmet laws. I don't like lots of the driving laws that are out there but I adhere to them for my and everyone's safety. Oh yes, I'm a bike rider and a helmet wearer.
 
They have had no-helmet laws here in Wisconsin since before we moved here. The one that made me mad was the judicial activism a few years back that says if your injured on a cycle they can't ask if you were wearing a helmet at the trial that decides who gets to pay to keep your drooling brain dead carcass in the home for the rest of your life. Yes it's inconsistent that I have to wear my seat belt in the pickup but don't have to wear a helmet on the bike, it is also inconsistent that I can't be made to show photo ID when I vote because that is some sort of impairment of the underprivileged's constitutional rights, yet you have to show photo ID to purchase a firearm, another right protected under the constitution. If we passed a law requiring photo ID for an abortion bet'ya that one would get tossed real quick. Where are all the civil liberties lawyers on this one? Where are all the civil liberty lawyers going after NBC because they doctored a tape of a 911 call to make a Hispanic look guilty in the shooting death of a black teenager? Man those J.D. (Juris Doctorate)types need to get on that now, seems NBC should be undergoing a change of ownership based on the pending outcome of the mother off all libel lawsuits. I guess it boils down to the real advantage of being abundant is you don't have to be responsible for anything, you can say or do anything you want an it's your right, however if your a Conservative it's only fair you go to jail and forfeit all your worldly goods if you say something that upsets or offends someone.
 
Ok, in those states where the death rate was 'about the same', how many Helmetless riders were not killed but were much more severely injured in an accident? I think that needs to be tracked as well...
 
I guess you are referring to the no-helmet law.

Well....It is a free country (sort of) and if people want to commit dangerous acts, like riding a motorcycle without a helmet, and jumping off bridges, and skydiving. Then let them knock themselves off. I dont ride a motorcycle because I like my limbs attached to my body.
 
Gene, that's a good point.

Naturally somebody did a study. You can read it at the link below, but I'll cut to the chase:

"... 3.1 to 4.6 percent of those who died while awaiting an organ in 2007 would have instead received a transplant if all helmet laws were repealed. These estimates may understate the long-run impacts of helmet laws on organ donations, but they show that helmet laws profoundly affect the lives of some potential transplant recipients."
Motorcycle organ donor study pdf
 
I don't expect fatality and injury rates to go up among Harley riders because most of those guys didn't wear helmets before the law was repealed. They preferred to wear "beanies", which vaguely resemble helmets but are not. As the name implies, these plastic hats offer the same degree of protection as a kid's propeller beanie, albeit less stylishly.

On the other hand, I now see a lot of guys on crotch rockets without helmets. The sport-bike riders seemed to prefer real helmets over beanies, but now are going helmetless. Prime organ donor candidates. A bonus is that, unlike the typical Harley rider, these guys are usually young enough that they haven't had a chance to wreck their internal organs with greasy hamburgers, Miller Lite beer and Camel cigarettes.
 
No - I say to myself "there's a disaster waiting to hapnen." I rode for many years and was lucky. When I'm not riding - the thought of it seems dangerous. Once on my bike, the fear is gone. I don't care it it's a modern 150 horse "crotch rocket" or an old 100 cc Honda. The main danger is the OTHER people on the road and you can't always see them coming.

Regardless of the danger - it's nobody's business except maybe close family and friends. Certainly not the government's.
 
If the nanny staters like helmets so much they should wear them.
For the rest of us, just like with your darned seat belt laws I say:
TAKE YOUR LAWS OFF MY BODY!!
 
Couple of things here some of you are missing.

1. A lot of motor cycle accidents involve concussion. So rider A. wearing a helmet has a bad concussion but was wearing a helmet, brain swells and he dies . Rider 2 has a bad consussion and lives hecause he wasn't weaing a helmet, fractured his skull allowing it to flex and relieve pressure on the brain. This has happened enough that there have been studies into helmet design. Check out what the NFL is doing right now reguarding helmets and long term damage to players because of concussion.

2. The safety nuts are claiming that seat belt save lives. They cite yearly trafic death rates sence seat belts started to get installed into cars and now. They ignore one big factor. EMT's! The old numbers they cite were from pre EMT days. Where an ambulance crew could put a bandage on you and transport and thats about all. They don't cite the number of deaths per year per 1000 accident victems (not all accidents are reported) from right before mandatory use laws went into effect to the year following enforcement. They also ignore the newer tuff DUI laws.

Rick
 
An argument can be made that the seat belt keeps you in front of the controls, for example in a skid or a trip through the ditch. Seat belts may therefor help prevent accidents. Another argument could be made that a helmet blocks vision and hearing and can help cause an accident. Studies have shown that medical costs increase when helmet use is required by law (costs of keeping mangled quads alive vs buying a brain-dead accident victim).

Are the nanny-staters here also fans of the early (mandated) air-bags that killed more kids than school shootings? These were forced on consumers ten years before the technology was ready. Some parents were actually forced to pay extra for premature technology that killed their children. Seems to me that this is an issue best left to the markets and individual choice.
 
I think your willingness to put yourself in a very dangerous situation, is modified by your knowledge that our society (me and the other tax payers) will do our darnest to save your life if you have an accident. The cost to us will be huge, especially if you suffer one of those horrible brain dead injuries and live on in a semi-comatose state for another generation.

You can say it is not part of the equation, but our society (me and other tax payers) have evolved to a position via the welfare system where we will care for your wife or girlfriend and children after you have killed yourself .

So why do you need to be responsible, knowing that you can dump your medical bills, or the care, feeding, housing, and education of the children you fathered onto someone else?

You can make all the speeches you want about your rights to ride without a helmet, and I would agree.....but only if we could convince society to let you die from your injuries and not to care for your surviving street urchins.

That will never happen and you know it, and that is why you can be so blase about your responsibilities as a citizen and father.
 
Ed the whole point is that motor cycles are very dangerous. There is no protection at all. Plus DOT certified helmets are not all they are cracked up to be plus the are hot, uncomfortable and restrict both your vision and hearing. Most states found that they had fewer accidents when they repealed helmets laws. When I retired from the Army you were required to wear a long sleeve manure, gloves, reflective vest, shoes that covered your ankles and a helmet both on and off post is you were a service member. So every soldier that I knew of that died on a bike was wearing a helmet. I had the additional duty in several units, I was the accident reporting NCO. Any time a soldier was injured in any kind of accident both on and off post, while on or off duty I had to investigate it and file a report up the chain of command. I made more than one trip to the morgue to view a body, saw several veggies in the hospital and some guys that were just plain lucky. On guy at Ft Bliss leaned way over to cut a corner and caught his face shield on a sigh post.....yup he was wearing a helmet.....his head was still in it about 100 feet from his body. Another traveling at a very high rate of speed hit a Ford LTD hard enough to total the car.....he was bruised from his ankles to his neck, his crotch crushed the gas tank as he was going off the bike and over the car, he bruised his heart, had a sprained wrist and ankle. Every one I investigated was wearing a helmit. During the same time frame none of my civvy friends or relatives that rode and did not wear helmets were involved in an accident.

Rick
 
It all seems pretty silly to me. If someone wants to ride a bike with no helmet and take his/her chances - how is it anyone else's business? And yeah, I've heard the lame argument about the cost to taxpayers and society. Well if true - I guess none of us should get to eat what we want, drink, smoke, drive fast cars, date fast women, shoot firearms, drive old tractors - or do anything that anyone can perceive as risky.
Click to expand...

Sounds exactly like what the various levels of government have been trying to do since I can remember...
 
(quoted from post at 05:15:06 04/17/12) If the nanny staters like helmets so much they should wear them.
For the rest of us, just like with your darned seat belt laws I say:
TAKE YOUR LAWS OFF MY BODY!!
Click to expand...

I agree, but with one caveat:

Don't expect *ME* to pay for your hospital bill or long-term care via public assistance:

When your money runs out, we pull the plug and kick you to the curb. What you do from there is YOUR problem.

Frankly if this were the case I think people would make better decisions and take better care of themselves.
 
I'm old and gray, been in the fire dept, and also EMS for over thirty years. I don't claim to be a expert, but these studies, about seat belts / helmets saving lives seem bigger than life to me.

There are the tough guys that don't need helmets.......You should hear their crybaby arses after they dump their bikes.

A friend of mine argued with my opinion several times about helmets........With his permission, I perhaps could give you his phone number....and then you could decide for yourself if he needed a helmet. If you listen close, you can understand him telling about his twenty five MPH incident eight years ago. He will also tell you about the stupid government not sending him enough money to get by on.
 
Let's see now, It's legal to drink yourself into madness and the state will pay for you.
You can drug yourself till you're an invalid and the state will pay for you.
You can pop out babies till kingdom come and the state will pay for you And your babies.

You can go skydiving, snomobiling, motorcycling, cliff climbing and a host of other dangerous sports and if you bust yourself all to smitherines the state will pay for you.
Why do you single out helmets and seat belts as a way to save money
And what is it exactly that you don't like about liberty?
 
I believe what he is saying is , LIBERTY is a two way street and YOUR liberty doesn"t overide his. He is NOT saying drinking or any of the other cases you cited are any better. what he (and I ) are saying is this...let legal aged society do what ever they damn well please (LIBERTY) but they and they only will be soley responsable (financially and otherwise)for their actions! THAT IS LIBERTY! You want to serve that up and you won"t hear ANY complaints from the responsable ones. Just as a wellfare recipient chooses not to work because he still eats , smokes , votes , paid up health care , and more bennies than you can shake a stick at. He chooses NOT to work , that IS LIBERTY! WHY he made that choice is SOCIALISM. History tells us that SOCIALISM follows LIBERTY every time. Think maybe some "easy riders" might just be helping it along?Play into external_link"s hand (in the name of "liberty". Read some "TRUE" history books if you think I"m wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
cancer journey update, off topic
2
Replies
37
Views
1K
Texasmark
T
Square Eye
Want input on choosing a new ute
2
Replies
20
Views
1K
544hydro
544hydro
S
8N Governor issue?
Replies
8
Views
538
ShawnPalichuk
S
7
New Holland LX 565 skid steer that doesn't seems to have governor response after overhaul
Replies
0
Views
159
7000Eric
7
R
Oliver 600
Replies
14
Views
433
johnlobb
J
Tractor Parts Tractor Manuals

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy

Back
Top