Is tooth brushing water from hot tap safer than from cold tap?

[Guy King]

The message from Adrian Tupper contains these words:

When I was a kid we used to make our own chloroform. We were too middle class to have heard of glue-sniffing.

[vulgarandmischevious]

Indeed, it turns most people into driving/walking/cycling *gods*.

Or, at least, they *think* they are...

[John Savage]

It has that air of authenticity, but the mythbusters went to town on this one. Try as they might, they had to admit defeat. Flying bacteria didn't manage any mass migration onto their array of toothbrushes.

Myth busted!! Pity though, as it's a goodun.

-- John Savage (my news address is not valid for email)

[Dave Fawthrop]

|Dave Fawthrop wrote: | |>A tiny sniff of alcohol has significant effects on driving/walking/cycling |>ability. | |Indeed, it turns most people into driving/walking/cycling *gods*.

You misspelled "idiots".

[dennis]

All it actually shows is that the mythbusters were unable to do it, not that it doesn't happen. They often do things wrong.

Take the suspension bridge they built for the marching soldiers myth. It wasn't a suspension bridge at all. It was supported by the deck as the "support" wires weren't anchored to the ground so offered no support at all.

[The Reid]

Following up to Guy King

I used to by ether and amyl nitrate to make up model aeroplane fuel at about 15 or so. dont suppose you can now (possibly not legally then?).

[The Reid]

Following up to vulgarandmischevious

I see Dave missed the "in" from "insignificant" What a pillock you are Dave.

[The Reid]

Following up to Adrian Tupper

cyclists sometimes hit pedestrians, often while jumping red lights. You will see lots of animal related accidents at Pamplona each year.

[The Reid]

Following up to Adrian Tupper

but that never happens, there are no big gaps when this sort of thing goes on. They do it by forcing their way in between two cars, often already often too close together (possibly trying to stop the w****** getting in) everybody brakes and it ripples down the line, maybe somebody else following too close or on the phone hits the car in front and there's a pile up and someone dies. The little prats don't even know it happened and they caused it.

much more significant than speed. In fact everything is more significant than speed in this context. Low speed (where there are no hazards) is just a way of getting away with inadequate driving.

[The Reid]

Following up to Adrian Tupper

I broadly agree. But I'm sure you see that you are therefore agreeing with the utility argument, but just at a different chosen trade off.

[The Reid]

Following up to Adrian Tupper

they are all 30 round here, not that that's the point. The cameras I pass on one regular daily run are thusly several on 50 dual (was 70 until recently,so you can picture the layout) one on steep downhill 30 (no particular hazards) none outside schools, shopping centres or junctions where low speed would be good. I'm inclined to conclude they are placed where most people speed, rather than protecting hazards to pedestrians. The downhill 30 seems designed to catch out relatively "innocent" people who fail to brake enough for the downhill.

I might as well have a rant about the one on the A303 while I'm at it Picture up hill two lanes, down hill one lane (crawler lane type layout) . At end of stretch of uphill 2 lane a blind brow. If there's one spot in the whole country where high speed is safer, its there. Overtake and get back in well before the brow in case a lunatic is in wrong lane or there's some other hazard over the hill. so what do they do? Put a speed camera on the safe bit so people end up still overtaking when they get near the brow. no doubt they noted accidents at that spot so concluded a camera would cure the problem. A nice piece of concrete island would cure it much better. the camera just has the effect of stooping overtaking and moving overtakes somewhere less suitable.

[Ian Stirling]

Haven't you seen South Park?

[Mike Barnes]

Of course. A pile-up is, by definition, a failure to keep a safe distance. :-)

[The Reid]

Following up to Mike Barnes

except for the ones who are asleep :-)

[Dave Plowman (News)]

You can certainly buy amyl nitrate - but you might not like the places that sell it. ;-)

[Dave Plowman (News)]

I'd think so. The amount they found in my blood was something like 1/50th of a unit. But I took the bus home to be sure. ;-)

[Dave Fawthrop]

|Following up to vulgarandmischevious | |>Dave Fawthrop wrote: |>

|>>A tiny sniff of alcohol has significant effects on driving/walking/cycling |>>ability. | |I see Dave missed the "in" from "insignificant" What a pillock |you are Dave.

No just an observer of the idiots who mess up their lives with drink :-(

They all deny that it has any effect, and also swear blind that they are

*not* alcoholics.

[Dave Fawthrop]

|Following up to Mike Barnes | |>>But as I say, as long as drivers keep a safe distance. Many a pile-up |>>can be prevented. |>

|>Of course. A pile-up is, by definition, a failure to keep a safe |>distance. :-) | |except for the ones who are asleep :-)

Sleep caused by alcohol?

[Adrian Tupper]

The Reid wrote in news: [e-mail]:

Yes, well that's already illegal and they deserve to be prosecuted.

Trust you to come out with a load of bull like that :-)

[Adrian Tupper]

The Reid wrote in news: [e-mail]:

pedestrians

Very very few value statements work when tested in extremis. The important thing in my mind is to challenge the drivers' mentality you frequently see that the road is MINE. If they can't share it with pedestrians and cyclists etc then a reduction in everyones' rights is inevitable.