<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: Table Saw Injury Numbers in Perspective</title> <atom:link href="http://www.popularwoodworking.com/article/table-saw-injury-numbers-in-perspective/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.popularwoodworking.com/article/table-saw-injury-numbers-in-perspective</link> <description>Woodworking advice, woodworking plans, woodworking projects and woodworking blogs</description> <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 02:04:06 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator> <item><title>By: Hank Lay</title><link>http://www.popularwoodworking.com/article/table-saw-injury-numbers-in-perspective/comment-page-1#comment-16088</link> <dc:creator>Hank Lay</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 16 Feb 2011 16:48:51 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/Table+Saw+Injury+Numbers+In+Perspective.aspx#comment-16088</guid> <description><![CDATA[Mark my words: some day, CPSC, OSHA, or some other organization is going to want blade guards on kitchen knives!Hank Lay
retired engineer]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mark my words: some day, CPSC, OSHA, or some other organization is going to want blade guards on kitchen knives!</p><p>Hank Lay<br
/> retired engineer</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Alan Falk</title><link>http://www.popularwoodworking.com/article/table-saw-injury-numbers-in-perspective/comment-page-1#comment-16087</link> <dc:creator>Alan Falk</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 13 Feb 2011 06:03:21 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/Table+Saw+Injury+Numbers+In+Perspective.aspx#comment-16087</guid> <description><![CDATA[Bob Miller... I think one important element of Bob Lang&#039;s comment relates to the GIGO effect... the provberbial Garbage In =&gt; Garbage Out homily from the computer world.He rightly pointed out that the estimates were, at least in part and probably more than &quot;in part&quot; based on flawed data input right at the source... the Emergency Rooms of the hospitals!When a doctor or whoever clicks on or writes in &quot;table saw&quot; when the perp was a band saw, the resulting data point is useless in a field of data on table saws!Unfortunately, it seems that people are more interested in a battle of &quot;my degree makes me more knowledgeable [hence more credible???] than your degree or experience makes you...&quot;Rubbish!CPSC should clean up its own act by working with the medical profession and ER teams to create better descriptions and categories for the healthcare people to use BEFORE extrapolating from available &quot;data.&quot;  Or add caveats like, &quot;the source data probably is 60% representative of the reality we&#039;re trying to estimate, so take it all with a grain or more of salt...&quot;And who am I and what&#039;s my qualification for saying this?  I&#039;m &quot;Justin Engineer.&quot;  :)]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bob Miller&#8230; I think one important element of Bob Lang&#8217;s comment relates to the GIGO effect&#8230; the provberbial Garbage In =&gt; Garbage Out homily from the computer world.</p><p>He rightly pointed out that the estimates were, at least in part and probably more than &quot;in part&quot; based on flawed data input right at the source&#8230; the Emergency Rooms of the hospitals!</p><p>When a doctor or whoever clicks on or writes in &quot;table saw&quot; when the perp was a band saw, the resulting data point is useless in a field of data on table saws!</p><p>Unfortunately, it seems that people are more interested in a battle of &quot;my degree makes me more knowledgeable [hence more credible???] than your degree or experience makes you&#8230;&quot;</p><p>Rubbish!</p><p>CPSC should clean up its own act by working with the medical profession and ER teams to create better descriptions and categories for the healthcare people to use BEFORE extrapolating from available &quot;data.&quot;  Or add caveats like, &quot;the source data probably is 60% representative of the reality we&#8217;re trying to estimate, so take it all with a grain or more of salt&#8230;&quot;</p><p>And who am I and what&#8217;s my qualification for saying this?  I&#8217;m &quot;Justin Engineer.&quot; <img
src='http://d2amilv9vi9flo.cloudfront.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Brian Ogilvie</title><link>http://www.popularwoodworking.com/article/table-saw-injury-numbers-in-perspective/comment-page-1#comment-16086</link> <dc:creator>Brian Ogilvie</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 22:08:46 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/Table+Saw+Injury+Numbers+In+Perspective.aspx#comment-16086</guid> <description><![CDATA[Just one more quick point: if you want to see what an effective power tool guard looks like, head over to Home Depot and look at the radial arm saw they use for cutting construction lumber.In my Home Depot, there is a box-like guard made of laminate covered MDF that completely encloses the blade and is wide enough that you really could not get your hand under the guard if you tried.  I am sure a clever monkey could defeat it or remove it, but it would take considerable effort to have a traumatic amputation with that guard in place.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just one more quick point: if you want to see what an effective power tool guard looks like, head over to Home Depot and look at the radial arm saw they use for cutting construction lumber.</p><p>In my Home Depot, there is a box-like guard made of laminate covered MDF that completely encloses the blade and is wide enough that you really could not get your hand under the guard if you tried.  I am sure a clever monkey could defeat it or remove it, but it would take considerable effort to have a traumatic amputation with that guard in place.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Brian Ogilvie</title><link>http://www.popularwoodworking.com/article/table-saw-injury-numbers-in-perspective/comment-page-1#comment-16085</link> <dc:creator>Brian Ogilvie</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 22:00:55 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/Table+Saw+Injury+Numbers+In+Perspective.aspx#comment-16085</guid> <description><![CDATA[I found this very interesting.  I am an engineer (who has been trained in undergraduate level statistics) and I did not find Bob Lang&#039;s analysis all that bad--he simply asked questions about the sources and quality of the data collected.  His extrapolations are likely not quite right, but his arguments did not seem to be that statistical analysis is bad or wrong, just that when we simplify the data too much it is easy to draw wrong conclusions.I would prefer to see the data presented with an explicit confidence interval clearly stated in English, such as something like: we can be 90% confident that the number of hospital visits for injuries involving a table saw (in any way) was between xx,xxx and yy,yyy.The database itself is fascinating.  At least one of the sample &quot;table saw&quot; amputations clearly states in the notes that the accident occurred on a band saw, for instance.  There are no flesh detecting technologies for bandsaws that I am aware of.I was also stuck by the age of the patients in the samples that the database showed me.  Patients aged 82 and 77 and 76 etc. which makes me think that familiarity and comfort with a tool can be a double-edged sword.  Note to self: Don&#039;t get complacent about safety.  This also points away from the litigant in the original table saw lawsuit who I believe had zero hours of table saw usage before his accident.As a country, I think we could have much better bang-for-our-buck by requiring more effective guards, better training, and more safety oriented product materials (as opposed to the current safety warnings that come with power tools which are designed to prevent lawsuits rather than amputations).  I would put flesh detecting technology low of my list bang-for-buck mitigation steps.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I found this very interesting.  I am an engineer (who has been trained in undergraduate level statistics) and I did not find Bob Lang&#8217;s analysis all that bad&#8211;he simply asked questions about the sources and quality of the data collected.  His extrapolations are likely not quite right, but his arguments did not seem to be that statistical analysis is bad or wrong, just that when we simplify the data too much it is easy to draw wrong conclusions.</p><p>I would prefer to see the data presented with an explicit confidence interval clearly stated in English, such as something like: we can be 90% confident that the number of hospital visits for injuries involving a table saw (in any way) was between xx,xxx and yy,yyy.</p><p>The database itself is fascinating.  At least one of the sample &quot;table saw&quot; amputations clearly states in the notes that the accident occurred on a band saw, for instance.  There are no flesh detecting technologies for bandsaws that I am aware of.</p><p>I was also stuck by the age of the patients in the samples that the database showed me.  Patients aged 82 and 77 and 76 etc. which makes me think that familiarity and comfort with a tool can be a double-edged sword.  Note to self: Don&#8217;t get complacent about safety.  This also points away from the litigant in the original table saw lawsuit who I believe had zero hours of table saw usage before his accident.</p><p>As a country, I think we could have much better bang-for-our-buck by requiring more effective guards, better training, and more safety oriented product materials (as opposed to the current safety warnings that come with power tools which are designed to prevent lawsuits rather than amputations).  I would put flesh detecting technology low of my list bang-for-buck mitigation steps.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Bob Lang</title><link>http://www.popularwoodworking.com/article/table-saw-injury-numbers-in-perspective/comment-page-1#comment-16084</link> <dc:creator>Bob Lang</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 20:52:04 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/Table+Saw+Injury+Numbers+In+Perspective.aspx#comment-16084</guid> <description><![CDATA[Bob (we are just bob, bob, bobbing along here)Thanks for taking a second look. I admit that statistics are beyond my field of expertise, and I accept that the people who can develop something like NEISS do good things. In trying to understand the numbers on the surface, I did some digging into where they came from. While I don&#039;t know how the methodology works, I do know that the limited amount of data on the front end needs to be reliable or the results on the back end aren&#039;t useful.If you query the NEISS database, you can download the samples and read the ER doctor&#039;s notes for the samples. Many of these are cryptic and unclear, or show that the data going in doesn&#039;t say what is being said about the numbers coming out. If we&#039;re trying to decide if this is a big enough issue for government action, I don&#039;t think we should be counting a fall that lands on a table saw as a table saw accident. And if there aren&#039;t enough accidents in high school shop classes to even register in the projections, I think it&#039;s irresponsible for anyone to say we&#039;re doing this to protect our children.So far, most of what has been printed and discussed on this subject has been far from factual. I don&#039;t have formal training in journalism either, but I think we need to take a close look at a complicated subject in order to make a decision that does the most good for the most people. Stay tuned, as there is more to come.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bob (we are just bob, bob, bobbing along here)</p><p>Thanks for taking a second look. I admit that statistics are beyond my field of expertise, and I accept that the people who can develop something like NEISS do good things. In trying to understand the numbers on the surface, I did some digging into where they came from. While I don&#8217;t know how the methodology works, I do know that the limited amount of data on the front end needs to be reliable or the results on the back end aren&#8217;t useful.</p><p>If you query the NEISS database, you can download the samples and read the ER doctor&#8217;s notes for the samples. Many of these are cryptic and unclear, or show that the data going in doesn&#8217;t say what is being said about the numbers coming out. If we&#8217;re trying to decide if this is a big enough issue for government action, I don&#8217;t think we should be counting a fall that lands on a table saw as a table saw accident. And if there aren&#8217;t enough accidents in high school shop classes to even register in the projections, I think it&#8217;s irresponsible for anyone to say we&#8217;re doing this to protect our children.</p><p>So far, most of what has been printed and discussed on this subject has been far from factual. I don&#8217;t have formal training in journalism either, but I think we need to take a close look at a complicated subject in order to make a decision that does the most good for the most people. Stay tuned, as there is more to come.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Bob Miller</title><link>http://www.popularwoodworking.com/article/table-saw-injury-numbers-in-perspective/comment-page-1#comment-16083</link> <dc:creator>Bob Miller</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 20:25:24 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/Table+Saw+Injury+Numbers+In+Perspective.aspx#comment-16083</guid> <description><![CDATA[Bob,
Firstly does it feel weird addressing things to other Bob&#039;s, it always throws me off.  I may have misread what exactly you were questioning in my haste.  If you were looking at how USA Today pick and chose its data points to &quot;prove&quot; a point then I have absolutely no problem with what you did or your questioning of it.  The way I had read it, and I admit that I am touchy about it, you were questioning the ability to extrapolate data using statistical methodology.  In this case from a 100 hospital sample to national numbers.  I think questioning the core of a major field of mathematics without very good reason (more than &quot;it seems wrong&quot;) takes the dialog away from where it should be which is &quot;are we looking at the right numbers&quot;, which in my second reading is what you were actually writing about, and &quot;what if anything should we be doing about it&quot;.If nobody believed the data that comes out of statistics because they thought it was just a form of guessing, which it is definitely not, then we would loose a very powerful tool for examining the world around us.  This was my worry.Also I am just grumpy today.  I am looking forward to your future articles, especially ones on the costs as that is definitely a more subjective measure and I am guessing as a woodworker for many years you know a good number of people who have hurt themselves.Chris, As for my statement that you should be a professional statistician to do statistics:  statistics are not just an opinion, they are a formal field of study that uses specific methodologies to come to conclusions.  Without an very large amount of knowledge about how to do statistics you lack the ability to do any meaningful analysis.  The same would be the same as saying that building &quot;will/will not&quot; stand without being a mechanical engineer.  Yes you can &quot;have an opinion&quot; that their math is wrong but you are just flapping your jaw.  There are exceptions usually of the form of the rigging crew saying &quot;this beam should probably be 6&quot; to the left, you know where the bolts actually come through the concrete&quot;.Bob]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bob,<br
/> Firstly does it feel weird addressing things to other Bob&#8217;s, it always throws me off.  I may have misread what exactly you were questioning in my haste.  If you were looking at how USA Today pick and chose its data points to &quot;prove&quot; a point then I have absolutely no problem with what you did or your questioning of it.  The way I had read it, and I admit that I am touchy about it, you were questioning the ability to extrapolate data using statistical methodology.  In this case from a 100 hospital sample to national numbers.  I think questioning the core of a major field of mathematics without very good reason (more than &quot;it seems wrong&quot;) takes the dialog away from where it should be which is &quot;are we looking at the right numbers&quot;, which in my second reading is what you were actually writing about, and &quot;what if anything should we be doing about it&quot;.</p><p>If nobody believed the data that comes out of statistics because they thought it was just a form of guessing, which it is definitely not, then we would loose a very powerful tool for examining the world around us.  This was my worry.</p><p>Also I am just grumpy today.  I am looking forward to your future articles, especially ones on the costs as that is definitely a more subjective measure and I am guessing as a woodworker for many years you know a good number of people who have hurt themselves.</p><p>Chris, As for my statement that you should be a professional statistician to do statistics:  statistics are not just an opinion, they are a formal field of study that uses specific methodologies to come to conclusions.  Without an very large amount of knowledge about how to do statistics you lack the ability to do any meaningful analysis.  The same would be the same as saying that building &quot;will/will not&quot; stand without being a mechanical engineer.  Yes you can &quot;have an opinion&quot; that their math is wrong but you are just flapping your jaw.  There are exceptions usually of the form of the rigging crew saying &quot;this beam should probably be 6&quot; to the left, you know where the bolts actually come through the concrete&quot;.</p><p>Bob</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: raney</title><link>http://www.popularwoodworking.com/article/table-saw-injury-numbers-in-perspective/comment-page-1#comment-16082</link> <dc:creator>raney</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 20:09:43 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/Table+Saw+Injury+Numbers+In+Perspective.aspx#comment-16082</guid> <description><![CDATA[I didn&#039;t see any criticism of NEISS in this article whatsoever;  what is implicitly (and I think rightly) criticized is the oversimplification of the NEISS data by other sources - such as, in this case, a media outlet who is inherently interested in conflict, which draws and holds readers more consistently than balanced and factual analysis of dry subjects like complex statistical analysis.My tablesaw has been in storage for quite a while as it just wasn&#039;t earning the space it occupied in my too-small shop.  nonetheless, I am quite discouraged by the continual trend toward protecting people from themselves at the expense of choices. I&#039;ve also noticed a tendency for people who don&#039;t use tablesaws, or have much need for them, to be the ones leading the charge to eliminating them.  Never a situation that sits well with me.Personally, I think the key (as always) is to try to provide education and resources to improve people&#039;s personal safety.  However, legislating to the lowest common denominator of caution or education seems to be more and more the strategy du jour in the US.Personally, I thought it was quite a good writeup Mr Lang.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I didn&#8217;t see any criticism of NEISS in this article whatsoever;  what is implicitly (and I think rightly) criticized is the oversimplification of the NEISS data by other sources &#8211; such as, in this case, a media outlet who is inherently interested in conflict, which draws and holds readers more consistently than balanced and factual analysis of dry subjects like complex statistical analysis.</p><p>My tablesaw has been in storage for quite a while as it just wasn&#8217;t earning the space it occupied in my too-small shop.  nonetheless, I am quite discouraged by the continual trend toward protecting people from themselves at the expense of choices. I&#8217;ve also noticed a tendency for people who don&#8217;t use tablesaws, or have much need for them, to be the ones leading the charge to eliminating them.  Never a situation that sits well with me.</p><p>Personally, I think the key (as always) is to try to provide education and resources to improve people&#8217;s personal safety.  However, legislating to the lowest common denominator of caution or education seems to be more and more the strategy du jour in the US.</p><p>Personally, I thought it was quite a good writeup Mr Lang.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: chris C</title><link>http://www.popularwoodworking.com/article/table-saw-injury-numbers-in-perspective/comment-page-1#comment-16081</link> <dc:creator>chris C</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 19:31:56 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/Table+Saw+Injury+Numbers+In+Perspective.aspx#comment-16081</guid> <description><![CDATA[Bob Miller forgot to add to his signature:
&quot;CEO: NEISS&quot;Yes, please, after I have my mandatory table saw
lessons I will also attend my mandatory training
for statistics as well since only certified
experts are allowed to have any opinion on
statistics.I am not even sure what Bob Lang said that was so bad. But
the suggestion that he can&#039;t have an opinion because only
certified gurus can tell us what to do or how to think is
repugnant.Chris]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bob Miller forgot to add to his signature:<br
/> &quot;CEO: NEISS&quot;</p><p>Yes, please, after I have my mandatory table saw<br
/> lessons I will also attend my mandatory training<br
/> for statistics as well since only certified<br
/> experts are allowed to have any opinion on<br
/> statistics.</p><p>I am not even sure what Bob Lang said that was so bad. But<br
/> the suggestion that he can&#8217;t have an opinion because only<br
/> certified gurus can tell us what to do or how to think is<br
/> repugnant.</p><p>Chris</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Bob Lang</title><link>http://www.popularwoodworking.com/article/table-saw-injury-numbers-in-perspective/comment-page-1#comment-16080</link> <dc:creator>Bob Lang</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 19:09:46 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/Table+Saw+Injury+Numbers+In+Perspective.aspx#comment-16080</guid> <description><![CDATA[Well Bob, I don&#039;t think I expressed any disdain or disagreement with &quot;actual&quot; numbers. It&#039;s the guesses paraded as facts and counting apples as oranges that I have my doubts about. I fail to see how asking questions causes great harm.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well Bob, I don&#8217;t think I expressed any disdain or disagreement with &quot;actual&quot; numbers. It&#8217;s the guesses paraded as facts and counting apples as oranges that I have my doubts about. I fail to see how asking questions causes great harm.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Bob Miller</title><link>http://www.popularwoodworking.com/article/table-saw-injury-numbers-in-perspective/comment-page-1#comment-16079</link> <dc:creator>Bob Miller</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 18:20:51 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/Table+Saw+Injury+Numbers+In+Perspective.aspx#comment-16079</guid> <description><![CDATA[I do not have much of an opinion on the matter.  I have but do not use a tablesaw, largely because it is an older model that is painfully noisy even with hearing protection when used in my concrete basement.What I do have an opinion on is this:  I believe you do the world a great disservice by attacking modern statistical methods in a very public forum simply because you do not like the numbers they generate.  From your article you do not have alternate data that indicate the NEISS data is flawed and from your bio on popularwoodworking.com there is no mention of a background in formal statistics.  So I see no grounds for you to be able to disagree with the actual numbers.Resources like NEISS are designed to take what we feel a number should be and replace it with something founded in reality.  Such analyses have brought us modern medicine and engineering and we should not reject them because they run counter to our personal feelings.I respect you greatly as a woodworker and I would much rather hear about how you plan on reacting to these numbers instead of you attacking them and their methodology.  Much like a table saw statistics can seem easy to use at first but you can cause great harm trying to use them without training.I do have to admit that amateur statistical analysis has been a pet peeve of mine for quite a while and usually sets me off.  But I thought it should be stated here.Bob]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I do not have much of an opinion on the matter.  I have but do not use a tablesaw, largely because it is an older model that is painfully noisy even with hearing protection when used in my concrete basement.</p><p>What I do have an opinion on is this:  I believe you do the world a great disservice by attacking modern statistical methods in a very public forum simply because you do not like the numbers they generate.  From your article you do not have alternate data that indicate the NEISS data is flawed and from your bio on popularwoodworking.com there is no mention of a background in formal statistics.  So I see no grounds for you to be able to disagree with the actual numbers.</p><p>Resources like NEISS are designed to take what we feel a number should be and replace it with something founded in reality.  Such analyses have brought us modern medicine and engineering and we should not reject them because they run counter to our personal feelings.</p><p>I respect you greatly as a woodworker and I would much rather hear about how you plan on reacting to these numbers instead of you attacking them and their methodology.  Much like a table saw statistics can seem easy to use at first but you can cause great harm trying to use them without training.</p><p>I do have to admit that amateur statistical analysis has been a pet peeve of mine for quite a while and usually sets me off.  But I thought it should be stated here.</p><p>Bob</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Object Caching 493/596 objects using apc
Content Delivery Network via Amazon Web Services: CloudFront: d2amilv9vi9flo.cloudfront.net

 Served from: www.popularwoodworking.com @ 2013-05-24 06:33:58 by W3 Total Cache -->