Warning Signs

Most all the rides at Cedar Point have those dubious warnings that state if you have back/neck problems, are pregnant, have had recent surgery or have high blood pressure or heart trouble you should not ride. I can't think off hand of any particular ride that doesn't have the sign, it's on pretty much everything but the bathrooms.

Not long ago there was a thread about age and we found that the average age of Pointbuzz members is probably a bit higher than many of us were assuming. That being the case I'm going to guess that at least some of us probably don't take the signs literally and are flinging our no longer quite so young and healthy bodies on to rides where we will most certainly meet our doom or be irrepairably damaged.

I'm curious what peoples' thoughts are on things like how damaged or sickly would we be before we decided the sign applied to us? Recent surgery and preganacy are pretty straight forward. If you've been recently stitched up and haven't yet been cleared for resuming regular activities you aren't ready to be tossed around or subjected to major g-forces. If you're pregnant it's best to avoid any risk and it's only for nine months anyway so you can look forward to riding next year. Even with these two examples though I would think the ferris wheel and train are safe but isn't there a sign on at least one of them, too? When it comes to back and neck issues or high blood pressure and heart "trouble" though things seem to be a little less straight forward (at least in my mind) because there is such a wide range between the extremes of each condition. Also these are more likely to be chronic and life long so if you stop riding it's likely to be indefinitely, not just a temporary break.

You would think that the simple advice of discuss it with your doctor would take care of the issue but in my personal experience once you have more than one doctor involved in your life their opinions start conflicting and you are ultimately left having to decide for yourself. I've already made the decision that I feel is right for me so I'm not looking for advice. I'm just interested in the thoughts and ramblings of others who have dealt with this. We have a long winter ahead of us, it doesn't hurt to have one more thing to yap about while we have no coasters to ride.

I don't think the problem is people ignoring health warning signs, it's people ignoring the keep cameras and phones off the ride signs. I only recall one instance this year on Gatekeeper where someone was unresponsive coming into the station, but they were taken to the hospital and recovered.

I would guess those signs are there because of the current legal climate in the U.S.

^^He's right, you know.

Without a warning sign, pregnant women might ride Mean Streak in the back of the train which would cause their kid to pop right out. Then, riders get held up while the crew has to clean up the spill. Additionally, considering the child would not meet the minimum height requirement or be properly restrained, the crew might get in trouble... ;)

Nah, what Pete said. I tend to view CP's warning signs in a similar way to the "Caution: Hot!" on a coffee cup or the warnings to not place babies in plastic bags or enclosed Rubbermaid storage containers. They're there to prevent or counter frivolous lawsuits when someone with an existing condition has issues on a ride.

As for when to stop riding rides, I'd say go with what your body is telling you and to research risks with any existing health conditions. If you're feeling faint, suffering from back issues, heart attacks, having difficulty breathing, etc...probably not a good idea to ride the extreme stuff.

Those are signs nobody reads because these newer ones have included too much stuff on there in smaller print. I wish I could find a picture but really, you could take 10 minutes reading it all. Reminds me of the pharmaceutical commercials on TV where 2/3 is about who should NOT take the medicine they are advertising.

I've seen senior men on Maverick but they must be in good condition. One time it looked like it might have been his first time and I felt concerned to tell him how to hold the handlebars so his head wouldn't get knocked about. I didn't because I didn't want to make him feel bad but it worried me. Maybe I should have. Now I do feel bad.

I don't know, I imagine if you're prone to angina or heart attacks for starters. My 84 year old father will never ride another roller coaster, it's been years since he stopped.

Sometimes stopping an activity and trying to restart it again much later is worse than never stopping if you have been tolerating it. Everyone should try to clarify their conditions with their doctor.

Ffej said:
I tend to view CP's warning signs in a similar way to the "Caution: Hot!" on a coffee cup... They're there to prevent or counter frivolous lawsuits...

While I agree with your overall point, be careful when referring to the McDonald's hot coffee incident as "frivolous". That was absolutely not a frivolous lawsuit.

Ffej said:
Without a warning sign, pregnant women might ride Mean Streak in the back of the train which would cause their kid to pop right out. Then, riders get held up while the crew has to clean up the spill. Additionally, considering the child would not meet the minimum height requirement or be properly restrained, the crew might get in trouble... ;

Good one!

^^Yes. People need to look into that "hot coffee" incident and get the facts, instead of using it as a knee jerk reaction when they talk about "frivolous" lawsuits.

I usually try to stay off the heavy topics around here...oh well.

It's not comparable to the McDonald's incident, but I definitely think all the signs were replaced for legal reasons. It's just part of the society we live in now.

Another woman recently filed suit against McDonalds because of coffee burns to the groin. These women need to learn that there are better things to put between their legs than hot cups of coffee.

HI YO!!!

(um...sexist...but funny!!)

Like a bag of arbys..

There's a double entendre if you think about it :P

Pete said:
I would guess those signs are there because of the current legal climate in the U.S.

I totally get that the signs are a CYA effort on the part of the park and I don't blame them. That's why it annoys me when a doctor uses the fact that there's a sign as their reasoning for why you shouldn't be doing something. "Why were you doing that, they have signs?" Yes, they have signs, lots of signs, identical signs on rides who's characteristics are completely different from each other. How about a little more info doc?

I was admittedly very young when the McDonald's coffee incident occurred, so I only remember the popular opinion.

Out of curiosity, I just reviewed the case to see if what happened was way off from what I had heard / remembered all these years:

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaurants

Is there something missing here? An old lady dumped her hot coffee on herself (which was determined to be an acceptable temperature...the same temperature served today), and she faced serious burns. It's no doubt very unfortunate, but how was this more than a bad accident?

I believe you have the temperature part wrong. If I recall, they were serving it somewhere around 190 degrees to keep it fresh longer, when I believe it's supposed to be kept at 160. Granted, even at 160 you'd be burned, but the extra 30 degrees significantly increased the extent of her injuries.

"Since Liebeck, McDonald's has not reduced the service temperature of its coffee.[17] McDonald's policy today is to serve coffee between 80–90 °C (176–194 °F),[29] relying on more sternly-worded warnings on cups made of rigid foam to avoid future liability, though it continues to face lawsuits over hot coffee.[29][30]"

That McDonald's still serves coffee at that temperature is not an indication that the lawsuit was frivolous.

I've seen the pictures, and I'm scarred. That was no frivolous lawsuit.

Considering that my coffee maker has a brewing temperature setting, and I have it currently set at a normal 192 degrees, McDonald's does not serve coffee at an unusually high temperature. Although I'm no coffee expert, my understanding is that brewing temperature is important to make coffee turn out well.

No one from McDonald's dumped coffee on Liebeck, she was a clutz and spilled it on herself in a careless attempt to add cream and sugar to the cup of coffee that was held between her legs. How is that McDonald's fault and how is that not a frivolous lawsuit? There are many, many products available to consumers that are dangerous to use if mishandled. The coffee was mishandled by Liebeck, she was at fault for her injuries, not McDonald's.