Talk:Parallettes
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Request for external link addition
[edit]- I would like to make a formal request to add http://www.celtickane.com/projects/parallettes.php to the external links section of this page. It is my own website, so I wouldn't like to add it myself, but I would prefer that someone else review the website, and make the decision to add it. --Sugarskane 03:47, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
- I added it. I wanted to expand the stub to at least have some links to parallette exercises/pictures, and as I looked around I kept finding references to your site anyway. Seems like a very appropriate addition to the page. Cityintherain 17:31, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Doubtful material choice?
[edit]Even though PVC seem to have become the low-budget material of choice, it could be appropriate to point out that it could not be the best choice, as the practicioner is in permanent skin contact and PVC is criticized for negative health issues. Maybe someone competent could evaluate PP-HD, PE as an alternative.Skrio (talk) 12:37, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- "Permanent skin contact" doesn't apply here because parallettes are only used occasionally. Also, PVC health issues are primarily related to prolonged exposure to PVC manufacturing processes or byproducts (though chewing on PVC toys for extended periods is unhealthy). Occasional skin contact wouldn't seem to be a problem. Even so, if one has concerns about PVC, it would be a simple matter to fabricate parallettes from many other materials (but none as readily available or as inexpensive as PVC). Or, simply wrap the PVC handles with tape. Lambtron (talk) 16:25, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- "Permanent" during the time of the exercise, most likely paired with sweat, possibly acting as solvent. True, contact could be eliminated by taping, but sources on the internet show concern of hazardous gases leaving the PVC solid (with or without the softening ingredients you referred to implicitly). My concern here is, that the reader should be made aware of the issue in the wikipedia-entry itself. Otherwise the article is not as good as it could be, possibly inviting the reader to take the information completely correct as it stands (as the sheer number of people having build the "pvc homemade parallettes" without doubting the material seems to show).Skrio (talk) 17:24, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- Your hypothesis about sweat combining with PVC to become a harmful solvent is interesting, and possibly valid, but unsuitable for mention in the article unless it is supported by a reliable source. As for hazardous outgassing, I don't see how parallettes would significantly add to the risk posed by the abundant PVC plumbing present in most homes. I don't mean to downplay the health risks associated with PVC, but frankly, I think the biggest risk from PVC parallettes is the possibility of muscle strain in new users who overexert themselves. Lambtron (talk) 18:05, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- Don't take the hypothesis as the major point against PVC parallettes, but rather look at it from a higher level of abstraction: I could only find one commercial manufacturer who sold parallettes made out of PVC _AND_, that is the interesting part, PP. All others are build from aluminum or a combination of metal and wood. As you argue with the abundance of PVC in present homes, this is invalid: for the sake of argument, plug in asbestos for PVC. In other words, the abundance of a hazardous material in some place does not justify to add more in the same or other places. A short note in the article about the interplay of health and the chosen material (in general) should therefore be appropriate.Skrio (talk) 03:25, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
- Your hypothesis about sweat combining with PVC to become a harmful solvent is interesting, and possibly valid, but unsuitable for mention in the article unless it is supported by a reliable source. As for hazardous outgassing, I don't see how parallettes would significantly add to the risk posed by the abundant PVC plumbing present in most homes. I don't mean to downplay the health risks associated with PVC, but frankly, I think the biggest risk from PVC parallettes is the possibility of muscle strain in new users who overexert themselves. Lambtron (talk) 18:05, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- "Permanent" during the time of the exercise, most likely paired with sweat, possibly acting as solvent. True, contact could be eliminated by taping, but sources on the internet show concern of hazardous gases leaving the PVC solid (with or without the softening ingredients you referred to implicitly). My concern here is, that the reader should be made aware of the issue in the wikipedia-entry itself. Otherwise the article is not as good as it could be, possibly inviting the reader to take the information completely correct as it stands (as the sheer number of people having build the "pvc homemade parallettes" without doubting the material seems to show).Skrio (talk) 17:24, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
It's not meaningful to compare PVC, which is relatively benign, to asbestos. I'm not a champion of PVC, but its well-researched, benign nature is precisely why PVC is so widespread in plumbing applications (and in door frames, window frames, fabrics, clothing, electrical insulation, ceiling tiles, foam board, etc.). Please explain: what harm, exactly, could one reasonably expect to incur from the PVC in a pair of parallettes? Lambtron (talk) 05:50, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
- I did not intend to compare PVC to asbestos, but rather show in a drastical way the invalidity of the argument that it is fine to use something because it is already in widespread use. Just check this for example. More lecture discouraging the use of PVC (if the high quality references at the end of the paper do not suffice) exists. All I am asking is to include a note in the article, so that it empowers the reader to make a more informed decision, if she decides to build it herself. I think it would be good to do so, as many bloggers jumped the train and simply spread construction plans w/o pointing this out.Skrio (talk) 06:15, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
- Please have a look at the many other WP articles about gymnastics apparatus; each is focused on the structure of an apparatus and its use. The materials comprising each apparatus are listed but there is no discussion of the potential hazards of those materials, just as there is no discussion of other aspects of the underlying materials science. There are two very important reasons for these "omissions": (1) such information is readily available in the article about each material (along with other information that is highly relevent to a discussion of that material); and (2) discussions of material properties rightly belong in articles about those materials, not in ancillary articles. It is pointless and, many would say counterproductive, to repeat those discussions in every article in which the primary topic is associated in some way with a material.
- Your own independent research has shown that aluminum, various other metals, and wood are also used in parallette construction. Is it sensible to repeat here the risks associated with those materials too (e.g., contact dermatitis and Alzheimer's disease from aluminum, lead poisoning from brass, wood splinters, ...)? If so, shouldn't there be health warnings in every article that relates to those materials in some way? Unless you can explain, in layman's terms, why the small amount of PVC found in parallettes poses an unusually large health risk, I'm not convinced that a health warning is warranted here. Lambtron (talk) 18:35, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
- I wasn't pointing out clearly, that a company must face the possibility of being sued for possible health issues deriving from its product, hence has to be more careful in its choice of material than a do-it-yourself person. The closest (commercial) thing I could find to a PVC-only construction was part PVC, part PP (PP being completely harmless, leading to solvent hypothesis). Of course, I do not intend to list the pro and cons of every possible material again here, but as the article stands, it invites to build the PVC device. But you are right, we should see it in the bigger picture, very good point you mentioned here. You are right, a general note reminding the reader to check for health issues, arising from any material, seems more appropriate, a warning is too harsh. By the way, have you read the resource I provided above? It could be of high interest for you (definitly no offense!). Actually I was quite struck by the facts myself and will be more careful about objects for use at home.Skrio (talk) 19:32, 22 December 2010 (UTC)