On Aug 25, 1:00 am, Smitty Two wrote:
In article , CJT
wrote:
Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
"SteveB" wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
Most of what you need to know can be found here;
http://www.rhtubs.com/104f.htm
I'm sorry, you must have not been paying attention or just missed the OPs
comments on how he and his wife love temperatures that would ruin a
lobster.
You missed the parts where people have mentioned that it may be unsafe
medically, but were promptly corrected, chastised and castigated.
This OP has his mind to make the water as hot as he/she/it wants it, and
doesn't want facts.
All they want is a way to bypass the normal circuitry; safety guidelines,
and common sense be damned.
Not to worry, though. You'll be reading about them soon in the paper.
Steve ;-)
Lots of things carry potential risk, sometimes even life-threatening
risks. When the g'mint makes laws to protect me from myself, they've
gone too far. People dig holes in the ice to go swimming in the dead of
winter. You gonna outlaw that, too? I don't blame the OP for wanting
hotter water and not giving a god damn about someone else's concept of
safety.
My jacuzzi is about thirty years old, I'd guess -- it's a Hawkeye, for
those that might remember. I like my water around 102 or so, that way I
can stay in it as long as I like without getting uncomfortably hot. I
never tested the max, but I'm sure it would climb way the hell up there
if I wanted it to.
Now I'm gonna go stick a knife in the toaster, eat some pork that's pink
in the middle, ride my bike without a helmet, and break another ground
plug off a power tool so it will fit in the outlet without an adaptor.
Why? Because I've evaluated the risk vs. reward, and find the ratio
acceptable to me.
Just don't expect the police or 911 to rescue you, or the hospital
emergency room to fix you up, or Social Security to give you disability
payments, and I might be ok with your kooky risk/reward evaluation.
Yeah, I'm a regular kook, all right. Why shouldn't I expect those
agencies to take care of me, same as they take care of people who expose
themselves to risks that I consider, well, too risky? Tailgating,
driving drunk, screwing total strangers, smoking, living on **** fast
food and other junk food, refusing to question authority, building homes
in fire or flood zones, living in debt with no cash reserves, going
without insurance, all come readily to mind. You get the idea. I make my
choices, you make yours. The government is welcome to make laws that
protect me from you, but not me from myself. That's bull****.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I'm with you Smitty. If the guy wants his spa at 108, more power to
him. I doubt half these people so worried about what's gonna happen
even have a spa or know what 104 or 108 is like. Mine is around 106
and I can tell you that I've been in many public spas, at hotels,
resorts, spas, etc that were much hotter. At 106 I have no problem
quickly getting in. At some of these others, they were so hot that I
had to ease in. And people weren't keeling over and dying.
Just because some people get drunk and die in a spa or have some
unknown medical condition doesn't mean JJ can't set his to a temp he
likes. Some people keel over and die jogging from some unknown
medical condition. Should we ban that too or limit how fast you can
jog?