Interesting visualization. My only complhint would be that evening hours appear more impactfol than morning hours due to the larger circumference towards the outer edge.

yah, thats essentially what i said.

except that falling is part of climbing. if your equipment fails on a fall and you get injured, the equipment is the primary reason for the injury imo.

It would be like having statistics on why most skydivers die and the top result is sudden stop. It's just not interesting and informative.

but aborting a fall is the primary function of many pieces of gear. saying that the fall is the main issue and absolving the gear is kind of meaningless. that would basically mean that you could only fault the gear in a static load situation.

i'm still a gumby though and cant climb overhangs. i tend to down climb and take rather than risk a big fall on slab and vertical walls... lol

amazing that such a small number is attributed to gear failure. Misplaced gear is user error. but im surprised there aren't more snapped rope injuries from people using old ropes, or have sheaths cut by sharp edges.

Really gotta give the manufactures credit for their load tolerances.

i could imagine many falls on R (5.9 R) rated routes have ledges you can fall on. Or there are swing risks if the route traverses at all.

The chart doesn't really say the severity though i might guess this is hospitalizations and death? not sprains and scrapes.

'role in epigenetics' means that this effect is observed even in mature people? or is it still limited to fetuses?

i swapped to plant-based diet a year ago. i've realized that im probably not realizing the benefits of the diet, because ive substituted meat and cheese with highly processed plant-based alternatives. these are NOT healthy and NOT cheaper.

It was likely the easiest way to transition, but now I really want to make the harder jump to a diet of more whole foods.

ive been trying to be plant-based for a year, mainly for health and environmental reasons. But many of the environmental statistics used to justify veganism are more than a little misleading. not wrong, but probably not as strong as indicated. like lots of crops are grown for meat/dairy animals. but replacing that food source with human vegetables does not use the same farmland. a lot of grazing land is also not suitable for human vegetables. many human vegetables must be irrigted, while grazing land is rain fed.

I still believe that vegetarian/plant-based is better overall, but it's just so hard to get unbiased information.