Comments for Dominic Sayers http://blog.dominicsayers.com Wed, 01 Jul 2009 12:08:01 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Comment on Cycling and infertility by Dominic Sayers http://blog.dominicsayers.com/2009/06/29/cycling-and-infertility/#comment-20075 Dominic Sayers Wed, 01 Jul 2009 12:08:01 +0000 http://blog.dominicsayers.com/?p=447#comment-20075 Thanks Tim. Link? Thanks Tim. Link?

]]> Comment on Cycling and infertility by TimG http://blog.dominicsayers.com/2009/06/29/cycling-and-infertility/#comment-20074 TimG Wed, 01 Jul 2009 10:23:56 +0000 http://blog.dominicsayers.com/?p=447#comment-20074 There is some research from the US on the ECD Sports website - looking at the effects of prolonged riding among a small group of cycle patrol officers, which seems to show that fertility was not impaired but there was evidence of erectile dysfunction, which increased the longer the officers spent in the saddle. There is some research from the US on the ECD Sports website – looking at the effects of prolonged riding among a small group of cycle patrol officers, which seems to show that fertility was not impaired but there was evidence of erectile dysfunction, which increased the longer the officers spent in the saddle.

]]> Comment on Cycling and infertility by Dominic Sayers http://blog.dominicsayers.com/2009/06/29/cycling-and-infertility/#comment-20071 Dominic Sayers Mon, 29 Jun 2009 21:16:53 +0000 http://blog.dominicsayers.com/?p=447#comment-20071 Lawrence, you clearly need a holiday. Have a lovely time. For my other reader, the word "might" in each of my three suggestions was an attempt to warn pedants that nothing in my article was to be taken as evidence-based cartesian discourse. Ready about? Lee-oh! Lawrence, you clearly need a holiday. Have a lovely time.

For my other reader, the word “might” in each of my three suggestions was an attempt to warn pedants that nothing in my article was to be taken as evidence-based cartesian discourse.

Ready about? Lee-oh!

]]> Comment on Cycling and infertility by laggleton http://blog.dominicsayers.com/2009/06/29/cycling-and-infertility/#comment-20070 laggleton Mon, 29 Jun 2009 18:57:05 +0000 http://blog.dominicsayers.com/?p=447#comment-20070 But the study was only of elite high-mileage cyclists, so anything else is pure supposition. The journalist didn't dismiss their effects on social/commuting cyclists, it was a British 'expert'. I take your point about the unbased assumption that any morphology changes are permanent though. Anyway, I've got to go on holiday and learn to sail now, so maybe a MOP once I'm back? But the study was only of elite high-mileage cyclists, so anything else is pure supposition. The journalist didn’t dismiss their effects on social/commuting cyclists, it was a British ‘expert’. I take your point about the unbased assumption that any morphology changes are permanent though.

Anyway, I’ve got to go on holiday and learn to sail now, so maybe a MOP once I’m back?

]]> Comment on Cycling and infertility by Dominic Sayers http://blog.dominicsayers.com/2009/06/29/cycling-and-infertility/#comment-20069 Dominic Sayers Mon, 29 Jun 2009 18:41:11 +0000 http://blog.dominicsayers.com/?p=447#comment-20069 I gladly accept your offer of beer, by the way. I gladly accept your offer of beer, by the way.

]]> Comment on Cycling and infertility by Dominic Sayers http://blog.dominicsayers.com/2009/06/29/cycling-and-infertility/#comment-20068 Dominic Sayers Mon, 29 Jun 2009 18:35:12 +0000 http://blog.dominicsayers.com/?p=447#comment-20068 I tried to make it clear my guesses were not rooted in double-blind peer-reviewed statistical granite, just that there might be grounds for not dismissing these results as only applying to high-mileage cyclists. I am happy with what I wrote although I take your point about overall bike technology. Rereading the BBC article I also take issue with the study leader saying "it was unclear whether sperm quality would improve if men retired from the sport but that after years of wear and tear this was unlikely." She has absolutely no basis for saying this and I am immediately suspicious of her motives for doing so. ps Lucky you if you find London roads nice to ride on. Come and try the East End. I tried to make it clear my guesses were not rooted in double-blind peer-reviewed statistical granite, just that there might be grounds for not dismissing these results as only applying to high-mileage cyclists. I am happy with what I wrote although I take your point about overall bike technology.

Rereading the BBC article I also take issue with the study leader saying “it was unclear whether sperm quality would improve if men retired from the sport but that after years of wear and tear this was unlikely.” She has absolutely no basis for saying this and I am immediately suspicious of her motives for doing so.

ps Lucky you if you find London roads nice to ride on. Come and try the East End.

]]> Comment on Cycling and infertility by laggleton http://blog.dominicsayers.com/2009/06/29/cycling-and-infertility/#comment-20066 laggleton Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:16:30 +0000 http://blog.dominicsayers.com/?p=447#comment-20066 "My anecdotal evidence has no scientific weight at all but I would suggest the following things may be true" I'm not sure whether I'm more amused by this sentence or the fact that you're comparing yourself to an elite cyclist! If you saw a journalist write the above wouldn't they be a prime target for abuse? (and/or forwarding the column to Ben Goldacre) But, to respond to your points in turn: 1. While I'd agree that modern seats can potentially be more constricting, I've found since I got my road bike that my (cycling) posture has actually improved because of having a higer seat. In addition, I'd say seat posts and bike frames are much more shock absorbant these days - and that's just in road bikes. Lest we forget, far more people ride mountain bikes and hybrids now than they did 40 years ago - and these tend not to have the lightweight racing saddles. 2. Actually, I find London roads aren't that bad - it's not like they're cobbled which would really suck. And triathlons in general are done on normal roads, so I don't think the comparison is entirely fair. 3. Well, yes, but this is really just a truism. I suppose my general point is that fertility (amongst other things) is an extremely powerful and emotive issue - cutting to our underlying animal procreation instinct. Making non-scientific guesses about that and then complaining about decimal place rounding in a kilometre conversion jar a little I guess. But I'd happily dicuss it further over a beer ;) “My anecdotal evidence has no scientific weight at all but I would suggest the following things may be true”

I’m not sure whether I’m more amused by this sentence or the fact that you’re comparing yourself to an elite cyclist! If you saw a journalist write the above wouldn’t they be a prime target for abuse? (and/or forwarding the column to Ben Goldacre)

But, to respond to your points in turn:

1. While I’d agree that modern seats can potentially be more constricting, I’ve found since I got my road bike that my (cycling) posture has actually improved because of having a higer seat. In addition, I’d say seat posts and bike frames are much more shock absorbant these days – and that’s just in road bikes. Lest we forget, far more people ride mountain bikes and hybrids now than they did 40 years ago – and these tend not to have the lightweight racing saddles.
2. Actually, I find London roads aren’t that bad – it’s not like they’re cobbled which would really suck. And triathlons in general are done on normal roads, so I don’t think the comparison is entirely fair.
3. Well, yes, but this is really just a truism.

I suppose my general point is that fertility (amongst other things) is an extremely powerful and emotive issue – cutting to our underlying animal procreation instinct. Making non-scientific guesses about that and then complaining about decimal place rounding in a kilometre conversion jar a little I guess.

But I’d happily dicuss it further over a beer ;)

]]> Comment on RFC-compliant email address validator by   New and noteworthy open source email implementations | On Message with Ben Gross http://blog.dominicsayers.com/2009/01/28/rfc-compliant-email-address-validator/#comment-20053   New and noteworthy open source email implementations | On Message with Ben Gross Fri, 19 Jun 2009 21:45:09 +0000 http://blog.dominicsayers.com/?p=361#comment-20053 [...] RFC-compliant email address validator: It is well known that many email address validation routines do not accept the full range of valid email addresses. This can be maddening for people with addresses that fall outside of this range. Dominic Sayers posted a PHP email address validator that is RFC-compliant. [...] [...] RFC-compliant email address validator: It is well known that many email address validation routines do not accept the full range of valid email addresses. This can be maddening for people with addresses that fall outside of this range. Dominic Sayers posted a PHP email address validator that is RFC-compliant. [...]

]]> Comment on confused@rfc5322.com by Dominic Sayers http://blog.dominicsayers.com/2009/02/23/confusedrfc2822com/#comment-20052 Dominic Sayers Mon, 15 Jun 2009 08:13:13 +0000 http://blog.dominicsayers.com/?p=402#comment-20052 Hi Stu, You can see the detailed results from the validation tests here: http://www.dominicsayers.com/isemail/results.php All the validators correctly allow the plus sign (the test case is user+mailbox@example.com) I agree that sending an email is a great way of testing if it's valid in the real world. I believe that checking its format is valuable too - no need to block the internets with test emails if the address is nonsense in the first place. Also some people might have need for an offline validator. Hi Stu,

You can see the detailed results from the validation tests here: http://www.dominicsayers.com/isemail/results.php

All the validators correctly allow the plus sign (the test case is user+mailbox@example.com)

I agree that sending an email is a great way of testing if it’s valid in the real world. I believe that checking its format is valuable too – no need to block the internets with test emails if the address is nonsense in the first place. Also some people might have need for an offline validator.

]]> Comment on RFC-compliant email address validator by Dominic Sayers http://blog.dominicsayers.com/2009/01/28/rfc-compliant-email-address-validator/#comment-20051 Dominic Sayers Mon, 15 Jun 2009 08:08:41 +0000 http://blog.dominicsayers.com/?p=361#comment-20051 Hi Christian and thanks for the feedback. I'll work on getting rid of those PHP notices for the next version. The addresses that Doug says are valid are not valid! He was citing addresses from the original version of RFC 3696. This RFC was later corrected by its author (see the errata here: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3696&eid=246) Unfortunately the RFC online system only shows you the original version not the corrected one. I'm sure this led Doug Lovell to make the mistakes he made in his article. Hi Christian and thanks for the feedback. I’ll work on getting rid of those PHP notices for the next version.

The addresses that Doug says are valid are not valid! He was citing addresses from the original version of RFC 3696. This RFC was later corrected by its author (see the errata here: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3696&eid=246)

Unfortunately the RFC online system only shows you the original version not the corrected one. I’m sure this led Doug Lovell to make the mistakes he made in his article.

]]>