No eyewash

FaxModem1 · Post by **FaxModem1** » 2002-12-10 04:58pm

If you look at the TNG episode where they are all devolving, when Worf sprays Beverly, she doesn't go to the eyewash or is taken to the eyewash by anyone, why isn't there one in sickbay?

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2002-12-10 05:20pm

FaxModem1 wrote:If you look at the TNG episode where they are all devolving, when Worf sprays Beverly, she doesn't go to the eyewash or is taken to the eyewash by anyone, why isn't there one in sickbay?

Its because they have no sense of any safety procedures. They don't have them in the science labs either. Another example of something that belongs in sickbay but don't have cause it doesn't look "cool."

FaxModem1 · Post by **FaxModem1** » 2002-12-10 06:24pm

But, surely the writers would have enough sense to put an eyewash in a science lab, wouldn't they?

Or am I still too innocent in the ways of trek?

Post by **Kuja** » 2002-12-10 06:44pm

FaxModem1 wrote:But, surely the writers would have enough sense to put an eyewash in a science lab, wouldn't they?

I think I'll let this one slip by.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2002-12-10 06:50pm

FaxModem1 wrote:But, surely the writers would have enough sense to put an eyewash in a science lab, wouldn't they?

Or am I still too innocent in the ways of trek?

Too innocent. The writers at Trek seem determined to murder and piss on the grave of any sensible and sane safety precaution.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-12-10 07:06pm

FaxModem1 wrote:But, surely the writers would have enough sense to put an eyewash in a science lab, wouldn't they?

Or am I still too innocent in the ways of trek?

I would have thought so, too, but it isn't there. Maybe they just decided that their transporters can do it for them.

VF5SS · Post by **VF5SS** » 2002-12-10 07:10pm

Master of Ossus wrote: Maybe they just decided that their transporters can do it for them.

Heh. I can just see them doing that on Voyager. They used the transporter for everything in that friggen show. They should've just started beaming their meals in their stomachs

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-12-10 07:14pm

VF5SS wrote:
Master of Ossus wrote: Maybe they just decided that their transporters can do it for them.
Heh. I can just see them doing that on Voyager. They used the transporter for everything in that friggen show. They should've just started beaming their meals in their stomachs

No, I'm serious. In one episode, Crusher talks about how the transporter is designed to beam contaminants from the air away from them, so they don't need masks even when they're working with contagious people. Of course, the transporter only works with that if it already knows what to look for, but they STILL don't wear masks (or, in this case, goggles) even when working with unknown microbes.

VF5SS · Post by **VF5SS** » 2002-12-10 07:21pm

That's just... I cannot even describe the stupidity... I guess special effects cost less than a quick trip to a costume shop. What's next? Transporter child care? Hey, keep the kid in a pattern buffer until the parent gets off from work.

Jason von Evil · Post by **Jason von Evil** » 2002-12-10 07:22pm

Worf in that episode reminded me of the Xenomorph from the Alien movies.

MirrorUniverseSpy1 · Post by **MirrorUniverseSpy1** » 2002-12-10 07:30pm

I agree that an eye wash station probably was not "cool" enough
to be included.

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2002-12-10 09:58pm

VF5SS wrote:Transporter child care? Hey, keep the kid in a pattern buffer until the parent gets off from work.

That doesn't sound like a bad idea (says the person with no children).

VF5SS · Post by **VF5SS** » 2002-12-10 10:30pm

Ted C wrote:That doesn't sound like a bad idea (says the person with no children).

Heh, I'm sure that some Trekkie would love the idea. I'm opposed to child genocide though.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2002-12-10 11:45pm

Hmm...I don't think it's so much technobabble as the writers probably have never had real jobs or taken more than one or two science classes with labs, so it wouldn't even occur to them to have an eyewash station. Same goes for the set designers: they were art majors; what in the world would they know about lab safety?

Zaku-chan · Post by **Zaku-chan** » 2002-12-11 12:45am

RedImperator wrote:Hmm...I don't think it's so much technobabble as the writers probably have never had real jobs or taken more than one or two science classes with labs, so it wouldn't even occur to them to have an eyewash station. Same goes for the set designers: they were art majors; what in the world would they know about lab safety?

And you end up with a sickbay that seems to have been designed by a Microsoft technician.

data_link · Post by **data_link** » 2002-12-11 12:52am

Zaku-chan wrote:
RedImperator wrote:Hmm...I don't think it's so much technobabble as the writers probably have never had real jobs or taken more than one or two science classes with labs, so it wouldn't even occur to them to have an eyewash station. Same goes for the set designers: they were art majors; what in the world would they know about lab safety?
And you end up with a sickbay that seems to have been designed by a Microsoft technician.

Zaku-chan · Post by **Zaku-chan** » 2002-12-11 12:55am

data_link wrote:And you end up with a sickbay that seems to have been designed by a Microsoft technician.

[/quote]

Seriously!

All style and flashiness, and no substance and efficiency.

data_link · Post by **data_link** » 2002-12-11 01:11am

Zaku-chan wrote:All style and flashiness, and no substance and efficiency.

You must be joking. There has never been any style in Star Trek.

Zaku-chan · Post by **Zaku-chan** » 2002-12-11 01:17am

data_link wrote:
Zaku-chan wrote:All style and flashiness, and no substance and efficiency.
You must be joking. There has never been any style in Star Trek.

Dammit, there's no "laughing so hard he's crying" smiley.

data_link · Post by **data_link** » 2002-12-11 01:25am

This do it for you?

Moonshadow · Post by **Moonshadow** » 2002-12-11 02:10am

Fresh from the Microsoft Shipyard the New Galaxy Class Starship. Its warp drive is designed by a descendent of the Lead programmer behind Windows ME, Leah Brahms! The sickbay was designed by Dr. Bill Gates the X!

Kamakazie Sith · Post by **Kamakazie Sith** » 2002-12-11 05:39am

FaxModem1 wrote:If you look at the TNG episode where they are all devolving, when Worf sprays Beverly, she doesn't go to the eyewash or is taken to the eyewash by anyone, why isn't there one in sickbay?

Did that scene even last long enough to show her being taken to treatment?

Post by **Vympel** » 2002-12-11 06:23am

This is not just Crusher- even Pulaski, who knows how to make a splint, goes out onto a shuttle to test the health of a kid with a super immune system etc etc- without ANY PROTECTIVE GEAR WHATSOEVER. She gets attacked by the super immune system and commences aging rapidly.

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2002-12-11 10:16am

Vympel wrote:This is not just Crusher- even Pulaski, who knows how to make a splint, goes out onto a shuttle to test the health of a kid with a super immune system etc etc- without ANY PROTECTIVE GEAR WHATSOEVER. She gets attacked by the super immune system and commences aging rapidly.

They probably figured transporters could take care of this. If this is the future, I'm glad I'm going to die in the 21st century.

Zoink · Post by **Zoink** » 2002-12-11 10:38am

Looks like I'll have to save B&B yet again...

[bullcrap]
In typical Trek fasion, the science lab is equipped with an advanced scanner/transporter system that beams away harmfull material automatically without the need for eyewash/emergency showers. Exausting research has shown that this system has rendered eye wash obsolete: anything that could possibly defeat the scanner/transporter system would not be effected by eye wash anyway... except for a power failure which can never happen because the warp engine engineers said so.
[/bullcrap]

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

No eyewash

No eyewash

Re: No eyewash

Re: No eyewash