Few Helmets in Ski Magazine Photos and Vail Videos

I read the article Hardheaded? in November 2009 SKI on page 35.  The article mentioned Natasha Richardson accident, half of all skiers and riders in the US now wear helmets, Vail Resorts now requires employees to wear helmets and many ski schools require children to wear helmets. 

I asked myself has the media and resort videos caught up with the reality of wearing a helmet.  

I glanced through the photos in November 2009 SKI.  Nowhere near 50% of skiers and riders were wearing helmets in the photos.  The two articles on improving your skiing ability had no helmets. One of these articles by Michael Rogan with PSIA logo on jacket and no helmet. The pretty faces article not one helmet.  They also had a few full page knit hat advertisements.

Then I went to www.vail.com.  I found lots of photos and instructional videos with vail employees sliding down the hill with, you guessed it,  no helmet.  Click on the ski tips tab on this Vail link.  Vail marketing better get busy to upgrade all their videos and photos.  If its a Vail employee he/she better be wearing a helmet.

Obviously the ski media marketeers never got the memo that  helmets are in and knit hats are out. 

Personally I am Pro Choice (less government  intervention)  when it comes to helmets.  I just think its amusing that the reality of the sport is very different from what they show in the media and advertisements.  

Mods please move this thread to the Helmet Thread Forum

Ahhhh, It's almost November. November means a new Warren Miller flick and the annual helmet thread. I was getting a bit worried that it would get passed up this year. 

No hitting below the belt, no kidney punches, and no head butts(unless you're wearing a helmet). If the referee gives the signal, go to your corner while the count is called.

I noticed the same thing, I was actually surprised that more mountains haven't followed Vail because it would reduce the chance of an employee missing work because of an injury. I realize that could be taken to an extreme with body armor and such, but a helmet sounds like an easy way to reduce ski related injury much like has been done with seat belts in cars. I however am pro-choice that if you want to wear a helmet it is you're own choice. I do because its saved me from more than a few concussions and a close encounter with a tree a few years ago convinced me its not worth not wearing one.

Here is the cover of the magazine. Fairly typical on most media shots where knit hats are preferred over helmets. 

http://www.skinet.com/ski/files/_pcd/SKI_November_09_cover.lowres_0.jpg

I typically prefer wearing the knit hat to a helmet.

One problem with a resort requiring employees to wear helmets is the resort would have to provide the helmets for every employee.  This could put serious financial strain on smaller resorts.

If the people in the photos were not generally skiing with a helmet, then why should they make them wear one in a photo just for the pictures?  The photos were not showing half of the skiers in the US.   They were showing these skiers, and maybe these skiers were accurately portrayed.

It should be the job of the media to report the reality as it is.

Some people of course would rather use the media to report what isn't, in order to make it so.


Edited by Ghost - 10/31/09 at 9:21am

Ghost, I think you and I are in agreement.   We may be looking at the same thing and counting it different.  I think we agree in principle.

I also would like the media to portray the sport of skiing the way it is and not some fantasy world.

Which is going to cost them more buying helmets for x ammount of employees or paying for one employee who gets injured because they're not wearing a helmet?

The data does not support the idea that helmets are this instant magic thing that prevents injury. When you really look at the numbers helmets do not change the outcome of injuries much. The media has taken skiing and helmets and skewed the numbers to make for good news.

Requiring and providing helmets open resorts up to so much more. They have to maintain the helmets, and log it. The resorts providing helmets also replace and replenish there helmets every few years. If you deviate from any of your procedures you are instantly liable for any problems. Then you also have to police the helmet use. There is also the issue of employees that use snowmobiles, do you make them carry two helmets, one for skiing and one approved for motor vehicle use? Just requiring helmets opens up so many more headaches for a resort and management for something that is not proven to be this end all solution.

At what speed does a skier need to be traveling for having a helmet on or not having a helmet on to not significantly change the out come?

12-14mph I do not know about you but I do not spend much time below that speed.

Answer:
0 mph.  Slipping and falling from a standstill and hitting the back of your head on the ice can kill you.

That data has been twisted just like you said the data is twisted by the media. For example, you may still get a concussion with a helmet on, but the severity of the concussion will be reduced. It is simple physics, the longer it takes for you're head to go from a given speed to zero, the less of a force its going to endure which is what the helmet will do. So while it may not prevent the actual injury, it does lessen the severity of injuries.

That is an example of when wearing a helmet makes a difference. I am talking about the helmet not having much effect on the outcome.


Your sample is also something people bring up. But the actual numbers for type of injuries does not support helmets making a huge impact on injury prevention. yes, they can make a difference but is there a history of injuries that would have changed if people had helmets on, not really.

I think the real question is; why are you reading SKI magazine?

Quote: Damn good question.  I stopped my surbscription to Kinsgston Freeman Daily Newspaper and this SKI magazine was in my mailbox for free. 

The cost of helmets to an employer would be a certainty, while a helmet-preventable injury to an employee isn't a certainty...or even likely.  

According to OSHA any safety equipment required by an employer for a job has to be provided by the employer. This is federal law. When something falls under the category of safety that is when OSHA gets involved and changes everything.

Just like the real world.......

Forget Helmet vs. Knit..... C'mon, Polartec much more comfortable than a knit hat.


But this is an interesting observation regarding the advertising. LOL I agree it should be the choice of the employer if they require an employee to wear a helmet, but they should cover the cost. I am sure Smith/Giro/Boeri would jump at the chance to be the "Official Helmet of Vail Resorts" and offer a "special" price on ANY of their models for Vail employees, even free. But as a "consumer" who is buying a ticket it should be their choice.

Side question... How does a required helmet compare to having a required beacon to ski Slushmans at Bridger? 

 The real question is whether you can use rotation when putting on a helmet or a knit hat - or can the employer require tipping?  

Helmet rotation means it's too big.

I wish they could.

It's a marketing thing!!...most ski magazines leave the helmet off for marketing reasons (otherwise all skiers would basically look the same).

On my mountain, most folks wear helmets and I think that's a good thing...would you have your child go out for the day without a helmet?? And for all those who can conjure up arguments to say that there is no empirical evidence to say that helmets do not save lives, I say BS!! Same to be said for those that are pro-choice on helmets....I'm of the belief that they should be mandatory on all mountains just like helmets on motorcycles (at least most states) or seatbelts.

I'm still shocked when I see someone on the mountain without a helmet...get a clue, save a life (could be your own!)

1/2 true, dust masks, ropes and expensive rigging gear maybe but not all. Explain steel toe boots, chain saw bibs & required long pant, those are items YOU must provide to work in that particular industry. 

Well, of course.   Duh.

It's media.    We all know that the guy wearing the helmet and the armour is going to get creamed.  

Exhaustive treatment of the principle here:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ArmorIsUseless

I mean, come on, when's the last time someone wearing a Stormtrooper helmet survived to the end of the movie/book/photo shoot?

I am all for choice for adults but kids should wear helmets!   If your old enough to pay for your own health care you should have a choice.  By the way, as you can tell, we wear helmets, but it's our choice and the preferred head gear in Big Sky, MT...

I was thinking something similar when I read you're comment. Many people say well its their choice to make for their kids, but the fact is a lot of parents ore morons who are incapable of making good decisions for their children. At first I was pro-choice universally but now I'm starting to lean towards requiring it for children.

Yet another in a series of "I know what's good for you" preaching rants.... 

I've got no problem if you do or don't wear a helmet on the slopes or motorcycle. It's your choice.
Give me mine as well.