Fixed it for ya!
- 513 Posts. Joined 1/2009
- Location: Wisconsin
- Select All Posts By This User
Fixed it for ya!
Leave it to the Brits:
"Wearing A Helmet Puts Cyclists At Risk, Suggests Research"
ScienceDaily (Sep. 13, 2006) — Drivers pass closer when overtaking cyclists wearing helmets than when overtaking bare-headed cyclists, increasing the risk of a collision, the research has found.
One must consider whether the variances in the weight of human brains across the adult population are of primary concern. Even those brains on the low end of the weight scale are sufficiently heavy to result in forces far above their their structural limits at rather low speeds. Non of the data I have even seen has highlighted any correlation between TBI's (or neck injuries) and body weight.
The experiement is carried out daily by the world population. The acceleration limits of the brain are tested in every collision, fatal and non-fatal. The data is used by many industries to manage safety...amusement parks to the Indianapolis outer wall cushions. The fact is that the current crop of ski helmets are not designed to manage the cranial accelerations of moderate to high skiing speeds. In fact, speeds in the 40-50 kph range are more similar to the design input for motorcycle helmets. Also, due to the potential impact vectors, a full face helmet would be by far the most logical design. Consider all the debate regarding TBI's in football. Are football
helmets more similar to ski/bike helemts or motorcycle/auto helmets in terms of overall toughness?
The point of my prior post was in response to your premise that other athletic activities, specifically hockey and gymnastics, do not expose participants to the level of potential forces seen on the slopes; in fact they clearly do.
On my mountain, skiers or boarders who aren't wearing helmets are going the way of guys still wearing uni-suits or with runaway straps on their skis or having spring-loaded bindings...also nice to see that most boarders seem to have gotten the message and simply accept the helmet as part of the "look".
My son is a competitive snowboarder and not only does he wear a helmet, he also wear a reticulated back protector. He had a crash last year attempting some trick on a box, ended up in the hospital and fortunately, it was only a concussion. Could have been much worse had he not had the helmet and this is a kid who knows how to ride.
I also think its important to recognize that the sport has changed a great deal over just the last 4-5 years, with both skiers and boarders doing more in the area of rails, boxes, freestyle and other objects on the mountain that were simply non-existence just a few short years ago.
Also, if you're skiing trees and not wearing a helmet, you should have your head examined (no pun intended!). ANYONE can catch a root and bang into a tree and if there's nothing between your brain and the tree (meaning a helmet!), you will experience a little something that's referred to as head trauma....i.e., not fun!
I'm the type that's still blown away that in some states helmets for motorcylces are still not mandatory and the shocking statistics which indicate that for those states that enacted mandatory helmet laws, that fatalities decreased in those states by some 30% or more!!
Helmets are the principal countermeasure for reducing crash-related head injuries, which is the number one cause of fatalities on the slopes....crystal clear to me:
WEAR A FREAKIN HELMET!!
Lastly, roadracing, motorcross, and auto racing are far more strenous than skiing, at any comparable level, and are often done wearing 25 pounds of gear in high heat and high humidy. There is never any debate or complaint. Why? Because everyone recognizes the benefit over comfort.
I have friends who are ex-skiers. Surprisingly, we talk. Some of them are avid motorsports participants too. We can compare things at any level, but let's consider the upper end for example. Does Bode regularly see 5g's? Does he have to muscle around hundreds of pounds in addition to his body weight? Does he have to exert himself for an hour straight? ... I could go one, but my point was simply that the mentioned activities place far more stress on body temperature management than skiing.....re comfort. I am very curious why this surprises you?
This thread is still going, well here is some more thought. You slam into a immovable object at 40 MPH or KPH or even half that speed (I'm talking a direct impact resulting in a total instant stop). You will probably die many internal injury's irregardless of what protection you have on your head. Most skiing accidents are of a glancing hit and sliding nature (several ft or meters and not a instant stop). I believe all tests quoted in this thread are of a instant stop (from motion to none).
If you don't want to wear a helmet then don't, but from my past experience a helmet does offer some protection to your head/brain and only YOU know what YOUR head/brain is worth.