EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Do You Wear Body Armor or Recommend Wearing Body Armor?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Do You Wear Body Armor or Recommend Wearing Body Armor? - Page 2

post #31 of 56

I don't wear armour while skiing, but if a ski jacket/pants came along with some armour built in I might consider it.

post #32 of 56

i live on the mean streets of nantucket, I wear body armor with ceramic inserts and my ride is bullet proof. the random gunfire and IED.s make life a bitch-- be prepared and ski like hell

post #33 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTKook View Post

http://www.asteriskbrace.com/  ?


The site reminds me of the supplement advertising in health food stores. It is good for you but we can't tell you exactly why.

 

'Paralleling the form, fit, and function of the best orothopedic knee braces'. Prove it. Tell me how these will help me. 'Anti-rotation' and 'full coverage knee cup' are pretty vague 'features' yet about they are the only mentions of the type of protection being provided. No mention of hyper-extension, knee alignment. The most vaunted features are the materials (carbon fiber epoxy matrix) and colors.

 

They may be great but they aren't selling me anything but flash and tech.

post #34 of 56


That's the one.  The two guys I know swear by it.  One guy is older and has been injured in the past, the other guy is young and hardcore.  Both are experienced 100+ day a year skiers.  The younger guy also teles quite a bit at a very high level with this brace.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CTKook View Post

http://www.asteriskbrace.com/  ?

post #35 of 56

I stand by my previous statement: preventive bracing is a bad idea.  At best it doesn't do anything. At worst, it causes injuries to other parts of the body.

 

Elsbeth

post #36 of 56

You might be right.  I'm not advocating them or using them myself.  Just reporting.  BTW liked your website for the training programs.  Really addresses a need.  I hope your killing it.  I need to get signed up for this years ski fitness class.  Last year I trained with Crystal Wright.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by evaino View Post

I stand by my previous statement: preventive bracing is a bad idea.  At best it doesn't do anything. At worst, it causes injuries to other parts of the body.

 

Elsbeth

post #37 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by evaino View Post

I think body armour is a really bad idea. Or at least any body armour that has a hard plate along the back and chest. This can prevent proper movement in your core and thoracic spine, which can lead to increased low back problems.  

 

I also don't think for skiers, back and chest is a major collision site. Maybe if you're skiing a lot of trees, but even then I don't think it's a high risk issue. And so for me, the potential harm is greater than the benefit.

 

For snowboarders it's a bit different - when they catch their back edge, or if they misjudge a jump, they are landing on their back. 

 

Elsbeth


I'm going to have to call you on this.

 

First, the spine protectors protect against collision. They are not "bracing", and don't really restrict movement.

 

Secondly, you seem to think that skiers either don't jump, or don't land on their backs, but that snowboarders do. I'm not sure where you get that idea. I see as many skiers as snowboarders in the park; likewise skiing around and off cliffs.

 

There are times when a back protector is a really good idea. If you're training DH at 90mph, or if you're throwing inverts off really big kickers, or if you are hucking off cliffs.

 

If on the other hand, you mostly ski groomers, one would probably be overkill.

 

On the other hand, I've never had low back issues. I keep my core strong. And I have a hard time seeing how use a hard protector for a few hours at a time on occasion is likely to increase my risk of developing low back problems. Compared to the risk of breaking my back landing on a rock from 40 feet, I'll accept the risk of low back problems, and continue to keep my core strong enough to hopefully prevent them from ever occurring.

 

post #38 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by volantaddict View Post

I do not wear body armor; I do not recommend body armor.

 



my favorite answer.

post #39 of 56

Only when jousting. 

post #40 of 56


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by iWill View Post




I'm going to have to call you on this.

 

First, the spine protectors protect against collision. They are not "bracing", and don't really restrict movement.

 

Secondly, you seem to think that skiers either don't jump, or don't land on their backs, but that snowboarders do. I'm not sure where you get that idea. I see as many skiers as snowboarders in the park; likewise skiing around and off cliffs.

 

There are times when a back protector is a really good idea. If you're training DH at 90mph, or if you're throwing inverts off really big kickers, or if you are hucking off cliffs.

 

If on the other hand, you mostly ski groomers, one would probably be overkill.

 

On the other hand, I've never had low back issues. I keep my core strong. And I have a hard time seeing how use a hard protector for a few hours at a time on occasion is likely to increase my risk of developing low back problems. Compared to the risk of breaking my back landing on a rock from 40 feet, I'll accept the risk of low back problems, and continue to keep my core strong enough to hopefully prevent them from ever occurring.

 


Fair point on the leaps off cliffs and big kickers. In that case, I might agree.  But in those situations, do you not find that you tend to fall to the side? I take air, but don't go big like that so I'm not sure how landing one badly feels. But just the geometry of how you're set up in skis would make it hard to have a direct landing on your back. Where are your skis if you're landing on your back?  When a snowboarder lands, because of where they are positioned on their board, they're pretty much landing on their back or their arms/chest. Skiers are more likely to land (initially at least) on their side. I would venture to guess that back injuries among skiers are from compression from landing a huge drop on skis vs direct impact to the spine. 

 

So the brace doesn't restrict your ability to rotate your upper (thoracic) spine region?  I'm going to call you on that. It certainly looks like it does. Or at least the hard shell ones sure do. 

 

Is it a problem to wear one for a few hours here and there? Probably not. But I would suggest that it definitely could be a problem when worn every time you ski. 

 

Elsbeth

post #41 of 56


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tetonpwdrjunkie View Post

You might be right.  I'm not advocating them or using them myself.  Just reporting.  BTW liked your website for the training programs.  Really addresses a need.  I hope your killing it.  I need to get signed up for this years ski fitness class.  Last year I trained with Crystal Wright.
 


 


Thanks!  It's definitely coming along!  Also getting excited as I've got an article coming out in the upcoming CSIA magazine (skiers edge I think?) and I'll be giving a presentation at the Ottawa Ski Show next month. I'm happy to spread the word that when we think about tuning our ski equipment, the most important equipment we have is our body, so best to do a little work on it.

 

Elsbeth

 

PS - How did you like training with Crystal Wright? I just checked out her bio and she's certified through NASM, which is a good sign that she probably a good trainer.

post #42 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by evaino View Post
So the brace doesn't restrict your ability to rotate your upper (thoracic) spine region?  I'm going to call you on that. It certainly looks like it does. Or at least the hard shell ones sure do. 

 


Again, I wear a spine protector, not a "brace". It has 2 straps over the shoulders and a single abdominal strap. I have not found it to restrict rotation at all.

post #43 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by evaino View Post

Fair point on the leaps off cliffs and big kickers. In that case, I might agree.  But in those situations, do you not find that you tend to fall to the side? I take air, but don't go big like that so I'm not sure how landing one badly feels. But just the geometry of how you're set up in skis would make it hard to have a direct landing on your back. Where are your skis if you're landing on your back?  When a snowboarder lands, because of where they are positioned on their board, they're pretty much landing on their back or their arms/chest. Skiers are more likely to land (initially at least) on their side. I would venture to guess that back injuries among skiers are from compression from landing a huge drop on skis vs direct impact to the spine. 

 

So the brace doesn't restrict your ability to rotate your upper (thoracic) spine region?  I'm going to call you on that. It certainly looks like it does. Or at least the hard shell ones sure do. 

 

Is it a problem to wear one for a few hours here and there? Probably not. But I would suggest that it definitely could be a problem when worn every time you ski. 

 

Elsbeth


Also; in the park or doing backcountry tricks involving rotation, you could obviously have any kind of side impact, or head, or feet or whatever. In a straight air, the only reason you would normally fall tot he side would be in a hip-check, otherwise your body should be travelling laterally down the hill. A significant drop will end in a back slap as often as a hip check.

 

But that is really moot; even in situations where I am not intentionally dropping, the possibility of rag dolling down a face, or off a cliff certainly exists. The question of where my skis might be in those falls is not much of an issue.

 

This is what I fear:

 

"Marc-Andre Belliveau suffered a tragic accident on Monday, April 3, while skiing in the British Columbia interior, leaving him paralyzed from the waist down...

 

Visibility was poor on the day of the accident, and Marc lost his line in a technical area. He attempted to find his route down, but instead hit rocks that sent him tumbling into bigger, jagged rocks. Marc lost feeling in his legs immediately. After he was flown to the hospital, doctors discovered that he fractured his spine and permanently damaged his spinal cord."

 

I don't know whether he landed directly on his back or not, whether he was wearing a spine protector or not, or whether it would have helped.But, I ski in conditions that could lead to the same outcome, and so for those situations, I choose a spine protector.

 

post #44 of 56


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by evaino View Post


 

So the brace doesn't restrict your ability to rotate your upper (thoracic) spine region?  I'm going to call you on that. It certainly looks like it does. Or at least the hard shell ones sure do...


Spine protectors do restrict movement.  How much depends on how much a given model covers and as you note what they're made of.   I think it's less of an issue for good skiers and riders, who generally won't use them unless they're warranted and generally are in at least decent shape.  For your average skier or rider, they do present some of the same conceptual issues as weightlifting belts and other types of back supports...maybe still not a big deal, because most people wouldn't use them that often, though? 

post #45 of 56

I'm definitely of the opinion that the cost of the ski fitness class I take in the fall is the best money I can spend on my skiing for the year.  It makes a huge difference in my skiing to be able to be mostly strong at Thanksgiving on the WROD.  By the time I'm working 19-21 days in a row at Christmas I feel like a rock.  Without the fitness class I would still be sucking wind skiing off piste from bell to bell.  I liked Crystals class a lot, but my wife and I liked the class we took the year before a bit more.  It was 90 minutes instead of 60 minutes, the class size was smaller, it was a bit harder and I felt stronger at the end, and we could walk there from my house instead of driving across town.  Crystals class was a bunch less expensive and very good so I haven't decided which to do this year.  I really like walking instead of driving.  There's at least 6 options in this town for group classes and who knows how many private trainers.  Good luck with your business.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by evaino View Post


 


Thanks!  It's definitely coming along!  Also getting excited as I've got an article coming out in the upcoming CSIA magazine (skiers edge I think?) and I'll be giving a presentation at the Ottawa Ski Show next month. I'm happy to spread the word that when we think about tuning our ski equipment, the most important equipment we have is our body, so best to do a little work on it.

 

Elsbeth

 

PS - How did you like training with Crystal Wright? I just checked out her bio and she's certified through NASM, which is a good sign that she probably a good trainer.

post #46 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by iWill View Post




Also; in the park or doing backcountry tricks involving rotation, you could obviously have any kind of side impact, or head, or feet or whatever. In a straight air, the only reason you would normally fall tot he side would be in a hip-check, otherwise your body should be travelling laterally down the hill. A significant drop will end in a back slap as often as a hip check.

 

But that is really moot; even in situations where I am not intentionally dropping, the possibility of rag dolling down a face, or off a cliff certainly exists. The question of where my skis might be in those falls is not much of an issue.

 

This is what I fear:

 

"Marc-Andre Belliveau suffered a tragic accident on Monday, April 3, while skiing in the British Columbia interior, leaving him paralyzed from the waist down...

 

Visibility was poor on the day of the accident, and Marc lost his line in a technical area. He attempted to find his route down, but instead hit rocks that sent him tumbling into bigger, jagged rocks. Marc lost feeling in his legs immediately. After he was flown to the hospital, doctors discovered that he fractured his spine and permanently damaged his spinal cord."

 

I don't know whether he landed directly on his back or not, whether he was wearing a spine protector or not, or whether it would have helped.But, I ski in conditions that could lead to the same outcome, and so for those situations, I choose a spine protector.

 

 

I'll buy that - what you've described above is a situation where body armour would be a good idea.  In fact I'd want a michelin man suit. :)  

 

But for the skiing that most of us do, no way.

 

Elsbeth

post #47 of 56



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post

I don't wear armour while skiing, but if a ski jacket/pants came along with some armour built in I might consider it.

 

There used to be (see my post here from 2007:http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/60924/new-aegix-armored-jacket-the-hux)....but only after about 2 or 3 years in existence, they folded which was kind of a bummer....
 

post #48 of 56
Thread Starter 

Why don't you feel chest protection is every bit as important if not more than spine protection?

 

A number of you here have talked about using spine protection without mentioning chest protection. 

 

I am teaching ski patrol OEC refresher class on chest injuries this Sunday.   A direct impact on a few ribs in the the front of your body (anterior) can generate an incredible amount of force transferred to the spine by those one or two ribs.  Blunt force anterior trauma to the chest can result in injury to the spine.   Having a chest protector could distribute frontal impact forces across a larger number of ribs and reduce the chances of spinal injury as well.  Like a helmet, a chest protector could also save your life.  Blunt force trauma to the chest can result in injury to the lungs and/or heart.  A small bleed to the heart can fill up the sac around the heart with blood, which after a few hours this results in ineffective pumping of blood, shock, and often death.  This is called cardiac tamponade, which can go unnoticed until its too late.  Injury to the lungs called pneumothorax  can also lead to death.  Everyone knows  you have major blood vessils in your chest. Blunt force trauma to the chest can easily fracture a rib which can then penetrate one of those major blood vessils and immediate death. 

 

Both head and chest injuries are the primary reasons for death on the slopes.  Here in these forums there is discussion about the use of helmets and back protection.  Its interesting to me that there is almost no discussion about chest protection.  


Edited by catskills - 9/23/10 at 12:16am
post #49 of 56


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by catskills View Post

Why don't you feel chest protection is every bit as important if not more than spine protection?...

Both head and chest injuries are the primary reasons for death on the slopes.  Here in these forums there is discussion about the use of helmets and back protection.  Its interesting to me that there is almost no discussion about chest protection.  


Excellent point.  Chest protection is also effective in protecting against what it's designed to, which makes it an even better question. 

 

My personal answer is that the type of major blunt force trauma that you describe is so rare in regular skiing and riding that the negatives of a chest protector that really protects the sternum area, for regular skiing and riding, would far outweigh the positives. 

 

Though if you're a young male who likes to ski fast on groomed runs with trees at the edge and/or who likes to cut close to lift towers, etc. obviously your chance for blunt force trauma goes up.

 

The Aegix product was interesting in that it was focused on what you'd call maybe recreational padding  -- keeping people comfortable and helping with minor bumps.  I can't recall if they later rolled out a more impact-focused product or not.  Edit: I went back and read Tyrone's post, I see they did roll out the "Hux" line later on. 


Edited by CTKook - 9/23/10 at 4:32am
post #50 of 56

I have thought about going with something like this over the basic turtle shell I've got now. At least for those higher consequence choices.

 

6432-00.jpg

 

 

It may be a consequence of the terrain, or of the skier population, but significant trauma leading to incapacity or death is decidedly common here, even inbounds. We average about 2 fatalities a year, and nearly half of those are inbounds. Looking at the past few years, that has included 2 cliff falls that lead to death from thoracic injuries and 1 from head trauma. There have been other, debilitating spinal and thoracic injuries as well.

 

It seems like the mortality runs neck and neck between avalanche deaths, NARSIDs and blunt trauma. Evaluating the avalanche deaths, blunt trauma is a significant factor in mortality. It would seem that the level of awareness, and protection for trauma should be brought up to where our expectations for avalanche protection are.

 

 

post #51 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by iWill View Post

I have thought about going with something like this over the basic turtle shell I've got now. At least for those higher consequence choices.

 

6432-00.jpg

 

 

It may be a consequence of the terrain, or of the skier population, but significant trauma leading to incapacity or death is decidedly common here, even inbounds. We average about 2 fatalities a year, and nearly half of those are inbounds. Looking at the past few years, that has included 2 cliff falls that lead to death from thoracic injuries and 1 from head trauma. There have been other, debilitating spinal and thoracic injuries as well.

 

It seems like the mortality runs neck and neck between avalanche deaths, NARSIDs and blunt trauma. Evaluating the avalanche deaths, blunt trauma is a significant factor in mortality. It would seem that the level of awareness, and protection for trauma should be brought up to where our expectations for avalanche protection are.

 

 

 


Just to chime in here. I have one of those that I bought for riding. I wore it a few times skiing and found it uncomfortable. The fit was 'meh.....  The spine protection is there but it is pretty unimpressive. Would obviously deflect a hit but it isn't as strong or protective as you would think. The chest protection is pretty stout. The rest of the padding on the thing (shoulders) is just eye candy IMHO. I guess I would consider it a "would not buy again, would not recommend" type product. They're also pretty hot.

post #52 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by iWill View Post

I have thought about going with something like this over the basic turtle shell I've got now. At least for those higher consequence choices.

 

6432-00.jpg

 

 

It may be a consequence of the terrain, or of the skier population, but significant trauma leading to incapacity or death is decidedly common here, even inbounds. We average about 2 fatalities a year, and nearly half of those are inbounds. Looking at the past few years, that has included 2 cliff falls that lead to death from thoracic injuries and 1 from head trauma. There have been other, debilitating spinal and thoracic injuries as well.

 

It seems like the mortality runs neck and neck between avalanche deaths, NARSIDs and blunt trauma. Evaluating the avalanche deaths, blunt trauma is a significant factor in mortality. It would seem that the level of awareness, and protection for trauma should be brought up to where our expectations for avalanche protection are.

 

 

 


Keep in mind that IF this does actually take the impact for you, there's a good chance that it will just transfer it up to the neck. I can see this for chest protection, but I just don't see it for the spine. If anything, I could see this turning a papaplegic-causing injury into a quadriplegic-causing injury.  That is just my opinion of course - based on an understanding of anatomy but definitely not based on research or even personal experience.  

 

Elsbeth

post #53 of 56

It would be worth looking at accident statistics from MTB where use of body armor is more prevalent to see what kind of experience has been recorded.

post #54 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by iWill View Post

It would be worth looking at accident statistics from MTB where use of body armor is more prevalent to see what kind of experience has been recorded.


That would definitely be interesting.  

post #55 of 56

Should everyone be required to wear body armor under the age of 18? Definatly a no. Helmets? No.

 

The way I look at it. Its your body and your choice. Just like my seat belt argument. If you want to fly through the windshield.........go ahead and be my guest.  Body armor is bulky and uncomfortable. I wear a helmet on the rare occasion. Its not a matter of if I fall but a matter of when. I typically rag doll it at least once a year.

post #56 of 56

I like steep trees. I wear a goofy-looking Aegix Hux jacket (thanks to a hot-deal tip from Spindrift). It's way more comfy than body suits like the 661 pictured in post above. They seem to made exclusively for skinny teenagers. The pads are warm, so less/thinner layers a called for.

 

The back protector saved my bacon once. Hooked a bush on a steep, slid into tree. Checker pattern bruises from inside of protector (thru fleece and long johns). Made me a believer. See post: http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/81544/do-you-ski-with-armor

 

Regarding chest protectors...they're just too bulky and uncomfortable for me. I'm already a beefy guy. I don't know what the injury stats are, but it seems to me that I'm more likely to take an uncontrolled slide whack on my back than my chest. I'm not going to ski into a tree: I'm going to hit a tree if I've gone down into an uncontrolled slide. If your chest is facing my direction of travel during a slide, you should be able to get your feet in front of you without too much effort. The scary slide is back first, since you have to spin around before you can get your feet in front.

 

Funny thing is, I really like the waist belt on the back protector. Holds my gut up. Even if not interested in armor, other gut-laden guys might try a minimal gut belt just for support...you might like it too.

 

Does wearing armor cause me to take bigger risks? Maybe. If so, it might cancel the safety factor but it amplifies the FUN factor.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Do You Wear Body Armor or Recommend Wearing Body Armor?