D-Sub Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 oh I hear ya about taking issue with this particular person...ipod vs helmet, etc... other issues, too...whatabout someone without insurance who gets hurt. society foots the bill? although if insurance were more affordable...but then insurance would be more affordable if... speaking of seatbelts...back in high school a friend in his 68 Nova was racing another in a 66 camaro...drifted a big turn and lost it, went in a ditch and nailed a telephone pole hard enough to drive the steering column into the drivers seat... amazingly enough, he didnt have his seatbelt on, and was thrown from the car, avoiding certain death by impaling! life is odd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philw Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 I don't know. They got popular after some american chap rode into a tree, didn't they? If you're american and you tend to ride into trees then certainly wear a helmetr. Mostly where I ride banking your head on something other than the bottom of an avalanche isn't really a big risk. Although I suppose I may get run into by americans looking for trees to test their helmets on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Agreed! I remember as a kid never wearing a helmet on a bike as they did not exist (unless it was a motorcycle helmet in the Roger DeCoster/Bob Hurricaine Hannah era). I was riding down an alley in Seattle and I remember doing the superman between a cement wall and a camper. The next thing I remember is waking up with a scratch on my elbow. I dont know how long I was out and my bike was fine but it could have been ugly. Another time as a young adult on my mt bike I decided not to wear the old Bell V1Pro as it was just a little heavy. Later in the ride I almost had a frontal labotomy with an old growth Doug Fir at speed. Still not to be in the ways of common sense, I was on my road bike going down a steep Seattle hill when my friends pump pops off his frame and under my bike. It was slo-mo as the thing pops my rear tire. I put down the landing gear at 45 mph and have to decide what will kill me less-the head on into the car (bad) or the hop over the drainage ditch inth the Laurel hedge. I got stopped before either happened and have worn a helmet since. Now with all of the gasbagging above there is no accounting for every eventuality. When your number is up you punch out and go to whatever place you believe in. Hopefully with clean undies and a sh!t eating grin on your face. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willywhit Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Willy, First day riding with the Leedom, my 2nd day riding, I caught a heel and smacked the back of my head hard. Leedom inspcected and said I cracked the styro @ impact and the reprocussion cracked the front too. Rebuilt the lid for $30. Two years later the chin strap wore out? Sent it back and once again they found a crack in the liner. So now I am on the third liner. Lately I have been wearing a Giro 9 with the "TuneUps" - speakers in the ear flaps. The Giro is light and comfy. The guys at Boeri MPH Leedom are a great crew but I really want a helmet much beefier than the one I have.These 2 are a good example.When you ride at speeds that have potential for real impact, a helmet could save your life. I don't preach helmets but if you go fast, in any sport, wear a helmet. Props to Marc Hauser at Boeri for bringing helmets to the masses."Hey, it's YOUR head" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willywhit Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 My trusty brain bucket.It's really just for sticker display. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest claudio Posted February 3, 2006 Report Share Posted February 3, 2006 Helmets are the way to go. Like almost everyone, I didn't take it seriously until I knocked myself out by catching an edge heelside at high speed. After I woke up and dealt with my concussion for a couple of days, I saw the light.... Not worth the risk of not wearing one, IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest powderprincess Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 wear your damn helmet!!!!!!!!!I broke one tonight and it could have been my skull, I was going slow too, riding with a noob on a green trail head injuries can happen anywhere at any speed, be careful and wear protection hehe "wear protection" reminds me of something else right on! Sorry a noob killed your run, but good thing you had a helmet on! p.s. Brain bucket sales are key. No excuse not to have one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest powderprincess Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 Helmets are the way to go. Like almost everyone, I didn't take it seriously until I knocked myself out by catching an edge heelside at high speed. After I woke up and dealt with my concussion for a couple of days, I saw the light....Not worth the risk of not wearing one, IMHO. Same here. I didn't have one until I got taken out by a noob. I saw stars and thought, "so, that's what the cartoons are talking about. . .and that can't be good for my brain". I felt like a computer must feel when it reboots. In the east there is always ice to fall on, and in the west there are trees. And there are always people who don't know what they are doing, just waiting to crash into you, no matter where you are. helmets are good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 will a helmet really prevent a concussion? I thought it was more to prevent real head injuries and cracked skulls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baka Dasai Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 My wife pleaded with our yougest son to wear a helmet, even bought it for him. After telling us he was able to make up his own mind about it, he had it on two days later. The last he recalls about that day was stopping to watch the dudes jumping in the park. He woke up in the hospital hours later with a fractured radius, a sprained ankle and a BIG headache. The doc said he would likely have been dead or brain damaged if not for the helmet. There's an alternative conclusion - he may have avoided all injury if not for the helmet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted February 4, 2006 Report Share Posted February 4, 2006 oh baka now you've done it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derf Posted February 5, 2006 Report Share Posted February 5, 2006 It may make the difference between a concussion (shaken brain with no permanent damage) and a contusion (shaken brain with permanent damage). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thomas_m Posted February 5, 2006 Report Share Posted February 5, 2006 There's an alternative conclusion - he may have avoided all injury if not for the helmet. Didn't we already do this... Or maybe it's just Washington helmeted skiers and snowboarders that are immune to risk compemsation. Page 44: http://www.orthop.washington.edu/UserFiles/File/research/2004.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gleb Posted February 5, 2006 Report Share Posted February 5, 2006 i love my helmet. I have a leedom i bought for $40 on sale ($80 on ebay) at a TJ Max winter blowout sale they have in october. I got a nice $200 jacket for $130 as well and some ski pants. I cannot put myself to ride without it. As everyone said, its more comfortable and warmer than a hat, and it makes no sense not to wear one, at least to me. D-sub, ive heard the stories of people being saved by not wearing a seatbelt for some reason such as getting tossed out of the car. The odds of a seatbelt saving your life is much, much greater than it being the cause of your death. I would not be here if it wasn't for my seatbelt and I never ride without one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willywhit Posted February 5, 2006 Report Share Posted February 5, 2006 Have you ever met someone that has permanent brain damage from a snowboarding crash ? They still rip, act fairly normal despite seeming stoned all the time and maybe some slight issues with balance.It's scary.Kinda like the guy that ate WAY too much acid one night. Riding without my helmet is like riding with my pants around my ankles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ak_rider Posted February 5, 2006 Report Share Posted February 5, 2006 a helmet will not prevent consussions, it will help prevent crushing/cracking your skull. But like everything it's not fool proof. If you're doing mach 10 and crash the helmet will probably not help, but if you're cautious and ride within your abilities a helmet will greatly reduce the chance of a traumatic head injury(which does not include msot concussions). I work at a very popular FS resort, almost everyone associates breck with FS. I'll admist I'ma bit of a pipe jock, I love superpipe and the fact that the country's best is in my backyard makes it very easy to go and session it for a few hours. everytime i see a kid dropping in or hitting stuff in the freeway park-we have 60 ft jumps here-without a helmet, i try to find a point where i can talk to them. all i do is ask if they've ever met or seen a person who has suffered a traumatic brain injury, the answer is usally no, and i then ancourage them to look it up online,at the very least. i find that if they see other people who were like them and now are unable to dress themselves or use the bathroom alone it tends to have more of an impact. it can happen any time, any place. and while i totally take it fro granted, i would like to continue feeding and bathing myself, and being able to use the bathroom solo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jschal01 Posted February 5, 2006 Report Share Posted February 5, 2006 Risk compensation is real, and a particular problem for snowsports because not only do people tend to ride/ski more aggressively with helmets, they also overestimate the ability of the helmet to protect them. Snowsports helmets, with the exception of the Team Wendy Zorbium helmets, http://www.whelmets.com/, specifically are designed to protect against major impacts sustained at speeds less than 20 miles an hour that would otherwise results in severe concussions/possible skull fractures, etc. Say, hitting a lift tower after getting stuck on an edge. Or, obviously, glancing a lift tower at 40 mph after getting stuck on an edge, but this only helps in the aggregate if you don't ride more aggressively with the helmet. They impair hearing, and can make minor impacts worse. They do not protect against most concussions (thank the trial lawyers for this one, there are many substances that could help with both minor and major impacts, but except for Zorbium the liability has scared off virtually all innovation). They can make some brain and neck injuries worse due to adding to "whiplash." They can hurt proprioception, making slams worse than they need to be in this way. I actually think alpine riding is for many good riders a case where helmets may make sense, the above qualifiers notwithstanding, due to the ability to spectacularly catch an edge and the energies involved due to the gear. Same for riding a really icey pipe or going really big in the park or some rails. But, good alpine riders, or park riders doing rails that aren't ride-ons, are a very small % of the resort population. The best evidence imo could support the proposition that resorts as a whole would be safer if helmets were banned, equally with the view that helmets should be encouraged, due to the risk compensation issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thomas_m Posted February 5, 2006 Report Share Posted February 5, 2006 Risk compensation is real, and a particular problem for snowsports because not only do people tend to ride/ski more aggressively with helmets, they also overestimate the ability of the helmet to protect them. Can you cite snow sports specific, published, and unbiased research that supports the above claim? I'd be very interested in seeing it to understand both sides of the issue. Until then, I'll continue to be most influenced by the results of the study done by the Univ of Washington "Department of Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine 2004 Research Report" that I cited above (last para p44) as opposed to unsupported claims in an internet forum. T. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Houghton Posted February 5, 2006 Report Share Posted February 5, 2006 D-Sub, your story is a fabrication. There is no such thing as a 66 Camaro. They didn't start making them until 67. There's no excuse for not wearing a helmet. It has more to do with being taken out from behind than it does with your own "skill" level. Protection from inherent risk is a good thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jschal01 Posted February 6, 2006 Report Share Posted February 6, 2006 Can you cite snow sports specific, published, and unbiased research that supports the above claim? I'd be very interested in seeing it to understand both sides of the issue. Until then, I'll continue to be most influenced by the results of the study done by the Univ of Washington "Department of Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine 2004 Research Report" that I cited above (last para p44) as opposed to unsupported claims in an internet forum. T. With any effort this stuff is available to anyone these days...except that as to bias, my view is that the bias in these studies pro and con is unintentional and moral in nature, you will have to be the judge. 15 seconds of googling: http://www.lidsonkids.org/ski-or-snowboard-as-if-youre-not-wearing-one.asp. The guy writing there works with Carl Ettlinger of Vermont Ski Safety in Vermont, and has been chair of the ASTM snow skiing committee. So, not a kook, but you judge the bias. Since most people (not you, just most people reading this) will not take 15 seconds to research, here's a newspaper excerpt referring to the same: "Using speed guns at Sugarbush, the researchers found that people wearing helmets ski 3 mph faster than those without. And they found that skiers wearing helmets had worse concussions than those who didn't. Shealy will soon publish results from a study of head injuries sustained by people wearing helmets and those going without. He found that 65 percent of the helmeted skiers had injuries worse than a mild concussion, compared with only 23 percent of the unhelmeted. Shealy also looked at the 41 skiing-related deaths in the United States from last winter. Helmet information was available in about half the deaths; in those cases, 60 percent of the dead had been wearing a helmet. "As best we can tell, the fatally injured population uses helmets at about twice the rate of the general population," Shealy says." Excerpt is from www.projo.com. There are roughly 2 or 3 other snow-specific studies addressing risk compensation directly that you should be able to find if you're genuinely curious, perhaps 1 minute more of googling?, with similar results. Motorcycle and similar studies are far more comprehensive and thanks to the internet can also be easily looked up. Again, I am not anti-helmet, and as I said previously for alpine riders in particular they may be a good idea. They're just completely oversold to the public overall. On a personal note, I am a walking study in risk compensation. For park riding in particular I will occasionally wear not just helmet but mouthguard, kneepads and shinguards (even though the last two are cheating). So, I am biased myself by what I see from my own behavior. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wavechaser Posted February 6, 2006 Report Share Posted February 6, 2006 My trusty brain bucket.It's really just for sticker display. ...Dig the Avalanche and Kryptonics stickers man.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted February 6, 2006 Report Share Posted February 6, 2006 D-Sub, your story is a fabrication. There is no such thing as a 66 Camaro. They didn't start making them until 67. LOL ok...it was a 68 camaro and a 66 nova then? :) it really did happen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tex1230 Posted February 6, 2006 Report Share Posted February 6, 2006 willy - is that your entry into the evil sports sticker contest? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thomas_m Posted February 6, 2006 Report Share Posted February 6, 2006 With any effort this stuff is available to anyone these days...except that as to bias, my view is that the bias in these studies pro and con is unintentional and moral in nature, you will have to be the judge. 15 seconds of googling:http://www.lidsonkids.org/ski-or-snowboard-as-if-youre-not-wearing-one.asp. That's an interesting read and certainly something to think about but it's not a very rigorous piece of scientific research. Maybe they did perform the correct sampling to make the study statistically valid and just didn't have the copy space to cover the details. Even someone as uneducated on the subject as I can immediately think of a couple factors that would skew the results in that direction, like, are the helmeted skiers more likely to be racers? If so, then of course they are skiing faster. Around here 100% of racing kids wear helmets but the general population wearing helmets is much lower. Is the 3 day a year skier on rental gear going to be skiing as fast as the guy/girl/kid participating in organized events? Course not. Are they wearing helmets? Probably not. I'd guess they are also less likely to get concussions but I wouldn't make any bets on other injuries. Note, he stated the incidence of injuries was unchanged only the severity had increased which makes sense given the speed results. Conditions, riding environment & terrain are much different here in Washington than the east coast - more freeriding, less park and racing(I think). So, the study might not have a high confidence level at explaining what happens with the behaviour of my non-racing snowboarder kids riding heavy Washington pow & trees. The UW sports medicine study had the exact opposite findings, especially for snowboarders. So who to believe? Ultimately, it rests with us as individuals and parents. I don't ride any differently with a helmet than I did when I wasn't wearing one. My kids? Beats me, they've always worn (and will continue to wear) helmets so that's all they know. Thanks for the links and saving me 1 minute and 15 seconds of googling. T. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdea Posted February 6, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2006 Hey Phil:Just be careful of those crevasses. I will not only recommend helmets, I will recommend harnesses in case the you encounter gaps in the bottomless pow you ride. It is also possible that you encounter angry objects that form chutes, you just never know. Cheers Bola www.allboardssports.com I have met up with rocks in pow fields Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.