Fascinating helmet study

[cantunamunch]

Thread tangent: looking for studies/proof that specific types of helmets (MIPS maybe?) are best at preventing concussions. Got a kid's brain, most important to protect, I need to worry about. And my own.

Va Tech's studies are by far the most authoritative on this issue. Everything else is marketing driven. Be aware that all technology-specific studies will be based on simulated testing and computer modeling. Proof doesn't exist and alleged proof is a marketing ploy.

Also be aware that other elements of helmet design, e.g. vent placement and spar design, can negate MIPS functionality,

 

[RobSN]

I am unconvinced that wearing a helmet makes it statistically more likely that one would take risks that one wouldn't otherwise. There'll always be one or two, but generally? Many/most? new skiers (and snowboarders) nowadays wear helmets. Many of them are young men. Based on my experience, young men frequently take risks. Since most new skiers wear helmets, does that mean that it is helmet use that leads young men to take risks? No, it's a logical fallacy. On the other hand, for those who are <ahem> a little more mature <cough> and think of helmets as a risk mitigation device, does that mindset lead to increased risk taking? Well, from a statistically invalid sample of one (moi), I'd say no. I've always liked skiing fast and in control, and the helmet hasn't resulted in faster and less control, merely a hope that when I do wipe out - which at my age I try my very best to avoid anyway - my recovery time might be less. My 2c.

 

[crgildart]

I'd argue that wearing the helmet might have an initial impact on the psyche of the user (no pun intended). i.e. I'm going to try some super sick trick so I put on a helmet and body armor to go after that. However, when wearing a helmet is so routine and 2nd nature that the rider isn't even conscious of wearing it during most parts of the day I'd argue it has no bearing on the level of risks taken.

 

[sparty]

Thread tangent: looking for studies/proof that specific types of helmets (MIPS maybe?) are best at preventing concussions. Got a kid's brain, most important to protect, I need to worry about. And my own.

We absolutely believe in helmets in our fam, no question.

Relatedly, anyone seen any data on whether or not the newer FIS helmet standards (requiring CE 1077 Class A) have actually resulted in reduced injury rate or severity?

Do people ski at different levels of risk depending on how confident they feel about their bindings? i.e. do people on touring rigs avoid bump runs they would ordinarily ski with full alpine set ups?

Well, I try not to spend too much time going slow on my GS skis, because I know the DIN setting is appropriate to a higher-energy crash and not a low-energy one, and I try to also remember that reverse is true on my all-mountain skis.

 

[Dwight]

Helmets are warm and 2nd nature to me.

On a hill that has huge amount school groups, it isn't the helmet that makes people do dumb stuff, it is their friends peer pressure. It is the helmet, that helps them go home on the bus vs an ambulance.

When learned to snowboard 6 years ago, it was my helmet that allowed me to see stars and stay awake.

 

[James]

Helmets are warm

Not a given. They’re all obsessed with venting.

 

[Henry]

Several things jump out from that abstract.
--The data extends back to 2010. There were fewer helmet wearers then, and some of the helmets then were not well designed.
--The statement of 65% helmeted and 35% unhelmeted skiers & riders sounds fishy. I never see more and a few unhelmeted people on the slopes.
--The fact that "helmeted patients were significantly more likely to suffer severe injury... intracranial hemorrhage ... chest injury..., and/or lumbosacral spine injury... than unhelmeted patients...." suggests two things. (a) the helmeted skiers were better skiers going faster, (b) chest and lubosacral spine injuries don't relate much to helmets.

This evaluation needs more work, especially to relate the skill level and skiing speed of the injured to the injuries suffered.

Correct use of the strap is critical, as well as correct positioning of the helmet on the head. Some put the helmet on the back of the head so goggles can sit on the forehead. This does not protect the vulnerable forehead. If the strap is loose the helmet can fly off and do nothing.

"...snow globe (brain slosh?) injuries haven't been reduced and might have risen with helmets. Which makes sense because helmets can't protect your brain bouncing around when you go from even low speed to a sudden complete stop...."
The polystyrene (styrofoam) lining inside the helmet shell is designed to absorb g-forces to slow the head speed in relation to the immediate stopping of the shell when something hard is hit. This counts on the polystyrene liner being in good condition and the helmet fitting correctly. A helmet that is too large, or a round helmet on an oval skull or vice versa, or a big helmet over a puffy knit cap can't do the job it is intended to do. Or an old helmet where the styrene foam isn't as good as it was when new. Motorcycle helmets are often suggested for replacement after 5 years of use or one crash due to deterioration or damage of the polystyrene liner.

Helmet testing involves several tests including penetration resistance (the benefit of the hard shell) and impact management tests (the benefit of the polystyrene foam liner). Here is the Snell test protocol:
https://smf.org/standards/pdf/rs98std.pdf

 

[dbostedo]

Va Tech's studies are by far the most authoritative on this issue. Everything else is marketing driven. Be aware that all technology-specific studies will be based on simulated testing and computer modeling. Proof doesn't exist and alleged proof is a marketing ploy.

Also be aware that other elements of helmet design, e.g. vent placement and spar design, can negate MIPS functionality,

Unfortunately, Virginia Tech hasn't added ski helmets to the database yet :

Virginia Tech Helmet Ratings

Virginia Tech Helmet Ratings - testing sport helmets to evaluate their ability to reduce brain injury risk.

helmet.beam.vt.edu

You might be able to glean a bit about the effectiveness of MIPS by looking at how many are atop the bicycle helmet rating. But that could also be because newer helmets tend to also be MIPS helmets?

 

[cantunamunch]

Unfortunately, Virginia Tech hasn't added ski helmets to the database yet :

The database is tangent to @Decreed_It's request for studies on types. Those are linked to on the publications page:

Relevant Research Publications

Sport helmet ratings based on the Virginia Tech Helmet Lab's research

helmet.beam.vt.edu

 

[Andy Mink]

I wear a helmet not necessarily because it makes me feel better taking "risks" that I wouldn't take without a helmet. I wear on because I've seen others take a fall with helmets that would have (probably) been worse without one. I did a smack down last year without a helmet. Would I have seen stars if I did have the helmet on? Probably. Would I have a bloody ear and scraped up forehead? Probably not. And my number one reason for wearing a helmet? CLUNK. bar down.

 

[Andy Mink]

I believe the bottom line is when your head stops and your brain doesn't, you're going to have problems. That's with or without a helmet. A helmet will likely mitigate the other injuries like cuts, bruises, and fractures. Much like seatbelts, there will always be a percentage of injuries that would have been worse wearing a helmet. But statistically you're better off wearing your seatbelt in an accident.

 

[dbostedo]

I believe the bottom line is when your head stops and your brain doesn't, you're going to have problems. That's with or without a helmet.

The point of the helmet though is to minimize the maximum deceleration by spreading the deceleration over a longer time. If you truly hit something solid at speed, the deceleration (measured in Gs) can be really high - well over 100 Gs. By compressing, or even breaking, the helmet makes the deceleration happen over a longer period of time, which minimizes the peak impact.

So in an impact event, even if you have a brain injury with or without a helmet, it will be lessened with a helmet.

As far as the risk taking goes, I don't think it is a conscious thing. I would think that the general risk taking posture of folks is affected by feeling safer in the first place. I don't think anyone often thinks "I wouldn't do this if I didn't have a helmet, but since I do, here goes". Instead I think people go a bit faster, jump a bit more, trying a bigger drop, worry about trees a little less, etc. because they feel safer in the first place.

 

[cantunamunch]

As far as the risk taking goes, I don't think it is a conscious thing. I would think that the general risk taking posture of folks is affected by feeling safer in the first place. I don't think anyone often thinks "I wouldn't do this if I didn't have a helmet, but since I do, here goes". Instead I think people go a bit faster, jump a bit more, trying a bigger drop, worry about trees a little less, etc. because they feel safer in the first place.

And if Snowcookie type devices catch on, that will be quantifiable

 

[François Pugh]

Lies, damned lies and statistics.
Figures don't lie, but liars can figure.

The problem with the study is that people who know they are going to do something more likely to cause severe head injury self-select into the helmet wearing population.

I don't ski any differently when wearing or not wearing a helmet; after a few minutes of skiing, I am not even aware of the helmet's presence or absence.

I don't take as nearly as much risk skiing now (or say the last 10 years) as I did 35 years ago, and I wasn't wearing a helmet 35 years ago.

In the five to ten years that I have been wearing a helmet, it has lessened my head trauma once for sure, and saved me from a few nasty chair lift bar bangs. I think I'll keep wearing it regardless of the studies.

 

[pete]

There's similar cyclical discussion regarding Hard football helmets and the increase in severity of force used. Same thought that feeling more safe promotes more risk taking.

perhaps for some, as @Eleeski noted, a soft helmet may be an acceptable option to those not caring for the bulk of a regular helmet ... least for brush and chairlifts:

Hutch Leather Football Helmet H 8 RED & BLACK circa 1930's-40's Medium | eBay

<p>Marked medium</p><p>A little rough, some stitching coming apart, no strap, some wear to the leather.</p><p>But still a great display piece- </p><p>Ships fast with tracking</p><br><p>Hutch Leather Football Helmet H 8 RED & BLACK circa 1930's-40's. Shipped with USPS Priority Mail.</p>

www.ebay.com

 

[pete]

Another thought may be that by wearing a helmet when learning new things, you fear less about falling or injury and can concentrate on your technique or skill building.

Much as foam pits, safety nets or pools: less detracted on failure/injury and more on skill building.

too, seen more Go Pros mounted to a helmet than an arm or chest belt

 

[Wendy]

A buddy on my former cycling team is an orthopedic who does ER rotations. His stories about head injuries and fatalities of unhelmeted patients was always sobering.

This study is fascinating and clearly, a helmet doesn’t guarantee protection from head injuries, regardless of level of skiing.

Kudos to my alma mater, Virginia Tech, for producing some good studies on the subject.

For me, helmets are warmer than a hat, keep my head dry on snowy/icy/rainy days, are more comfortable than a hat while wearing goggles, and have protected me a number of times from the premature lowering of the chairlift bar by clueless skiers. What they don’t do is give me more confidence to engage in risky skiing.

 

[dbostedo]

Kudos to my alma mater, Virginia Tech, for producing some good studies on the subject.

Just thought I'd say hello from a fellow Hokie

 

[applecart]

I can’t imagine skiing without a helmet. Over the past couple seasons I have fallen at least 4 times where I’ve whacked the back of my head. I’m not doing anything risky, but I am learning to ski bumps!

 

[Carolinacub]

I honestly don't know if people take bigger risks or not because of the helmet. For the younger skiers that are less risk adverse that could very well be the case especially if they started out skiing without one. For the folks who put on a helmet for the first time the same day as they put on their first pair of skis I would argue that it makes no difference.
Personally it didn't take me very long to regard the helmet as just another piece of equipment just like gloves. It's such a normal part of my ski day I for the most part don't pay any attention to it.
Anecdotally there have been plenty of times that I have taken a knock to the head that prior to wearing a helmet would have made me cuss up a storm and now it's just not a big deal.