 Poster: A snowHead
|
The article is a lot more balanced than you'd think given the person who posted it. The bottom line is that ski helmets aren't very good at protecting people from brain injury caused by the brain bouncing around inside your skull but are good at preventing all the other injuries you'd otherwise get at the same time like skull fractures and bad cuts which can only improve the situation. Sadly the brain injury is typically the life changing/threatening bit.
Here's hoping Schumacher makes a good recovery.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
meh, Just read it and seems balanced and informative, also some interesting facts and studies there.
Amazing on this thread some people are so agressively in disagreement about their choices 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Few comments from Gary Hartstein
@former_f1doc: Lets get the nuance right: Michael is grievously injured but from what's being said & not said, things are not going worse.
@former_f1doc: Right now, I'll take that. But overall, this is a bad situation. So lets send all our good energy to Michael, Corinna, Gina Marie and Mick!
[asked how this compares to Hakkinen or Massa's injuries]
@former_f1doc: This is significantly more severe. Quite significantly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
I did copy the post and pasted it in the latest helmet thread. As said, it's a summary of what most people pretty much agree on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| stanton wrote: |
The Helmet did break according to German media.
|
....and if he wasn't wearing a helmet, his head would've split in two.
I understand if an individual chooses not to wear a helmet, it's their head, but to argue against the wearing of helmets is ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Mollerski wrote: |
| ... to argue against the wearing of helmets is ridiculous. |
It's not ridiculous at all. No skiers (except racers and children) wore helmets until the mid-1990s, and the incidence of serious head injuries was the same (as far as I can gather) then as it is now.
I don't argue against wearing them - anyone is capable of making an intelligent decision - but I wouldn't be seen dead in a ski helmet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Comedy Goldsmith wrote: |
| .... I wouldn't be seen dead in a ski helmet. |
Yep, that's the idea.
Last edited by Then you can post your own questions or snow reports... on Wed 1-01-14 16:39; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some of you will remember that my husband suffered a broken neck a few years ago (actually 5 years to the day of MS's accident). He was skiing on piste and wasn't wearing a helmet. An impact from another skier caused the injury, and that impact was at the level of the nape of the neck. I was told at the time by the surgeons treating MS that a helmet was unlikely to have prevented the fracture as it was below the level of a helmet, and that was backed up in conversations with others later. However to argue that helmets are dangerous and encourage risk taking is just plain ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
Comedy Goldsmith, But in those days people were not playing in huge numbers in parks with big jumps, half pipes, rails, hucking off cliffs and only the elite were really hitting big lines down steep couloirs. These activities did not increase because helmets came on the market. Yet helmets do not give a lot of protection to massive trauma. So the evidence suggests that despite a massive increase in the numbers of people doing risky activities the incidence of serious head injuries has not increase along expected lines. Perhaps helmets are preventing a lot of the borderline cases becoming serious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News from the doctors treating MS seems a bit more encouraging today. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
pam w, About time there was some better news 
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
Today's Mirror incidentally looks like it has a different site pictured for the accident, at the very least it's further down the slope from the yesterday's shot.
There's no indication from Kehm's account (which is currently the only account I've heard, albeit unverified by the investigation so far) that he was skiing too fast or being reckless or taking unnecessary risks. So on that basis nothing to suggest his judgement was impaired by wearing a helmet or appetite for risk increased either because he was wearing a helmet or as a result of his previous career.
The surgeons have been clear that whilst the helmet did not protect him from the serious injuries he did sustain, it likely prevented an immediately fatal incident.
That the helmet broke on impact doesn't indicate the helmet was necessarily faulty, it split from the impact having absorbed the initial shock, which is what it is designed to do rather than the skull splitting from the impact having absorbed the initial shock, this may well have been what prevented a much more serious injury, but clearly the impact was such that the helmet reduced the severity of the accident rather than mitigating it altogether.
I think it would be wrong from this incident to insist that it proves that everyone should wear a helmet on the slopes, but to suggest or imply that the wearing of a helmet (on the basis of the information so far) in any way contributed to the accident is malicious and misleading.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
'it split from the impact having absorbed the initial shock'
I've never looked at a ski helmet, but assuming the construction is similar to cycle helmets, the polystyrene inner is designed to absorb the impact and possibly deform/break. The outer shell is to 1. Hold the inner together and 2. Protect against sharp stuff getting in.
I'm not sure the shell breaking is a design feature, just shows that in this case it was a pretty hard/sharp impact and the helmet did indeed do it's job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
martinm, I've certainly not seen any pictures of the helmet, nor indeed what it hit. So can't comment on the details.
What I meant was that the helmet's job was to absorb the initial shock, which it appears to have done to some extent according to the comments from the medical team. I wasn't suggesting it was specifically designed to split on impact and if that's the impression I gave, that was my mistake.
Whether there may have been a fault in the helmet or not is one of the factors which I am sure will be investigated, but it seems to me that the fact of the helmet being damaged post impact does not in itself indicate a fault with the helmet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Quote: |
However to argue that helmets are dangerous and encourage risk taking is just plain ridiculous.
|
Whilst arguing that helmets are dangerous, is a bit marginal to say the least, it is simple nature that many, not all, people will put themselves at more risk of an accident, whether it results in injury or not, if they are using some form of protective equipment, conversely not wearing protective equipment encourages people to take more care.
If you walked over a bridge with no handrails, would you walk near the edge????
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| tangowaggon wrote: |
| Quote: |
However to argue that helmets are dangerous and encourage risk taking is just plain ridiculous.
|
Whilst arguing that helmets are dangerous, is a bit marginal to say the least, it is simple nature that many, not all, people will put themselves at more risk of an accident, whether it results in injury or not, if they are using some form of protective equipment, conversely not wearing protective equipment encourages people to take more care.
If you walked over a bridge with no handrails, would you walk near the edge???? |
Show us some evidence to back this statement up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
tangowaggon, as I said above I think in the context of this thread which is about a specific incident it is misleading to suggest with no evidence to support it that the wearing of a helmet contributed in any way to the accident.
A more general discussion of the pros and cons might perhaps be better on a different thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
martinm, as I said there is no evidence to indicate this played any part in the incident this thread is based on.
There are endless repetitive arguments throughout the snowheads archive on the subject of whether or not to wear helmets, many within the last couple of months.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
From your own wiki link:
| Quote: |
Other recent studies have concluded that helmet use is not associated with riskier behavior among skiers and snowboarders, and that helmet usage reduces the risk and severity of head injuries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| nozawaonsen wrote: |
martinm, as I said there is no evidence to indicate this played any part in the incident this thread is based on.
|
True, but I never said there was either 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| PJSki wrote: |
From your own wiki link:
| Quote: |
Other recent studies have concluded that helmet use is not associated with riskier behavior among skiers and snowboarders, and that helmet usage reduces the risk and severity of head injuries |
|
I have to say I'm not going to read all the studies or even their summaries, but personally I think risk compensation is real (irrespective of whether it's skiing or cake making) 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| martinm wrote: |
| PJSki wrote: |
From your own wiki link:
| Quote: |
Other recent studies have concluded that helmet use is not associated with riskier behavior among skiers and snowboarders, and that helmet usage reduces the risk and severity of head injuries |
|
I have to say I'm not going to read all the studies or even their summaries, but personally I think risk compensation is real (irrespective of whether it's skiing or cake making) |
Ok, you ignore the most recent scientific and peer reviewed studies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
I've invented a new helmet that deliberately explodes and mashes the wearer's brain when it impacts on anything. Wearers in trials were found to ski with extreme caution. I'm pushing for these to become law  I'm thinking CG and Stanton would both approve of this new safety measure that seems far more compliant with their ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
'Ok, you ignore the most recent scientific and peer reviewed studies.'
No, I'm not obsessed by the subject either way. And it wouldn't surprise me if there are conflicting 'recent scientific and peer reviewed studies' as well! And of course, the earth was once considered flat by scientists (and still is by some living in Cornwall )
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| martinm wrote: |
'Ok, you ignore the most recent scientific and peer reviewed studies.'
No, I'm not obsessed by the subject either way. And it wouldn't surprise me if there are conflicting 'recent scientific and peer reviewed studies' as well! And of course, the earth was once considered flat by scientists (and still is by some living in Cornwall ) |
Feel free to ignore the wide-ranging research available, but bear in mind that this also means that your opinion holds no weight whatsoever in the debate, being backed up by didly-squat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Here's an example to clear things up for you. Put a helmet on, and bang your head against a wall. Still ok? Well gee whizz, who'd have thunk it?. Now do it without a helmet.
|
Simples!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
I wish I'd had my helmet on when putting things away in the loft early, cracked my head something rotten on the rafters!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Quote: |
tangowaggon wrote:
Quote:
However to argue that helmets are dangerous and encourage risk taking is just plain ridiculous.
Whilst arguing that helmets are dangerous, is a bit marginal to say the least, it is simple nature that many, not all, people will put themselves at more risk of an accident, whether it results in injury or not, if they are using some form of protective equipment, conversely not wearing protective equipment encourages people to take more care.
If you walked over a bridge with no handrails, would you walk near the edge????
Show us some evidence to back this statement up.
|
Rather like saying "show us some evidence that the sun will rise tomorrow", Risk compensation is as obvious as the nose on your face, I do it all the time whilst at work, skiing, motorcycling etc, if I just have my work trousers on when on the bike to work, I ride much more carefully, when I rode the bike without a helmet around the farm, I would resist the urge to stick it on the back wheel at 70mph across the field.
My thoughts do go out to MS but no more to him than any other person injured whilst skiing, but the high profile of this incident gives a soapbox for all those who want to force everyone to wear helmets.
Last edited by Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name: on Wed 1-01-14 18:45; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Shimmy Alcott wrote: |
| Quote: |
Here's an example to clear things up for you. Put a helmet on, and bang your head against a wall. Still ok? Well gee whizz, who'd have thunk it?. Now do it without a helmet.
|
Simples! |
TBH I wouldn't bang my head against a wall with or without a helmet on. If you normally wear a helmet skiing try a run without it on. Anything change about your skiing, what you ski, how fast you go? I'm a helmet wearer of recent years but not all together convinced how effective they are, particularly at higher speed impacts. I survived 20+ years without one, maybe I was just lucky. There's a similar debate one could have about ABS bags, they appear to improve your chances of survival if you get caught but do they increase your risk of getting caught? I confess I have an ABS bag too. Everyone is different and I'm sure some people adjust their normal behaviour when sporting safety devices. Anyway all the best for MS, in what appears to be a very unlucky accident.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I always wear a helmet these days and to be honest I don't even think about it any more so I sincerely doubt it adds to my risk profile.
If you are still an anti helmet bigot read the following statement and see how ridiculous it is.
'If you want to be super safe you could always wear a jacket with spikes on the inside then you will never fall.'
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
If you want to be super safe then stay at home.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
waynos, most injuries occur in the home.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Apart from his having apparently hit his head on a rock Gruss's accident was surely quite different from Schumacher's? He was apparently skiing alone in a well known off-piste area and it was ages before he was found.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Media's behaviour outside (and inside) the hospital have gone (imo) from Mob Scrum to Sickening. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| PJSki wrote: |
| Ok, you ignore the most recent scientific and peer reviewed studies. |
You're referring to the most recent scientific and peer-reviewed studies on 'risk compensation', in relation to helmet-wearing.
You're welcome to cite those studies so we can read them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
In regards to risk compensation, you're telling me you wouldn't feel you can do more ambitious activities knowing you have a harness or other safety equipment? In myself I would. Perhaps other opinions differ and others do not. At the End of the day we all feel differently and a well wishing thread is not the place to be having petty arguments.
I join you all on wishing MS any form of recovery; hopefully a speedy and full one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Comedy Goldsmith wrote: |
| PJSki wrote: |
| Ok, you ignore the most recent scientific and peer reviewed studies. |
You're referring to the most recent scientific and peer-reviewed studies on 'risk compensation', in relation to helmet-wearing.
You're welcome to cite those studies so we can read them. |
Already been linked to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
