"Companies are working to reverse the stereotype that helmets are clunky hindrances by introducing features like the built-in Skullcandy headphones in the Smith Gage"
... and compromise your safety by blocking out sounds that might warn you of danger?
"The claim has always been that helmets protect against serious brain trauma on the slope, but now the science and technology behind them substantiates that claim."
Where is that claim? Where's the scientific evidence that helmets protect from "serious brain trauma"?
"Weight and size are being decreased across the board ..."
Now, that's interesting. I understood that motorcycle helmets are much larger than ski helmets because they genuinely offer protection. So, what's this reduction in size doing to the impact protection of the helmet?
Is the ski helmet industry a genuine safety business, or something rather different?
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Tue 1-10-13 13:50; edited 1 time in total
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
On construction sites hard hats need replacing every few years, hats all have a kite mark and DOB, and are invalid after a period of three years. Why should ski helmets be any different?
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?
Maybe because they're used for a fraction of the time of builders' hard hats?
Maybe because the helmet industry would like to boost their sales?
I'm amazed at the content of this article, which seems to have no scientific basis at all. There's been too much of this, in the general punting and promotion of helmets over the past decade+.
Motorcycle helmets have a recommended lifespan of 5-8 years, less for people who use them daily and more for weekend warriors. Obviously they should be immediately replaced in the event of a hard knock. Aren't ski helmets made out of the same stuff?
Well, there we go: a motorbike helmet is in the sunshine and daily use for much of the year ... and lasts 5-8 years. But here's a ski writer saying that a ski helmet (which will probably be a cupboard for over 11 months a year) will only last 2 years.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
I have a second hand helmet I bought off ebay. I usually ski without a helmet, but as I got this one for £10, I use it in icy conditions and when I ski hard (rather than just cruise on soft well pisted snow).
I suspect it is better wearing an old worn out helmet which has never been in a serious crash, than nothing at all.
The price of helmets are just ridiculous!
After all it is free
After all it is free
Bigtipper, mine cost £30. You're looking in the wrong places dude...
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 wrote:
Is the ski helmet industry a genuine safety business, or something rather different?
It's fear and fashion-fuelled racketeering.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Comedy Goldsmith wrote:
Maybe because they're used for a fraction of the time of builders' hard hats?
.
How does a builder use his hat? It sits on his head, no moving parts, not wearing out, but still need to replace after 3 years or any serious impact.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
bode swiller +1. Although there's nothing wrong with it if you like the way it keeps your ears warm... I know I'd lose mine far more often than every two years anyway - can't afford that, I'll stick to cheap beanies!
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.
Comedy Goldsmith, Salomon reccomend every 5-7 years or under a heavy impact.
Quote:
Where is that claim? Where's the scientific evidence that helmets protect from "serious brain trauma"?
Tons of research out there that shows they do offer protection but the best example is a real life one, Scott McCarthey crash in Kitzbul, every doctor that treated him claimed the helmet saved his life. The helmet did exactly what it was designed to do absorb the initial impact and dissipate the forces from the crash
Quote:
Now, that's interesting. I understood that motorcycle helmets are much larger than ski helmets because they genuinely offer protection. So, what's this reduction in size doing to the impact protection of the helmet?
Is the ski helmet industry a genuine safety business, or something rather different?
Its technology and design moving things forward, with little R&D or investment early helmets were large and clumsy as sales have increased as had the money put into engineering and improving the product.
Obviously any corporation that produces a product does so to make a profit, that does not mean that helmets provide no extra benefits to the end user.
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
blahblahblah, I think it's more a question of the plastic hardening or breaking down due to the affects of sunshine, you see the same effect on plastics left out in the open like plastic garden chairs, and rubbish that is left out, where they become brittle.
Night time skiing might be one way of increasing the life of your lid, or skiing with a parasole to keep the sun off.
...or 11months in the cupboard might be more reasonable (don't leave the light on though.)
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
bruisedskier wrote:
blahblahblah,
Night time skiing might be one way of increasing the life of your lid, or skiing with a parasole to keep the sun off.
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Must not make helmet joke
Must not make helmet joke
Must not make helmet joke
Must not make helmet joke
Must not make helmet joke
Must not make helmet joke
Must not make helmet joke
Must not make helmet joke
Must not make helmet joke
...........
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Fattes13 wrote:
... but the best example is a real life one, Scott McCarthey crash in Kitzbul
I'd say that a World Cup ski racer falling whilst landing a jump at 80+ mph down the Zielschuss is perhaps NOT the best example.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Comedy Goldsmith wrote:
Well, there we go: a motorbike helmet is in the sunshine and daily use for much of the year ... and lasts 5-8 years. But here's a ski writer saying that a ski helmet (which will probably be a cupboard for over 11 months a year) will only last 2 years.
Noo.. read it again...
queen bodecia wrote:
Motorcycle helmets have a recommended lifespan of 5-8 years, less for people who use them daily and more for weekend warriors. Obviously they should be immediately replaced in the event of a hard knock. Aren't ski helmets made out of the same stuff?
MOST motorcyclists aren't out every day.
Less for those who use them daily, so again, into the 2-3 year realm.
Also, motorcycle helmets are far more enclosed, will immediately get replaced after the slightest knock and aren't usually subject to the same temperatures.
Ski helmets are more likely to be bumped and knocked in normal usage and in each impact, the foam will be affected, even a tiny amount. Cumulatively over 2-3 years, and I'd be looking to replace one even if it appears fine.
The outer shell of motorcycle helmets tends to be a composite material, rather than plastic like ski/sport helmets, so it's not a direct comparison.
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?
Bode Swiller wrote:
Fattes13 wrote:
... but the best example is a real life one, Scott McCarthey crash in Kitzbul
I'd say that a World Cup ski racer falling whilst landing a jump at 80+ mph down the Zielschuss is perhaps NOT the best example.
I'd say that a World Cup ski racer falling whilst landing a jump at 80+ mph down the Zielschuss is perhaps NOT the best example
I would say it is perfect, it is an extreme example yes, but it shows that Helmets do prevent or aid in the reduction of damage in an impact situation, even at the worst case scenario as this crash was the helmet aids in the prevention of permenant injury and damage.
I know it's rising to the bait but I don't see why the referred to advice isn't reasonable enough with the qualifier being hard use. A helmet that's been used by a weekend warrior is likely to have rolled around in enough car boots, dropped off a couple of tailgates, been bonked by numerous chairlift bars, had a few run ins with branches and been bounced off hardish slopes a couple of times over 3 years. Obviously if it's been used to pootle upright along blues in Meribel for 5 days each winter (I had a bit of a sniffle on the Wednesday) then wear n tear isn't the same.
It's not exactly a top global conspiracy, no-one actually cares if you do or don't believe in helmets. No sympathy if you don't and then whinge about your googles fogging up when you put them on your forehead though
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
FFS Goldwidget, what are you thinking of? We've managed weeks and weeks without a lot of sanctiminious drivel about helmets, and now look what you've done.
After all it is free
After all it is free
Fattes13, let's forget Scott Macartney for a sec otherwise I'll have to throw myself off a tall building, but you say there's "tons of research out there" - can you point to that research bearing in mind that research is very different from mere opinion or guess work or throw away lines by brain surgeons or manufacturer/retailer spin or newspaper knee-jerking. There's plenty of all the latter out there but not much in the form of actual peer reviewed scientific research and certainly not recently (last major study I've seen was 2003 Shealy/Ettlinger/Johnson University of Vermont). So, I'd like to see the "tons of research".
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.
There's no need to replace your helmet every two years, or even after a few falls.
If it's split or the foam inner is compromised, that's a different matter.
It's not an unalloyed kind of thing, but taken as a whole helmets are obviously a good thing, and get better the quicker you ski.
If you ski quickly without a helmet, you're either a fool, or you don't care about head injuries (which amount to the same thing).
I've not seen too many proper skiers bombing through the backwoods without one.
All that said, it's your choice and I object to the pressure on fools not to be foolish; they can't help it, can they?
I'd say that a World Cup ski racer falling whilst landing a jump at 80+ mph down the Zielschuss is perhaps NOT the best example
I would say it is perfect, it is an extreme example yes, but it shows that Helmets do prevent or aid in the reduction of damage in an impact situation, even at the worst case scenario as this crash was the helmet aids in the prevention of permenant injury and damage.
It's absolutely perfect. Anyone but an imbecile would take away from that footage that helmets will protect you at 85mph so will (or are likely to) protect you at the lower speeds that we generally ski at.
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.
Those who say a helmet does not reduce the risk are............!
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Er... that was the point, Bode.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Quote:
let's forget Scott Macartney for a sec otherwise I'll have to throw myself off a tall building
Why forget him when it is an excellent example what is your issue with using it as an effective positive result of using a helmet?
Bode Swiller,
Here are just a sample, I work for one of the companies in the industry that has done their own independent research and it amazed me how effective they were in certain circumstances and even where they were not 100% effective their use was the difference between life changing injury and recoverable injury.
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?
northernsoulboy, ok, v funny, if a bit subtle.
Fattes13, I'll have a read and I'll also see if I can find an online version of the Ettlinger one. (Macartney... I don't agree with you but we could be here all night so better to see the research)
Those who say a helmet does not reduce the risk are............!
May be they are blue piste runners enjoying their 6 days of skiing a year, pootling down a piste or two, having a hot chocolate etc, the need for helmets in the bar afterwards is limited.
There has been a similar airing on cycle helmets in the press recently. Renewal periods of 3 to 5 years were quoted, but no scientific basis was offered. We would probably all agree that they need replacing after a fall, but surely manufacturers could (should!) research how much deterioration occurs as a result of ageing. I do look after my helmets and keep them well away from baggage handlers.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
There has been a similar airing on cycle helmets in the press recently. Renewal periods of 3 to 5 years were quoted, but no scientific basis was offered. We would probably all agree that they need replacing after a fall, but surely manufacturers could (should!) research how much deterioration occurs as a result of ageing. I do look after my helmets and keep them well away from baggage handlers.
oops - must have clicked twice - how do I delete?
Last edited by Then you can post your own questions or snow reports... on Tue 1-10-13 18:59; edited 2 times in total
After all it is free
After all it is free
blahblahblah - to be fair, I suspect those who don't wear helmets are usually a mix of very good skiers who grew up not wearing them (probably a fair few of the people on here who are against, I would imagine), bloody-minded contrarians who don't wear seatbelts (which is fair enough, it should be their choice) and, yep, a few blue run blokes who think they're butching it up by bombing about in a beanie.
I started wearing one a dozen or so years ago, mostly because I had young kids and a business to run, and because I ski quite rapidly and do have my share of falls, unfortunately. It almost certainly saved my life in a big crash in the States, which wasn't actually my fault, when a golf-ball sized rock on the piste left a big crease in the helmet right at the base of my skull.
At the time, I was in the minority on our annual boys' trips - last year we were all wearing them. Older and wiser, I suppose.
But each to his or her own.
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.
Deterioration = marketing.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
northernsoulboy, .
Quote:
It's not an unalloyed kind of thing, but taken as a whole helmets are obviously a good thing, and get better the quicker you ski.
If you ski faster you get an upgrade !!! How do they work that
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
