"Ski insurers are increasingly recommending that policyholders wear ski helmets."

A snowHead

My insurer don't require or recommend helmet wearing. I wear one, but through my own choice, not my insurer's.

This is definitely a feature of US insurers though, as I found when I was skiing in California last December. My friends there wore helmets, and it was an insurance requirement to do so.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

You need to Login to know who's really who.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

This is risking turning into another helmet thread. The stat of whether head injuries are increasing or not needs to be taken in context. The type of skiing done has a huge effect on it's relevance. Consider that more and more skiers are in the 'park' area, grinding rails and doing jumps, it's inevitable that head trauma is going to increase. As this is a relatively new development in skiing activity, and not one that has any history of being done before helmets became popular, it's impossible to quantify the extent to which helmets have reduced the degree of trauma.

You'll need to Register first of course.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

After all it is free · Last edited by After all it is free on Fri 11-01-13 0:47; edited 1 time in total

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

Strikes me that if there truly is an increase in both helmet sales and head injuries that it could be down to the world war one effect.

In WW1 troops were initially not issued steel helmets only cloth caps and a lot died and were injured on the battlefield due to their heads effectively being at ground level when they were in trenches with all the debris hitting them in the head. When helmets were issued there was an outcry as injuries to the head went up massively, at first there was a demand to remove the helmets as this was "obviously" causing troops to place themselves in more vulnerable positions, however what no one had done was look at how many fatalities from head wounds there had been, what had in fact occurred was that troops who would previously have been killed by flying shrapnel etc hitting their heads were now only being injured, calmer (more sensible) voices prevailed and the troops kept their helmets.

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

A very superficial article with very little research other than phoning a bloke at moneysupermarket.com

I lost total interest when it recommended £3000 cancellation costs. Who pays £3000 per person for a ski holiday up front.

In the summer I had to cancel our family climbing trip due to a heart attack with 3 days notice. The hotel at Gatwick refunded the money in full immediately, the car hire company in Italy most of the money, the airline most of the money. Our out of pocket expenses were less than £100 each, the excess charged by the insurance company took most of that so we didn't bother putting a claim in. Of course you cannot claim back for an insurance policy premium you never used.

The helmet bit is added at the end just to make the word count up

"Ski insurers are increasingly recommending that policyholders wear ski helmets. So far, however, Essential Travel is the only insurer to have made it mandatory for the skiers it insures." I suppose they are right in that going from zero to one is an increase, But then I have never heard of Essential Travel anyway

snow reports

You're missing the important bit in their advice guidelines.

You know it makes sense.

I think the helmet debate is more or less over in the US at least - at least 90% usage I'd estimate and those that don't seem to be the very casual tourists/weekenders or the odd holdout "core" boarders. Non-helmet wearing seemed to have a high correlation with straight skis and rear entry boots otherwise.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

There is nothing in my insurance about having to wear a helmet. Thankfully.

A snowHead

Insurers will start to mandate helmets if or when the actuaries calculate that doing so has an impact on the bottom line.

I wear a helmet, it (almost certainly) saved my life once, I couldn't care less whether other people do or don't. Is there much more to say?

A snowHead

Comedy Goldsmith, so when are you going skiing old chap?

Photos of you on snow with no lid on in the last 2 years please!

Otherwise your input and attempt to ignore the increasing body of evidence seems a bit weird. Bit like a virgin giving sex therapy...

El Hen - a proper journalist - has linked to relevant articles recently... eg

http://snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?t=92860

This may seem petty - but it would be really nice to see you posting a "news" item with less bias in your comment than... say... would be standard at Fox News...

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

You need to Login to know who's really who.

Comedy Goldsmith, I am really glad if you are now getting to ski again. You have in the past been someone who was not skiing and yet was happy to lecture others on all sorts of aspects of their safety and travel arrangements.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

You'll need to Register first of course.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

After all it is free

Can I just interject - I wear a helmet because I had a cranitomy a few years back - my wife wears one because of the same reason I do - my neurosurgeon explained the dynamics of impact on the head and it doesn't bear thinking about. Shocked

He also skis and he wears a helmet, but then I also know of doctors who smoke........... Cool

Until it becomes law, you takes your chance - I did.......... snowHead

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

Comedy Goldsmith, I am really glad you are skiing again.

But yes. I suspect you'd find few here who didn't think you lived in the past.

snow reports

No mention of helmets in my insurance, compulsory helmets would end my skiing, i hate wearing one so much. I had to wear one yesterday so i could join the kids on the toboggan run in les arcs, desperate to get it off after just 10min, never mind all day.

Comedy Goldsmith, You are wrong, because if insurers see it economically justified they may well tell you what to put on your head. The freedom of choice is fully yours only when you are prepared to pay out of your own pocket the full price of the consequences of your choice. Since this is not the case, this freedom is not unconditional and can be removed from you by those sharing the costs. I am not arguing for or against helmets but I find it very naive when people talk about their freedom to choose what to wear. Tear up your insurance policy, go skiing uninsured and then you will be free to choose. It's life. "Beggars can't be chooses" and all of us who need our costs to be shared are beggars in a way, and those sharing the bigger part of costs will always have a say that matters more than ours.

You know it makes sense.

Just got back from my first ever skiing holiday and was the only one in our lesson group without a helmet (other than the instructor! lol) I didn't even think to put one on until I saw everyone else with one, felt a bit exposed after that!

I also hooked up with some other guys who were absolutely fantastic skiers, one of them was an ex SAS veteran, they also all had helmets on, whilst in their company I was the only one to fall over and didn't have a helmet on, the point wasn't lost on me I have to say, from now on I will be wearing a helmet!

Of course I'm only a novice so I'll probably spend more time butting snow than most people on here, however I wouldn't dream of preaching to anyone about it, their choice, their risk.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

If you hit your head on something hard, a helmet will prevent or reduce the injury, I cannot see how anyone could argue against that, but how any one can stand up and say that using protective equipment does not modify behaviour is beyond me, the evidence is everywhere in life. The number of posters on this forum that say they would not ski without a helmet is a perfect example of this ie the use of a helmet allows them to take the risk of going skiing
At a rough estimate this week i would say 75% wearing helmets, 20% wearing hats and i'm in the 5% wearing sunscreen and sunnies

A snowHead

A snowHead

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

You need to Login to know who's really who.

andy from embsay, Indeed, there is a lot of nonsense from both sides of the debate, although it does appear that people are indeed voting with their feet and helmet users are now in the majority.

I've simply considered them as an 'insurance option', head-cover if you will.
You can pay for a £20 policy from Lidl or a £200 from Sweet or others, and get better coverage.
It's not a get-out-of-jail free card, and it's terms are quite specific, your cover is limited and you will be liable for the excess.
Insurance is certainally no substitute for taking personal care.

I have only had to cash my 'policy' in once in the past 12 years, and I was lucky enough to find my cover sufficient to cover the incident.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

Richard_Sideways, While I know Sweet make fine kit I think it's a little misleading to imply that a Lidl helmet isn't much cop, it will have been designed and made to comply with the standards stated (& I believe they are very similar to Giros). I too have cashed my policy once and was sufficiently dazed and confused to not want to know what the effect would have been without. However I don't care what others choose to do.

You'll need to Register first of course.

fatbob, Perhaps a little mean spirited of me to pick on a Lidl helmet in my example. And yes, all helmets must meet the regulation to be classified. But in my experience the difference comes not from meeting those requirements from how far the helmet can exceed them (along with other factors like build and material quality, weight, air flow/cooling etc, ability to survive multiple impacts etc). Equally, personal factors such as fit come into the euqation. Sure, some of it may be 'paying for a name' but not all helmets are created equally.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

It does seem to be a strange sticking point in skiing, as stated I am a total newcomer to the sport but I have done a lot of mountain biking in the past and whilst there are obvious differences the helmet argument is nothing like as divided, its pretty much accepted that everyone wears one, never helped me the time I face planted on a drop off though! Lol! I guess you pays your money and takes your choice, I would say however that if head injuries where anything like as prolific as something like motorcycle's then surely the insurance companies would already be insisting people wear them? Just a thought!

I guess with my skills as a skier I'm just as likely to ski off a precipice as hurt my bonce skiing into a tree head first, maybe I should wear a parachute as well? Worked for Roger Moore! Cool

After all it is free

andy from embsay, 'I wonder why no insurer has ever suggested making helmets compulsory in cars? Or when climbing? Or when riding a bike? Or when walking along the road?'

All good things come to those who wait...

I just don't get why this exercises people so much. If you want to wear a helmet, wear one. If you don't, don't - unless and until it's mandated by the resort, the nation or your insurers (in the former two cases that would be a black day, of course).

What is hard, or controversial, about that?

I own a helmet, but hardly ever use it. I don't use a cycle helmet either.

I'm not sure I can justify my actions, but I'll have a go.

I pretty much accept that it's safer to ski (or indeed cycle) while wearing a helmet. But by the same token it's also safer to do just about any activity while wearing a helmet. Where do we draw the line?

I view the debate about helmet wearing in skiing as the latest front line in a long slow campaign to introduce helmet wearing throughout life. This started with the introduction of safety helemts in obvious places like mining and recreational caving then moved through other high risk areas like construction work, motor racing, then onto all motorbike users, professional skiers professional cyclists to where we are today.

A quick Google on football (or soccer) helmets revealed that such things do exist, and seem to be used in Americam childrens' games. Othe areas ripe for 'helmetisation' would I suggest be childrens playgrounds, the elderly and all car drivers.

I have no problem with anyone wearing a helemt in any activity should thery choose to do so. I would however br profoundly angry if there was ever any element of coersion attached to the use of a helmet in my recreational activities. I really do not want to see helmet clauses appearing in ski insurance policies.

I believe it should be for each individual to make up their own mind about the risk/reward balance involved in wearing a helmet for any adult sport.

So I suppose I choose not to wear a helmet because I don't believe that safer equals better in all circumstances. For my personal risk/reward calculation I am prepared to accept a slightly increased risk of a head injury as the price I pay for the slight feeling of being a rebel Puzzled

Alternatively I might just be a knob.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

Help!!

"Ski insurers are increasingly recommending that policyholders wear ski helmets."

snowHeads Forum Index >>> The Piste