With all of the concussion and helmet talk out there...

[Vinman]

Is their research published in a peer reviewed journal anywhere? I am truely interested and would like to read their methods of data collection. Or is this internal research paid for by 6d? If this is paid research I'd be suspicious right off the bat. Link me an article so i can read for myself.

[Atrain505]

That is why I said the in house research needs to be backed up by a unaffiliated 3rd party. Until then who knows. If their numbers are correct though, then they are on the right track. Regardless of whether their numbers are legitimate or not I commend them for thinking outside the box and putting the brain as priority number one. I wish them success.

[Vinman]

Agreed, I like the concept. Having the inner shell "float" in relation to the outer shell makes sense I think. I'm just skeptical until their in house research is verified and published.

[Theo-san]

I don't want to derail this thread into a pissing match..I am just trying to help. All you armchair concussion experts can make up your own mind.
I am not going by graphs. I could give a fuck about opinions on why or how you think I got suckered. I watched the video, researched the shit out of the helmet, and bought one.
I was not using graphs or opinions when I smashed 10 bones my body, and was thrown 96 ft from impact. Had every fucking cat scan, and MRI to find head trauma with none. Doctors in the hospital heard about my crash, and kept coming in to find out why my head was not fucked. A minimum of 5 doctors asking me what helmet I was wearing, because the only time they had seen body damage like mine was on a corpse. They were absolutely positive I had to have brain trauma.
6D got a hold of me so they could examine it to see what went right, or wrong. How many of your helmet makers are willing to do this.. It tested fine, and no damage to the helmet, or my brain, so say what you need to justify what you think. It did its job.
I real world tested this shit, Not just a video. I don't give a fuck about graphs. As I said before, just trying to help others from getting hurt.
Take it or leave it, means shit to me. I know what I will be wearing. What is your head worth to you.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...mon-companions

[media310]

get one with MIPS.

However a helmet can only do so much.

[Racerden]

Picked up a new Smith Variant Brim last season, went back to my race helmet because:
1. Full ear coverage, better protection
2. Warmer
3. Stays in place without cranking the chin strap to strangle position
4. Who needs a brim when it's puking and you have a good hood
5. A hell of a lot quieter at speed

Speed event rated helmets are available now and while far from perfect are probably marginally better than the average ski helmet. If the vast majority of helmet wearers aren't paying the price to wear one, how likely will they be to pay even more for an effective helmet, if one could be invented?
Most people, including me, figure wearing a lousy helmet is better than nothing, just like most of us "environmentalists" figure we're doing our part by recycling and changing light bulbs.

[GaugeSymmetry]

I don't want to derail this thread into a pissing match..I am just trying to help. All you armchair concussion experts can make up your own mind.
I am not going by graphs. I could give a fuck about opinions on why or how you think I got suckered. I watched the video, researched the shit out of the helmet, and bought one.
I was not using graphs or opinions when I smashed 10 bones my body, and was thrown 96 ft from impact. Had every fucking cat scan, and MRI to find head trauma with none. Doctors in the hospital heard about my crash, and kept coming in to find out why my head was not fucked. A minimum of 5 doctors asking me what helmet I was wearing, because the only time they had seen body damage like mine was on a corpse. They were absolutely positive I had to have brain trauma.
6D got a hold of me so they could examine it to see what went right, or wrong. How many of your helmet makers are willing to do this.. It tested fine, and no damage to the helmet, or my brain, so say what you need to justify what you think. It did its job.
I real world tested this shit, Not just a video. I don't give a fuck about graphs. As I said before, just trying to help others from getting hurt.
Take it or leave it, means shit to me. I know what I will be wearing. What is your head worth to you.

Your experience (or any other brah's) means shit if you don't have data comparing the deceleration of the outside of the helmet with respect to the inside chamber. You could have fallen a million ways from 96ft that never produce concussion level deceleration to the outside of your helmet. I know you could give a fuck about graphs, data...blah, but without data, it could have been your boyfriend's cock that damped the impact for all we know. Data is the real world; everything else is your bf's cock.

Regardless, I doubt 6D is lying about their impact tests. It would be foolish to do so since those tests can be easily reproduced. With that said, if you were going to wear something, I would suggest 6D. It is the only thing that can reduce the impulse of force trying to slow down your dome. Other helmets are clearly inept at doing so.

Sadly, the only variable here is distance that your head can travel (more time) under lower average force trying to slow it down. Since our distance is limited and maxed out by a helmet design such as 6D, there is really not much more we can do sans skiing in a giant jello bubble.

[icelanticskier]

"The National Ski Areas Association reports that TBIs are the leading cause of skiing and snowboarding fatalities. And the numbers are growing. In 2004, 9,308 skiers and snowboarders suffered head injuries they deemed serious enough to visit a doctor. By 2010, that number had jumped to 14,947.

Despite the trends, we tend to pay attention only when famous people suffer a TBI—like actress Natasha Richardson, who died after a routine ski fall in 2009, and, more recently, Olympic freeskiing hopeful Sarah Burke, who died in 2012 after sustaining a TBI during a fall in a Park City, Utah, halfpipe. Last January, it was snowmobiler Caleb Moore, who died from brain and heart complications after his snow machine landed on top of him when an aerial maneuver went awry at the Winter X Games in Aspen, Colorado.

What the numbers don’t reveal is that the rise in brain injuries has happened during a period when helmet use among skiers and snowboarders has increased by 20 percent. (There hasn’t been a reliable study about bike-helmet usage in 15 years.) Neurologists and helmet makers attribute the uptick in TBIs to better reporting, but that’s only part of the picture. “There’s a greater trend of brain-­injury awareness,” agrees Weintraub. “But there is a brain-­injury trend. We’re seeing more of them from falls and sports.”

It’s not that helmets have gotten worse or gravity more powerful. It’s that our behavior has changed. In the past few decades, we’ve fundamentally altered how we recreate outdoors. From massive halfpipes to full-­suspension mountain bikes to junior-level big-mountain freeskiing competitions, we’re playing at a more intense level. “Our sports are supersizing,” says Mike Douglas, a pro skier from Whistler, British Columbia, who helped launch the freeskiing movement in the 1990s. “It’s all about going higher, farther, faster. It’s not sustainable.”

hmmmmmm, who'da thunk it?

helmets are makin more folks ski stupid. as I've always said

rog

[Vinman]

Sarah died from a ruptured vertebral artery not head trauma.

At least in sports there are very likely not more concussions, just more concussions that are getting reported and diagnosed because of the high media attention and efforts at educating the public.

It's no secret helmets cause increased risk taking, happens in organized sports like football and in recreational activity like skiing, riding etc.

[icelanticskier]

It's no secret helmets cause increased risk taking, happens in organized sports like football and in recreational activity like skiing, riding etc.

funneh that all the butthurtz on teh TGRZ disagree with that^^^^^.

rog

[Vinman]

Yeah maybe so, I wear one, would ski without one, I'm also realistic in knowing what it is good or not good for. And I'm probably one of those that takes increased risk when wearing one. I use mine to deflect whippets and pine branches mostly.

[icelanticskier]

Yeah maybe so, I wear one, would ski without one, I'm also realistic in knowing what it is good or not good for. And I'm probably one of those that takes increased risk when wearing one. I use mine to deflect whippets and pine branches mostly.

whippets and pine branches? ya I know someone that wears a helmet in the trees for that reason. then one day he injured himself (pretty badly) when a branch (that I ducked wearing no helmet) got snagged in one of his vents, whiplashing him and ending his ski day. not a smart thought process. better to duck wearing a hat than to bull in a china shop it through the trees wearing a helmet.

rog

[LeeC]

Your experience (or any other brah's) means shit if you don't have data comparing the deceleration of the outside of the helmet with respect to the inside chamber. You could have fallen a million ways from 96ft that never produce concussion level deceleration to the outside of your helmet. I know you could give a fuck about graphs, data...blah, but without data, it could have been your boyfriend's cock that damped the impact for all we know. Data is the real world; everything else is your bf's cock.

Regardless, I doubt 6D is lying about their impact tests. It would be foolish to do so since those tests can be easily reproduced. With that said, if you were going to wear something, I would suggest 6D. It is the only thing that can reduce the impulse of force trying to slow down your dome. Other helmets are clearly inept at doing so.

Sadly, the only variable here is distance that your head can travel (more time) under lower average force trying to slow it down. Since our distance is limited and maxed out by a helmet design such as 6D, there is really not much more we can do sans skiing in a giant jello bubble.

I am typing slowly, so that you may read.
I can tell that you are very intellectual, and seeing as how you have been on here for a year. I can safely assume you know 95% of everything.
That sweet talk of yours is going to get you throat slammed one day, but I digress.
Please explain to me how I can hit the ground with enough force to break 9 bones in my back, mostly upperback, and shoulder, without such forces being applied to my head.
I know, you are way smarter than me, but unless I have hulk muscles in my neck, it would hit the ground with equal force. I know I am not telling you anything you did not already know.
You collect your data boy. I'll choose whats best for me..
Look forward to your thesis obi wan jongnobi

edit: btw its desert out here, so I ragdolled without hitting anything but the ground.

[skideeppow]

How could the rider in the video crash like that and the medical team not hold c spine or inline spinal stabilization? It was like Caleb Moore at the X games. The X games have a bunch of PT guys on scene and they let him get up, and dicked around for 20 minutes until they finally gave him up to the paramedics on scene from Aspen Ambi. They lost 20 minutes of time by trying to portray him as being ok on TV. Who knows if that would have made a difference.

He died of cardiac tampinod. All the reports say he was airlifted to St Mary's, but he was airlifted from Rifle, not Aspen.

Anyway, not to hi jack the thread, but how did they not do a more thorough primary and secondary assessment on the guy with such a violent crash.

[XXX-er]

whippets and pine branches? ya I know someone that wears a helmet in the trees for that reason. then one day he injured himself (pretty badly) when a branch (that I ducked wearing no helmet) got snagged in one of his vents, whiplashing him and ending his ski day. not a smart thought process. better to duck wearing a hat than to bull in a china shop it through the trees wearing a helmet.

rog

Pro patrol told me about crazy bob up at the hill who ducked under a tree and ripped his scalp open on the bottom of the limb, lotsa blood even after that Bob was still rabidly anti helmet

I call him crazy Bob cuz he used to hum classical music to himself when he rode single on the chair with ya so I quit riding up with Bob, then he was in shit with the pro patrol for kite boarding on open ski runs, haven't seen Bob in a few seasons

do you kite board?

[Sinfield]

That sweet talk of yours is going to get you throat slammed one day, but I digress.

Rancho Los Amigos stage 4...

[icelanticskier]

do you kite board?

no, too complicated

rog

[SiSt]

I am typing slowly, so that you may read.
I can tell that you are very intellectual, and seeing as how you have been on here for a year. I can safely assume you know 95% of everything.
That sweet talk of yours is going to get you throat slammed one day, but I digress.
Please explain to me how I can hit the ground with enough force to break 9 bones in my back, mostly upperback, and shoulder, without such forces being applied to my head.
I know, you are way smarter than me, but unless I have hulk muscles in my neck, it would hit the ground with equal force. I know I am not telling you anything you did not already know.
You collect your data boy. I'll choose whats best for me..
Look forward to your thesis obi wan jongnobi

edit: btw its desert out here, so I ragdolled without hitting anything but the ground.

Falling from that height, you'd likely have excessive forces in your brain even if your neck was the strongest thing in the universe and your head never hit the ground.

Really happy for you that you've come away from something like that, but the point still stands. Nothing but long distance can slow your head down without excessive forces. Doesn't matter how funky the build of the helmet is, or how the shell is connected to the inner. Distance alone is the only thing that can make a high-speed direct hit a non - concussive event.

Rotational hits are a whole other ballgame, and here, both mips and the 6d tech seem functional.

[RCC55125]

There is an independent organization that does helmet testing, Snell Memorial Foundation, http://www.smf.org/standards/ski/rs98std. Their standards are the best out there and there was a Leedom helmet that met all their standards. I don't think this helmet is sold anymore. Snell sets the standards for auto racing and the standards and testing for ski helmets is similar and you can read the testing procedures at the above link. Currently I don't think there are any ski helmets for sale that meet the Snell standards.
From the website:
There are at least four critical elements affecting a helmet's protective properties:

1. Impact management - how well the helmet protects against collisions with large objects.

2. Helmet positional stability - whether the helmet will be in place, on the head, when it's needed.

3. Retention system strength - whether the chinstraps are sufficiently strong to hold the helmet throughout an incident involving head impact.

4. Extent of Protection - the area of the head protected by the helmet.

[DudeLebowSKI]

Falling from that height, you'd likely have excessive forces in your brain even if your neck was the strongest thing in the universe and your head never hit the ground.

Really happy for you that you've come away from something like that, but the point still stands. Nothing but long distance can slow your head down without excessive forces. Doesn't matter how funky the build of the helmet is, or how the shell is connected to the inner. Distance alone is the only thing that can make a high-speed direct hit a non - concussive event.

Rotational hits are a whole other ballgame, and here, both mips and the 6d tech seem functional.

Well stated. The math doesn't lie.

[Vinman]

There is an independent organization that does helmet testing, Snell Memorial Foundation, http://www.smf.org/standards/ski/rs98std. Their standards are the best out there and there was a Leedom helmet that met all their standards. I don't think this helmet is sold anymore. Snell sets the standards for auto racing and the standards and testing for ski helmets is similar and you can read the testing procedures at the above link. Currently I don't think there are any ski helmets for sale that meet the Snell standards.
From the website:
There are at least four critical elements affecting a helmet's protective properties:

1. Impact management - how well the helmet protects against collisions with large objects.

2. Helmet positional stability - whether the helmet will be in place, on the head, when it's needed.

3. Retention system strength - whether the chinstraps are sufficiently strong to hold the helmet throughout an incident involving head impact.

4. Extent of Protection - the area of the head protected by the helmet.

again even though small certified helmets, doesn't mean they prevent concussion. sports helmets have a similar certification from NOCSAE but they don't protect from concussion....

[jono]

Please explain to me how I can hit the ground with enough force to break 9 bones in my back, mostly upperback, and shoulder, without such forces being applied to my head.
....unless I have hulk muscles in my neck, it would hit the ground with equal forc.

Not to belabor the point, but the reason this is anecdotal evidence is that we have no way of knowing how much difference the helmet made. The fact that your bones broke instead of transferring the entire force and acceleration to your brain is how you managed to escape without brain trauma from the shear force of impact. That doesn't say anything about the helmet because that's not about helmet impacts. It's amazing to doctors because doctors are amazed by unusual events and this is unusual...but the least common event isn't what we want to plan for either. None of this says your helmet didn't save your life, either; that seems more likely than not. But it's anecdotal without knowing what hits the helmet took.

[Hugh Conway]

Currently I don't think there are any ski helmets for sale that meet the Snell standards.

I thought there were several that met or could meet the Snell standards, but many corps choose not to have them certified by Snell and pay Snell $. According to Snell "Vigor sports" does meet standards.

[Theo-san]

Please explain to me how I can hit the ground with enough force to break 9 bones in my back, mostly upperback, and shoulder, without such forces being applied to my head.
I know, you are way smarter than me, but unless I have hulk muscles in my neck, it would hit the ground with equal force. I know I am not telling you anything you did not already know.
You collect your data boy. I'll choose whats best for me..
Look forward to your thesis obi wan jongnobi

edit: btw its desert out here, so I ragdolled without hitting anything but the ground.

Desert - sand, not a solid surface and it surely worked to your advantage by reducing your rate of deceleration. I'm betting that this crash would've been much worse on a more solid surface (rock, pavement, tree).

On the bone breaking - it sounds like this also acted as a dissipation and energy absorption method, where the impact of the hit was taken by body parts that aren't your head. If you fall from a 3 story building and land on your feet I'm not going to be surprised when your legs shatter, but shattering your legs may save you from a severe head injury (death) in that situation. I think with what you've told us it doesn't sound absurd to believe that you could have been in that situation and not received a severe head injury.

Ragdolling - this means that not all of your deceleration happened in one impact, this is also a beneficial aspect of your crash. Much like a PLF, using multiple points of impact combined with rotational forces can work to dissipate and more evenly distribute forces throughout your body.

Did the helmet help? I'm sure it did.

Did the 6d helmet help MORE than a normal helmet would have? Possible, but without really analyzing what happened with great high speed footage, accelerometers, taking a close look at your injuries and gear, etc. it is tough to say. The technology does look like a good idea, but it doesn't address the key issue - that rapid deceleration upon direct impact with a solid object (a few inches for your head to go from 30mph to 0) is going to fuck your head up.

[Timberridge]

This is interesting...

http://allthingsd.com/20131125/weara...ssion-problem/