My next helmet will cost $80!

[Bones]

Lance,
Had I not read many, many of your past posts, you would have gotten the rise out of me you like to illicit. But I am smiling, because I find your last post to be, well, comical, I guess.

I never stated I was a HELMET expert. Having expertise in dealing with this type of trauma? Well, if having textbook chapters published in peer reviewed medical texts on this stuff, being a faculty member teaching 6th year surgical residents and supervising them in the OR and still getting up in the middle of the night to deal with this stuff qualifies, then I guess I am guilty.

Just curious, who WOULD you consider a reliable source in a PRACTICAL sense?

And by the way, it is pretty difficult to offend me, as having been through the "old school" style of surgical training, I was treated to 6 years of frequently being called "a worthless piece of poo" by attending surgeons, along with my co residents. After a while you just kind of shrug your shoulders and acknowledge the consistency of certain people's behavior. And you apologized first, anyway. Our attending surgeons never did.

Bones

[darthrider]

Something else...

Nearly 4 years ago when I did my ~35 MPH face-plant in the brick pavers after T-boning a traffic median on my new 50R, I had a "near death experience".

After viewing the crash site, or hearing the crash described, and seeing my helmet...2 Keller cops, 3 EMT's, an ER nurse, and an ER Doc all told me the same thing: If I hadn't been wearing my helmet I would be dead. The Doc went on to say that if by some chance I had survived I would wish I hadn't as my chin, many teeth, much of my left jaw bone & cheek bone & "forehead bone", probably my left ear, and half the skin on my face would be...gone. I still remember hearing the sound of my helmet grinding along those bricks and thinking this should be hurting like hell, in addition to my knees hurting like hell which they already were. I did have some injuries but not a scratch on my face or head.

It really didn't surprise me, what they all said, I thought so too. What did surprise me was not how *much* damage there was to my helmet but how *little*.

The helmet was a Shoei DuoTec, their previous generation model of the SynchroTec that took two hands to unlock the latch on either side. I have since switched to non-modular helmets exclusively but this one did it's job well with no latch release or even deformation of the chin bar or mechanism.

It was apparent it had been down with deep scratches on the left side of the shield, minor scratches on the chinbar, deeper scratches on the ear area and a place the size of a quarter in the temple area ground down flat. My description probably makes it sound worse than it looks. It really "looks like" it could be used safely, but we all know better.

I guess my point is how good most of our modern helmets are. And how fragile our bodies are, as Bones described above. And how quickly and easily we can be gone. And how important it is to use what we believe to be the very best safety equipment we can find.

I really dodged the bullet that night and now believe I have stacked the odds a little more in my favor with my helmet choice.

However you decide, choose wisely.

[wncbmw]

During the course of this debate/information thread, the thought occured to me - "I wonder if the type of discussion goes on a Harley board?"



Amazing we have this thread and many of my friends that ride Harleys, use next-to-nothing helmets and can't wait to get to South Carolina so they can take those off!

[Bones]

...and you know.....a lot of those little skid lids worn by Harley riders have DOT sticker on the back.

Bones

[Biff's R]

I tried on a Schuberth Concept 2 today, and found the lower part/neck to be way too tight in both XL and XXL(just call me jughead). Then I tried on the Nolan xlite and it fit like a glove. I also tried the HJC modular, and it did not g\fit as well as the Nolan. I guess my massive neck and shoulder muscles do not work as well witth the Schuberth. Helmets are a tough thing to recommend to others, since we all have different shaped melons..

BTW, Some people also call me "Joe Pecs".

[Lance1150]

As for the softer helmets being destroyed, shattered, useless, following a crash.... that sounds sort of like the crumble zones in a car doing their job???

That was the point of the article, with was a scientific study vs. Bone's observations....

P.S.
I appreciate the passion of a medical person faced with a long history of shattered people... I come from a similar, although less technical, background.... anyway, I thought the article made a good case for a different testing model, and one that would allow MUCH less force to be transmitted to the brain.. that was the point of the article as I read it.

[new2BMW]

P.S.
I appreciate the passion of a medical person faced with a long history of shattered people... I come from a similar, although less technical, background.... anyway, I thought the article made a good case for a different testing model, and one that would allow MUCH less force to be transmitted to the brain.. that was the point of the article as I read itl

I agree with that Lance. That's how I understood it as well. But it is nice to have profesional opinions to go along with data. I think your EMS experience is valuable as well if you're willing to share it.

[rdsmith3]

One thread we should really start is "how did you fit your helmet before buying." I will bet the majority bought one a full size too big. I did the first time!


Bones

Regarding fit, the dealer I went to held the helmet while it was on my head. He told me to rotate my head from side to side (as if shaking my head to say NO). If the helmet fit properly, I could not do this. The helmet did, in fact, feel too tight when I first got it.

I wear a Shoei full face.

Also, this is why I have advocated buying helmets from retailers who know how to fit you, NOT from mail order discount places. You have to try a helmet on for fit. A good dealer will help you get the proper fit, as mine did. On the old board, I remember more than a few people saying it is stupid to pay more $ for a helmet at a retailer.

Finally, my dealer has a picture of a full face helmet that survived a crash. The entire front of the helmet is scratched. I know for a fact that it convinced a few people to get full face helmets.

[Acacia]

Lance write; "That was the point of the article, with was a scientific study vs. Bone's observations....

Bones writes; " Having expertise in dealing with this type of trauma? Well, if having textbook chapters published in peer reviewed medical texts on this stuff, being a faculty member teaching 6th year surgical residents and supervising them in the OR and still getting up in the middle of the night to deal with this stuff qualifies, then I guess I am guilty."

Scientifc vs Bones? I would think that Bones would most certainly qualify for being a member of the scientific community with both academic, professional as well as practical experience in the real world. I would stack those qualifications and opinions against a journalist trying to sell copy any day. His experience vs Snell and DOT expertise - they mostly play with test rigs trying as best they can to similate accident events and that is scientific? - Bones get to play with the real thing and that is not scientific?

Unless of course Bones is a Shaman, Sangoma or has a mail order diploma!

I would like Bones' real world experience to put me back together if I ever needed it.

[Lance1150]

Some of you are being a bit silly about this debate when it comes to the observations of injured people... if Bones did indeed study helmet types, specific crash data, and study the specific damage to various helmets and relate such data to the injury recieved by the person, fine, then I stand corrected (and would love to read this published material)..... but, if as I believe, he is simply relating stories of dealing with gruesome head and facial injuries of various motorcycle riders, and somehow making a correlation based on seeing some of the rider's helmets, then I don't think that has much value.

I wish 'some' entity would publish a definitive study about how too much force is allowed to impact the brain due to faulty Snell/Dot regulations... and then change those impact numbers to better protect our heads... I thought the article in question tried to shed light on that.

[socalrob]

Hey Lance, I too wish someone would publish the definative study. But since that hasn't happened, intelligent observations, published or not, from a rider like Bones who I suspect spends a few extra moments talikng to the EMS folks & the injured riders, is better data than I am likely to get. I would also like to hear from you concerning your observations of accidents if you feel comfortable sharing.

Like the MC article implies, my wish is for a helmet that will be soft enough to crumple into a little knot when hit with the same energy that will kill me, but therefore will give my brain the most cushion possible in a survivalbe crash. But in real life I don't think we know what that energy hit is, and Bones is telling us that in his opinion the softer helmets are failing prior to other life ending injuries. So for right now I'm sticking with my Aria.

I am a bit pissed that the gov't isn't spending $$ to make biking safer. I wish I had some data on miles riden v. crashes & fatalities, bike style safty rates, & real helmet safty studies that don't count the toy helmets the same as real full face helmets. Until I get that info Bones & his ilk are my best/only sorce.

[Bones]

I do agree that the study Lance wants to see would be most helpful, but it is a study that NEVER will appear. The reason is because the only way to get close to "real science" with such a study is to have double blind controlled study with humans , and that can't and won't happen with this type of thing. When it comes to life and death issues in medicine, the only ethical way to do those types of studies is when you KNOW the patient is going to die. If the issue at hand is that the patient MIGHT die, the study can't happen. That is why you see so many of these studies with chemotherapy in cancer patients. If it is known that the prognosis is ultimately death within X number of months, it may be worth trying a new protocol that lengthens life by a few months. Once in a while, they come up with a new drug or drug combo and Eureka, a "cure" is found. That is why Hodgkins disease, for example, now has about a 90% ten year survival rate when it was universally fatal years ago. So if you think about how you would design such a study for helmets, it quickly becomes clear that the study won't happen.

The raw data on how many G's a head can take before a certain % of brains sustain injury is available. The data on what helmets will do in straight line impact is there (see article Lance posted). BUT.....and this is where Lance has issues with my comments..........those two bodies of information do not necessarily equate to real world outcomes in many if not most circumstances when it comes to riding and crashing a motorcycle. AND (and maybe this is one point that was lost amidst all of my comments) we have to choose a helmet that will protect us against the crash we are not sure is going to happen. In other words, if we could wear the softer helmet for one type of crash and the harder one for another, we could decide on which one to use on a given day.........but we don't know what might happen when we go for a ride.........THAT was my point. So I decided on what my helmet would be by digesting a COMPOSITE of information based on my experience in observation along with all the studies I have read (and it is a lot of them).

Now, "they" (whoever they might be) COULD design studies to more realistically simulate the REAL types of impacts helmets face in real riding crashes AND what types of forces are transmitted to a model skull with model brain inside of it, but those studies do not exist as far as my research has taken me. And I am willing to bet that I have spent more time looking into these things than Lance has. I don't think anyone has done them. Probably because it would take a lot of money. And currently, no one wants to cough up the money to do it. Hell, we can't even yet get enough money coordiated with interest to get an update on the Hurt study from DECADES ago.

Now, Lance, my point was that I HAVE studied exactly what you suggest: helmet types, specific crash data, specific damage to various helmet types and related the data to the injury(s) received by the person. BUT I am willing to admit that it is biased data. Not biased by my opinion, but biased by sampling. Why? Because in any community, market forces will skew what percentage of total helmet use is represented by given brands. For example, within a 75 mile radius of where I live and practice, it is VERY difficult to buy an Arai helmet. You can get Shoeis and You can get an HJC everywhere. I recognize and admit that. And I haven't ignored that. Plus, in the last few years, we see a lot more flip ups. They didn't show up much several years ago. Have I published a study? Of course not. The only way my type of observation would be meaningful is if it was a multicenter studywith a larger data pool and involving a wider geographic area. How many surgeons do I know that do this stuff and are REALLY interested in motorcycles and who ride (so they really understand the dynamics internally) AND who don't think all motorcyclists are idiots? Not that many.I don't think, however, that makes my experience completely meaningless, as you suggest. I still think it means more than a magazine article, a report from SNELL, or random observations by some guys drinking beer around a campfire who don't work in this area.

But, I am willing to share what I know about this, and have tried. I have no interest in just "sharing gruesome stories....." as you suggest. As I said, the novelty wore off a long time ago.

In terms of your assessment of the "value" of correlating these types of data as it applies to these things, I guess we just have to disagree,again. The very best physicians and scientists I have ever encountered were universally blessed with one thing above all others: the ability to be great observers. This is the MOST important thing in science (even in a lab) and most certainly in the real world practice of medicine.

And here is one more observation that HAS been born out in studies: much of this may be moot because almost always, when a rider crashes and dies of a head injury, they have sustained at least one other injury that would have killed them. Usually more.

In terms of the government doing the studies...........oh, let's not go there. It would cost 5 times as much as it would need to and take 10 years too long to get published. That is another subject.

So, I think I have blathered on enough about all of this. So I won't post in this thread any longer. I do hope some of the info. I have passed along has been helpful to some, and it seems, perhaps it may have been. Lance,I still hope you ride with a high quality non flip up full face helmet and ride safe.

Bones

[arkline]

Hell, we can't even yet get enough money coordiated with interest to get an update on the Hurt study from DECADES ago.

Au contraire, mon brudda. The lastest Federal Transportation bill has funding for an updated Hurt-like study. The AMA, not an entirely disinterested body, has been plumping for this for years now. Not necessarily specific to helmet construction/protection, but something anyway. And some funds for "education", whatever that means in this context. Maybe some good will come from it. Of course, recent data from NHTSA seems to link increased mortality of motorcyclists in some states with the repeal of mandatory helmet laws. But then that fact might get us into another type of religious argument. Pace.

[Bones]

ARk,
Yes, there is supposed funding for the project, but from what I have read, there is still no project about to start. Since it is going to be GUBBMENT funded, and since politics always creep in, it is not clear exactly how the study will be performed, who will the captain of the ship and how the data will be both interpreted and used. I really hope that if and when it is complete, the study will be as objective and clear as the Hurt report. You can bet that some politician somewhere will want to go on a rant about how unsafe motorcycling is and strap us with more and more laws.

Meanwhile, the Hurt report was done.....a LONG time ago. You would think another more comprehensive study would have been done quite some time ago and that an ongoing project would be in the works. Not yet. Let's keep hoping.

Bones

[arkline]

Bones,

Oh, yes, I can see that there will be a looooonnnnnngggg and tedious bunch of grant proposal writing and review. Still, since we have waited until a large enough organization (the Feds) could come up with the cash for the study, patience is in order. I've never understood why the AMA never put together a consortium to fund such a study, but what do I know? Or the MSF? Or someother interested party/parties. It couldn't really cost that much could it?

[NCRoaster]

The AMA reports in the October issue of its American Motorcyclist magazine that the recently passed $286.4 billion US Transportation Plan includes $3 million for a study of motorcycle crashes on the street. The organization states the study will be conducted by the Oklahoma Transportation Center, a respected independent organization that is a multidisciplinary coalition of Oklahoma State University, the University of Oklahoma State and Langston University, located at Oklahoma State University in Stillwater.

Let's hope something good comes from the study and that the researchers don't spin the information to support the NHTSA agenda. (For non US members: the National Highway Safety Administration, which is famous for its abuse of statistics).

NCRoaster

[new2BMW]

Excellent information NCRoaster.

Everyone should know that the state of Oklahoma in general is at odds with the NHTSA and has been for a long time. Basically, Oklahoma depends heavily on the Feds for highway funds due to our low population and tourism combined with the heavy through traffic on I40 and between Texas and a large portion of the country. The NHTSA has crapped on Oklahoma many times in the past.

Believe it or not, the mandatory helmet law issue back in the nineties was the final straw since the Feds wanted to cut 3% of any state's highway funding if that state didn't pass a helmet law.

In the end, I think they made a good choice for this project and the results should be fair.

[NCRoaster]

J. Paul,

Thank you for that useful tidbit of information. I hope you are right and that Oklahoma does not roll on this study because of NHTSA pressure. Either way, the statistics should be interesting if we are allowed to see them and interpret them ourselves. I am interested in the methodology of the study. You know sometimes its how you ask the question that matters.

NCRoaster