To wear or not to wear? HELMETS.
- Thread starter JAHBRADOR
- Start date
ski4fun420
Member
People die with them and without them. I am almost positive more people die without them.
Bong_Master
Member
feel so clumsy with one on, makes me feel as if i have no balance but its not very smart to ski without especially while skiing park and urban with so many things that can go wrong. starting the season off wearing one to try and adjust to it.
daannnnieel
Active member
Whenever I fall I seem to hit my head, so I always rock the helmet.
liftedresearcher
Active member
lost one of my best friends because he wasnt wearing a helmet while hitting a handrail
give this story a read if you need help deciding if you should wear one. i always wear one now because of what happened to Will.
http://www.globaltvedmonton.com/pages/story.aspx?id=6442533679
give this story a read if you need help deciding if you should wear one. i always wear one now because of what happened to Will.
http://www.globaltvedmonton.com/pages/story.aspx?id=6442533679
FuckAllOfYou
Active member
i've almost always seen Will Wesson rock one. not even Torin is consistent. maybe some of those mostly - comp guys like Goepper? the only pros i've ever seen always wearing a helmet are Will and Nick G... hmm, there are probably more
First off I am 99% sure I'm older than anyone else that posted in here and I've had more concussions than birthdays, from mellow to really bad and the all happened without a helmet, for a long time I was so anti helmets they are uncomfortable as fuck look pretty fucking gay compared to a beanie and its a pain in the ass getting you goggles and headphones and shit all sorted out. That being said I think anyone who honestly tries to push themselves and doesn't wear a bucket in the Parkis asking for a KO or two, I wear a back protector now too and that thing has kept out of the E.R. So many god damn times. It's your head guys and regardless of your crash its not going to HURT you to wear one. When your my age you'll be hyped everything in there still works.
First off I am 99% sure I'm older than anyone else that posted in here and I've had more concussions than birthdays, from mellow to really bad and the all happened without a helmet, for a long time I was so anti helmets they are uncomfortable as fuck look pretty fucking gay compared to a beanie and its a pain in the ass getting you goggles and headphones and shit all sorted out. That being said I think anyone who honestly tries to push themselves and doesn't wear a bucket in the Parkis asking for a KO or two, I wear a back protector now too and that thing has kept out of the E.R. So many god damn times. It's your head guys and regardless of your crash its not going to HURT you to wear one. When your my age you'll be hyped everything in there still works.
coolflash8
Active member
i always wear a helmet, if you throw a hat under them it looks steezey
DeRizzo
Active member
also(maybe someone said? didnt read whole thing) you have to see that these are PROs that are not wearing helmets. Some of the people on this website can cruise without a helmet throwing 7s and 9s and flips. Majority of us need to wear a helmet(If I didn't wear a helmet, I would have gotten serious damage to my head) and nowadays I never ever forget my helmet and its probably the first ting that comes to mind. I always keep it at te top of my bag so i can check quick.
theschneidler
Active member
Wear one, it feels like a part of me now. My province (Nova Scotia) just made helmets mandatory now so I thought that was pretty bubonic.
Here is your answer
Wear Helmet: Protect Head if needed, you never know...
Don't Wear Helmet: Die from hitting a tree after clipping the prior tree that was just that lil bit too tight (Experts' youve all been there) or get a serious concussion from a nasty park hit cuz you were too busy thking about "how cool you looked without your helmet and how much more comfortable it was"
Wear Helmet: Protect Head if needed, you never know...
Don't Wear Helmet: Die from hitting a tree after clipping the prior tree that was just that lil bit too tight (Experts' youve all been there) or get a serious concussion from a nasty park hit cuz you were too busy thking about "how cool you looked without your helmet and how much more comfortable it was"
Everyone against helmets is obviously a pussy and not posting in this thread. What's the disconnect, why don't pros ride with em? I don't think a helmet takes away from the shot, or the trick, or the attitude...
Montana_Hoodrat
Active member
The most important reason right here. Added bravery = more fun on sketchier features.
Also, I've noticed that if I have a helmet, I never hit my head. Without a helmet on, hard objects seem to gravitate towards my skull more often.
Also, I've noticed that if I have a helmet, I never hit my head. Without a helmet on, hard objects seem to gravitate towards my skull more often.
ThaLetterM.
Active member
I DONT WEAR ONE BECAUSE ITS FUN, ITS FUN TO DO BAD THINGS.
ThaLetterM.
Active member
serious answer, I don't wear a helmet most of the time because to me, skiing is about the pursuit of danger in order to feel a rush. Not wearing a helmet adds to that. That is as simply as I can put it.
also your mother doesnt like it when I wear condoms, so I dont wear a helmet.
also your mother doesnt like it when I wear condoms, so I dont wear a helmet.
k-rob
Active member
yknow i didn't mention it earlier because i didn't think that in this day and age it was necessary but there is an extremely alarming amount of you who think your helmet will save your life so...
if you ski a line you wouldn't ski without a helmet, the helmet becomes an enabler and you are more likely to get your head split open than you would if you just didn't ski that line, helmet or no. this is a too-often proven fact. hey guess what, people die with helmets on all the time, they don't save lives, otherwise every fucking helmet company would tell you they did, and they don't because that would be false advertising. half the people who do end up smashing their heads in ended up that way because they thought a silly little piece of foam and plastic was gonna protect them while they did some stupid shit they shouldn't have been doing.
the average male downhill skier skis at 70km/hr. that's average, i know myself and a lot of other people ski faster than that, probably everyone on this website skis faster than that. there is no helmet on the market that is gonna prevent your brain from becoming mush at 70km/hr, they test these things, they don't do that. they split open and explode (just like your skull) at much lower speeds. you want to see what a helmet looks like when it hits something at even 30km/hr? it looks like a fucking useless piece of shit.
like i said earlier, i wear my helmet depending on my mood. i don't ride up to something on a day that i'm wearing my helmet and go "got my helmet on, so i can do this." and i don't ride up to something when i'm not wearing a helmet and go "don't got my helmet on, can't do this." you're probably already brain damaged if you think that way.
i wouldn't wear my helmet, or go skiing at all if i didn't feel comfortable skiing without it.
if you ski a line you wouldn't ski without a helmet, the helmet becomes an enabler and you are more likely to get your head split open than you would if you just didn't ski that line, helmet or no. this is a too-often proven fact. hey guess what, people die with helmets on all the time, they don't save lives, otherwise every fucking helmet company would tell you they did, and they don't because that would be false advertising. half the people who do end up smashing their heads in ended up that way because they thought a silly little piece of foam and plastic was gonna protect them while they did some stupid shit they shouldn't have been doing.
the average male downhill skier skis at 70km/hr. that's average, i know myself and a lot of other people ski faster than that, probably everyone on this website skis faster than that. there is no helmet on the market that is gonna prevent your brain from becoming mush at 70km/hr, they test these things, they don't do that. they split open and explode (just like your skull) at much lower speeds. you want to see what a helmet looks like when it hits something at even 30km/hr? it looks like a fucking useless piece of shit.
like i said earlier, i wear my helmet depending on my mood. i don't ride up to something on a day that i'm wearing my helmet and go "got my helmet on, so i can do this." and i don't ride up to something when i'm not wearing a helmet and go "don't got my helmet on, can't do this." you're probably already brain damaged if you think that way.
i wouldn't wear my helmet, or go skiing at all if i didn't feel comfortable skiing without it.
RangledeFreak
New member
Under the ASTM and Snell standards, ski
helmets are tested in 2 meter drops that achieve about 14 miles
per hour (22.5 km/h) at impact, onto a flat anvil. Motorcycle
helmets are routinely tested using 3 meter drops which acheive
about 17 mph (27.36 km/h), yet it is widely accepted that motorcycle
helmets have proven to provide substantial protection against
brain injury at much higher speeds. It should be noted that the
differential between motorcycle helmet drop rig test speeds and
the average speed of motorcycle riders is far higher than the
differential between the ski helmet test speeds, and average
skier speeds. And yet no one seriously questions the efficacy
of motorcycle helmets, there is simply too much data proving
their effectiveness.
It should also be noted that bicycle helmets
are tested using the same 2 meter drops as ski helmets, and like
skiers, bicyclists frequently exceed 14 mph in forward speed,
yet the famous 1998 case-control study of the effectiveness of
bicycle safety helmets by Thompson and Patterson, indicated that
bicycle helmet use reduces the risk of head injury by 85%, brain
injury by 88% and severe brain injury by at least 75%. The Thompson
and Patterson study also showed that this protection extended
to crashes involving a variety of causes, and at higher speeds,
including collisions with fixed and moving objects, such as cars
and trucks. In addition, since the time of the Thompson and Patterson
study, there have been at least six independent studies published
which have conclusively shown that bicycle helmets are effective
in protecting against head injuries in a variety of accident
scenarios. (Hagel,
et al)
Simply put, both helmet wearing bicyclists
and motorcycle riders routinely ride much, much faster than the
apparent capability of their helmets to protect-- at least as
far as a literal reading of helmet test standards would indicate.
In reality, there is overwhelming real-world data and clinical
experience which has clearly shown that these helmet wearers
benefit from significant protection in collisions, even at much
higher speeds.
Another widespread criticism of ski helmets
is the one involving "risk compensation." This is the
theory that people will take more chances when using protective
headgear, that the exaggerated feeling of security a ski helmet
supposedly affords is likely to lead people into increasing their
level of risk-taking on the slopes. The theory posits that skiers
and snowboarders will tend to bring their level of thrill back
up to their own individual, acceptable level of risk.
This has been a favorite theory of one
Dr. Jasper Shealy, a researcher who has been the darling of the
National Ski Areas Association (NSSA) for many years. Dr. Shealy,
who has been quoted as saying that he doesn't wear a helmet unless
it is to keep his head warm, currently shares his thoughts on
the NSSA's Lids
on Kids website. Incredibly, in this article on an industry
site supposedly developed "to help educate parents about
putting helmets on their children while they're on the slopes,"
Shealy allows that he is "not exactly" happy with the
trend of increased helmet use. One of the main reasons he gives
involves the theory of risk compensation.
Yet in a landmark ski helmet study published
in 2004, Brent Hagel, an assistant professor of epidemiology
at the University of Calgary, found that helmet use did not
lead to riskier behavior or increase the risk of severe injury
while skiing and snowboarding. In fact, Hagel discovered that
wearing a helmet out on the slopes may reduce the risk of head
injury by as much as 29 to 56%. Hagel's
study didn't include those who fell and hit their heads but
did not sustain an injury because they were wearing a helmet.
Including those individuals would have increased the documented
protective effect of helmets even more.
Further, in 2005, Dr. Michael Scott of
the California State University at Chico, along with several
others, published a report
entitled "Testing the Risk Compensation Hypothesis for Safety
Helmets in Alpine Skiing and Snowboarding. Dr. Scott and his
group recorded face-to-face interviews with 1,779 adult skiers
and snowboarders at 31 ski areas in Western North America during
January-March 2003. Respondents were asked two questions assessing
risk compensation: do they (a) ski/snowboard faster, slower or
about the same speed, and (b) challenge themselves more, less
or about the same. Helmet wearers compared current behavior to
when they did not wear a helmet; non-wearers, to previous seasons.
The result: helmet use was significantly associated with less
risky skiing/snowboarding, and the study's authors concluded
that increasing helmet use does not appear to motivate more risk
taking. Helmet wearers were said to engage in "less risk
behavior than non-wearers, suggesting that decisions to adopt
helmets are motivated by safety concerns.
helmets are tested in 2 meter drops that achieve about 14 miles
per hour (22.5 km/h) at impact, onto a flat anvil. Motorcycle
helmets are routinely tested using 3 meter drops which acheive
about 17 mph (27.36 km/h), yet it is widely accepted that motorcycle
helmets have proven to provide substantial protection against
brain injury at much higher speeds. It should be noted that the
differential between motorcycle helmet drop rig test speeds and
the average speed of motorcycle riders is far higher than the
differential between the ski helmet test speeds, and average
skier speeds. And yet no one seriously questions the efficacy
of motorcycle helmets, there is simply too much data proving
their effectiveness.
It should also be noted that bicycle helmets
are tested using the same 2 meter drops as ski helmets, and like
skiers, bicyclists frequently exceed 14 mph in forward speed,
yet the famous 1998 case-control study of the effectiveness of
bicycle safety helmets by Thompson and Patterson, indicated that
bicycle helmet use reduces the risk of head injury by 85%, brain
injury by 88% and severe brain injury by at least 75%. The Thompson
and Patterson study also showed that this protection extended
to crashes involving a variety of causes, and at higher speeds,
including collisions with fixed and moving objects, such as cars
and trucks. In addition, since the time of the Thompson and Patterson
study, there have been at least six independent studies published
which have conclusively shown that bicycle helmets are effective
in protecting against head injuries in a variety of accident
scenarios. (Hagel,
et al)
Simply put, both helmet wearing bicyclists
and motorcycle riders routinely ride much, much faster than the
apparent capability of their helmets to protect-- at least as
far as a literal reading of helmet test standards would indicate.
In reality, there is overwhelming real-world data and clinical
experience which has clearly shown that these helmet wearers
benefit from significant protection in collisions, even at much
higher speeds.
Another widespread criticism of ski helmets
is the one involving "risk compensation." This is the
theory that people will take more chances when using protective
headgear, that the exaggerated feeling of security a ski helmet
supposedly affords is likely to lead people into increasing their
level of risk-taking on the slopes. The theory posits that skiers
and snowboarders will tend to bring their level of thrill back
up to their own individual, acceptable level of risk.
This has been a favorite theory of one
Dr. Jasper Shealy, a researcher who has been the darling of the
National Ski Areas Association (NSSA) for many years. Dr. Shealy,
who has been quoted as saying that he doesn't wear a helmet unless
it is to keep his head warm, currently shares his thoughts on
the NSSA's Lids
on Kids website. Incredibly, in this article on an industry
site supposedly developed "to help educate parents about
putting helmets on their children while they're on the slopes,"
Shealy allows that he is "not exactly" happy with the
trend of increased helmet use. One of the main reasons he gives
involves the theory of risk compensation.
Yet in a landmark ski helmet study published
in 2004, Brent Hagel, an assistant professor of epidemiology
at the University of Calgary, found that helmet use did not
lead to riskier behavior or increase the risk of severe injury
while skiing and snowboarding. In fact, Hagel discovered that
wearing a helmet out on the slopes may reduce the risk of head
injury by as much as 29 to 56%. Hagel's
study didn't include those who fell and hit their heads but
did not sustain an injury because they were wearing a helmet.
Including those individuals would have increased the documented
protective effect of helmets even more.
Further, in 2005, Dr. Michael Scott of
the California State University at Chico, along with several
others, published a report
entitled "Testing the Risk Compensation Hypothesis for Safety
Helmets in Alpine Skiing and Snowboarding. Dr. Scott and his
group recorded face-to-face interviews with 1,779 adult skiers
and snowboarders at 31 ski areas in Western North America during
January-March 2003. Respondents were asked two questions assessing
risk compensation: do they (a) ski/snowboard faster, slower or
about the same speed, and (b) challenge themselves more, less
or about the same. Helmet wearers compared current behavior to
when they did not wear a helmet; non-wearers, to previous seasons.
The result: helmet use was significantly associated with less
risky skiing/snowboarding, and the study's authors concluded
that increasing helmet use does not appear to motivate more risk
taking. Helmet wearers were said to engage in "less risk
behavior than non-wearers, suggesting that decisions to adopt
helmets are motivated by safety concerns.
Protection also depends on the helmet. Just look at Smith's Maze, which is said to be the lightest helmet in the world. Probably so, but it's also a super thin one and will definitely not give you the same protection as many others. Even though all helmets in the market fulfill some sort of safety standards you can still use common sense when choosing one.
One thing that is cool in freeskiing is the fact that wearing a helmet when hitting urbans is nothing exceptional. Just look at snowboarding and virtually nobody wears one (Jed Anderson is the exception that proves the rule). This simply because of cultural differences within two sports and has nothing to do with skiing being more dangerous. I wonder where differences like this come from? Anyway, I'm just happy that I don't have to feel like an idiot when wearing a helmet at a street spot because I couldn't ski without one.
One thing that is cool in freeskiing is the fact that wearing a helmet when hitting urbans is nothing exceptional. Just look at snowboarding and virtually nobody wears one (Jed Anderson is the exception that proves the rule). This simply because of cultural differences within two sports and has nothing to do with skiing being more dangerous. I wonder where differences like this come from? Anyway, I'm just happy that I don't have to feel like an idiot when wearing a helmet at a street spot because I couldn't ski without one.
It's a gamble not to wear one. Sure, if you're a damn good skier chances are better that nothing will happen..
But, just gotta seriously ask yourself if your lifes worth gambling with. I wear a helmet 95% of the time, other 5% are cruiser days where I feel like relaxing without that clunky thing.
But, just gotta seriously ask yourself if your lifes worth gambling with. I wear a helmet 95% of the time, other 5% are cruiser days where I feel like relaxing without that clunky thing.
Wear 100% of the time when skiing. However good you are, however easy what you're doing is, there's still the chance of an awkward fall. And it's not just you on the mountain, other people can crash into you.
A few years back a girl got a ski edge through her skull when someone crashed into her. If she was wearing a helmet, the damage would have been much less.
A few years back a girl got a ski edge through her skull when someone crashed into her. If she was wearing a helmet, the damage would have been much less.
RangledeFreak
New member
Sorry here some updated data for you.
Russell and colleagues in 2010 published a meta-analysis of 12 previous
studies and concluded that skiers and snowboarders wearing a helmet were
significantly less likely than those without
a helmet to have a head injury (odds ratio 0.65, 95% confidence
interval 0.55 to 0.79). In children under 13 years the odds
ratio was 0.41 (0.27 to 0.59). In addition, they
concluded that helmets were not associated with an increased risk of
neck injury (odds ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.72-1.09).
Jake Shealy from Vermont presented (as yet unpublished) data from their
ongoing epidemiological study that specifically focussed on this
question at the 19th ISSS meeting in Keystone, Colorado in May 2011.They
defined potentially serious head injury (PSHI) as concussion, skull
fracture, epidural/subdural bleed, neurological deficit or death from
head injury. They found that from the 1995/6 season to the 2009/10
season, helmet use increased from 5 to 76%. They also found that head
injuries as a % of all injuries decreased by 20% over the same time
frame. The incidence of PSHI (expressed as MDBI) improved by 64% from
8775 days to 24,690 days between each PSHI as the rate of helmet use
increased (p
Russell and colleagues in 2010 published a meta-analysis of 12 previous
studies and concluded that skiers and snowboarders wearing a helmet were
significantly less likely than those without
a helmet to have a head injury (odds ratio 0.65, 95% confidence
interval 0.55 to 0.79). In children under 13 years the odds
ratio was 0.41 (0.27 to 0.59). In addition, they
concluded that helmets were not associated with an increased risk of
neck injury (odds ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.72-1.09).
Jake Shealy from Vermont presented (as yet unpublished) data from their
ongoing epidemiological study that specifically focussed on this
question at the 19th ISSS meeting in Keystone, Colorado in May 2011.They
defined potentially serious head injury (PSHI) as concussion, skull
fracture, epidural/subdural bleed, neurological deficit or death from
head injury. They found that from the 1995/6 season to the 2009/10
season, helmet use increased from 5 to 76%. They also found that head
injuries as a % of all injuries decreased by 20% over the same time
frame. The incidence of PSHI (expressed as MDBI) improved by 64% from
8775 days to 24,690 days between each PSHI as the rate of helmet use
increased (p
logan_bingaman
Member
Better safe than sorry!
k-rob
Active member
again, i don't know why you don't bother to read my posts but i'm not responding to studies, especially ones that have literally nothing to do with my argument (neck injuries?) i'm responding to this thread. i'm not even arguing against wearing a helmet, i repeatedly stated that i wear a helmet sometiems, your brain can't seem to comprehend that. i'm arguing that a helmet will not save your life, which is a proven (by the same studies you referenced) fact, that half the people in this thread can't get through their skulls. i'm arguing that you should not rely on your helmet, but on your abilities as a skier. i am not against helmets, i am against people who think they can go around bashing their head against shit as long as they've got a helmet on.
White_raven
Member
Helmets are for fags and gapers.
LiquorLanch
Active member
austen sweeten, jed andersen those are snowboarders and i know a few ams who do as well
