More helmets this season?

[Ominous Omelet 0]

I was just reading a thread from a while back about helmets and safety. Wondering if people are noticing more helmet-wearing on the slopes in Japan this season or not?

[Dougy 0]

I've seen very few helmets the whole 4 years I've been here. I saw one guy with one in a park at Maiko Kogen but he didn't have the strap done up . It's strange the attitude towards them here, as I said in another thread I had some punk-arse wannbes tell me I must think I was something special because I was wearing a helmet. Learning to ride in Australia and having done several seasons at Mt Hutt(death-ice central)in NZ I never ride without one. Here the problem isn't ice but the large numbers of people, many of them who appear to be in worlds of their own, packed into such small resorts. Being a snowboard instructor/photographer I've seen too many injuries that could have been prevented if the rider/skier was wearing a helmet. " title="" src="graemlins/cry.gif" /> I can't stress enough the importance of wearing a helmet. I know everyone's heard it before and you'll probably write me off as being a pussy or your mum but don't give a $h!t about what people as in the end it's your head and its worth protecting.

[SerreChe 2]

Dougy, you are absolutely right. I do not wear a helmet but thinking about it. I actually think that people wearing helmets are smart/responsible and not pussies. People should get the best protection money can get them. As for these people making unfriendly comments directed at you for wearing a helmet, well there are aholes everywhere.

 

Can you imagine if people had the same attitude towards Aids/condoms/protection?...

 

Scary that some people can make such dumb comments, so I am thinking along the same lines as you: f#@& 'em !

[tsondaboy 0]

I always wear a helmet and I have also convinced my Japanese friends to buy one. The funny thing is that one guy said that the only reason he is going to buy one is because he feels cold only with a toque.

I ve noticed last time on the slopes that there are more Japanese wearing a helmet this year. It could always be my imagination though.

[mattlucas 0]

Helmet's have only really come into popularity in the last 5 years or so back home in NA.

Give it a another few years and they will be the next big thing.

But as for people saying shit about people wearing helmets they have obviously lost to many brain cells from bashing there heads so many times.

 

 

I hit my head pretty good on the weekend in a backwards fall into a nice big tree. It gave me a bit of a headache. I can only imagine what would have happened had I not been wearing my helmet.

[js 0]

Perhaps it should be mandatory for all ski/snowboard instructors to wear them - that way kids would pick up on the idea at an early age.

 

 Quote:

Originally posted by Toque:

I hit my head pretty good on the weekend in a backwards fall into a nice big tree. It gave me a bit of a headache. I can only imagine what would have happened had I not been wearing my helmet.

Was the toque under the helmet?

[mattlucas 0]

You may joke but I was wearing a type of toque under my helmet. I don't have ear flaps so wear a very thin toque.

 

I think helmets should be mandatory on bicyles before they are needed on the slopes.

[snowboarding maniac 0]

I also invested in a helmet this year. It is great! I never even know I am wearing one. I took my girlfriend out boarding for the first time last year at tenjiyama in Yamanashi. She had a spill and broke her tailbone AND her wrist. I had one instance last season where I landed on my wrist and it hurt like a mo fo. Needless to say, I invested in wrist guards too. Helmets and wrist guards for boarders is just smart riding!

[dave rave 0]

Helmets rule!!!!

[js 0]

 Quote:

Originally posted by Toque:
I think helmets should be mandatory on bicyles before they are needed on the slopes.

Bike helmets are mandatory in Oz, but many people still ride without them or done up correctly - the Police seem hesitant to book people because they don't rate it as either important or a significant money-spinner ... I reckon they're simply too lazy to get out of their plush pursuit vehicles.

With insurance being an issue, maybe resorts could make it a mandatory requirement of holding a lift pass ... no helmet = losing the pass.

[miteyak 0]

Unfortunately the helmet laws in Australia only served to decrease the number of bike riders and INCREASE fatalities.... things are never quite the way they might appear. The Aussie experiment is one of the reasons why Britain didn't bring in similar legislation.

 

If you really give a toss about safety, you should wear a helmet in a car before on a bike. That's where virtually all head trauma fatalities occur, and the biggest accident killer by an incomparable margin.

 

I could call everyone who gets into a car without airbags, side impact bars etc. an idiot, and there's rather more evidence to support my assertion, but I wont. I prefer to leave the decision up to the individuals, there are arguments for and against, it's not clear cut, and, as with my car example, many people are irrational in their approach to safety.

 

Let's refrain from calling either side 'idiots'.

 

(As an aside, if you do a bit of research you'll discover that most helmets do little more than save you from a headache from a minor twang.)

 

Subzero, they won't do that because there are no statistics that suggest that a lack of helmets increases their liability. Fortunately, the insurance industry is run more on fact, thus unlikely to contribute to any rules infringing unnecessarily on the rights of the individual.

[Yuki's Passion 1]

you should see the monster helmet on my head Its like a huge bubble.

 

I love the way peeps on scooters wear their helmets behind their heads - yeah, like that would help in an accident. I quit riding my motorcycle cuz I had too many near death experiences on it... and the helmet wouldnt have mattered

[js 0]

 Quote:

Originally posted by miteyak:
Let's refrain from calling either side 'idiots'.

(As an aside, if you do a bit of research you'll discover that most helmets do little more than save you from a headache from a minor twang.)

Subzero, they won't do that because there are no statistics that suggest that a lack of helmets increases their liability. Fortunately, the insurance industry is run more on fact, thus unlikely to contribute to any rules infringing unnecessarily on the rights of the individual.

I agree, there are only informed, uninformed, and ill-informed people.

Don't know where you got your info, but here is the conclusion of a govt study on bicycle helmets (which could be compared to any head-trauma incident - aka riding.)

It's a laborious read but for the sake of young 'lurkers', it's included:

‘Overall, these results provide clear evidence for the benefit of wearing helmets while cycling, in terms of risk reduction for not only head and brain injury, but also facial injury and fatal injury. These results are applicable to riders of all ages, both in less severe crashes and in collisions with motor vehicles. These results confirm those published in initial studies in Australia and the USA over a decade ago, although the more recent studies are confined to these two countries, Canada and the United Kingdom.

Furthermore, there should be a clear distinction between the benefits of helmets per se and the benefits of compulsory helmet wearing laws. Some of the opponents of compulsory helmet wearing laws have chosen to include the safety benefits of helmets within their criticism of cycle helmet wearing laws. As this paper demonstrates, there is clear evidence of the safety benefits of cycle helmets with respect to head, brain and fatal injuries. Any reasonable objection to compulsory helmet wearing laws can only be based on issues other than the efficacy of helmets themselves. For example, there is a civil rights aspect to any legislation that seeks to restrict the behaviour of citizens and debate over such issues is a healthy aspect of modern democracy. This is, however, a political or ethical debate, not a scientific one.

The issue for future action is not the benefits of cycle helmets per se, for this has been established repeatedly in the past and confirmed here, but how best to encourage the use of cycle helmets by all riders.’

http://www.atsb.gov.au/road/pdf/cr195.pdf


The insurance industry bases their rationale on studies as that mentioned above. It may be only a matter of time before resorts stipulate helmet wearing to reduce liability.

It's appears your argument is not related to helmet efficacy but civil rights issues.

Fine, no problem with that, but the cost to the community for rehabilitating brain-damaged people is exceptionally high, so a responsible govt takes measures to reduce costs by reducing the likelihood of such incidence.

Helmet laws haven't reduced cycling in this country - in fact, more people are using bikes because govt is providing additional infrastructure (paths, etc) for both recreational and commuting purposes.

In some countries, the need for political points scoring and dodgy economic rationalisation outways their civil responsibilites.

Anyway, hope this helps people consider the use of a brain-bucket.

[gamera 0]

Envy those who can get helmets with no problem

I have kinda size problem. A 63cm helmet is almost impossible to get rather than not easy in Japan

Even if I could get one, probably wonder if I could wear it off when I need

[miteyak 0]

We've had this debate before, and there are plenty of links in that debate that scientifically support the other side of the helmet issue, the reality not the clinical trials (and the reduction in cyclists).

 

The fact that this report is, er, biased towards a policy that needed to be heavily defended, given the critisism the govt received regarding implementation and corruption makes this report standard fair in the Western tradition of selective information to prove one's point.

 

You haven't addressed the real issue... why are car laws so lax if 'safety' is so paramount? Ooooh, now that's political, cyclists are a soft targets.

 

The truth is that the non-cycling hoi-poloi think cyclists need helmets so it's an easy platform to run on. Try insisting they wear crash helmets in their cars...(which makes MUCH more sense)... that'd be the last platform they ever ran on. Try telling them that not putting a helmet on their kid in the car is just plain irresponsible... suicide!

 

(Head trauma death or disability whilst skiing is at about 1/10,000,000 riding days, and when you factor in high-risk behaviour ... hardly a risky situation)

 

If you want to wear a helmet skiing, great, enjoy. But the risk factor (in most cases) and evidence does not support any kind of ridicule of those who choose not to partake, and certainly holds no precedent toward any mandatory helmet laws.

[Yuki's Passion 1]

 Quote:

Originally posted by miteyak:

(As an aside, if you do a bit of research you'll discover that most helmets do little more than save you from a headache from a minor twang.)

As a former triathlete I strongly disagree with this - I have been brushed and hit by cars before while training in Hawaii and cracked my helmet one time but was lucky I didnt break anything. My father wasnt so lucky as he was cut off by an 18 wheeler truck turning in front of him and had to go down under it, results: cracked helmet right down the middle, broke his collar bone, scapula, 4 ribs, and his left arm and couldnt compete in the Ironman that year.

And, I also have very good friends who werent so lucky and who have died from being hit by cars. But, helmets do save lives and not just protect you from a minor headache.

[js 0]

With many people it's also a matter of - 'oh, that will never happen to me', coupled with a bit of civil rights dogma.

 

For the purposes of this study, the 'reality' and the 'clinical trials' are inseparable - if you read this and other reports, the information is garnered from both spheres, and substantiated by medical records. (As any proper study should do)

 

Either way, you can't deny helmets reduce the severity of head injury and increase the likelihood of surviving a severe accident where head trauma is the main problem. Similar to airbags and soft impact surfaces, they won't prevent deaths - if the impact is big enough or other injuries occur.

 

As far as wearing helmets in cars - yes, it is a political and community based decision. But so is the push to improve the safety of vehicles, which is seen as a more palatable choice.

 

Ask a vehicle manufacturer if they'd prefer to leave out all the safety paraphernalia based exclusively on economics - damn right they would, but public opinion says different.

 

The choice not to adopt helmets for cars was made simply because vehicle occupants have more protection than motorcyclists, bicyclist, etc.

 

Ergo, helmets are mandatory for motorcyclists/bicyclists for added protection.

 

It boils down to: is your head important enough to protect, what is the probability of injuring it, and what are the benefits of a helmet.

 

Risk vs Benefit.

 

Benefits include reducing severity of an impact, keeping head warm.

 

Risk is a personal issue dependant upon many factors.

 

Helmets will probably be adopted as mandatory equipment on ski fields if insurance issues continue - regardless of historical injury type - because helmets minimise a particularly expensive, if uncommon, type of injury.

[me jane 0]

Agree on the bike helmet thing - my housemate when I was at uni had a taxi driver open his door in front of her as she was riding down the road. She flew over the door and landed the other side. The parameds strapped her to a board and took her to hospital. Turned out she was just a bit concussed and okay after a few hours. Her helmet wasn't so lucky & had a huge hole in it. Drs said it probably saved her life.

Ski/board wise I'm not sure. I think the benefits are pretty obvious if you ski in trees or in the park. I'd agree with the kid theory too - due to their lack of danger awareness and thinner skulls. How about for those who aren't at tree level and don't go that fast or in the park? Then again there is always the risk of someone else hitting you...

On the anti helmet side I have read that the extra weight can increase the risk of neck injury. There is also that when a helmet wearer crashes into and head butts a non helmet wearer the non-helmet wearer doesn't fare too well...

Talking about when people most need to be wearing helmets - has anone considered wearing one down the pub on a Friday night?

I haven't got one - hope I'm not jinxing myself for this weekend

[miteyak 0]

Yes, of course, having a helmet, in the event of an accident, will help. The argument against having a helmet centers around the increased risk of accidents (loss of peripheral vision, increased confidence, etc) while wearing a helmet, making data much harder to decipher.

 

Me Jane is right. Again, statistically, wearing a helmet down the pub would increase your survival rate more than wearing one skiing.

 

The 'motorists have more protection' is fallacious, as the factors present in motor accidents render the 'increased protection' useless at best, part of the problem at worst.

 

As for civil rights dogma... I was somewhat surprised at just how 'nanny state' Australia is, verging on oppressive. I wouldn't be at all shocked if Aussie ski fields brought in a mandatory law, libertarians appear a little thin on the ground down under. I'll be strictly backcountry when I move there, I think. Japan is unlikely to go that way for a very long time. I'm sure no resorts are looking to hasten the decline of ski numbers.

 

Subzero, I presume your car has all the latest safety equipment, as does mine, and that you don't drink or smoke (oh, more legislation possibilities), no fatty foods... etc. etc., all things that carry greater health risks than skiing helmetless.

 

Do as you will, choose your level of protection, but let's leave the law to the job of protecting people from each other, not from themselves, and give people a little credit for their own personal decisions, even if they differ from our own perceptions.

 

As for helmets on the slopes, the original question, I noticed a lot more last year, but it seemed to be around the same this year.

[miteyak 0]

Some interesting reading...

 

http://agbu.une.edu.au/~drobinso/bhacc.htm

 

http://www.cyclenetwork.org.uk/latest/doc/helmet_law2.pdf (PDF warning! but worth it,)

 

There is also, somewhere in ski-japan, one relating directly to snow sports, but can't seem to find it right now.

 

Let me re-state, I'm not anti-helmet, just anti the opinion that it's a clear-cut case.

[stepchild 0]

i will never ride without a helmet again after my buddy clipped his friend as they rode along side by side. they both crashed, one guy got up immediately, the other was in a coma for about 3 weeks and it took nearly a year to fully rehabilitate.

i think the whistler park has the answer. if you want to ride the advanced park you have to wear a lid, no ifs, no buts. so even the pros wear them. as a result, all of the kids see the pros doing all of their sick riding wearing helmets and so it's instantly 'cool' to wear a helmet. job done. so many people wear them in whistler, especially the youths.

of course there are loads of slams where a helmet wouldn't do a fat lot of good but it's got to increase your chances of walking away, especially with run ins with trees, rails etc.

 

one other thing, so many japanese riders i know wear full body armour, shoulders downwards. fair enough, but they refuse to wear a helmet. so they are acknowledging the inherent dangers of snowsports yet are ignoring their most vulnerable organ. their noggin. what's it all about?? i personally am surprised that more people here don't wear lids seeing as shaun white is idolised here and he has his own signature helmet and is always donning it for comps and vids.

i tell all of my mates to put a lid on. even if it just means getting up and riding on instead of that 'i'm going to take it easy for the rest of the day' after a slam it's worth it.

get your lids on.

[js 0]

 Quote:

Originally posted by miteyak:
As for civil rights dogma... I was somewhat surprised at just how 'nanny state' Australia is, verging on oppressive. I wouldn't be at all shocked if Aussie ski fields brought in a mandatory law, libertarians appear a little thin on the ground down under. I'll be strictly backcountry when I move there, I think. Japan is unlikely to go that way for a very long time. I'm sure no resorts are looking to hasten the decline of ski numbers ... Do as you will, choose your level of protection, but let's leave the law to the job of protecting people from each other, not from themselves, and give people a little credit for their own personal decisions, even if they differ from our own perceptions.

Nanny State? Don't know about that ... we're progressive and have a lot of people who'd like to move here - some indication of providng what people want, no doubt.

Libertarians? Well, obviously you don't know Aussies very well at all - Liberal by nature, but it's gotta be reasonable and logical. Maybe you need to do a bit more homework on us before considering a move.

Laws are there to protect people from people AND from themselves - common sense is NOT at all common.

Helmet or no helmet, at the moment a personal choice. Whether we use one or not doesn't really matter - it just boils down to how much importance an individual places on their brain and its ability to coordinate body functions.

But we both digress ...

In Australia, helmet usage is increasing, in Japan and the US I noticed a slight increase, and in Canada it seems like a huge increase.

No doubt it's also related to snow conditions - a fall in Oz often results in injury due to snow conditions - icy/hard packed compared to our lucky northern cousins.

[miteyak 0]

"Libertarians? Well, obviously you don't know Aussies very well at all - Liberal by nature, but it's gotta be reasonable and logical. Maybe you need to do a bit more homework on us before considering a move."

 

No, I think i'll move there and run for office...

 

Snow conditions definitely make a difference. I'd where a helmet snowboarding on ice just to cut out the headaches from falling over backwards.

[js 0]

 Quote:

Originally posted by miteyak:
No, I think i'll move there and run for office... '

Snow conditions definitely make a difference. I'd where a helmet snowboarding on ice just to cut out the headaches from falling over backwards.

Good luck too you - mind though, we need someone who doesn't play Party Politics.

A Pollie who understands the needs of Riders - that would be unique, AKA redneck bumper sticker: 'I Ride and I Vote.'

Yee Haa!!

(Enjoyable discussing shite with ya.)

[Sven 0]

Nice thread this one.

 

I reckon you guys should have a look at this:

http://casr.adelaide.edu.au/headband.html

 

Take a look at some of the design development pics... I'd wear 'em!

 

Also, my 2c...

Bike riding on footpaths - helmet not needed (but would be good)

Bike riding around cars - helmet

While driving - hey, I'll wear the caps from above

Skiing/boarding - I don't wear one yet, but I'll buy one this season...