Exactly. The mods should intervene re the title. And the first sentences of the article are also much more precise:
"Bicycle helmets do an outstanding job of keeping our skulls intact in a major crash. But they do almost nothing to prevent concussions and other significant brain injuries."
The major message of the article is that the standards ignore the topic.
"The government standard for bike helmets will in all likelihood never change. "With the CPSC, those standards are carved into stone," David Thom told me. "It may take an act of Congress to revise them.""
But luckily:
"In the late 1990s a Swedish neurosurgeon named Hans Von Holst grew weary of seeing helmet-wearing patients who'd suffered brain injuries in bicycle and equestrian accidents. In most cases, the damage had been caused by rotational acceleration. Working with Peter Halldin, a mechanical engineer at Stockholm's Royal Institute of Technology (...)" they discovered something new:
"Studies have shown that most bike falls result in an impact angle between 30 and 45 degrees. The Swedish team invented a test rig that examined drops at those more realistic angles.
By 2008, after years of sketching, testing, and prototyping, they had a working model. Their MIPS (Multi-directional Impact Protection System) helmet contained a low-friction slip plate between the head and EPS liner. On impact, the helmet rotates independent of the MIPS liner, absorbing some rotational acceleration."
The $40 helmet is one of the great success stories of the
past half-century. Like seat belts, air bags, and smoke
detectors, bike helmets save countless lives every year.
They do a stellar job of preventing catastrophic skull
fractures, plus dings and scrapes from low-hanging tree
branches and other common nuisances.
Helmets are good. The author is wondering why they aren't better at preventing concussions.
New paper helmets help prevent concussions because they have a crumple zone that make the deceleration more gradual.
"If you crash at 15 miles per hour in a normal helmet, your head will be subjected to around 220G [G-force], whereas the new design absorbs more of the impact and means you experience around 70G instead," says Surabhi.
acqq|11 years ago
"Bicycle helmets do an outstanding job of keeping our skulls intact in a major crash. But they do almost nothing to prevent concussions and other significant brain injuries."
The major message of the article is that the standards ignore the topic.
"The government standard for bike helmets will in all likelihood never change. "With the CPSC, those standards are carved into stone," David Thom told me. "It may take an act of Congress to revise them.""
But luckily:
"In the late 1990s a Swedish neurosurgeon named Hans Von Holst grew weary of seeing helmet-wearing patients who'd suffered brain injuries in bicycle and equestrian accidents. In most cases, the damage had been caused by rotational acceleration. Working with Peter Halldin, a mechanical engineer at Stockholm's Royal Institute of Technology (...)" they discovered something new:
"Studies have shown that most bike falls result in an impact angle between 30 and 45 degrees. The Swedish team invented a test rig that examined drops at those more realistic angles.
By 2008, after years of sketching, testing, and prototyping, they had a working model. Their MIPS (Multi-directional Impact Protection System) helmet contained a low-friction slip plate between the head and EPS liner. On impact, the helmet rotates independent of the MIPS liner, absorbing some rotational acceleration."
Confusion|11 years ago
oever|11 years ago
"If you crash at 15 miles per hour in a normal helmet, your head will be subjected to around 220G [G-force], whereas the new design absorbs more of the impact and means you experience around 70G instead," says Surabhi.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-25681895