I have one word. Anecdotal. I’m sure all of the comments posted here are based on double-blind, controlled, repeatable experiments.
I didn’t wear a helmet for 27 years and never suffered a serious head injury. I’ve worn a helmet for 12 years and suffered two serious concussions, ergo helmets cause brain damage.
Why not ask the audience how many and what size shims I should use in my ’02 Vanilla RC for my local dh track. They’re probably just as qualified to answer.
Still, I’d hate to miss out on the testiculation:
Full face helmet: Anecdotally, I would have to say very effective at reducing the severity of injury. Blunt force trauma to the head can cause brain damage. Most would classify brain damage as a serious injury.
Neck brace: No comment. Although some of the reading I have done has stated that most neck braces are worn too far below the helmet base to actually be effective in stopping spinal damage. I would suspect anecdotal effectiveness is a lot less prevalent due to the fact that serious neck injuries are a very rare occurrence in the first place. Further, instances of spinal damage I am aware of have been at low speed on ‘xc’ rides. No doubting though that spinal injury could be classified as serious.
Back armour: What are the instances of serious back injury? Anecdotally I’ve crashed a lot with and without armour and never been jabbed in the back. I’ve only ever heard of kidney/liver/spleen damage, all of which I would classify as serious. Is back armour actually effective in reducing this type of injury?
Chest armour: Chest impacts seem more common in DH. Again how effective are the various armour at reducing injury? I’ve seen no stats on this. Was there not reportage lately that some armour was actually quite crap at dissipating impact forces? I’ve been lanced over the heart by a tree limb while wearing armour. The tree limb punctured the armour. I was sore but able to walk away. Did it prevent serious injury? I won’t know unless I repeat the experience without armour. Speeds in DH are fairly low and the ribcage is actually pretty good at protecting your internal organs. I know of a person who was wearing chest armour and suffered 4 broken ribs and bruised heart. Did the armour reduce the severity of the injury or was it ineffective? Would broken ribs be classified as serious?
Then there’s the whole freedom of movement argument that applies to all forms of protective equipment. There have been many comments that equipment is restrictive, ill-fitting, vision impairing. Is this reduction in comfort/capabilities/confidence a leader for increased injury occurrence?
The armour-inspired confidence argument; if you feel more confident are you less or more likely to crash? Is the crash speed likely to be higher, and potential for serious injury increased?
Leg guards: I would guess that puncture wounds or fractures are the two most likely shin related serious injuries. I couldn’t even speculate on shin guard effectiveness. I wouldn’t classify pedal gouges as a serious injury.
Knee guards: Speculating, I would say they are probably helpful at reducing the severity of injury (assuming the guards stay in place, which is a massive assumption). Was Rob Eva wearing knee armour when he had his patella destroyed?
Elbow guards: Broken bones seem to be the most serious arm injuries in dh. I would question the effectiveness of elbow guards in preventing this type of injury. Arms guards also seem to be the worse culprit in staying in place during a crash unless worn as part of a suit, and even then I have anecdotal evidence they will move unless worn under long sleeves, as recommended by the manufacturers.
Gloves: Probably the most serious injuries here are major lacerations, punctures and breaks. I couldn’t comment on the effectiveness of gloves in preventing these types of injuries.
Goggles: I would speculate that sticks, branches, etc are the most likely threat. Are goggles actually effective at preventing these objects from impacting the eye? Are we all better off wearing safety glasses? There is also the whole vision impairment/improvement argument in causing/preventing accidents.
Ankles: What about ‘em? You kinda need ‘em to walk, They’re pretty susceptible injury, and can be a bugger to heal.
Genitals: They’re soft, they get in the way, and I would personally classify any injury as serious.
I’m old, bounce less, heal slow. I wear as much protective gear as practical for the situation. There’s probably a body of anecdotal evidence that would suggest it does help reduce/negate minor injuries such as cuts and abrasions. Will it protect me from serious injury? I don’t know.
So in concluding this dissertation, I’d say I have no freakin’ idea at how effective the above protective equipment is in preventing serious injury, but pffft, don’t let me stop you basing policy on the ramblings of an un/mis-informed audience on teh internermet. Perhaps you could ask downhill bicycle health and safety specialists and get back to us with your findings?
Cheers.
. Everything you have said in this thread is obviously what you believe to be true but it doesn't mean every one else that doesn't believe this is wrong. Maybe you are sponsored by a neck brace company (or wanting to be?) Cheers
