 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The TRUTH ABOUT HELMETS - Why Wear 'Em? |
| Buzz Buzzelli |
|
American Rider
|
 |
 Email this article to a friend! |
|
So it is only natural that when The State orders me-a free man-to wear something on my head, I resent it and want to rebel.
My head does not belong to The State, it belongs to me. So it is only natural that when The State orders me-a free man-to wear something on my head, I resent it and want to rebel. And that reaction is, after all, the All-American response to oppression.
Yes, indeed, rebellion against an evil empire is a noble American cause; however, it is not an American tradition to blindly revolt without giving the issues full consideration. Otherwise we'd just be part of a mob.
Although there has been a lot written about helmet use, I decided to go directly to the source and visit Dr. Harry Hurt's Head Protection Research Laboratory in Paramount, California. The lab's mission is simple and straightforward: "...to prevent deaths and debilitating injuries...," which seems extremely single-minded, yet absolutely clear what the operation is all about. (For more information about the Head Protection Research Laboratory, go to www.hprl.org or call 562-529-3295.)
HPRL has been in existence for more than 10 years, and is a continuation of the scientific laboratory at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles, which operated for more than 20 years. Dr. Hurt established HPRL when he retired from the University. He is perhaps best known for the landmark USC accident investigation study, published in 1981 and commonly referred to as "the Hurt report." Interestingly, in the years since its release, the report's conclusions have been verified by well-documented studies in the European Union and Thailand.
|
|
American Rider
|
|
|
Dr. Hurt has been in the business of studying safety issues and conducting accident investigation and helmet testing for more than 50 years. It was almost immediately apparent to me that this long experience has given him the vision to distill a lifetime of research into a few practical lessons.
For example, over the past 50 years or so there has been a lot of record-keeping and documentation, enough to cloud a galaxy. Through the arduous process we call the "scientific method," certain facts have become undeniably apparent; however, you might question their validity because many special-interest groups have attempted to use the data by taking it out of context and distorting it to suit their own political agenda. In the end, it's all very confusing.
So let's concentrate on something we can easily relate to. According to Dr. Hurt, one study showed that for every helmeted rider who has died of actual head injuries, 45 riders who were not wearing helmets died of head injuries. I don't mind admitting that I was shocked by that fact-if I do not wear my helmet, I am 45 times more likely to die of head injuries if I have an accident.
But what is a head injury, anyway? Here again there's a foggy misconception of what this means. The term "head" suggests an injury to the outside of the skull; but in fact, the term more accurately refers to an injury to the brain. Which brings up another ugly subject: something called "debilitating injuries." These consist of anything from a temporary loss of mental capacity to the total annihilation of brain function. It is difficult to say exactly how many riders who've had near-death crashes end up as living vegetables because in this case the record-keeping offers conflicting results. One thing's for certain: it is a fact of life that many riders who end up on life support were not wearing helmets or were wearing beanies; and that they may not have had those debilitating injuries if they'd worn a proper certified helmet. Everyone has their own version of a living hell, and mine is to be alive but not living-what we call brain dead.
Lab Rats and Real Life
There is a worldwide community of research and testing organizations dedicated to understanding exactly what causes death and injury from accidents and collisions and how to reduce the occurrence of death and debilitating injury through research and testing.
Helmet testing includes certain parameters, such as the amount of G-force involved in an impact. Testing the helmet itself would either have no meaning or no relationship to real-world crashes if it were not for accident research studies and accident analysis and reconstruction. These studies help to determine the types of impacts and the G-forces encountered in crashes, and subsequently relate that to testing parameters. For example, an impact that occurred during an actual crash that might have transmitted 250 or 300 Gs to the skull of a human being can be replicated in a research lab to simulate that G-force in its testing.
Things That Matter
If you were standing still and you fell over and hit your head on the ground, the impact would be equivalent to 13 mph. This fact has been verified through the previously mentioned research. Likewise, if you were sitting on your motorcycle in the driveway and fell over, it would also involve an impact of approximately 13 mph, more or less. The scary thing is, that's enough to kill you; many people have died from head impacts less severe than this!
Here is an intriguing twist to this piece of the puzzle: if you were riding on a highway at 60 mph and you fell over, the actual impact of your head against the pavement would be about 13 mph-not 60 mph. Of course if you hit a tree it would be a 60-mph collision, but Dr. Hurt says that most accidents involve falling to the ground with a glancing blow. In fact, 90 percent of all motorcycle accident impacts had the equivalent force of a 7-foot drop. Again, that's enough to kill you if you have no head protection.
It is no surprise, then, that DOT helmets include this parameter in its rating. This is the heart of the matter: Those DOT standards are not arbitrarily invented by whimsical politicians bent on stripping us of our freedom of choice; they are the result of scientific studies that promise to help protect us, to help to give us proven protection.
The Shell Game
Helmets have three essential systems to help protect our heads. There's an outer hard shell to help protect against abrasion and penetration; an inner liner that cushions against violent G-forces; and a strap to keep the whole thing securely on the head so it won't fly off in an accident.
The shell can be made of anything (usually fiberglass or polycarbonate plastic) that resists penetration by sharp, hard objects. It also protects against asphalt abrasion when skidding upside-down along the roadway. There's yet another engineering purpose of the shell that's equally important: to help spread the load of an impact to the inner liner so that it doesn't occur at one concentrated point.
The liner does most of the work in a crash. Its purpose is to cushion high G-loads, to absorb and dissipate the energy, reducing their damaging effect on the brain. Like they say, it's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop. When your 8-pound noggin comes to a complete stop in 0.0001 second the
|
|
American Rider
|
|
|
G-forces can rip your brain from its moorings and cause anything from paralysis to death. Dr. Hurt points out that in preventing this, the inner liner may be the single most critical element in a helmet.
The strap needs to have a foolproof attachment system, be it a traditional D-ring or another type of unbreakable clasp. Not only that, but it is important that the helmet not come off the head when the strap is fastened. Some helmets can slide right off the head with the strap tightened-not good in an accident.
Dr. Hurt told me about how some helmet wearers defeat the whole purpose of the strap. Sometimes ladies don't want to mess up their nails, and guys don't want to bother removing their gloves to hassle with the fastener, so they adjust the strap loose enough that the helmet can be slid on and off the head without messing with the fastener. Result: In an accident the helmet flies off, leaving the head unprotected. Why bother wearing the helmet in the first place if it doesn't stay on?
Which Rating?
DOT-approved or Snell-approved? What does it matter to us average street riders? Listen to the DOT helmet hawkers and they'll tell you DOT's best for the street, while Snell stewards say theirs is better than DOT. But there's one thing they all agree on: it's better to have a helmet with a sticker on it than one that has not been rated at all.
The arguments over one rating or another are far too convoluted and confusing to delve into here-I could write a book about it. Both ratings have their manifold advantages and disadvantages, but let's try to distill it down to the essentials.
Neither rating is perfect for every type of accident. Let's say that in an average motorcycle crash (if there is such a thing) a DOT helmet provides the best protection. In yet a different kind of accident a Snell helmet might offer superior protection. Okay, in one type of crash one type of helmet may save your life; in a different type of collision the other helmet is better. Problem is, we don't which type of accident we'll have, so we will never have exactly the perfect helmet for every type of accident. My solution is to wear either one and hope I don't have the wrong kind of accident.
The Beanie
Did you know that, legally speaking, every motorcycle helmet must pass DOT standards? Enter the "novelty helmet." These little skullcaps offer an appearance that is regarded by some people as being stylishly cool. Maybe they have this high regard because beanies are the ultimate symbol of rebellion, and they have the official stamp of approval of the fashion police. And that's about the only official rating they have, because these hats are incapable of successfully passing through a helmet-testing lab without earning the stamp of rejection.
Remember those G-force ratings mentioned earlier? One of the things I learned at HPRL is that, because they have no shock-absorbing liner, these beanies deliver such violent G-forces on impact that they are little better than no helmet at all. True, their outer shell helps protect against abrasion and penetration, but because they lack a cushion inner liner, they are not capable of diffusing G-forces. The result is that although they may save your life, they'll scramble your brain. Lucky you, a living vegetable.
All of which raises another question, if not for my readers but for me: If The State mandates that I wear a helmet-a DOT helmet at that-and I wear a non-approved helmet, am I demonstrating my rebellious American free will, or am I demonstrating that I failed to consider the big picture? Hm, let me think about this...
Things That Don't
Matter
Helmet companies are always telling us why their helmet is best, of the benefits of fiberglass-reinforced shells or polycarbonate shells, or of liners made of polystyrene or popcorn or whatever. Details like how the helmet is made, what it's made from and even where it's made are all fodder for the marketing department's claims and advertising. Which type of shell is best? Ask the people who sell helmets with fiberglass shells and they'll give every good reason to believe it's the best; ask the polycarbonate guys and they'll make you believe theirs is best. What to do?
When confused about the technology of a helmet-its materials and construction, for example-fall back on the most important factor: whether or not it passes DOT or Snell standards. Two different helmets that have the same rating have both passed the same tests and are both equally good whether they are made from plastic or glass. In the end, it is only the result of testing and the subsequent rating that counts.
Things That Do Matter
What does matter, at least for two different helmets that have the same rating, are the features you happen to like. If you like the fit and finish, the paint scheme, the way the face shield flips open or the way the strap connects, then that's the one for you. If one model costs $899 and another is $79.95, and you believe the more expensive one is better, then for gosh sakes buy it as long as it has the rating. Or you'll get the other one if you're cheap like me.
Hurt Talk
Before leaving HPRL, I asked Dr. Hurt what advice he would give someone who wanted to buy a helmet. He said there are three critical issues.
1. The helmet must fit correctly. If it does not conform closely to your head, it will not offer maximum protection.
2. The helmet's liner must offer real protection. The liner needs to be an inch thick to absorb G-forces.
3. The helmet must stay on your head. It should not be possible to remove it from your head with the strap securely fastened.
Bottom Lifeline
It would be easier to discuss all the issues involved in motorcycle safety helmets if I had about 20 or 30 pages to do an end-all investigative report. What I've tried to do here is condense the essence of the testing, the data, the most vital issues, so that it all makes sense. Hopefully this has helped you to form or change some opinions about helmets. Here are mine:
Whether we live or die in an accident depends on the circumstance of the crash; on whether we are wearing a helmet;
and to some extent on the type of helmet. For those of us who are interested in surviving an accident, there is no ultimate correct choice of which helmet-DOT- or Snell-rated-may happen to save our lives. All that really matters is that we wear one or the other.
For those of us who don't care about being maimed, paralyzed for life, leaving loved ones behind to grieve, or being a lifelong vegetative burden to others, then any unrated beanie-or no helmet at all-will do just fine.
For me, having had a few accidents and crashed several times in 45 years of riding, I've learned the value of helmets. My choice is to wear a DOT helmet. You can make your own choice.
|
»More Editor's Note
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Get a Free Issue of American Rider! Enter your trial subscripton and you'll receive a Risk-Free Issue. If you like American Rider, pay just $15.97 for 5 more issues (6 in all). Otherwise, write "cancel" on the bill, return it, and owe nothing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
