Slashdot Mirror


Science and Bicycling Meet In a New Helmet Design (arstechnica.com)

John Timmer from Ars Technica got a chance to take a look at Trek's new bicycle helmet that they claim offers "the first major change in helmet technology in years," and is backed up with peer-reviewed science. Here's an excerpt from Timmer's report: WaveCel is the product of orthopedic surgeon Steve Madey and a biomedical engineer named Michael Bottlang. The two had been working on a variety of ideas related to medical issues and protective gear, funded in part by federal grant money. When considering the idea of a lightweight material that could evenly distribute forces, Bottlang told Ars that they first focused on a honeycomb pattern. But they found that it was actually too robust -- the honeycomb wouldn't collapse until a lot of force had been applied, and then it would fail suddenly.

The design they eventually developed has a shape that allows flexing almost immediately when force is applied. "It starts to glide right away," Bottlang said. The manufacturing technique creates a clear point of failure that allows more extensive flexing once a certain level of force is exceeded -- part of the structure will fold over rather than experiencing a complete failure. Then, once folded, the polymer it's made of will allow neighboring cells to glide over each other. This provides some resistance even after the structure has collapsed. For the helmet, a patch of this material is attached to the inside of a more traditional EPS helmet, which provides impact resistance. But the WaveCel mesh is allowed to float within the helmet and can absorb much of the force of off-axis impacts. The thin strips of soft material that cushion the helmet where it rests on the head (also found in more traditional helmets) are attached directly to the WaveCel mesh.

It looks more uncomfortable than it is. Madey, the orthopedic surgeon, said they've done tests that show that, even if placed directly on the skin, the WaveCel mesh wouldn't break the skin under most impact forces. How does their new helmet work? According to a paper authored by Bottlang and Madey, helmets including the material reduced rotational acceleration from impacts by 73 percent compared to a normal helmet. A slip pad within a normal helmet (MIPS) only dropped acceleration by 22 percent, which seems like a substantial difference.

79 comments

  1. Testing Apparatus by alvinrod · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The helmet sounds interesting, but the testing apparatus (image from the study) in the linked study is really damned cool. I wish we could get something like that at the office, because it looks like it could one hell of an inverted choke-slam to those in need of such.

    1. Re: Testing Apparatus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Peer-reviewed science like this? https://benthamopen.com/DOWNLOAD-PDF/TOCPJ-2-7/

  2. What does the king of bicycling think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ONODA Sakamichi, The Mountain King, that is. Not useless One Ball Armstrong.

    1. Re:What does the king of bicycling think? by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      Ok I can see wearing a helmet for riding a motorcycle (although I still think it should be an adult choice to wear or not, but that's another discussion).

      I wear a motorcycle helmet when riding.

      However, do very many people at all wear a helmet for bicycling?

      I've never worn one, and while I do see the occasional bicycle rider around here with a helmet, I don't see many of them at all.

      So, I'm wondering is there much of a market for bicycle helmets? Do more people wear bicycle helmets in different parts of the US than others?

      I honestly ask because I hardly see anyone wear them, maybe a few kids, but not even all of them....there were really no such things when I was growing up as a kid.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:What does the king of bicycling think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      However, do very many people at all wear a helmet for bicycling?

      Anytime I'm out on my bicycle, I've got my helmet on. Why? From that time when I was a kid and one of my friends died from having his skull cracked open crashing into a curb at low speed.

      Once you've seen someone's brains on the ground as a result of a bicycle accident, you'll wear the damn helmet.

    3. Re:What does the king of bicycling think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends on the type of cycling you are doing. If riders are lollygagging about, they probably are not wearing one. In my neighborhood, the kids under 10 or so have them on because their parents make them I imagine. The teenagers don't have them on. The adults I see inside my neighborhood are mostly leisure riders riding about 8 miles/hour and mostly don't wear them. But when I ride outside my neighborhood I see the more serious riders who will be wearing helmets. Avid riders are more likely to be wearing one, myself included. The more often you ride, the longer distances you travel, the faster you ride, and the more exposure you have with mixed traffic (riding alongside cars) , then the more likely you are to have an accident. This makes wearing a helmet a good idea. Also, on organized rides helmets are mandatory.

    4. Re:What does the king of bicycling think? by b0bby · · Score: 2

      I also ride motorcycles, and I wear a helmet almost every time I ride my bicycle; I also wear a helmet when skiing. Around me (Mid Atlantic US) I'd say half or more of adults wear them, although with bikeshare that may be less since basically no one uses them on the shared bikes. I have known enough people hit by cars, concussed or (a friend of friends) killed when his his head hit a curb falling at fairly low speed that I don't even consider not wearing one unless I'm doing a short bikeshare hop. I also recently saw close up what a TBI can do when a good friend hit his head after falling in a parking lot (probable heart attack, not a bike accident) - over a year of rehab, 2 years to return to work, and he was lucky since at one point we thought he might never recover.

      They are cheap and easy and the potential downside is so bad, why not?

    5. Re:What does the king of bicycling think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I'm out on my road bike doing long rides in the countryside and descending at high speed, I wear a helmet, yes.

      Usually, on my bike, I'm travelling around the city where I don't. They're inconvenient and offer zero protection from motor vehicles driving over you.

    6. Re:What does the king of bicycling think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I won't argue with you on that but I grew up in a world where bicycling was a wonderful, fun, healthy thing to do. That all changed over night when Bell introduced their horrifically ugly polyethylene bucket. Cycling was now DANGEROUS. I wore one when racing but logged thousands of miles with no helmet at all while training and that included an over-the-bars endo into a ditch that broke a collarbone. (Otherwise I was fine and rode a few miles to a farmhouse to call for a ride home.)

      Today there are many more cars on few if any additional roads. Full of drivers who are speeding, distracted, drunk, stoned, weeping, angry, staring at their baby in the rear-view mirror. Or just too incompetent but are allowed by the DMV to drive anyway because in America not having a car is almost an economic death sentence, and the fact that America doesn't really care about anything except their automobiles; the Deus ex machina of the twentieth century.

      Around here I see more people riding without helmets than in the past. I always wear one, but I'm being held hostage by my family and I submit to their demands. I'm saddened to read of your loss.

    7. Re:What does the king of bicycling think? by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      Yes, many wear helmets and there's a large market for them. Helmet adoption is near universal within the cycling community itself so if you aren't seeing it then you aren't around cyclists.

    8. Re:What does the king of bicycling think? by JCW01 · · Score: 1

      I ride mountain bikes, and EVERYONE wears one. If we see someone without a helmet we stop them and tell them to go get one from the ranger station.

    9. Re:What does the king of bicycling think? by Radical+Moderate · · Score: 1

      I always wear one mountain biking, usually wear one on the street. I have a friend who lost most of the hearing in one ear when he hit his head in a bicycle accident, I'm sure he wishes he'd been wearing one then.

      --
      Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
    10. Re:What does the king of bicycling think? by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Yes, many wear helmets and there's a large market for them. Helmet adoption is near universal within the cycling community itself so if you aren't seeing it then you aren't around cyclists.

      Well, anyone I see on a bicycle I guess I consider a 'cyclist'.....and around my city, which is seeing more and more bicycles on the road (they're even making lanes for them on the streets), you just don't see many people wearing a helmet.

      Just going with what I observe....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    11. Re: What does the king of bicycling think? by illiac_1962 · · Score: 1

      Every time I get in a bike where I'm going to be riding the city or the woods I wear a helmet and I cannot remember the last time I saw a knowledgeable cyclist not wearing a helmet. When I'm on a flat pedestrian paved bike trail I often forgo the helmet however. The serious cyclists always wear a helmet because they are training and removing the helmet would alter the times.

  3. Re:Won't help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why must you ruin a perfectly good point with gratuitous xenophobia?

  4. Visual inspection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can you tell from casual visual inspection if the helmet will still function at 100%? If not, I'll stick with a traditional foam helmet.

    1. Re:Visual inspection by mysticgoat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This helmet is worth a close look.

      For the last 40+ years, bike helmets have been designed to protect the contents of the head from a single direct impact, They are the best protection for the occasional crash when the cyclist is thrown over the handlebars such that he drops head first onto the pavement from a height of 5 to 6 feet, or less. That kind of crash doesn't happen very often.

      Most crashes involve significant shear forces as well as direct impacts. Also most crashes involving other vehicles are a very fast sequence of bounces where each bounce is a complex of impact and shear forces. Foam helmets offer no protection with shearing and often no protection after the first impact.

      This helmet's design offers more protection against multiple direct impacts and shear forces.

    2. Re:Visual inspection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't tell from casual visual inspection of a traditional foam helmet whether it will still function at 100%.

    3. Re:Visual inspection by dasunt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For the last 40+ years, bike helmets have been designed to protect the contents of the head from a single direct impact, They are the best protection for the occasional crash when the cyclist is thrown over the handlebars such that he drops head first onto the pavement from a height of 5 to 6 feet, or less. That kind of crash doesn't happen very often.

      Well, there are a few standards. Here's a link

      Note that in most crashes, the cyclist, if they strike their head on the ground, will have an impact consistent with a drop of 5 to 6 feet. The cyclist may be going 20 mph, but their head is still likely to receive the same force as just dropping at 0 mph (since there's horizontal velocity (their speed)) and vertical velocity (force of gravity).

      Now motorcycle helmets have a similar standard for an impact test (DOT, Snell, and ECE). Again, because despite your velocity in the horizontal plane, it's the same force of gravity. Motorcycle helmet standards tend to have a few other tests as well (such as making sure the visor doesn't crack if a rock hits it at 55 mph), but there's only so much that can be prevented by a helmet.

      Now there are tradeoffs - you can make a helmet that's stiffer, or that survives multiple impacts better, but that tends to come at the cost of how much energy it can absorb in one impact. Snell faced accusations of this in one of their previous motorcycle helmet standards (either M2005 or M2010) - the helmet was more durable, but at the potential cost of more G-forces transmitted to the brain.

      Nothing in the above should be interpreted as me being anti-helmet - I always wear bicycle helmets, as well as full face, either Snell or ECE rated, motorcycle helmets.

    4. Re:Visual inspection by b0bby · · Score: 1

      I have discussed with friends a variety of these these issues as they relate to motorcycle helmets - it's a shame that there are not more detailed studies into the real world effects. I always wear a helmet on a motorcycle, and 99% of the time on a bicycle; on the motorcycle especially, I'd like more confidence that the helmet is designed for the most likely impacts. In truth most of the time my choice comes down to fit and (lack of) wind noise.

      I have tried to see if I could get a testing organization to test an older helmet of mine to try to settle an argument, but I got no response. I have a feeling that a 10 year old helmet will still be about as effective as when new, but I have friends who disagree.

    5. Re:Visual inspection by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 1

      Preface: I'm pro-helmet. I race bikes, and I pretty much always wear a helmet when I go out.

      That said, I find the claims that these guys make about the concussion-protection factor of their helmet pretty dubious. To the point: you don't need to hit your head to end up with a concussion. Falling off your bike and never striking your head can STILL give you a concussion. To make claims about how good the concussion-prevention design of this helmet is may border on misleading or negligent.

      But it looks like it might be more comfortable and provide better protection in some categories of crashes, so I'm not going to criticise them too much.

    6. Re:Visual inspection by dasunt · · Score: 1

      I have tried to see if I could get a testing organization to test an older helmet of mine to try to settle an argument, but I got no response. I have a feeling that a 10 year old helmet will still be about as effective as when new, but I have friends who disagree.

      It looks like, at least for bicycle helmets, there is no significant degradation over time.

      OTOH, standards can improve. Motorcycle helmets seem to do better than bike helmets for standards being changed over time.

  5. Re:Won't help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree, that needs to happen to your whiny faggot ass ASAP.

  6. MIPS vs 'Normal' by G-Man · · Score: 2

    It should be noted that MIPS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-directional_Impact_Protection_System) was only introduced to bike helmets pretty recently. The vast majority of helmets out there - and the majority of helmets on sale today - don't have MIPS. It tends to only be in high-end helmets, or is an additional cost over the non-MIPS version of the same helmet.

    1. Re:MIPS vs 'Normal' by goombah99 · · Score: 2

      This is more complex than MIPS which is just an anti-torque system.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    2. Re:MIPS vs 'Normal' by laxguy · · Score: 1

      this is basically trek/bontragers take on MIPS. MIPS is licensed and expensive, hence the higher end helmets and price tags to go with it Kali Protectives also has some interesting helmets and designs with a different take on MIPS

    3. Re:MIPS vs 'Normal' by Archimonde · · Score: 1

      And MIPS is in my opinion more marketing than anything. The very next day Trek announced their system, MIPS company claimed that Trek's system is basically rubbish (which they possibly couldn't even get their hands on).

      MIPS is just an added slip plane between the helmet and the head which doesn't make sense to me. I've never seen a helmet strapped so hard to the head that it doesn't slip even a tiny amount, and also hair and skin will make the helmet slip a bit which makes MIPS totally redundant and I would say even more dangerous.

      They are a shady company, they "invent" some BS, they partner up with some helmet manufacturer, push it for free probably, then market it up as the second coming of Safety, magazines start to review other helmets as "they lack MIPS/safety" and other manufacturers bend over and buy MIPS garbage not to seem like they ignore "safety". I applaud Kali and Trek for not giving in to those gangsters.

      --
      Trolls are like broken clocks. They show the truth two times a day. The rest of the day they talk nonsense.
  7. HÃvding Helmet by ChoGGi · · Score: 1

    Mentioned by some of the commenters, looks safer to me.
    https://youtu.be/61Kb53DCeEc?t...

    1. Re: HÃvding Helmet by astrofurter · · Score: 1

      That's awesome!

  8. Re: Won't help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try it and see what happens

  9. Original Idea? Nah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its a Purple mattress for your head

  10. Re: Won't help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oy vey borders are xenophobic, unless they are around Israel.

  11. They designed a helmet using SCIENCE??? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1, Troll

    What were they using before when they designed bicycle helmets? Astrology? Homeopathy? Republicanism?

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    1. Re: They designed a helmet using SCIENCE??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much. Enjoy the show. Feel free to skip the commercials

    2. Re:They designed a helmet using SCIENCE??? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      Worse. Marketing.

      Hey, it's "works" for the audiophile industry! /s

    3. Re:They designed a helmet using SCIENCE??? by clovis · · Score: 2

      What were they using before when they designed bicycle helmets? Astrology? Homeopathy? Republicanism?

      As you say, I'm not seeing science in there.
      My first thought was "engineering". Back in Edison's day, they would have called it "inventing".

    4. Re:They designed a helmet using SCIENCE??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, it's "works" for the audiophile industry! /s

      Oh gods does it!

  12. Re:Won't help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I don't know about that, but it sure as shit won't protect you when a fat orange-haired criminal baboon with a severe case of Digital Tourette's Sydrome gets elected President by a whole bunch of white nationalist neo-nazi baboons, that's for sure.

  13. Re:I don't need this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yay, this Slashvertisement has been brought to you by the letter S. S sometimes stands for SCIENCE!
     
    Forget having cobblers design shoe-inspired helmets, forget the artists who design helmets designed out of coconut shells with nails driven inward a few millimeters. Forget the helmets made of glass, bread, or steel. These bicycle helmets were designed by TREK BICYCLE CORPORATION of WATERLOO, WI or paid affiliates, using SCIENCE.

  14. Re:Won't help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    great. a political shitpost in a apolitical subject. 2019 is shaping to be pretty great.

  15. Looks useful for the kitchen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've always wondered what brains would look like after going through a crinkle cutting device. I guess we'll soon know.

  16. Shut up, APK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't you have anything better to do in your $1 house than constantly post this spam? Are you really that desperate for attention that you feel the need to constantly stalk and harass SuperKendall, raymorris, and ShanghaiBill? The answer appears to be yes, though your efforts would be better spent completing a MacOS version of your toy string sorting program.

    Your spam and harassment is unwelcome, Alexander. You've harassed many other users, too, including Subie, Ol Olsoc, webmistressrachel, c6gunner, Zontar The Mindless, amicusNYCL, Coren22, and so many others. Isn't it time you stop being such a bitter crybaby and do something useful with your life? Although your string sorting program (APK Hosts File Engine) is complete shit, working on it would still be better than crapflooding Slashdot.

    Grow up, APK. You're 54 years old. Act your damn age.

    1. Re:Shut up, APK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the desired Bernanke Rate of 2% YoY, 54 is not what it used to be either.

  17. Re:Won't help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That would be AN apolitical subject, you uneducated Trumptardian traitor faggot.

  18. Re:Won't help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you think bicycle helmet inadequacy is the most random thing to trigger a TDS episode, you haven't been paying attention at all.

  19. No innovation in bicycle helmets?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about Hövding?
    https://hovding.com/

  20. Why the focus on bicycle helmets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Shouldn't there be helmets for car drivers and passengers? Brain injuries are the most serious car crash injuries. And those brains are more valuable too, because you know, unlike cyclists, these people can afford cars. I say we make helmets mandatory in cars. All professional racers wear helmets already.

    1. Re:Why the focus on bicycle helmets? by eepok · · Score: 1

      1. People driving cars have seat belts, multiple air bags, a steel cage, and steel armor. That is all better than any bike helmet.
      2. Most bicyclists drive as well. For the vast majority of bicyclists, it's a choice to ride a bike for a trip. (That also means they pay into the road system via fuel taxes, income taxes, etc... just in case that was the next comment.)
      3. All professional racing drivers and racing bicyclists wear helmets because they're in a high risk industry and have been thoroughly educated on the value of a helmet given said risk.

      And still, I support your questioning of the focus on bike helmets. A bike helmet is literally the last line of defense against injury while riding a bike. First, is good bike education to PREVENT hazardous situations from occurring. This education should instill the value of predictability on the road, communication among other road users, recognizing existing and developing hazardous situations, and always maintaining maximum visibility. Second, this bike education should teach bicyclists how to AVOID imminent hazardous situations via bicycling handling training and reaction preparation. The last layer of protection is injury MITIGATION in the form of gloves, helmets, etc. If you're a sufficiently skilled and experienced bicyclist (ie. have taken a full bicycle education course), chances are that you may never NEED to put your helmet to use, but it's a good layer of safety to have in a country where that vast majority of motorists on the road (1) don't understand the law surrounding bicycling, (2) don't understand how bicyclists move on the road, and (3) may be resentful to bicyclists on the road.

    2. Re:Why the focus on bicycle helmets? by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Not needed for in-the-vehicle use. However, this helmet technology might be a worthy upgrade for construction worker use.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    3. Re:Why the focus on bicycle helmets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could wear a bicycle helmet in your car if you like. Neither should be compulsory.

    4. Re:Why the focus on bicycle helmets? by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      "...because you know, unlike cyclists, these people can afford cars..."

      Cyclists can't afford cars? Car passengers can afford cars? Car passengers' brains are more valuable than cyclists' brains? Helmets are mandatory for cyclists? Helmet laws are determined based on the value of the brain?

      How is any of this "Insightful"? I realize the sarcasm, but the entire premise demonstrates ignorance on the part of the poster.

    5. Re:Why the focus on bicycle helmets? by Megol · · Score: 1

      Professional racers doesn't drive in normal traffic, they drive faster, their cars don't have airbags. A bicycle type helmet would be useless and anything that could protect the head from car accidents would also limit the movement of the head so increasing accidents, be heavier therefore increasing some kinds of injuries, get in the way for airbags, and be very uncomfortable for longer rides therefore increasing accidents.

      If you are trying to make a point you've failed miserably.

    6. Re:Why the focus on bicycle helmets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're doing cycling wrong. It's not a war. Watch this (and count helmet vs. no helmet).

    7. Re:Why the focus on bicycle helmets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I realize the sarcasm

      Do you? Well, maybe cyclists could also afford cars, but they hoard the money and ride those cheap flimsy contraptions instead, defrauding the economy that we all depend on. Shouldn't we make sure that the good consumers are protected first? And there are a lot more people in cars than there are on bicycles. If we protect car drivers and passengers from head injuries, that will be much more effective than protecting cyclists' heads, even before you account for their relative value to the economy. So many selfless motorists push for cycling helmet laws, but we need to protect motorists first. Drive safely.

    8. Re:Why the focus on bicycle helmets? by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      However, this helmet technology might be a worthy upgrade for construction worker use.

      Not really. Bike and motorcycle helmets protect the wearer because they often go flying off their vehicles and hit the pavement. (And cyclists should wear helmets - too many preventable concussions and other disabilities have occurred because the cyclist didn't have a helmet. At the very least, it wouldn't have made things worse).

      Construction hard hats generally get impacted by objects hitting it - either the worker is moving around and bumps into something, or something falls on it. Very little lateral forces are applied that twist the helmet around, which is unlike say a rider or cyclist sliding on the road where the helmet may try to spin or undergo signidicant lateral impacts.

      (They do make lateral impact hard hats for the few industries that need them, but most of the time the protection needed comes from being hit from the top).

  21. Re:Won't help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing is apolitical anymore.

    If someone told me that POTUS just said that cyclists should be ran over and encouraged his voters to do so then I would have to check the source, but my immediate reaction would no longer be that it probably is false.

    He recently tweeted about water bombing Notre Dame.
    He is completely clueless and butts in with whatever little brainspark he can muster.
    There is a president that reasons like a pre-teen and doesn't know when to leave things to the experts.

  22. Re:Won't help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing is apolitical anymore.

    If someone told me that POTUS just said that cyclists should be ran over and encouraged his voters to do so then I would have to check the source, but my immediate reaction would no longer be that it probably is false.

    ....

    Hey dumbass, it's you "progressives" that openly call for people to "punch Nazis", where "Nazis" are defined an anyone who disagrees with your received wisdom.

    Reality be damned.

    How's that Socialism going in Venezuela? Or you you going to pull a facile "that's not true Socialism" Thalidomide-brained retort out of your ass?

    "Progressive" FWEEEE STUFFZZZZ FOR LIFE!!! "I want a pony!" make-me-happy-or-I'll-hold-my-breath GIMMEE GIMMEE GIMMEE "economics" is a policy appropriate for a petulant, spoiled two-year-old.

  23. Nazi faggot demonstrates needing punched @ face... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And reality surely obliges the inbred nazi faggot soon enough, no doubt.

  24. Here in Sweden we have airbag helmets... by jools33 · · Score: 1

    Here in Sweden we have airbag deployable helmets, you wear them like a collar over your shoulders, and should you fall off the airbag will deploy. The only issue then is that once used in an accident, you will need to buy a new one, but they are less cumbersome than a helmet, and so often preferred by city cyclists.

    1. Re:Here in Sweden we have airbag helmets... by coofercat · · Score: 1

      Looks pretty cool - in the homepage video, it also seems to make it possible for the woman to ride backwards too (see the aerial shot)

    2. Re:Here in Sweden we have airbag helmets... by samwichse · · Score: 1

      https://helmets.org/airbag.htm

      A neat idea, but I don't know if they're ready for prime time.

    3. Re:Here in Sweden we have airbag helmets... by eepok · · Score: 1

      I remember when these were all over the news because they were being hailed as the the future of bicyclist skulls. And then they disappeared. At the cost of THREE-HUNDRED euros per use, have these actually been adapted in large numbers or is it still a very boutique item?

    4. Re: Here in Sweden we have airbag helmets... by illiac_1962 · · Score: 1

      Have you seen the price of the helmets that are made out of Styrofoam cups? A cheap POS is $60.

    5. Re:Here in Sweden we have airbag helmets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      About 15 years ago, motorcycle jackets with airbags were introduced. The only part that survived was the neck brace because modern non-inflatable materials provide better impact and abrasion resistance. I can see the same for a bicycle. You can make a traditional helmet that will withstand a very large variety of crash scenarios (for example, even at bicycle speeds, you don't want this inflatable "helmet" to snag on something and snap your neck, and it isn't going to fair well in a higher speed crash involving pointy rocks).

  25. Re:Won't help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know about that, but it sure as shit won't protect you when a fat orange-haired criminal baboon with a severe case of Digital Tourette's Sydrome gets elected President by a whole bunch of white nationalist neo-nazi baboons, that's for sure.

    Obviously we need to be testing for more than radon leaks in basements these days. You losers are seriously demented to insist on political shitposting as the answer to every fucking thing in this world.

    Do the rest of us a favor. Pick up the bong, and shut the fuck up already.

  26. MAMILs will LOVE it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Middle aged men in Lycra, particularly slovenly overweight ones, will love putting this helmet on with their shiny spandex while they ride around on their little bicycles and tiny, asshole-massaging seats.

    1. Re:MAMILs will LOVE it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Awww, what's the matter? You jelly because you're too lazy to get your fat, cheeto-stained ass off the couch and exercise?

  27. Bicycle Helmets Make No Sense! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bicycle helmets make no sense at all. They sit high atop the head, offering little or no protection to the periphery, where impact is most likely to occur when falling from a bicycle.

    The bicycle helmet seems to be designed to be streamlined, stylish, and exclusive. In that order. Protection is clearly not a real consideration.

    Consider almost all other helmets, football, baseball, hockey, climbing, paragliding, skydiving, construction, military... All of these helmets extend protection to a far greater area of the head than bicycle helmets do.

    Bicycle helmets are designed for speed and looks while satisfying a helmet requirement. They provide shitty head protection. Bicycle helmets make no sense!

    1. Re:Bicycle Helmets Make No Sense! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Consider almost all other helmets, football, baseball, hockey, climbing, paragliding, skydiving, construction, military... All of these helmets extend protection to a far greater area of the head than bicycle helmets do.

      Yet none of those helmets do a damn thing to prevent concussions. Turns out that yes, keeping your cranium intact is a good start, it still doesn't stop the inertia of the brain from slamming into the side of your skull.

      But you know, since they're not 100% perfect, lets not wear ANY AT ALL!

    2. Re:Bicycle Helmets Make No Sense! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice strawman. GP never suggested not wearing a helmet. Though the GP is based on a false premise (that helmets provide shitty protection) that is demonstrably false by decades of research.

    3. Re:Bicycle Helmets Make No Sense! by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      It's clear you know nothing about bicycle helmets starting with your complete lack of awareness of how many different kinds there are. It would appear you are commenting on road racing helmets, through you know nothing about those either.

  28. Material choice needs re-thinking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I got the promo for these helmets via email about a month ago. They looked cool and I thought the material was like a soft silicon form the images and videos I watched. Then I saw these helmets at the bike store 2 weeks ago. Nope! The material is like a hard plastic that is turned on edged toward the rider's skull. I can't imagine the laceration damage that would result in the event of a collision. Stick with MIPS, I think.

  29. Re:Won't help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why must you ruin a perfectly good point with gratuitous xenophobia?

    If you were smart enough to pick out the pertinent points of OP's post you would agree with them since most car/cyclist deaths involve gross damage to internal organs other than the brain or substantial blood loss. But you're not smart enough and simply strike at the bait of current events.

    This is how social media moves its herds; with not-so-subtle nudges that are not even recognized as such by the zombie masses. In Wisconsin they have largemouth bass with better situational awareness than you have here demonstrated. But I know you meant well. Good luck going forward and say hi to your handlers for me.

  30. Re:Won't help by dfghjk · · Score: 1

    No, the purpose of the post in question was to make a xenophobic remark. No one needs it pointed out to them that bicycle helmets don't help when "gross damage to internal organs" occurs nor are helmets intended to address that.

  31. Hey asshole trying to FRAME me... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey asshole trying to FRAME me, tell you what: ANYTIME you want to accuse me of the bs lies you're spouting, meet me face to face & do it - I will fucking END you motherfucker...

    * I SHIT YOU NOT!

    (You PUSSCAKE PUNK hiding behind UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous posts weezil)

    APK

    P.S.=> I will FRACTURE YOUR SKULL cocksucker - guaranteed... apk