Leaderboard

Great.... we have a vaccine-autism link conspiracy theorist supporter (debunked by the very "doctor" that started it - he admitted he was paid to release that info) and a VT helmet test supporter in the same thread. Can they occupy the same space? The world may be coming to an end!

........and that's a fine way to systematically go about picking a helmet. You just have to remember that the function of a helmet is to prevent skull fracture, and that they all work. And you can't realistically expect the first helmet on the list to protect against concussions any more than the 50th helmet on the list.

The doctor who fraudulently claimed there was link sure made a killing from it, and he was planning on making more. I wonder if VA Tech will be testing tinfoil lined helmets soon. I know at least one guy who might be interested.

Doctors don't make money on vaccines. They make more money treating for the illnesses the vaccines prevent. As far as the VT study goes, they measure the transfer of force to the headform the helmet is on. They use the same headform for every test regardless of the head shape the helmet was meant for. If you've ever had on a helmet that doesn't actually conform to your head you will immediately realize why this is a problem. The study tells absolutely nothing worthwhile about helmets that don't fit the headform they used. The helmets that fit it well score well, the helmets that do not score poorly.

@Louie picked one up last week and said that the 9K shells line up perfectly with the attachment points on the new Super Tacks Girdle.

What's good about that is, they're not impervious to critique. I'd be surprised if they haven't considered the headform issue. I haven't read through their literature end to end so it could be buried in there. My view--sure it's a flawed study, perhaps more so than would be ideal at this point (everything and every study is going to have its limitations), but it's a step in the right direction by a team that shows it's open to improvements. Doubtless, the peer-review process has raised some issues as well. I wish journals published the peer-review referees' comments as an appendix to each article. It would raise a lot of the major points that may be missed by curious readers who aren't expert in the particular topic, as well as indicate the degree to which the debate around an issue points in various directions of concern.

I stand corrected, thank you. I was confusing it with the football study. The abstract states they added rotational measurements to the hockey study to help address this critique of the football study.

Here is another analogy to placing too much emphasis on the VT results: just as they run crash tests with cars to determine the "safest" car in an accident, the fact of the matter is that you are still in an accident !! Chances are good that at some point in playing hockey you are going to get hit in the head. Buy the helmet that fits your noggin the best.

I know that feel. Ref in my league tacks on additional minors if anyone asks what the offending player was called for, even if it's the captain asking. It's ridiculous.

I've used this analogy a few times and I think it fits well. It's no different from people thinking vaccines cause autism, despite the study that linked the two being debunked. Some people still put weight into it, regardless of the facts, because "it's all we have". There's not much you can say to sway those people. The best you can do is educate the uninformed (those who may not know it's been debunked) and hope common sense takes over. I guess all other things being equal (fit, price, weight, materials, looks... in that order) then yea sure go ahead and use the VT score as a tie breaker. I like to think one of the first couple items in the list would have broken the tie long before then, though.

No longer collecting dust in the back of one of my rink pro shops...