Health Canada prohibits sale of non-certified head/facial protection

[W.Heinle 0]

Saw this posted on another board.

Apparently, helmets and facial protection that isn't CSA certified has been classified as a 'hazardous product' in Canada. The sale, importation, and/or advertising of these non-CSA certified products within Canada is prohibited.

This applies to everything related to head and facial protection. Helmets, visors, cages, goalie masks, goalie mask cages (cateye, cheater). All prohibited to sell or import (e.g. buy from the US and have shipped into Canada). You can use your existing uncertified gear as long as you like, you just can't sell it to someone else or buy new uncertified gear.

Canadian Regulatory Requirements for Ice Hockey Helmets and Face Protectors

Quick Reference Guide to the Hazardous Products Act for Manufacturers, Importers, Distributors and Retailers - 2009

[ID Rollerpop 4]

If this ruling realy does apply to all cat eye goalie mask cages it will be interesting to see how Luongo and some of the other canadian professional goalies who wear cat eye cages go about replacing their old equipment. I would think they will personally have to buy it wherever else and will not be able to rely on the equipment managers from their teams.

[michael.yue 2]

does any know if it's alright to take of the certification stickers? is it allowed in minor hockey to play with a helmet that doesn't have the stickers on?

[JR Boucicaut 3805]

If this ruling realy does apply to all cat eye goalie mask cages it will be interesting to see how Luongo and some of the other canadian professional goalies who wear cat eye cages go about replacing their old equipment. I would think they will personally have to buy it wherever else and will not be able to rely on the equipment managers from their teams.

It does not apply to professional leagues.

[jimmy 194]

Yes, this was discussed in detail on GSBB. Let's say Canada actually enforces a ban on selling cateyes, they still will be available as some US entrepreneur will certainly produce them here. That is until our "nanny" state government bans sales, and that shouldn't happen for a while.

[jbyun04 7]

Yeah it's pretty stupid... I know cateye is banned and I heard pro visors are next. Basically what they're saying is someone without a visor is better off than someone who wears a non csa visor. Their argument for that is when you buy a visor you're assuming you will receive adequate protection and if a non csa visor moves on you you're not getting it.

[Leafsrule16 5]

This is a joke. I dont understand why soceity doesnt let us make our own decisions for ourselves. We should have the choice to (maybe not the best one) refuse wearing facial protection. Woudln't it just be awesome if you could sign a waiver and throw your cage in the garbage? All this laws crap is what drives me crazy. Go biking without a helmet, i figure you should be able to do those kinda things as long as you accept the fact your going to get hurt at some point or another. Once i get out of minor hockey im never wearing facial protection again, maybe a wild puck will change that but for now theres nothing i hate wearing more then a visor or a cage, a cage being a lot less worse then the certified visors your forced to wear that go down to your chin and fog and scratch up.

[jbyun04 7]

This is a joke. I dont understand why soceity doesnt let us make our own decisions for ourselves. We should have the choice to (maybe not the best one) refuse wearing facial protection. Woudln't it just be awesome if you could sign a waiver and throw your cage in the garbage? All this laws crap is what drives me crazy. Go biking without a helmet, i figure you should be able to do those kinda things as long as you accept the fact your going to get hurt at some point or another. Once i get out of minor hockey im never wearing facial protection again, maybe a wild puck will change that but for now theres nothing i hate wearing more then a visor or a cage, a cage being a lot less worse then the certified visors your forced to wear that go down to your chin and fog and scratch up.

the Oakley 2.0 treated me good and the dx100 isn't bad looking buy all csa visors are a lot less appealing than the pros

[McDougalfaschnitzer 32]

Sounds like a ploy to get more companies to pay for certification...

[Law Goalie 147]

It absolutely is a cash grab, among other things.

If this ruling realy does apply to all cat eye goalie mask cages it will be interesting to see how Luongo and some of the other canadian professional goalies who wear cat eye cages go about replacing their old equipment. I would think they will personally have to buy it wherever else and will not be able to rely on the equipment managers from their teams.

It does not apply to professional leagues.

That is the root of its hypocrisy.

I called the CSA, and they claim (at least) that this new enforcement guidelines for the HPA (which is, after all, about two decades old) is a direct response to the WJD goalie mask situation. When I pointed out that this would force custom masks maker to certify every single shell they cured, and that this would consequently remove from recreational use the safest and most durable instrument for protecting a goalie's brain while leaving many others certified and on the market that I wouldn't trust to a protect me from a ten year-old's shot (ahem, Itech 1200 - hell, the NV7 too), they said they'd get back to me. In about a century or so.

The other one that just kills me is that a helmet with an Oakley straight-cut visor - or even a Heatley 3/4+ - is now an unsaleable and unmarketable item, but a helmet with NO facial protection is just fine and dandy. Brilliant.

Sure, there are ways around this, like claiming that such items are "For professional use or display purposes only," since this is, like alcohol, purely a matter of sale and not on-ice enforcement. My little brother couldn't buy himself a beer at 15, but I could buy him one; a ref had no grounds to throw you off the ice for wearing a visor or a cat-eye unless it's in the league rules, and it probably won't be for ages, if ever.

[epstud74 24]

Kinda effed up nanny system like Canada's health care system.

[jimmy 194]

A Cat-Eye will never be certified, so I think it's more than a money grab to forcing more certifications. That would be totally understandable. Banning sales. That's just Big Government control of out lives,... that's more the issue.

BTW, I use a WJD, one of the ones with the counterfeit stickers. It is an awesome mask with superior protection. It's sad WJD cheated to save money. What happened there has to be regulated, especially with a product that has hand laid up construction.

[lampliter87 8]

What's WJD?

[Law Goalie 147]

A mask company that unfortunately used counterfeit CSA/HECC stickers. It was a big deal up here - the CBC had a feature on it.

I think it is ultimately, as jimmy says, a money-grab by a floundering agency, and an attempt to reestablish itself as a major player in a field much, much wider than hockey.

The secondary issue of effectively banning all custom professional-grade masks and the totally illogical position on visors are just stupid oversights, IMO.

[oldtrainerguy28 478]

Seeing as I can not comment on issues discussed at meetings trust me there is nothing being done to grab extra money from anyone. All the companies have there own test facilities.

All companies test higher than standards.

So if you were to use a Mask from say "WJD" and if it was your kid wearing a non-tested mask that got hit by say a puck machine and died I am sure you would be saying the CSA didnt do enough. The people that sit and make those decisions are good hockey people and its a very balanced group and they make smart decisions.

The Visors are being discontinued and the cages are now however they are letting retailers sell through everything.

Before you make comments on something about the CSA you may want to get proper clarification about the questions you ask. As for getting back to you I am betting they will after the next meeting they take all inquires very seriously!

[Law Goalie 147]

Thanks for the update, Jeff - good to know that current stock won't be effected. I think a few retailers were still in the dark on that one.

I'm pretty sure that Pro's Choice, Pro-Masque, etc. don't have testing facilities; I could be wrong, however. I think Stacey may, but then again, he has access to equipment far beyond the hockey industry. I was also under the impression that to gain the full CSA certification there was a per-shell fee of something like $10K. Again, that's just my understanding. If true, it would indeed eliminate the ability of someone for whom custom mask-making is a spin-off of more significant material work to sell to consumers, even if their masks were still in use by professionals. It would also eliminate the ability of a larger company like, say, Sportmask, from offering a custom-moulded T3 to anyone outside a professional league. This is tantamount to saying that recreational players don't deserve the maximum level of protection.

Personally, I would rather have myself and my hypothetical child wearing masks made from quality fibres and good epoxy resin than anything in the Itech line below a 960/1 -- and even then, there are options I'd prefer.

As for garbage like the Itech 1200/1400, I wouldn't put them on the heads of my worst enemies to face tennis balls.

My exact questions were:

When will these guidelines take effect? (ie. is there a grace period)

Will this effectively ban the sale of custom-made goalie masks?

As a sideline, I was also more than a little curious about the visor issue, which still seems simply illogical. How is a helmet with *any* degree of facial protection - even a Spezza-style eyebrow-protector - less protective than a CSA-certified helmet with no facial protection? I understand that visors are a grey-area in safety terms, and difficult to regulate, but this simply doesn't seem optimal.

[W.Heinle 0]

As a sideline, I was also more than a little curious about the visor issue, which still seems simply illogical. How is a helmet with *any* degree of facial protection - even a Spezza-style eyebrow-protector - less protective than a CSA-certified helmet with no facial protection? I understand that visors are a grey-area in safety terms, and difficult to regulate, but this simply doesn't seem optimal.

I can comment on that as a trainer. In order for a shield (or cage for that matter) to be CSA certified it must be hinged so that it can be flipped up easily in case of mouth-to-mouth.

As I'm sure you understand that if a player is unconscious on the ice, the last thing you want to do is to have to remove the helmet in order to give CPR.

[JR Boucicaut 3805]

HECC would never do this, as they have a vested interest in selling facial protection.

[W.Heinle 0]

HECC would never do this, as they have a vested interest in selling facial protection.

Wow :o is that not a conflict of interest

[JR Boucicaut 3805]

Well, facial protection manufacturers have served on the HECC board.

[Jason Harris 31]

Kinda effed up nanny system like Canada's health care system.

As an aside, I was in Toronto for an event with Gouche, whose friend from Winnipeg also flew in. His friend needed a new kidney and was feeling weak, so we drove him to the hospital for dialysis and picked him up about three hours later.

Maybe he could have already had a replacement kidney if he had lived in the States, but I don't think anyone would consider it an effed up system when anyone can walk into any hospital and be treated for their malady no-questions-asked for nothing more than the taxes they had paid throughout the year.

[starsfan71 9]

Kinda effed up nanny system like Canada's health care system.

As an aside, I was in Toronto for an event with Gouche, whose friend from Winnipeg also flew in. His friend needed a new kidney and was feeling weak, so we drove him to the hospital for dialysis and picked him up about three hours later.

Maybe he could have already had a replacement kidney if he had lived in the States, but I don't think anyone would consider it an effed up system when anyone can walk into any hospital and be treated for their malady no-questions-asked for nothing more than the taxes they had paid throughout the year.

+1

[Leafsrule16 5]

I agree with Lawgoalie, I wore an Itech 1200 for road hockey and even with a road hockey ball i was still feeling the ball pretty good, you coudlnt pay me enough money to get on the ice with that with a puck and people lifting the pick. Im not even sure i would feel safe in an atom house league game taking shots with that thing on, awful. Wjd, were they any good? A goalie play with had one until recently, said it was a pretty comfortable mask.

[Law Goalie 147]

As a sideline, I was also more than a little curious about the visor issue, which still seems simply illogical. How is a helmet with *any* degree of facial protection - even a Spezza-style eyebrow-protector - less protective than a CSA-certified helmet with no facial protection? I understand that visors are a grey-area in safety terms, and difficult to regulate, but this simply doesn't seem optimal.

I can comment on that as a trainer. In order for a shield (or cage for that matter) to be CSA certified it must be hinged so that it can be flipped up easily in case of mouth-to-mouth.

As I'm sure you understand that if a player is unconscious on the ice, the last thing you want to do is to have to remove the helmet in order to give CPR.

Thank you: that's finally clear to me. So with cages, the Itech HLC and DX100, the Oakley/1Xcell with straps, etcthe trainer/paramedic just pops the side-snaps, hinges the protection up, and the airway is accessible; if it's bolted, obviously not.

I knew there had to be something I was missing.

Now, if someone can enlighten me as to how crap like low-end Itechs will be approved for sale while a Pro's Choice off a head-mold will be deemed an illegal import under the HPA, I'll never speak of this again.

[oldtrainerguy28 478]

As a sideline, I was also more than a little curious about the visor issue, which still seems simply illogical. How is a helmet with *any* degree of facial protection - even a Spezza-style eyebrow-protector - less protective than a CSA-certified helmet with no facial protection? I understand that visors are a grey-area in safety terms, and difficult to regulate, but this simply doesn't seem optimal.

I can comment on that as a trainer. In order for a shield (or cage for that matter) to be CSA certified it must be hinged so that it can be flipped up easily in case of mouth-to-mouth.

As I'm sure you understand that if a player is unconscious on the ice, the last thing you want to do is to have to remove the helmet in order to give CPR.

Thank you: that's finally clear to me. So with cages, the Itech HLC and DX100, the Oakley/1Xcell with straps, etcthe trainer/paramedic just pops the side-snaps, hinges the protection up, and the airway is accessible; if it's bolted, obviously not.

I knew there had to be something I was missing.

Now, if someone can enlighten me as to how crap like low-end Itechs will be approved for sale while a Pro's Choice off a head-mold will be deemed an illegal import under the HPA, I'll never speak of this again.

\

Itech 1200/1400

Simply put the drop test that are done they pass with above minimum requirements. The cage is the same as on the others although it is tested on the helmet and it passes. Because it may not be fitted properly is a different case altogether.

As for the other mask manufactures they can have an independent 3rd party lab do the testing and send in one to be tested for certification and then I believe its one in every 250 for a Production helmet that has to be tested...Now you cant Test a Custom and then use it so you just sell it as Non-certified same as the 960.

That being said you just cant use a Cat eye cage anymore.

Its really not that hard to be certified but yes it does cost....

As for the visors I don't remember the part about were it had to be non fixed just that it came below the nose to be Certified but I will check on that. As there are a few fixed visors left that are CSA approved. Hummm now I have to go check my notes darn!