This Web site is an easy guide to
give you information about
Safety Facts USA
According to 2005 data from the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), 4,008 motorcycle occupants were killed on
our nation's roads last year, an 8% increase from 2003. Motorcycle
helmets have been shown to save the lives of motorcyclists and
prevent serious brain injuries. Twenty states and the District of
Columbia require helmet use by all motorcycle drivers and their
passengers. Twenty-eight other states have laws only covering some
riders, especially those younger than 18. Three states - Colorado,
Illinois, and Iowa - have no helmet requirements at all. All-rider
helmet laws are effective in increasing motorcycle helmet use,
thereby saving lives and reducing serious injuries.
2003
Motorcycle Helmet Safety Fact Sheet USA
- Helmets saved the lives of 1,158 motorcyclists nationwide.
- If all motorcyclists had worn helmets, an additional 640
lives could have been saved.
- Motorcycle helmets are estimated to be 37% effective in
preventing fatal injuries.
- 20 states plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico
require helmet use for all drivers and passengers of
motorcycles.
- 27 states require helmet use for motorcycle drivers and
passengers under a specific age, usually age 18.
- 3 states do not require helmet use for drivers or
passengers. These states are Illinois, Iowa and Colorado.
BikerKiss.com - the largest biker personals site!
What kind of
protection does a helmet provide?
Helmets are tested laboratories for straight line (linear) blows
only. Test procedures set by
standards bodies like Snell, ANSI, and
CPSC require a helmet containing a 5kg (11lbs) hard headform
to be dropped onto a flat anvil from a height of 1.5 to 2.0 metres
(5ft to 6ft 8in). If more than 300g's is imparted to the headform
the helmet cannot be certified.
The outer shell of the 1980's hard
shell helmet is designed to spread the force of an impact over a
greater area of the head. The micro-shell of modern helmets does
not do this, deforming instead and allowing the liner to start
compressing at the point of impact. Whether this is good or not is
open to question.

All shelled helmets reduce friction
in a slide compared to no-shell helmets. The helmet's liner is
made of foam sufficiently stiff that the head inevitably will
absorb some of the impact. The stiffer the liner, the more shock
the head will absorb. Theoretically, the liner is supposed to
limit the deceleration for a typical fall on to a flat hard
surface to a sub-lethal level, ie. less 300g's, by absorbing
energy. Sub-lethal means anything from a very bad concussion to a
coma. If a blow is of such severity that the liner is crushed to
its minimum thickness, excess energy is absorbed by the head and
the blow is likely to be lethal.
The medical profession now believes
that even lesser accelerations can produce serious injury and that
the 300g level is too high. However, it is unlikely that helmet
standards will be raised to provide significant protection because
the industry doesn't believe that consumers would buy the
resulting products. The trend is in the opposite direction. In
Australia, the standard was actually lowered because helmets
produced under the old standard did not meet with market
acceptance. Manufacturers are presently responding to market
demand for helmets which improve air-flow inside the helmet and to
fashion by manufacturing helmets with more holes them. While these
pass standard tests, they spread impacts over a smaller area of
the head, so when an impact occurs it will be more concentrated
around the center of the impact.
Are helmets supposed to provide
protection against all impacts?
No. Sharp, high speed objects are likely to penetrate helmets
particularly those with many vent openings. Also, helmet tests
monitor the effect of linear force but not rotational force. A
blow which is not square on centre, i.e. not linear, will rotate
the head. Diffuse injuries - the most serious and common type of
brain injuries - result from rotational stresses on the brain.
Linear force on the other hand, result in focal or localized
injuries rather than diffuse injuries.
It has not been ruled out that the
added mass, size and surface texture of a helmet may make the
rotational effect more severe. A "safety" device which has been
shown undeniably to assist in rotation and increase the risk of
diffuse brain injury is the headrest on car seats in rear-end
crashes. Nothing has been shown one way or another though, for
bicycle helmets. When acquiring new helmets, buyers should
consider helmets which are spherical in shape as they are more
likely to minimize rotational effect than the trendy duck-shape
aerodynamic helmets.
|