View Single Post
  #32 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 23, 2006, 07:36pm
Kaliix Kaliix is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 555
Jeff, I actually said I was calling you a name and you say, if this isn't name calling, I don't know what is... What?!?

I believe you are trolling but let's try this one more time. The medical community doesn't have to sign off on anything. We are not talking about concussions. We are talking about the ability of two different protective mask designs to resist, deflect, absorb or do anything but not transfer energy to the head. This is a very measurable effect. Something transfers energy or it doesn't. If it does, how much? You place sensors at various points and hit the maks from all directions. You get quantifiable data as a result and you can determine with scientific accuracy how well a mask protects from the force of a baseball hitting it.

The whole process is not nearly as hard as you make it out to be. Biomechanical engineers, et al. have been crash testing cars for years and have gotten very good at figuring out how to make crash dummies replicate almost exactly how the human body responds to various types of impacts. I feel confident in saying this as the National Geographic Channel just aired a special detailing the various types of impacts that different martial artists can deliver. They hired crash test experts (biomechanical engineers and the like) to run their tests. They do impact measuring for a living, every day, and can accurately measure exactly how the human body reacts to impact, whether it be from an automobile or fist, elbow, knee, etc. Measuring a baseball hitting a mask from various angles at various speeds would be right up their alley and just wouldn't be that damn hard to figure out.

Now I am NOT saying that we understand exactly why people get concussions or why they affect some and not others. But we can measure the kind of forces delivered and we can compare how those forces would be withstood by different types of masks. That part isn't hard.

The fact that two independent labs said that the traditional mask and the hockey style mask have roughly the same protective qualities in terms of baseballs hitting them means that the tests are confirmed and reproduceable. We know exactly what kinds of forces the helmets/masks will withstand and how much force will be transferred to the head. What happens after that is not so certain in terms of how concussions happen, their effects short term vs. long, etc.

More to the point, a HSM covers more of the head. If a ball hits the back of an unprotected head, your gonna get hurt. If a broken bat hits you upside your unprotected head, you will get hurt. If you have an HSM and those things happen, in the same way, you likely suffer nothing more than you would if you got tagged with a foul ball while behind the plate, maybe less. Ergo, the HSM is safer.

That's all I'm saying Jeff, the HSM is a helmet designed to protect from impact. Take a foul ball straight back with either a traditional mask or an HSM and you will be protected in relatively the same way. How much that hit effects you is certainly debatable, but the transfer of energy will be roughly the same with either one. And it is entirely measureable.

Getting hit anywhere in the head but in the front is not that common an occurence. But if it happens, you will not be protected with a traditional mask. It is a relatively minor risk statistically speaking, so I completely understand umpires not rushing to wear HSM. But if that statistically minor chance happens to you, it isn't so minor. Depending on where you work, the chances might increase and so for some of us, we choose to wear an HSM (their are other reasons, but whatever).

As I said before, I am not trying to convert you. I just like a good discussion and I want the facts straight. You are under this delusion that we can't quantify the differences between the protective qualities of the two styles of masks. It just ain't so. We can and we have. Straight on hits, both styles offer the same protection. In the less likely event that you get hit some where else on your head (that is to say, the side, top or back) you are still protected with an HSM and not protected with a traditional mask.

Capiche?



Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
If this is not name calling, I do not know what is.



Are you saying that the entire medical community has signed off on these studies? Are you telling me that everyone from the medical profession agrees with the methodology of the studies and there are no further studies that need to be done? These are simple questions, not understanding why these are hard to understand. There are medical professionals that cannot agree on the effects of Steroids and the heath effects on the body, now you want me to believe that a club doing a study changes the amount of disagreement out there on causes and solutions of concussions?



Concussions are more than likely come about when your brain hits the walls of your skull during some kind of head trauma. This is why you see football players with concussions a lot mainly because they are hit with such force, there body is jolted. Many times they come about in football not as a result of the actual hitting of the head, but the way their brain moves forcefully in different directions.



So what you are telling me know is you are a medical doctor or a physicist and that is the conclusion all doctors will come to only because the head is protected. Aren't football players heads completely covered too? Why was Troy Aikman getting concussions every other week at the end of his career? You are talking about facts, but simply having your head covered does not elude you from having a concussion. I was only asking a question so to get clarification if all these factors have been explored. I am also sure all helmets are not made the same. I know all football all helmets are not the same and there are no conclusive evidence as to which helmet works and why. If that was the case I am sure only certain kinds of helmets would be made legal and others would be considered illegal. As a typical internet umpire you took my comments and ran with them. I would ask any doctor the very same questions I am asking you. To me you are WAAAAAAYYYYYYY too emotional about this issue. You claim their are facts and I bet if I went to a neurologist or some kind of brain specialist they might not be so quick to say what you are saying here about helmet safety.

Dude, wear the damn helmet. I am sure you are not going to change the minds of many people.

Peace
__________________
Well I am certainly wiser than this man. It is only too likely that neither of us has any knowledge to boast of; but he thinks that he knows something which he does not know, whereas I am quite conscious of my ignorance. At any rate it seems that I am wiser than he is to this small extent, that I do not think that I know what I do not know. ~Socrates