Originally Posted by
ItsJustMe
By the way, the standards for helmets USED to evolve as new research discovered new threats and new ways to protect against them. But there was no legal requirement to conform to the standards. Then congress decided to pass such a law and they used the CPSC standard.
The problem now as I understand it is that even if the CPSC discovered that their standards are not sufficient given current knowledge of anatomy and brain injury, congress requires them to now put a monetary value on potential injuries that could be avoided by updating the standard, and weigh that against the monetary impact of requiring manufacturers to update their designs, and will only allow the change if the safer helmets save more money than it would cost.
A state of affairs only an actuary could love.
Motorcycle helmets were often rated by Snell (who uses a different rating system than CPSC) as well as the CPSC when I was a biker. For many years the Snell rating was considered better and safer as they offered protection from larger more severe impacts, but eventually their standards led to helmets that actually transmitted more of the more common low impact forces to the head that lead to more injuries. Which led to some people complaining that Snell was using unrealistic standards to sell their Snell approved labels for helmets. And then there are the N.O.T. approved helmets.... if you've got a $10 head wear a $10 helmet as Bell used to advertise.