<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>sliken</author><text>I agree.  I&amp;#x27;ve raced on road, off road, been a bicycle messenger, and commuted on bike to work every working day since 1994.  Accidents happen and helmets help.  The most dangerous thing about a bike accident is generally the vertical distance.  Try laying down on concrete, lift your head up an inch, and drop it.  Keep in mind that when falling your acceleration is 9.8 m&amp;#x2F;sec&amp;#x2F;sec, so a 10 inch fall is worse than 10 times as bad as one inch.&lt;p&gt;The MIPS and Wavecell seem to assume that helmets grab the road with great traction and then snap your skull producing a large rotational acceleration so great that your brain falls behind.  In my experience helmets (which are at first approximation spherical) hit in the center, easily skid, and induce approximately zero rotation in your skull.&lt;p&gt;I do recall in the 1990s or so that as brands switched from a heavier plastic shell (like the ancient bell helmets) to the then common nylon sleeve over the styrofoam that one manufacturer picked a particularly high friction material which did cause additional injuries.   Once that was fixed everyone was happy again.&lt;p&gt;So absorbing energy from the fall is great.  Playing games with additional layers with low internal friction or fancy ways to collapse is useless.  I&amp;#x27;m not completely against the idea, but seems laughable to pay 3-6X for something unlikely to help.  Bike helmets that meet the toughest impact standards are available for $50 or so.&lt;p&gt;I personally have fallen many times, had my helmet skip many times (the longest was more than 10 feet) and never noticed my helmet gripping the ground and trying to torque my head.</text><parent_chain><item><author>parsimo2010</author><text>I’m going to comment with what seems to be the common sentiment here.  It’s really hard to tell how effective a helmet is at preventing concussions in real life.  So we&amp;#x2F;they design a test of some hypothetical concussion cause, and lo and behold, their helmet is very effective in that test.  Note that this is a different test than the ones used to prove that MIPS was better than a styrofoam helmet.&lt;p&gt;The real story is that marketing probably has a bigger influence than science in this case.  Several years ago helmet manufacturers hit the practical weight limit for helmets with styrofoam and carbon fiber shells.  I bought a Giro Atmos over a decade ago and never needed to upgrade because the top of the line helmets were only a couple grams lighter, after a decade of “improvement.”  The manufacturers noticed that helmet sales were declining, and all of a sudden “new science” appeared with a theory about concussions being caused by brain rotation and MIPS technology helps prevent that.  How convenient that this appeared.&lt;p&gt;The dirty secret is that literally nobody has ever seen a brain rotate inside a skull and result in concussion.  It’s really hard to image a brain in motion (impossible with off the shelf equipment), so the brain rotation theory is just a hypothetical mechanism.  There isn’t an ethical test for blunt force trauma in real life conditions, and bike crashes are very rarely reported if they don’t send the rider to the hospital.  So the leading authority on product safety, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, doesn’t even have good numbers on concussion rates for cyclists.&lt;p&gt;The bottom line is that MIPS and this new gel layer came at way too good of a time for the helmet industry for us not to be wary of the science.  They can get away with it because it’s such an easy marketing sell- most people think their life is worth more than $250, so any helmet tech is a bet on the order of Pascal’s wager.  If it’s snake oil I’m just out $250, but if it really is better then I just saved my life in a crash.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Bontrager’s WaveCel material more effective at preventing concussions than MIPS</title><url>https://pelotonmagazine.com/gear/bontragers-new-wavecel-bests-mips-at-concussion-prevention/</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>Alex3917</author><text>&amp;gt; They can get away with it because it’s such an easy marketing sell- most people think their life is worth more than $250, so any helmet tech is a bet on the order of Pascal’s wager.&lt;p&gt;I think this is basically accurate. Even if you have zero expectation that either this or MIPS or whatever works, I don&amp;#x27;t see how anyone who has seen Crash Reel or any of the football-related concussion documentaries could possibly not spring the extra few bucks.&lt;p&gt;Someone should put together a list of the cheapest or highest expected-value Pascal&amp;#x27;s wagers. Even things like flossing your teeth are a good example, where it&amp;#x27;s clearly good for your gum health even though the Cochrane research is equivocal. (Although using a WaterPik is probably better, especially if you do so in addition to flossing.)&lt;p&gt;Anyway if you haven&amp;#x27;t seen it, this movie will change the way you think about sports: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.youtube.com&amp;#x2F;watch?v=c1hxtjlbTHI&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.youtube.com&amp;#x2F;watch?v=c1hxtjlbTHI&lt;/a&gt;</text><parent_chain><item><author>parsimo2010</author><text>I’m going to comment with what seems to be the common sentiment here.  It’s really hard to tell how effective a helmet is at preventing concussions in real life.  So we&amp;#x2F;they design a test of some hypothetical concussion cause, and lo and behold, their helmet is very effective in that test.  Note that this is a different test than the ones used to prove that MIPS was better than a styrofoam helmet.&lt;p&gt;The real story is that marketing probably has a bigger influence than science in this case.  Several years ago helmet manufacturers hit the practical weight limit for helmets with styrofoam and carbon fiber shells.  I bought a Giro Atmos over a decade ago and never needed to upgrade because the top of the line helmets were only a couple grams lighter, after a decade of “improvement.”  The manufacturers noticed that helmet sales were declining, and all of a sudden “new science” appeared with a theory about concussions being caused by brain rotation and MIPS technology helps prevent that.  How convenient that this appeared.&lt;p&gt;The dirty secret is that literally nobody has ever seen a brain rotate inside a skull and result in concussion.  It’s really hard to image a brain in motion (impossible with off the shelf equipment), so the brain rotation theory is just a hypothetical mechanism.  There isn’t an ethical test for blunt force trauma in real life conditions, and bike crashes are very rarely reported if they don’t send the rider to the hospital.  So the leading authority on product safety, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, doesn’t even have good numbers on concussion rates for cyclists.&lt;p&gt;The bottom line is that MIPS and this new gel layer came at way too good of a time for the helmet industry for us not to be wary of the science.  They can get away with it because it’s such an easy marketing sell- most people think their life is worth more than $250, so any helmet tech is a bet on the order of Pascal’s wager.  If it’s snake oil I’m just out $250, but if it really is better then I just saved my life in a crash.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Bontrager’s WaveCel material more effective at preventing concussions than MIPS</title><url>https://pelotonmagazine.com/gear/bontragers-new-wavecel-bests-mips-at-concussion-prevention/</url></story>