• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

New York Times article on air vests

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New York Times article on air vests

    Interesting NYT article on the Point Two and Hit Air vests: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/24/sp...agewanted=1&hp

    There's a quote from our very own Reed Ayers on page 2.

  • #2
    I would like more information on the study they say they had done by a nonprofit on the vests that shows a fairly significant reduction in injury. I wonder if it was specific to riding accidents/injuries.

    sigh- this is almost certainly going to prompt a call from my mother (who reads the NYT every day) about my dangerous sport. I get one each time they publish one of these articles. This call will probably start with do I have one of these and (since I don't) will I wear it if she buys me one?
    There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man.(Churchill)

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by bambam View Post
      I would like more information on the study they say they had done by a nonprofit on the vests that shows a fairly significant reduction in injury. I wonder if it was specific to riding accidents/injuries.

      sigh- this is almost certainly going to prompt a call from my mother (who reads the NYT every day) about my dangerous sport. I get one each time they publish one of these articles. This call will probably start with do I have one of these and (since I don't) will I wear it if she buys me one?
      I'll wear it if she wants to buy one!
      Proud and achy member of the Eventing Grannies clique.

      Comment


      • #4
        I think the take home lesson of the article is that while the idea is valid, one should never rely on these as a sole method of protection. That is what the last 3 quotes (including mine) describe.

        The study was done by TRL and Point 2 has put the conclusion letters on their website. They DO NOT state a reduction in injury! They describe a reduction in force and deformation that MAY result in injury. There is NO way to measure injury reduction without extended times of analysis of injuries incurred on XC.

        I bolded and capitalized because this is a common misconception of the testing.

        Reed

        Comment


        • #5
          It was nice to see the sport portrayed in a positive light. Obviously, it would be better if there were no falls that needed any sort of vest but the technology seems like it can't hurt.
          Can you stress-fracture your brain?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by bambam View Post
            sigh- this is almost certainly going to prompt a call from my mother (who reads the NYT every day) about my dangerous sport. I get one each time they publish one of these articles. This call will probably start with do I have one of these and (since I don't) will I wear it if she buys me one?
            Haha, that was my mom's reaction when I told her they existed. Still need to take her up on it.

            I realize it's not an end all be all, but I like the idea of reduction of force.

            This may be a totally silly thought, but I'm assuming that these things put out enough pressure exploding outward that they break pinneys?
            Last edited by melodiousaphony; Aug. 23, 2010, 07:22 PM. Reason: to be more specific and demonstrate I understand reduction of what
            ~T3DE 2010 Pact Clique~

            Comment


            • #7
              Melodiousapony,

              No, they do not break the pinneys, although they deflate quickly.

              But, "first timers" sometimes panic when this happens - and so do the people around them.

              Most salespeople are recommending that the rider "test use" (unmounted) their vest so that they understand that feeling of "compression".

              When I win the lottery I will invent pinneys that velcro on one side, so one doesn't have to pull them over one's head when trying to get them off!

              Comment


              • #8
                The article should have stated -- as fact borne out by conclusive evidence, photographic and physical -- that Oliver Townend's air jacket did not save him.

                What saved OT was his helmet, which was then tested by the manufacturer (CO?) and measured for the deformities and other metrics. The helmet is a safety product that is certified and tested to an established standard. It performed as it was designed to perform.

                The helmet deserves some credit. Debating the air jacket in a situation where it was irrelevant only serves as a distraction from a more valid argument for tested and certified safety products.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by JER View Post
                  The article should have stated -- as fact borne out by conclusive evidence, photographic and physical -- that Oliver Townend's air jacket did not save him.

                  What saved OT was his helmet, which was then tested by the manufacturer (CO?) and measured for the deformities and other metrics. The helmet is a safety product that is certified and tested to an established standard. It performed as it was designed to perform.

                  The helmet deserves some credit. Debating the air jacket in a situation where it was irrelevant only serves as a distraction from a more valid argument for tested and certified safety products.
                  I can assure you that in my interview with Katie Thomas that was an explicitly stated point. I do think she was pretty even about the whole thing though.

                  I also told her I will continue to wear my EXO and that other vest such as the RP are also more protective than the air vests in other ways.


                  Reed

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by RAyers View Post
                    I can assure you that in my interview with Katie Thomas that was an explicitly stated point. I do think she was pretty even about the whole thing though.
                    Putting my professional writer's hat on for a moment (and I assure you that a writer's hat is not a safety helmet, it's more like an inviting punching bag), I thought the piece suffered from a lack of real estate, either via editing or space considerations.

                    (Katie Thomas is very good. We are lucky to have held her interest.)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      So how do we get the story of OT's fall & his vest/helmet straight??

                      Originally posted by JER View Post
                      The article should have stated -- as fact borne out by conclusive evidence, photographic and physical -- that Oliver Townend's air jacket did not save him.

                      What saved OT was his helmet, which was then tested by the manufacturer (CO?) and measured for the deformities and other metrics. The helmet is a safety product that is certified and tested to an established standard. It performed as it was designed to perform.

                      The helmet deserves some credit. Debating the air jacket in a situation where it was irrelevant only serves as a distraction from a more valid argument for tested and certified safety products.
                      According to more people than I can count, OT's vest worked miracles at Rolex ( I believe he may have been quoted as saying he was alive because of the vest, but I may have that wrong)...I took a long look at the pictures & it sure seemed to me that he was in more danger of having his head squished than a broken rib or 2....but the misinformation prevails. Maybe the vest people prompted his testimonial? I too would like to see clearer and more substantiated research before making a decision on this. Head injuries are what seem to be our biggest problem, so we started from there...and now have tested and certified safety products, as JER states.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by FlightCheck View Post

                        But, "first timers" sometimes panic when this happens - and so do the people around them.
                        So do horses. A rider at our barn was bucked off when her vest inflated and frightened her horse.
                        2012 goal: learn to ride like a Barn Rat

                        A helmet saved my life.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by pixietrix View Post
                          According to more people than I can count, OT's vest worked miracles at Rolex ( I believe he may have been quoted as saying he was alive because of the vest, but I may have that wrong)...I took a long look at the pictures & it sure seemed to me that he was in more danger of having his head squished than a broken rib or 2....but the misinformation prevails. Maybe the vest people prompted his testimonial? I too would like to see clearer and more substantiated research before making a decision on this. Head injuries are what seem to be our biggest problem, so we started from there...and now have tested and certified safety products, as JER states.
                          I thought his testimonial was nearly immediate, before he had seen any replays, studies or analysis - a knee jerk reaction to his gratitude for the fact he was alive?


                          I wonder how long it will be until vest manufacturers figure out a way to use an accelerometer to trigger inflation based upon rotational acceleration... and if they figure it out, how many will get triggered by riders jumping ahead or being left behind.

                          I look forward to more studies and what we learn - and just hope the vests aren't used as an excuse to be less safe otherwise, because that would definitely be foolhardy!
                          Originally posted by Silverbridge
                          If you get anything on your Facebook feed about who is going to the Olympics in 2012 or guessing the outcome of Bush v Gore please start threads about those, too.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I believe he said his vest AND his helmet saved his life. Someone with more time than I have right now should be able to find his early quote on the subject. I believe he stated it was both pieces of equipment multiple times.
                            Amanda

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by JER View Post
                              Putting my professional writer's hat on for a moment (and I assure you that a writer's hat is not a safety helmet, it's more like an inviting punching bag), I thought the piece suffered from a lack of real estate, either via editing or space considerations.

                              (Katie Thomas is very good. We are lucky to have held her interest.)
                              The article didn't even make it into the Massachusetts edition. I looked for it once I saw this posting, but it wasn't there.

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                Originally posted by RAyers View Post
                                I think the take home lesson of the article is that while the idea is valid, one should never rely on these as a sole method of protection. That is what the last 3 quotes (including mine) describe.

                                The study was done by TRL and Point 2 has put the conclusion letters on their website. They DO NOT state a reduction in injury! They describe a reduction in force and deformation that MAY result in injury. There is NO way to measure injury reduction without extended times of analysis of injuries incurred on XC.

                                I bolded and capitalized because this is a common misconception of the testing.

                                Reed
                                Putting my scientist hat on here. Given the rate of these types of accidents, and our inability to randomize riders to air vest or no air vest groups, I doubt that the effectiveness of the vest will ever be proven or dis-proven using experimental methods generally used to test public health interventions. Instead, the association between wearing a vest and being protected in a rotational fall will probably be assessed using observational studies comparing observed injury rates for those wearing vests with observed injury rates for those not wearing vests. Given the sudden popularity of the vests the rates of injury for unprotected riders may well have to be based on historical data. The problem is that with really small numbers of accidents, it is unlikely that the accident for a rider wearing a vest is exactly the same as an accident for a rider not wearing a vest. In most epidemiologic studies, you can overcome this sort of a problem with large numbers of observations in each group, and statistical adjustment for any differences, in studies with small numbers of events, you really cannot statistically adjust for differences in the groups, and you are usually rather screwed. That is, you don't know if the difference in outcomes that you see is due to the vests or due to other factors.

                                Now, I doubt that anyone has read this far, but I think that I have a fun new example of the problems that arise in planning clinical trials that I can use for my class this fall. Thanks all, stepping off the soap box now.

                                Also, as for the effectiveness of the vests, it is my understanding that you need to come out of the saddle for the vest to deploy. While I have been fortunate enough not to have a rotational fall on with my horse, I have had one while riding my bicycle. I vividly remember the bicycle flipping over my head and landing on the ground still on the bike. And this was before I started using toe clips.

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  Originally posted by IFG View Post
                                  The article didn't even make it into the Massachusetts edition. I looked for it once I saw this posting, but it wasn't there.
                                  I am in a posting frenzy this morning. Should have read the NYT before the COTH. Hubby just pointed out that the article is in Tuesday's paper.

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    I still think we're in sort of the medieval period of safety engineering for our sport. What we have is wonderful, but I suspect those who take up our sport in the not so distant future will look back on us and say, "Can you believe those people rode without a _____ on?" We have to fill in the blank.

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      Originally posted by JER View Post
                                      The article should have stated -- as fact borne out by conclusive evidence, photographic and physical -- that Oliver Townend's air jacket did not save him.

                                      What saved OT was his helmet, which was then tested by the manufacturer (CO?) and measured for the deformities and other metrics. The helmet is a safety product that is certified and tested to an established standard. It performed as it was designed to perform.

                                      The helmet deserves some credit. Debating the air jacket in a situation where it was irrelevant only serves as a distraction from a more valid argument for tested and certified safety products.
                                      I think he wears a Champion skull.

                                      I just had yet another discussion about his wreck this past weekend and everyone was sure the vest saved his bacon. Even those that I sent the video to seem to really want to believe that the vest saved the day. I think people are just desperate for a solution and want to feel invincible. Not to say the vest doesn't mitigate damage but the nothing is 100% in our sport except staying off the horse.
                                      "look deep into his pedigree. Look for the name of a one-of-a-kind horse who lends to his kin a fierce tenacity, a will of iron, a look of eagles. Look & know that Slew is still very much with us."

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        Originally posted by RAyers View Post
                                        The study was done by TRL and Point 2 has put the conclusion letters on their website. They DO NOT state a reduction in injury! They describe a reduction in force and deformation that MAY result in injury. There is NO way to measure injury reduction without extended times of analysis of injuries incurred on XC.

                                        I bolded and capitalized because this is a common misconception of the testing.

                                        Reed
                                        I think that misconception will be reinforced by this article- the language it uses is that the testing showed an increase of protection to the spine by 69% and the "air bag vest also reduced the risk of rib fractures and underlying organ damage by as much as 20 percent"

                                        RBP- I will pass that along when she calls and let you know if you will getting a new vest via my mom
                                        There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man.(Churchill)

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X