You are reading a single comment by @NotThamesWater and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
Maybe there's a differentiation in examination based on the presence of a helmet.
If there is, then all hope is lost, since even people who are supposed to be scientists have been fooled by the propaganda. Unless there's brain science I don't know about which points to very different treatment protocols based on the small statistical differences between helmet and no-helmet, i.e. helmet users tend to suffer slightly smaller linear accelerations, but no-helmet users tend to suffer smaller angular accelerations.
gbj_tester
@NotThamesWater
s/need/want/
Who knows. I wasn't involved in writing the protocols.
I'm guessing that they take the presence of a helmet as a proxy for likelihood of injury in the event of a head injury. Maybe it's just a data point in their diagnosis. Maybe there's a differentiation in examination based on the presence of a helmet.
Versus actually having accelerometers.
And maybe lasers.
In fact, definitely lasers.