Helmet Helmets : An Effective Strategy For Decreasing The Frequency Of And Upper Facial Injury

the helmet covers your whole face and head in order to protect you face from getting kicked in the face after getting bucked off. wearing a helmet is required if you are under 19 years of age. i feel that the helmet should be required for all ages.( in bull-riding you try to stay on a wild, 2,000 pound bull, some with horns the size of my arm. These bulls have tight straps around there butt to make them kick and jump harder. And all you have to hold on to is a single rope. if you fall of, the bull can stomp, trample, or horn you, and you could break bones from the fall (bull riding, 2015). So in the case of safety i feel that helmets should be required for all ages and at all

Should people under the age of 18 be required to wear a protective helmet while skateboarding, in-line skating, bicycling, snowboarding and skiing? I believe truly believe so. The thrill in these activities, are to speed jump tricks and ride.

In 2015 28% of injuries occurred to the head or face, including concussions. High school injuries are so high because most people are just learning and don’t understand the right way to tackle so they lead with their head. High school athletes account for an estimated 2 million injuries and 500,000 doctor visits and 30,000 hospitalizations each year (Mills 2016).What Highschool started to use was the ZERO1 helmet. It has four core layers. The layers are (outside-In) Lode shell, Core layer, Arch shell, and form linear. The hard shell is the most important because it allows the helmet to not collapse when the player hits the ground (“The Safest Helmet in Football Is Set to Make Its NFL Debut"). The helmet stays straight, and the padding gives the player cushion when tackled.

Although looking at a younger and an inferiorly qualified group of athletes could change the results of the study, younger soccer athletes play with a reduced aggression on the field. This lack of offensive drive ultimately reduces their chances of sustaining serious injuries. With little chance of serious injury, supplying or asking the young athletes or their parents to purchase protective headgear, on top of the existing costs of the sport, is unnecessary (Niedfeldt). In an effort to ease the minds of concerned individuals on the use of protective headgear among younger, less experienced athletes, players should take precautions in the form of alternatives.

Helmets are a major guideline that needs to be improved because a helmet is there to protect the head and prevent concussions but it doesn't seem to be doing a good job. Now there's always that question of “why don't we just make the helmet better and more equipped to prevent concussions?”, well we've had football around for years now and if it hasn't been done yet I don't think it will ever be done. According to the North Eastern Undergraduate Writing Journal, since the 1970s, helmets have been made with a polycarbonate shell, a steel face mask, and padding which is just foam and inflatable air bladders. Even though modern helmets maybe more

The use of protective headgear in contact sports has been a major issue of discussion amongst the sporting community for many years. Some people believe that headgear should be compulsory for all contact sports because they decrease the rate of catastrophic head injuries and they give the athlete a greater sense of security that there will be less head injuries. Others believe that headgear should not be compulsory, but instead optional, because they are an added cost to already expensive sports and they don’t offer any protection against concussions which can lead to brain damage and other problems in later

Florida’s decision brought a lot of outcry within many high school teams and even US Lacrosse. A mandate in only 1 state had US Lacrosse in a bind because they could not all of the sudden mandate headgear across the country, and they could not force Florida to repeal the decision as it was a statewide vote. Not only did they mandate a helmet,--that they had not tested--they had changed the rules in all of Florida to be more lax on the yellow card rule (“Why Women 's”). This new headgear was a 10 millimeter thick headband that had to be worn under the girl 's goggles. Many of the high school players spoke out against these protective headbands saying that all they were doing was creating distraction (Pennington). It got in the way of their goggles, was flimsy, and continually fell off during game play which caused discontent from officials as well. These headbands have been criticized because they only cover a very small portion of the girls head and have not been very successful in decreasing the number of concussions. In fact, some argue it could even have made the rate of concussions rise. Ann Carpenetti, Vice President of lacrosse operations at US Lacrosse, called the headgear decision in Florida “irresponsible” and continued by saying that Florida’s

There’s a small amount of data that current sports helmets for youth cut down the risk of brain injuries, according to a national academy of sciences published the year before. Concussions noted in the National Football League are rising dramatically, likely because of a decreased stigma in noting them. Brain injuries reported every week increased by 67 percent from 2009 to 2012.

Next, in the Rogerian Argument body paragraph, the author wants to equal time discussing both positions on the issue, but try not to persuade the reader. The Helmet paper spent a lot of time debating the adverse side effect and different incidents that happen to people not wearing the hamlets. By talking about the unwanted side effect an example of an event in the sport, this gave the reader to think not wearing a helmet is wrong. The conclusion paragraph fails to make a compromise between the two issue in the paper. The last part discusses why people should start to wear a helmet because it can save life's and companies are beginning to make them more comfortable and not so cumbersome to the rider. This paper did a poor job with the Rogerian structure. The article discusses the other position briefly in the

Have you ever played a sport, that injured you or give you a concussion? Safety always comes first. Especially, when you're doing something that can get you an injury really easy. Having protective gear is important, mainly in sports. Some sports should have protective head gear. Protecting your head is important, and every part in it. Half of the sports are usually contact sports, which getting hurt in the head can be more of the chance, which is bad. As well, getting hurt in the head has many consequences which no one wants to have. Many athletes get concussions and it’s not good. 90 percent of the times, the person is conscious while having a concussion, the other 10 percent, there are unconscious. Therefore, protective head-gear

From my perspective, there should be mandatory helmet laws throughout the United States. I have witnessed the injuries and losses of lives from those involved in accidents. Some wore helmets and some did not.

There has been extraordinary improvements of helmets from the old leather to the modernized-plastic football helmets along with the face mask and energy- absorbent padding. In addition, the concern over preventing concussions, have led to helmet changes, impact testing methods and reconstruction of injuries during play helping to provide insight on concussions(4). Helmets have been successful in decreasing the risk of traumatic brain injuries, but there is much concern over concussion; therefore, scholars argue the importance of technology development to address concussion(5). As the author(s), David Viano and David Halstead discusses, there is room needed for understanding the types of collisions associated in youths and the impact condition addressing collisions. There are many variables to consider addressing concussion and where they occur.

Many people think that to wear a helmet should a personal desition and should be not mandatory. After all, if harm is cause for not wearing a helmet, it will be a personal harm and no a general harm for society, “People have the right to chose their own poison” (Rosenstand, 255).

With many concussions and brain injuries that football players have acquired recently, football helmets have become a piece of equipment that teams are now viewing more closely. From the school’s perspective, they have the duty to provide proper and safe equipment to their players. They must supply equipment that appropriately fits every player. Manufacturers should make certain that their products are made correctly and are safe for player’s to wear. When accidents happen, the blame goes on the manufacturer because they actually created the product. Most states have the rule that the manufacturer indemnifies the seller as long as the seller passes along the product unchanged. Schools with limit equipment and personnel budgets should ensure

Adopting and implementing a universal helmet law for the State of Arizona is associated with a variety of costs as well as benefits. The most obvious benefit is the amount of lives that could potentially be saved by a universal helmet law. Studies and research have consistently proven that wearing a helmet while operating a motorcycle greatly decreases the prevalence of injuries and fatalities associated with motorcycle accidents. There is no price that can be put on a human life. In my opinion, if a universal helmet law can save even one life then it is worth whatever the monetary cost necessary to implement it.