At 12:37 AM 3/4/04, you wrote:
>Yup, must have missed that thread, work and all.  Minnewaska State Park
>was the place I was refering.  So I'm a little skeptical about claims that
>helmets don't provide any more protection.  Not that I doubt you, but can
>you actually document any of those claims Skip?

Here's a few sources.  The lead researcher in ski helmet effectiveness is
Dr. Jasper Shealy of the University of Rochester.,1,7764621.story?coll=hc-headlines-skiing,12795,327172,00.html

>I'm also curious, I know resorts have been sued (and lost) for other
>reasons contributing to a skiers death, but are you aware of any resorts
>that have been sued due to a skiers death which was caused by a collision
>with another skier?

There have been suits brought against ski areas due to collisions - I can't
cite chapter and verse off the top of my head.

>Finally, not that I expect resorts to ever require helmets, but I would
>contend that just because something is completely irrational, that
>wouldn't stop large corportations from considering it.  I think legal
>departments at many corporations tend to be quiet conservative when it
>comes to the possiblity of getting sued.  And if not resorts, then perhaps
>their insurances companies.

I concur - look what McDonald's is doing right now, eliminating their
'supersize' menu - I don't think it's a stretch to think that this is
partially related to the (so far unsuccessful) suits brought against fast
food companies.  Changes in American diet patterns are probably a larger
factor, though.

Here's the rub - helmets have become increasingly popular in the past five
or six years; where they were once uncommon you currently see them on a
significant percentage of skiers (I don't know exact percentages, and I'm
not aware of any studies to indicate how many participants are actually
wearing them).  But the important thing here is that there has been no
measurable change in the rate of catastrophic ski injuries.

Put another way:  when it comes to skiing safety, what's IN your head is
much more important than what's ON it.

>Either way, someones probably made the joke already, but why did
>Killington choose NH?

I think it has something to do with state mottoes... Killingtonians are a
pretty independently-minded bunch who would have a bit of a problem being
part of 'The Empire State," whereas the ability to have a license plate
that says "Live Free or P*ss Off" has appeal. 8->

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
SkiVt-L is brought to you by the University of Vermont.

To unsubscribe, visit