[dinogyro]

I've never played rugby, so excuse my ignorance - why don't concussion-prone players use something like the N-Pro scrum cap? This claims to reduce head impact transmission by 75%.

Why don't all players use them?

Slightly off-topic (on my own thread!) - why do other players have to slap a player who has just scored on the head?

[Olyy]

Very sceptical about their claim, tbh

I know they've got their research paper on there, but can't see how 5mm of foam, not matter how fancily it's shaped, is going to stop your brain rattling around inside your head

If it were as simple as shaping the foam a certain way to reduce TBIs by 75% then the NFL would've clocked onto it years ago

Edit:
Was googling about scrumcaps vs concussions and found this on a discussion about another company that claimed to have a product that would solve the concussion issue, and used the same (WR approved) tests

But to summarise, they’ve not shown scrum caps reduce concussion... they’ve shown adding padding on a surface and dropping reduces the force of the landing...

Drop tests are not appropriate to replicate the events that cause concussion

[Jalyn Mills]

Again no expert, but based on some basic research I think they reduce direct collision impact - ie a 'Knock' to the head, but the main source of concussion in rugby is from whiplash type effects where the body decelerates quickly but the brain (sat in fluid) doesn't and essentially impacts the skull.

Apologies if not exactly correct, but thats my recollection from a while ago when I looked into it.

[DaveAitch]

Scrum caps prevent surface injuries - cuts to scalps and suchlike. Armour plate more and you probably will prevent some facial bone fractures (such as Will Cliffe had a few years back), but will cause more injuries to other players.
Long term concussion problems are the result of the brain, which is in itself semi-fluid, hitting the inside of the skull when the head stops rapidly.
Boxers have been long known to suffer the consequences of blows to the head. Several years back a surgeon was arguing that bare Knuckle fighting would be much safer in terms of concussions: more broken bones, but considerably less injury to the brain.

[Streatham Shark]

Scrum caps prevent surface injuries - cuts to scalps and suchlike. Armour plate more and you probably will prevent some facial bone fractures (such as Will Cliffe had a few years back), but will cause more injuries to other players.
Long term concussion problems are the result of the brain, which is in itself semi-fluid, hitting the inside of the skull when the head stops rapidly.
Boxers have been long known to suffer the consequences of blows to the head. Several years back a surgeon was arguing that bare Knuckle fighting would be much safer in terms of concussions: more broken bones, but considerably less injury to the brain.

My brother's an ex-amateur boxer, and said they dropped the requirement for helmets for exactly this reason - it didn't stop the brain ricocheting around in the skull, and I think I'm right in saying that the free surface effect of the sweat under the helmet actually exacerbated it.

[Carlos]

Again no expert, but based on some basic research I think they reduce direct collision impact - ie a 'Knock' to the head, but the main source of concussion in rugby is from whiplash type effects where the body decelerates quickly but the brain (sat in fluid) doesn't and essentially impacts the skull.

Apologies if not exactly correct, but thats my recollection from a while ago when I looked into it.

That's pretty much it - in addition, they can give a false sense of protection and so cause more injuries because players take more risks.

[Jalyn Mills]

Interestingly much evidence about this re bike helmets. A helmet free rider will take less risks and motorists will pose less risks if there in a helmet.

[Carlos]

Interestingly much evidence about this re bike helmets. A helmet free rider will take less risks and motorists will pose less risks if there in a helmet.

I think it was actually a cycling article that I read it in, which referenced other sports including rugby for that reason.

It's the same psychology which has lead to the recent innovation of shared spaces for traffic calming in town centres (e.g. Poynton & others). If there's no defined boundary between the road and the pavement, and it all looks different to a normal road, everyone uses more caution.

[ageinghoody]

I'd suggest that cycling helmets (and motorbike helmets too) are intended to offer protection against a single sudden, potentially catastrophic, traumatic impact rather than the repeated relatively minor impacts that are suspected of playing a major part in sport related brain damage.

In other words you end up with a concussion rather than a fractured skull, and your brain stays inside it.

As a driver I can't say cyclists' headwear, or absence of it, plays any part in the consideration I give them. As a cyclist I can say that there's no way I'd take to the road without a helmet.

[Carlos]

I'd suggest that cycling helmets (and motorbike helmets too) are intended to offer protection against a single sudden, potentially catastrophic, traumatic impact rather than the repeated relatively minor impacts that are suspected of playing a major part in sport related brain damage.

In other words you end up with a concussion rather than a fractured skull, and your brain stays inside it.

As a driver I can't say cyclists' headwear, or absence of it, plays any part in the consideration I give them. As a cyclist I can say that there's no way I'd take to the road without a helmet.

I agree, the article if i remember correctly was talking about how things had changed, no one wore a helmet in the TdF not too long ago, now they do and as a result more risks are taken, more crashes happen, but less catastrophic injuries occur.

[Carlos]

I'd suggest that cycling helmets (and motorbike helmets too) are intended to offer protection against a single sudden, potentially catastrophic, traumatic impact rather than the repeated relatively minor impacts that are suspected of playing a major part in sport related brain damage.

In other words you end up with a concussion rather than a fractured skull, and your brain stays inside it.

As a driver I can't say cyclists' headwear, or absence of it, plays any part in the consideration I give them. As a cyclist I can say that there's no way I'd take to the road without a helmet.

I agree, the article if i remember correctly was talking about how things had changed, no one wore a helmet in the TdF not too long ago, now they do and as a result more risks are taken, more crashes happen, but less catastrophic injuries occur.

I'll see if I can find it - was a while back though, so not sure where it was. If I remember rightly it was in response to a (possibly rhetorical) question about what's safest. rugby was mentioned in comparison to US football and talked about how risk was managed in both sports both both by rules and also behaviour, and how each needs different levels of protection accordingly - e.g. jumping into tackles in US Football.

I didn't write it - sort of sorry I brought it up now.