In Search of a Safer Helmet: Why MIPS is the Future of Bike Helmets

First off, my apologies for taking so long between blogs - it's been a busy few weeks, but I've gotten in the swing of things in terms of getting stuff done at home even with my longer commute. I'm still enjoying the ride tremendously, which is what really matters.

One thing my new commute prompted was research into bike safety and, in particular, what makes for a "good" helmet. My new route takes me along much busier streets, including one that has almost no shoulder, so safety became more of a concern than ever as I prepared for the transition.

"Protecting Cyclists, Sort-of"

The turning point for me was a spectacular article in Bicycling Magazine titled "Senseless," that discussed the problem with current bike helmet safety guidelines. I highly recommend reading the full article - it's long, but well worth it. Essentially, the problem is that bike helmets are effective in protecting against blunt-force trauma but not against concussions, which can still cause a great deal of injury. This problem is compounded by the fact that all bike helmets sold in the U.S. are required to meet the CPSC (Consumer Product Safety Commission)* certification, which is a pass/fail test with criteria that have not changed in 15 years. As long as a helmet passes this test (which only measures blunt impact), it is eligible for sale. There is no measurement of how safe that helmet is - cars may have a 5-star safety rating, but there is no equivalent for bike helmets. This means that a $140 helmet is no "safer" than a $40 helmet. Why the huge price difference then? As the Bicycling Magazine article points out, "For decades, major helmet manufacturers have competed on styling, comfort, and aerodynamics. Not safety." Racers will pay a premium for a lightweight, aerodynamic helmet, so this is what the market has catered to. But isn't safety, not speed, the entire point of a helmet?

I still remember when I bought the helmet I've used for years now - a $40 Bell Citi. I asked the bike shop employee if one helmet was any "safer" than the others, and he told me, "No - they all meet the same standards." Even then this struck me as odd - shouldn't there be a base-line safety standard, but the option to pay more for a model that exceeds the minimum requirements?

The problem is that, as the BM article explores, the pass/fail standard eliminates any competitiveness among helmet-makers to make a safer helmet - why would they, when the safest helmet in the world would receive the same "Pass" sticker as my $40 Bell? Because there is no way for consumers to identify an objectively safer helmet, there has been no real incentive for companies to create one, even though the technology exists. This is in spite of growing evidence (see the BM article) that people who wear helmets are still at risk for serious head injuries (specifically concussions) as a result of the old, narrowly-focused CPSC standard.

Thankfully, some companies have begun voluntarily exploring and implementing a new helmet technology to address this problem. One technology in particular, MIPS (Multi-directional Impact ­Protection System), is highly effective at reducing rotational momentum (the cause of concussions) in addition to blunt impact.

For clarification, Red = Concussion (from www.mipshelmet.com)

The concept of MIPS is so simple, it's stunning no one thought of it sooner. The system is a plastic liner inside of the helmet that stays in place while the main helmet body rotates in a collision, absorbing rotational momentum instead of passing it on to the brain, and thus preventing concussions. Lab test data has been extremely promising Even better, MIPS is fairly simple and inexpensive to incorporate into existing bicycle helmet designs, so the biggest barrier is the willingness of companies to include it.

The Scott Lin helmet, with MIPS (image from REI)

If MIPS is so simple, you would think companies would immediately begin implementing it, but you'd be wrong. So far only a handful have, most notably POC (a Swedish company) and Scott (a U.S. company). However, given how hard it is to find an available MIPS helmet from Scott (their Lin model, which was highlighted in the BM article, has been on back-order on REI and numerous other sites for about over two months now), there seems to be a huge demand for the option among safety-conscious consumers. This is encouraging, as it means that helmet buyers are voting with their wallets, and hopefully other companies will begin including this amazing new technology as well. Maybe CPSC will finally update their ratings system, too...

As it is, I am excited to say that I finally got my hands on a Scott Lin helmet, thanks to my parents finding one at a local bike shop where they live. It came in the mail just this week, and I'm very happy with it so far. I'll be writing up a full review next week, after I've used it for a few more days.

UPDATE: Click here to read my review of my new helmet: http://bikecommuterblog.com/2014/07/review-scott-lin-mips-bike-helmet.html

 *Note: There are other certifications, primarily the ASTM standard, for helmet safety that have been updated over the years, but these are voluntary certifications. Only the government's CPSC standard is required by law.