PR: Dungey Injured

GrapeApe wrote:

They need to get twin brothers with identical builds, and shoot them head first out of the same cannon, one after the other, directly into a...

They need to get twin brothers with identical builds, and shoot them head first out of the same cannon, one after the other, directly into a brick wall. One will be wearing a brace, and the other no brace, and record the results. Science.

AtlasBrace wrote:

Wow you guys are really on fire now.. this will probably end up a wall of text but let me try to address some of these...

Wow you guys are really on fire now.. this will probably end up a wall of text but let me try to address some of these posts.

@tpog496 and Early - A tough crowd is one thing, this is an impossible crowd.

@Jimmy_Sloan, Colonel, Tek14, Davbrukas, Hvaughn88 - You can start with www.atlasbrace.com/testing/ , but the problem is you guys want the impossible. We can release our data showing reductions in forces, but Leatt already did that and you guys didn't believe it. That data is still out there, online, for everyone to read. You guys want us all to say 100% you wont get hurt wearing this, ever. But we can't do that! So it comes down to, do you want to reduce the forces to your neck in a crash, or not reduce them at all? It isn't as complicated as you guys make it out to be. The data from "real world crashes" will come with time, that is ultimately the stats you guys will want. But it takes years to compile and has to have enough instances documented to come to a real conclusion... we aren't there yet.

We test at a 3rd party in California (not our own lab, not bias), with the same people that developed the neck unit Leatt uses, same people that did 6D's testing (some of it using the dummy that we had built), same people that are testing for the military, various car companies, etc. Here is their website, maybe it is better if some of you guys call and talk to them about neck braces, since they are the PhDs and biomechanical engineers who designed our test rig and tested ours, and other products - http://www.dynres.com.

The other part many of you may not know is our brace isn't rigid. It's flexible... think of it as added muscle/ligaments for your neck.... it helps absorb and control the impact. This is a very different approach than other companies because we believe in the way that your body naturally functions. The issue is we are throwing forces at our bodies that they can't handle by themselves... the speeds are high and the impacts are violent. So we designed our product to function as an extension of the body, not a foreign object that could cause additional harm. We sit around the spine and sternum, we sit on 27% MORE surface area of your body than the competition to help spread the load out over a greater area, we have suspension built into the chest supports, padding overtop of the collarbone.... and we flex. This is not like other braces.

Helmets have a long history, but none of them claim anymore than we do. They reduce forces to the head. Enough to stop an injury? Can't say.. Yet you guys aren't clawing for data from any other type of protection... only neck braces. We apologize that the first company may have left a bad taste in your mouth... but when we came around all the other brace manufactures started changing how they designed their product.. We think that speaks volumes to our credibility.

Like akillerwombat said - doing nothing doesn't help the problem. We are trying to do something to help the problem. Some of you don't agree with that and that is ok! That is your choice. But don't attack us for trying to be part of the solution... If you guys have ideas to help improve the product we are all ears... but in the mean time we are trying our best using all the technology available to us to create something that can help people, and does reduce forces.

On the note of peoples and doctors testimonials - we didn't say they are proof, we said it makes us sleep better at night knowing we have positively impacted peoples lives.

@ns503 - Thank you! We mean well, but Vital is a brick wall that is difficult to convince that even the sky is blue. So you're right, we do have way more to lose than gain by all this back and forth, but because we hate seeing people get hurt we can't just stay silent on the subject.

AtlasBrace wrote:

Wow you guys are really on fire now.. this will probably end up a wall of text but let me try to address some of these...

Wow you guys are really on fire now.. this will probably end up a wall of text but let me try to address some of these posts.

@tpog496 and Early - A tough crowd is one thing, this is an impossible crowd.

@Jimmy_Sloan, Colonel, Tek14, Davbrukas, Hvaughn88 - You can start with www.atlasbrace.com/testing/ , but the problem is you guys want the impossible. We can release our data showing reductions in forces, but Leatt already did that and you guys didn't believe it. That data is still out there, online, for everyone to read. You guys want us all to say 100% you wont get hurt wearing this, ever. But we can't do that! So it comes down to, do you want to reduce the forces to your neck in a crash, or not reduce them at all? It isn't as complicated as you guys make it out to be. The data from "real world crashes" will come with time, that is ultimately the stats you guys will want. But it takes years to compile and has to have enough instances documented to come to a real conclusion... we aren't there yet.

We test at a 3rd party in California (not our own lab, not bias), with the same people that developed the neck unit Leatt uses, same people that did 6D's testing (some of it using the dummy that we had built), same people that are testing for the military, various car companies, etc. Here is their website, maybe it is better if some of you guys call and talk to them about neck braces, since they are the PhDs and biomechanical engineers who designed our test rig and tested ours, and other products - http://www.dynres.com.

The other part many of you may not know is our brace isn't rigid. It's flexible... think of it as added muscle/ligaments for your neck.... it helps absorb and control the impact. This is a very different approach than other companies because we believe in the way that your body naturally functions. The issue is we are throwing forces at our bodies that they can't handle by themselves... the speeds are high and the impacts are violent. So we designed our product to function as an extension of the body, not a foreign object that could cause additional harm. We sit around the spine and sternum, we sit on 27% MORE surface area of your body than the competition to help spread the load out over a greater area, we have suspension built into the chest supports, padding overtop of the collarbone.... and we flex. This is not like other braces.

Helmets have a long history, but none of them claim anymore than we do. They reduce forces to the head. Enough to stop an injury? Can't say.. Yet you guys aren't clawing for data from any other type of protection... only neck braces. We apologize that the first company may have left a bad taste in your mouth... but when we came around all the other brace manufactures started changing how they designed their product.. We think that speaks volumes to our credibility.

Like akillerwombat said - doing nothing doesn't help the problem. We are trying to do something to help the problem. Some of you don't agree with that and that is ok! That is your choice. But don't attack us for trying to be part of the solution... If you guys have ideas to help improve the product we are all ears... but in the mean time we are trying our best using all the technology available to us to create something that can help people, and does reduce forces.

On the note of peoples and doctors testimonials - we didn't say they are proof, we said it makes us sleep better at night knowing we have positively impacted peoples lives.

@ns503 - Thank you! We mean well, but Vital is a brick wall that is difficult to convince that even the sky is blue. So you're right, we do have way more to lose than gain by all this back and forth, but because we hate seeing people get hurt we can't just stay silent on the subject.

AtlasBrace wrote:

You hit the nail on the head as to why these threads get out of control. A helmet is an easy concept to understand. "It wraps...

You hit the nail on the head as to why these threads get out of control.

A helmet is an easy concept to understand. "It wraps around my head, has padding, this must be good". Easy to understand.

A neck brace is more complicated than that, and visually much more difficult to understand. But that doesn't mean it doesn't work. To compare a test to your egg experiment:

Case a 70' triple with no suspension... now case it with suspension. Which do you prefer?

That is not much different than compressing a neck till it breaks. Now add suspension and a controlled limit to how far you can push that same neck. I would prefer the latter, everyday of the week.

GrapeApe wrote:

They need to get twin brothers with identical builds, and shoot them head first out of the same cannon, one after the other, directly into a...

They need to get twin brothers with identical builds, and shoot them head first out of the same cannon, one after the other, directly into a brick wall. One will be wearing a brace, and the other no brace, and record the results. Science.

AtlasBrace wrote:

You laugh, but that isn't far off what we actually do... but with a dummy, and minus the cannon. The drop speeds and heights are calculated...

You laugh, but that isn't far off what we actually do... but with a dummy, and minus the cannon. The drop speeds and heights are calculated based on real rider speeds/falls, and 50th percentile body weight.

It's repeatable, accurate weight, controlled environment, adjustable type of impact (face up, down, sideways - into 90 degree wall, or any other angle we choose).

This essentially replicates the lawn dart scenario into a jump face, to the best of our abilities.

KennyT wrote:

You are trying to explain the value of a neck brace to a group that has a combined IQ in the single digits. Do not worry...

You are trying to explain the value of a neck brace to a group that has a combined IQ in the single digits. Do not worry about the critics as they would never be able to afford a neck brace until the Gov increases the minimum wage

AtlasBrace wrote:

You hit the nail on the head as to why these threads get out of control. A helmet is an easy concept to understand. "It wraps...

You hit the nail on the head as to why these threads get out of control.

A helmet is an easy concept to understand. "It wraps around my head, has padding, this must be good". Easy to understand.

A neck brace is more complicated than that, and visually much more difficult to understand. But that doesn't mean it doesn't work. To compare a test to your egg experiment:

Case a 70' triple with no suspension... now case it with suspension. Which do you prefer?

That is not much different than compressing a neck till it breaks. Now add suspension and a controlled limit to how far you can push that same neck. I would prefer the latter, everyday of the week.

colonel wrote:

Bottom line is that you nor Leatt have published published Peer review studies proving what you claim. You can you do, but you don't and Leatt...

Bottom line is that you nor Leatt have published published Peer review studies proving what you claim. You can you do, but you don't and Leatt don't either. I know this from working the early braces for testing and having a close friend work there before leaving due to reasons.

If there was, it would be thrown in every non-believers face. Cash being offered to a rider and have him / her turn it down says a lot.

Sorry to be a buzz kill here, but but part of my job involves being part of case studies for review etc and I know this very well and I know your lively hood is selling braces and thank you for bringing that aspect to the sport, while making people feel comfortable whilst riding but don't ever claim or push something when there is no real back up. this goes for anything in this world when wanting someone to buy such a product.

I wish you many sales going forward but don't try bullshit those who know what is what.

MX45 wrote:

Scary stuff. Glad Dungey wasn't hurt worse. I wish spine injures and preventative safety were taken more seriously in our sport. This could have been Dungey...

Scary stuff. Glad Dungey wasn't hurt worse.
I wish spine injures and preventative safety were taken more seriously in our sport.

This could have been Dungey.

colonel wrote:

Bottom line is that you nor Leatt have published published Peer review studies proving what you claim. You can you do, but you don't and Leatt...

Bottom line is that you nor Leatt have published published Peer review studies proving what you claim. You can you do, but you don't and Leatt don't either. I know this from working the early braces for testing and having a close friend work there before leaving due to reasons.

If there was, it would be thrown in every non-believers face. Cash being offered to a rider and have him / her turn it down says a lot.

Sorry to be a buzz kill here, but but part of my job involves being part of case studies for review etc and I know this very well and I know your lively hood is selling braces and thank you for bringing that aspect to the sport, while making people feel comfortable whilst riding but don't ever claim or push something when there is no real back up. this goes for anything in this world when wanting someone to buy such a product.

I wish you many sales going forward but don't try bullshit those who know what is what.

AtlasBrace wrote:

A peer reviewed study would be great - but this isn't a highly funded university, or medical school trying to get a new drug approved. There...

A peer reviewed study would be great - but this isn't a highly funded university, or medical school trying to get a new drug approved. There isn't exactly a line of people or government agency throwing cash at us to help fund round after round of testing that can be evaluated over and over by multiple parties.

Either way, no amount of peer reviewed data will help in this situation. We could have 1 million peers all see the numbers and go "Yes, in their testing wearing a brace was always better than not" - but that wouldn't satisfy you because you guys want to know the impossible "will I get hurt". The answer, just like in a helmet, is - maybe. Because not even the the most tested products in the world (airbag, seatbelt, roll cage, whatever) that have been tested for decades and "peer reviewed" and government mandated, can't always protect you either. When it comes to accidents and safety, it comes down to if the majority of the time it helps, then it is the best route to go till something better is invented that can do a better job. Seatbelts aren't perfect, or airbags, or anything.. but they are all better than not having them, the majority of the time. A properly fitted neck brace is no different.

If it helps, all of our testing is performed by peers, not us. We don't have our own in house lab, everything is done 3rd party, in an unbiased way, on a test rig designed by the 3rd party... there is no influence from us on how to perform the tests, and we can't manipulate the test to change the results. In every test they performed wearing an Atlas Brace was better than not wearing a brace. Every test. lowered forces on the neck, AND lowered forces to the head. And we were throwing forces at it that closed up the entire eye port of the helmet.. the nose touched the forehead of the helmet... it is really nasty stuff.

Those results make us very confident in what we have. We (and others) have moved passed the "does it work as intended" phase several years ago, our focus now is to keep improving it as the available technology allows us to, and as new materials or manufacturing techniques because available.

colonel wrote:

Bottom line is that you nor Leatt have published published Peer review studies proving what you claim. You can you do, but you don't and Leatt...

Bottom line is that you nor Leatt have published published Peer review studies proving what you claim. You can you do, but you don't and Leatt don't either. I know this from working the early braces for testing and having a close friend work there before leaving due to reasons.

If there was, it would be thrown in every non-believers face. Cash being offered to a rider and have him / her turn it down says a lot.

Sorry to be a buzz kill here, but but part of my job involves being part of case studies for review etc and I know this very well and I know your lively hood is selling braces and thank you for bringing that aspect to the sport, while making people feel comfortable whilst riding but don't ever claim or push something when there is no real back up. this goes for anything in this world when wanting someone to buy such a product.

I wish you many sales going forward but don't try bullshit those who know what is what.

colonel wrote:

Bottom line is that you nor Leatt have published published Peer review studies proving what you claim. You can you do, but you don't and Leatt...

Bottom line is that you nor Leatt have published published Peer review studies proving what you claim. You can you do, but you don't and Leatt don't either. I know this from working the early braces for testing and having a close friend work there before leaving due to reasons.

If there was, it would be thrown in every non-believers face. Cash being offered to a rider and have him / her turn it down says a lot.

Sorry to be a buzz kill here, but but part of my job involves being part of case studies for review etc and I know this very well and I know your lively hood is selling braces and thank you for bringing that aspect to the sport, while making people feel comfortable whilst riding but don't ever claim or push something when there is no real back up. this goes for anything in this world when wanting someone to buy such a product.

I wish you many sales going forward but don't try bullshit those who know what is what.

kzizok wrote:

Do you have an english version of this post?

Jimmy_Sloan wrote:

It's not just seeing the results in peer review, but showing the relevant data that demonstrates that neck braces do work in stopping spinal injuries. Also...

It's not just seeing the results in peer review, but showing the relevant data that demonstrates that neck braces do work in stopping spinal injuries.

Also, is the 3rd party who performs the test paid for their services? Have they released the detailed data of their findings?

Ted722 wrote:

I'm not sure it's so much about doubt as it is about confusion. Why would a Pro who's had a head first get off, stop wearing...

I'm not sure it's so much about doubt as it is about confusion. Why would a Pro who's had a head first get off, stop wearing the brace? Broc Tickle and Will Hahn come to mind.

I may be wrong, but didn't Will have this horrendous get off last year and he's not wearing a brace this year?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c0gxNuhrYs

It's a short career as a Pro. It looks like more and more believe that they are more likely to get laid up with some broken collarbones and vertebrae wearing a brace vs.getting a spinal injury not wearing a brace. Still confused.

hvaughn88 wrote:

I remember listening to an interview Brayton did (I think on pulp but can't remember exactly which one) where he said he was turning a bit...

I remember listening to an interview Brayton did (I think on pulp but can't remember exactly which one) where he said he was turning a bit faster lap times without a neck brace on. He basically said (again, not quoting word for word here) that as a pro it was worth the risk to him not to wear one if it meant a faster lap time, given how close the competition is in lap times.

With that being said, if it comes down to risk/reward, each person can make that decision themselves. While I respect the skill these riders have, they are probably the last people I would look to for advice on safety and protection haha. But again, that's just me.

AtlasBrace wrote:

That's where you will never be satisfied. It's impossible to show that "neck braces STOP spinal injuries". Just the same way helmet testing can't prove helmets...

That's where you will never be satisfied. It's impossible to show that "neck braces STOP spinal injuries". Just the same way helmet testing can't prove helmets "STOP concussions or death". All we can do is reduce forces... and there is more than enough data available to show that neck braces reduce forces as intended.

The 3rd party testing is paid for by us, of course. They are a private company who isn't going to work for free. And no, that data is ours to do what we want with it. There is no benefit to releasing it because all it shows is a reduction in forces. There isn't an "injury or no injury" test that is possible to perform.

What you are after is data published over a 15 year period from accidents all over the country (or world) accumulated over time, with and without a brace.

rjs wrote:

Hey Ted, RV has 747 followers, and he says they are not a scam. Who's right? What a dilemma! Ted, maybe you can search for someone...

Hey Ted,

RV has 747 followers, and he says they are not a scam.

Who's right? What a dilemma!

Ted, maybe you can search for someone with even more followers to find the right
answer. Try Justin Bieber maybe and see what he thinks.

eGGz wrote:

The fact that Atlas Brace needs to jump in to a Dungey discussion thread to promote their product (oh yes you are) proves to me that...

The fact that Atlas Brace needs to jump in to a Dungey discussion thread to promote their product (oh yes you are) proves to me that their product falls short of their claims. And is akin to ambulance chasing.
If a product is indeed wonderful, everyone will know it. It will be obvious. All the pros will use it.
Therefore the need to "convince" people of their products viability would not exist.

rjs wrote:

Hey Ted, RV has 747 followers, and he says they are not a scam. Who's right? What a dilemma! Ted, maybe you can search for someone...

Hey Ted,

RV has 747 followers, and he says they are not a scam.

Who's right? What a dilemma!

Ted, maybe you can search for someone with even more followers to find the right
answer. Try Justin Bieber maybe and see what he thinks.

AtlasBrace wrote:

That's where you will never be satisfied. It's impossible to show that "neck braces STOP spinal injuries". Just the same way helmet testing can't prove helmets...

That's where you will never be satisfied. It's impossible to show that "neck braces STOP spinal injuries". Just the same way helmet testing can't prove helmets "STOP concussions or death". All we can do is reduce forces... and there is more than enough data available to show that neck braces reduce forces as intended.

The 3rd party testing is paid for by us, of course. They are a private company who isn't going to work for free. And no, that data is ours to do what we want with it. There is no benefit to releasing it because all it shows is a reduction in forces. There isn't an "injury or no injury" test that is possible to perform.

What you are after is data published over a 15 year period from accidents all over the country (or world) accumulated over time, with and without a brace.

Jimmy_Sloan wrote:

What I'm after is data showing that neck braces work in reducing spinal cord injuries. Without the relevant data, how do we know they work? Your...

What I'm after is data showing that neck braces work in reducing spinal cord injuries. Without the relevant data, how do we know they work? Your company has paid another company, received certain results, and you feel no need to release the data of those results. That's the point of transparency, so that the results can be looked at by others. Just saying that there is a reduction in forces is very vague.

Jimmy_Sloan wrote:

A rider who is/was sponsored by a neck brace company says they work? Get out of town!