Jerek, I addressed your identical points above. Quoting one very flawed study does not make the argument as a whole - those results are only from one study. It's not 'conclusive'.
Also, don't lecture me about our jobs as reviewers. We didn't let any bias creep in. It was fairly reported that there is no rotational impact technology in this helmet. If you want a ten-minute disclaimer every single time, I'll just ask this: what's your appetite to read that stuff? Before you answer, how closely did you read the study you are presenting as proof that Mips, etc, all work?
Aug. 17, 2022, 9:27 p.m. - Pete Roggeman
Jerek, I addressed your identical points above. Quoting one very flawed study does not make the argument as a whole - those results are only from one study. It's not 'conclusive'. Also, don't lecture me about our jobs as reviewers. We didn't let any bias creep in. It was fairly reported that there is no rotational impact technology in this helmet. If you want a ten-minute disclaimer every single time, I'll just ask this: what's your appetite to read that stuff? Before you answer, how closely did you read the study you are presenting as proof that Mips, etc, all work?