Neck protection is better that no protection.
Christopher L Vaughan, PhD, Hyman Goldberg Professor of Biomedical Engineering
Thank you for sharing with me the report by Land Mobility Technologies numbered R/1/00431/1 and dated June 2004. I have read this report in detail and I concur with the basic findings as summarised in section 1.2 on page 5. You have asked me for my own interpretation of these data, which I am willing to provide.
By way of establishing my credentials, I should mention that I am an A-rated scientist of the National Research Foundation in the area of musculoskeletal biomechanics, I have worked in the field for 25 years, and for 10 of those years I was Professor of Orthopaedics and Biomedical Engineering in the USA. During this time I also acted as an expert witness in the field of automobile accidents and impact biomechanics.
Injury to human tissues (such as bones, ligaments, spinal cord, etc.) in an impact can occur through the application of excessive force and/or displacement. In designing restraining and protection systems (such as seat belts, helmets and your neck brace) there is often a trade-off between the reduction of force and displacement. This is indeed the case with your brace: there has been a slight increase in force when the braces are used but there is also a massive decrease in the range of angular displacement at the neck (175 degrees for no brace, 110 degrees for your motorcycle brace, and 65 degrees for your car brace). In my expert opinion, it is this reduction in movement that is most likely to provide protection to the person’s cervical spinal cord and head. I must add that some angular displacement is required to enable the brace to bring the head to a controlled halt (impulse-momentum relationship). Should you require any further advice, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Christopher L Vaughan, PhD
Hyman Goldberg Professor of Biomedical Engineering
Director: MRC/UCT Medical Imaging Research Unit
South Africa