# Body Cage Back Protectors and Rotational Falls



## SpottedCat (11 September 2008)

I was just reading on EWW about the rotational fall at fence 1 of the Novice at SpringHill, in which the horse landed square on the rider and she walked away with a broken wrist (all be it after needing to be airlifted to hospital). She was wearing a body cage. 

Now I have long thought these are a superb idea, and well worth the money considering the potentially life-saving effects, however I've also heard down-sides. Things I have heard (from pros in the main):

1. They don't look smart enough/are too bulky when riding for owners/sponsors;
2. There is a risk of whiplash because of the way they sit away from your neck.

Now personally, as someone unconcerned with riding for looks, I think first point is pretty silly. As for the second - well, surely whiplash is better than being crushed to death? 

So why aren't they more widely used? I know the reason I don't have one is because last time I tried one on it was too long in the back and would hit the saddle - not great - but if they have a wider range of sizes and one which fitted me, I'd be keen to give one a try. 

Is it the lack of pros wearing them? - look how a few pros have made the HS1 so popular.

Is it the price? 

Is it because they feel 'odd'/different/heavy until you get used to them? 

Or is there something else entirely?


----------



## JessPickle (11 September 2008)

I find the idea of being basically locked into a body protector very intimidationg.  Also very chrotophoebic (sp!)


----------



## lucretia (11 September 2008)

you need an allen key to get them off and i suspect people are worried that the emergency service swont have one tho i  think you have to declare that you are wearing one so they are prepared. this in itself is a complication some riders wont want to bother with. 
  but i remember when regular body protectors came in virtually no one wore them until it became a mandatory rule and i suspect it will be the same with these, if it really has been proven that they do as it is claimed. the makers have certainly spent enough developing them.


----------



## AutumnRose (11 September 2008)

This is a really interesting post, i've wondered about these since they came out. I tried one on and didn't like how bulky it felt. However, i don't like the feel of my normal one either, until i go xc and then i foget it's there and i've never ridden in one. I also found it too long, had to have mine made to measure as i'm short but have big bust!!

Things i worry about;

-you have to have a key to open them, delay in getting this to you after a fall might be a bad thing and prevent treatment?
-I read an article that said the bulkiness and weight made you less flexible and mobile. This made it harder to roll/move away from the horse in the event of a fall. 
-price. Of course i can't put a price on my life but it's still a lot of money in an already expensive sport.

Be interested to hear others thoughts....


----------



## SpottedCat (11 September 2008)

All events now have a list at the sec tent where you have to declare you are wearing one, plus the TA has an allen key plus the paramedics are given one. You as a rider need do no more than declare you are using one. The allen key is only used if you can't stand up to get it off - you don't need one to get it on and off 'in general'. 

I just think that we spend all this time discussing how we can prevent these falls, and whilst prevention is certainly the way to go long term, no-one seems to have any answers at the moment, so in the meantime using a product which can at least partially mitigate for the effect of being landed on by a horse has to be sensible surely? 

As for compulsory...well that's a rumour I've heard from two different sources....but who knows how it would sit with people from a business point of view/sponsorship point of view etc since only one company makes them and you can be sure they are patented up to the hilt.....would BE really be brave enough? There would be outcry from other manufacturers, outcry from riders sponsored by other BP makers, outcry from just about everyone about the additional cost etc etc etc.


----------



## seche (11 September 2008)

Im not sure and have never tried one - sadly the price at the moment would put me off but then its a stupid think to say as how can you put a price on a life? I wear an HS1. Though hearing they weigh 2/4kgs - in the scheme of things is what roughly half a stone? - so a wet hunt coat the weight wouldnt bother me but Id feel sorry for my horse (not that he stuggles to carry me but why should he carry more weigh than needs be)
Unless of couse eventing goes back to the days of 11stone-  use of lead cloth etc ? so that everyone is fair - im sure alot of us with saddle and all kit on weigh more than 11stone anyway so thats pretty much irrelevant. 
That they need a key to get in and out of knowing my clumsyness I can see myself driving home in it having been unable to find the Key!
As for smartness - why do people think BPs are a fashion statement? so have their colours on (mine do) after all WFP, piggy french, andrew nic, rosie thomas, and MASSES of others wear a plain black or navy BP so where is the fashion statement. - My complex would be wearing one at PN/N level - I know rotationals happen at any and all levels but there appears to a greater risk the higher up I go, but when I start fearing for my life everytime I go in the start box should be the alarm bells for me to GIVE UP?


----------



## CracklinRosie (11 September 2008)

I've never heard of these does anyone know where I can have a gander?

Sounds good in principle. much better than the inflatable one that was in a post this morning.

I remember when the body protector enforcement came in and I still haven't worn one.


----------



## kerilli (11 September 2008)

if they start making them out of carbon fibre, so they are substantially lighter than they are now, i'll be first in the queue. i said this when i tried one of the prototypes, fwiw.
i liked the feel of it, but i didn't like the weight. i thought it was pretty heavy.
why can't people with one wear an allen key for it around their neck for xc? then if, god forbid, they have a terrible fall and the medics need to get it off them very fast, the key is right there.
i've heard the bad rumours about them and i think it's a nasty smear campaign tbh. as said above, a whiplash injury has to be better than being crushed to death.


----------



## SpottedCat (11 September 2008)

AutumnRose - I defy anyone to prove that in the event of a rotational fall they were aware enough what was going on to roll out of the way of their horse - not a chance IMO! Normal falls happen so fast XC that you've usually hit the gorund before you realised you were falling, to get out of the way of the hrose in a rotational fall involves not only you hitting the gorund, but also being aware of a horse, directly above you, about to land on you, when you may not have realised in the first place it was rotational. I don't see anyone being able to get out of the way then I'm afraid.


----------



## Baydale (11 September 2008)

I'm not very up-too-date with this (as I still wear my old Tipperary BP 
	
	
		
		
	


	




), but why do they need a key to get them on and off?


----------



## BBs (11 September 2008)

Everytime I went to try one SC they were too long for me too 
	
	
		
		
	


	




Thats the only reason.
My father was all set for buying me one when then came out - I was at Windsor and did an artical for EWW, well ER.com but you know what i mean.

It took a further 18 months for them to bring out these body cages and then never had the right size as it became apparent that many needed shorter lengths because of the hitting on the saddle etc.

I really think the look and the whiplash are minor excuses.


----------



## SpottedCat (11 September 2008)

With respect to the weight - I'd be surprised if it made the blindest bit of difference - now before you all say this is because I'm 5 foot, weigh 8.5 stone on a 16.2 so he wouldn't care anyway, the reason I say this is because effectively the rider carries the weight - it is suspended on you by a harness. Therefore it (I believe) fits into the definition of 'live' weight for the horse - i.e. you are balancing on the horse as a 'live' weight and I am sure studies have shown that this is far less taxing than 'dead' weight such as lead. It's one of the reasons jockeys try and get as close to the target weight for the horse as possible. So if the horse had 2-4kg of lead, it is more taxing than you being 2-4kg heavier. 

Of course, riders may have to be fitter to compensate for the extra weight they have to carry, but so be it!


----------



## AutumnRose (11 September 2008)

I didn't know that the paramedics etc were all given a key...that makes me feel better about that.
I know what train_robber means about wearing them at lower levels but like it or not we all risk our lives when we leave the start box (not that that thought crosses my mind at the time!!) and anything we can do to minimalise the risk must be a good thing.....

I'd be interested in riding in one and finding out about sizes/having one made/colours. i know lot's of the pros wear plain but however amateur it sounds i like my colours!!!

Not sure BE could force us to wear a product only supplied by one company.....


----------



## SpottedCat (11 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not very up-too-date with this (as I still wear my old Tipperary BP 
	
	
		
		
	


	




), but why do they need a key to get them on and off? 

[/ QUOTE ]

They don't 'in general' but they have a safety mech which allows parts like the shoulders (whcih I think are hinged to let you get them on and off) be unscrewed if you are unconscious and the release mech is hidden - it basically comes apart like two hlaves of a shell using an allen key in the event of an emergency release being needed - in general you don't take them on and off with the key I don't think? I may be wrong, but I don't remember the allen key being used when I tried them on either time. 

I guess it is the equivalent of cutting off your jods and boots?


----------



## kerilli (11 September 2008)

SC, i know what you mean, but it's still weight that the horse has to carry. when i tried one i was eventing a 15.3 homebred mare, and i am 5'10" and struggled to get to 10 stone... if i was 8.5 stone i wouldn't mind at all and would have one.
baydale, you can open them from the front without an allen key, but if you have to open the sides (because you daren't move the rider, i guess) you need an allen key to take apart the metal cage, i think.


----------



## SpottedCat (11 September 2008)

Autumn Rose - they come in black. But as your number bib covers 99% of the area covered by your BP, do you really care?! You can still wear your colours underneath. 

I wonder also if they'd be cooler as they sit away from the body - just speculation though, and we've seen precious little sun this season for it to make any blooming difference!


----------



## lucretia (11 September 2008)

i think that you do need a key to get them off baydale because they are rigid and the hole for your head is not quite big enough to get the thing off otherwise.  they are like a frame that sort of fits over your torso. a friend of mine used one for a good while to test it. i will ring and ask her.
  and i expect spotted cat is quite right now about the keys now, i have barely been in the country for the last 18 months so have noticed little rule changes. you certainly had to let the powers know you had one when they came out.


----------



## AutumnRose (11 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
AutumnRose - I defy anyone to prove that in the event of a rotational fall they were aware enough what was going on to roll out of the way of their horse - not a chance IMO! Normal falls happen so fast XC that you've usually hit the gorund before you realised you were falling, to get out of the way of the hrose in a rotational fall involves not only you hitting the gorund, but also being aware of a horse, directly above you, about to land on you, when you may not have realised in the first place it was rotational. I don't see anyone being able to get out of the way then I'm afraid.  
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]

i certainly am completely unaware of where i am when i fall but it was just an artical i read and thought maybe some people are more mobile than me. You often see things about the correct way to fall/roll etc etc. Could have been written by a rival company for all i know.....


----------



## mle22 (11 September 2008)

I'm really interested in this post as I am a paranoid mother who would definately buy one and damn the cost if I thought it would keep daughter safe. Who makes them?


----------



## alwaysbroke (11 September 2008)

Article in H&amp;H today, designers are cutting their 'six figure' losses and donating the patent for the protector to Riding for the Disabled. Too few have been sold.
Can see the pros and cons with it, wounder if it would have been possible to have had a sceure pocket to keep an allen key on it. If an accident occured anywhere else other than an organised event emergency services would be able to release the casulty in any situation, eg hacking, yard xc schooling.


----------



## SpottedCat (11 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
SC, i know what you mean, but it's still weight that the horse has to carry. when i tried one i was eventing a 15.3 homebred mare, and i am 5'10" and struggled to get to 10 stone... if i was 8.5 stone i wouldn't mind at all and would have one.
baydale, you can open them from the front without an allen key, but if you have to open the sides (because you daren't move the rider, i guess) you need an allen key to take apart the metal cage, i think. 

[/ QUOTE ]

I do see your point - I just think there are plenty of men out there who weigh far more than you or I ever will who ride small horses XC and it makes no difference. Ok, maybe you need to get your horse slightly fitter too....but again, so be it...I dunno I could be wrong.


----------



## mle22 (11 September 2008)

oh - just seen next post - what a shame


----------



## lucretia (11 September 2008)

you are right i about the hinge thing i remember now i think about watching someone put one on and off


----------



## SpottedCat (11 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
Article in H&amp;H today, designers are cutting their 'six figure' losses and donating the patent for the protector to Riding for the Disabled. Too few have been sold.
Can see the pros and cons with it, wounder if it would have been possible to have had a sceure pocket to keep an allen key on it. If an accident occured anywhere else other than an organised event emergency services would be able to release the casulty in any situation, eg hacking, yard xc schooling. 

[/ QUOTE ]

How sad! I don't buy H&amp;H so had no idea about this. 

FWIW they all ahve an allen key on them in a secure pocket with a green cross on it so the emergency services know where to look - it's just if you fall and are lying on that it doesn't help much, hence paramedics etc having a key.

ETA: Hmm, so the RDA now have the patent, so conceivably, BE could now make them compulsory and RDA could license the patent to all the BP companies and one of the massive issues with making them compulsory is removed - that of there being no rival to the company that makes them and people being sponsored etc. I wonder....


----------



## kerilli (11 September 2008)

moyraL, they are made/distributed by Woofwear.

AutumnRose, i agree with SC, it isn't possible to roll out of the way of a horse in a rotational fall, at the most the rider would hit the ground a split-second before the horse did. no-one's reactions are that fast.
i think the "learn how to fall" stuff is for falls like those we witnessed at the Burghley Mushroom this weekend - fall without sticking out an arm to save yourself (and breaking your collarbone), learn to "tuck and roll" as you hit the ground.


----------



## Baydale (11 September 2008)

Ah, I see. I've just been on their website and had a good look - they do look bulky and the weight of them would bother me. Surely it's only a matter of time before they make a new improved lighter version. Or if they don't, that another company make something similar?


----------



## seche (11 September 2008)

I am fully aware of making weights and have done so when I p2pointed - my mother was a jockey herself and when she trained she insisted her work riders were never "underweight" for the very reason horse should never carry dead-lead. 
One of my greatest friends suffered with an eating disorder in her teens and set herself the goal of pointing again once she didnt have to wear a lead cloth to make the weight - she is as tall as me - Im like Kerilli - 5.10, (would love to be 10stone!) and have a 16/1hh TB he has never complained about carrying me and I wont mind being fitter/stronger to deal with BP  but for 6mins XC how bad can it be?.... 
I am giving it some thought - its certainly Mums main concern (she wishes id go back to National Hunt!) with me eventing.


----------



## AutumnRose (11 September 2008)

Kerilli, completely agree re rotationals and as i said i have no idea where i am when i fall!! I think it was the tuck and roll types thing that the article was talking about restricting.

Anyway i would have been interested to try riding in one if had found one to fit 
	
	
		
		
	


	




.


----------



## kerilli (11 September 2008)

They told me that it would have cost a lot more to make them out of carbon fibre from the start. shame, because i bet i'm not alone in worrying about the weight. i found it comfy and not restrictive at all, fwiw. i think they retail at about £300, is that right? since a good pair of boots costs more than that, i don't think it's expensive tbh!
in fact, reading all these posts i suppose i sound a bit mental, worrying more about the horse having to carry an extra half a stone for 6 minutes or so, than about myself getting crushed....


----------



## Nando (11 September 2008)

There is also a big article in todays H&amp;H with various pro's &amp; con's being banded around. It seems the makers who have invested loads into these bp's have now 'donated' the patent to the RDA because they feel that there has been too much opposition to the idea behind the exo cage and they claim they have not had the backing of BE.

Apparently they have sold very few mainly due to the concerns you mentioned about whiplash and being unable to roll away (although if you ask me there is limited chance to 'roll away' in a fast rotational fall anyway) But as you say, most of us would take whiplash over being crushed. Oddly enough though none of the bp's on the market have to undergo any form of crush test as part of the BETA checklist 
	
	
		
		
	


	





Size and weight have also been contributing factors and, as has already been mentioned perhaps an element of vanity has also crept in?

Good news though if you are thinking of getting one is the RDA are planning to make it in a wider range of sizes and are also considering carbon fibre models so the horses aren't carrying un-necessary extra weight.

I think at the end of the day, anything that has been proved to save even one life should be endorsed and promoted in a little more positive light, perhaps then we may see more people giving them a go?


----------



## SpottedCat (11 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
They told me that it would have cost a lot more to make them out of carbon fibre from the start. shame, because i bet i'm not alone in worrying about the weight. i found it comfy and not restrictive at all, fwiw. i think they retail at about £300, is that right? since a good pair of boots costs more than that, i don't think it's expensive tbh!
in fact, reading all these posts i suppose i sound a bit mental, worrying more about the horse having to carry an extra half a stone for 6 minutes or so, than about myself getting crushed.... 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]

Those things are kinda what I'm getting at - in the nicest possible way of course  
	
	
		
		
	


	





I think they're a shade under £300, but I bet they don't deteriorate in the way normal ones and probably therefore don't need replacing as often (assuming you don't get landed on!). I spent £230 on two hats within 4 months because I bought a new one then fell on it - when you look at it that way....how many of us would compromise on hat safety XC if we were given the choice of somehting better?


----------



## kerilli (11 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
   Oddly enough though none of the bp's on the market have to undergo any form of crush test as part of the BETA checklist 
	
	
		
		
	


	




Good news though if you are thinking of getting one is the RDA are planning to make it in a wider range of sizes and are also considering carbon fibre models so the horses aren't carrying un-necessary extra weight.

[/ QUOTE ]

no normal back protector would offer any crush-protection at all, i can fold my (level 3, very good) Rodney Powell back protector in half, no way would it protect me at all from a falling horse.

i really hope RDA does bring out a lightweight carbon fibre version, i'll be impressed if they do though, it'll cost a lot to do. i'll be first in line, as i said!

i feel really sorry for the designers, if they really have lost a 6-figure sum. that's terrible.

oops, edited to make quoted bit clearer!


----------



## SpottedCat (11 September 2008)

Nando - I quite agree - they probably saved the girl at SpringHill, and TBH I've never understood why they weren't more popular. As I said, the only reaosn I don't have one is that I never found one which fitted me, otherwise I'd be in the minority of people who ride in one. If the RDA want to measure me for size, then brilliant!!


----------



## kit279 (11 September 2008)

There are some quite good reasons why these aren't popular with the medics.. 

*NB. this is quite technical/nerdy and also quite graphic as I'm a medic and therefore not unduly squeamish*

I did an undergrad project on horse riding accidents and what actually kills people in rotational falls is not usually head/spinal damage.  It is blunt chest trauma - similar to car accidents, the force applied to the chest is so great that the aorta ruptures and the person bleeds to death within 30 seconds. There's almost nothing that can be done under those circumstances and early paramedic invention rarely saves them. That is what these body-cage protectors are designed to stop and they are by all accounts effective.

However the vast majority of falls are not rotational.  The real medical concerns are spinal injuries and fractures and the risk of paralysis.  Race jockeys are obliged to undergo training courses in 'how to fall' and they have to keep themselves pretty fit so as to fall 'correctly'.  The data from my project showed that the risk of injury after a fall was increased if the person was unfit or overweight.  Under these conditions, adding an extra 2kg of rigid body armour which substantially hinders your ability to roll and fall properly is a bad idea. Race jockeys usually only wear Level 1 protectors so as to allow them to roll effectively.  

In the event of a spinal injury, the spine MUST be immobilised immediately to prevent any movement of bone which might damage the spinal cord.  A body protector that has to be taken to pieces with an Allan key and cannot be cut off with a pair of scissors will by definition involve moving the spine - ergo increased risk of paralysis. The other risk is that the head will loll back in a hyperextended position when the body protector is worn lying down. This would also increase the risk of spinal injury as the head would need to be moved in order to support the airways if the patient is unconscious.

That's a lot of info - I did hope to get a paper published with my results but alas the BMJ doesn't really care!!


----------



## mle22 (11 September 2008)

Glad to hear that they are still going to be made, I misunderstood the post about the patent being handed over. Thanks Kerilli - I'll have a look at them on the website, although I have a good idea a standard one wouldn't fit as my daughter is not very tall and is also quite slight and always has problems with things being too big or too long for her. I'm just becoming more and more paranoid about falls these days - could hardly bear to watch those mushrooms! Began to wonder if the whole eventing game has become too dangerous.


----------



## AutumnRose (11 September 2008)

Thats a good point re hats. I got a new one end of june, fell on my head at Brightling and so replaced it within a month without thinking twice....

I did think one thing though following that article about them not selling enough. perhaps how few people knew details about them on here shows something lacking in the advertising? We all knew off them but not lots of details. Or maybe its because sc says and they didnt' become fashionable with the pros


----------



## SpottedCat (11 September 2008)

Kit279 that is really interesting - but did your research look at HOW people get spinal injuries? Do they get them because they hit the fence, say, or because of the way they land, or because the horse stands on them or lands on them (non-rotationally) or whatever? 

What I'm trying to say is that it's no good saying that the body cage will make this worse because of the immobilisation problem, if in actual fact the majority of people who end up with spinal injuries do so because the horse stands on them or they are thrown into the fence - both of which the BC would provide protection against.


----------



## mle22 (11 September 2008)

Kit279 - now I'm unsure!! Maybe I should just buy her a dressage horse!!


----------



## SpottedCat (11 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
Kit279 - now I'm unsure!! Maybe I should just buy her a dressage horse!! 

[/ QUOTE ]

....or a rocking horse....with guards to stop her trapping her fingers if anyone else is on it...


----------



## mle22 (11 September 2008)

Mothers are allowed to worry!! In fact it's part of the job description.


----------



## SpottedCat (11 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
Mothers are allowed to worry!! In fact it's part of the job description. 

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm only joking - you do realise if you buy her a dressage horse she will insist on being allowed to ride without a hat, don't you?


----------



## LauraT (11 September 2008)

I rode around Bramham CCI*** in the roll cage and I have to say it was brilliant. I have nothing bad to say about it. 

With regards to weight training, I galloped my horse with racing weights on and I also galloped in it a few times. I also made an effort to keep my weight down, but only by about 1/2 a stone. 

I guess it is just a case of "each to his own" and maybe some people don't like them. 

My own attitude is that a fatal rotational fall can happen to anyone, regardless of how good you are as a rider or how good your horse is. So if there is product that might save you from death it is worth wearing. Like I say that is a personal opinion and i understand others may have different views on the issue.

If anyone wants to know anything specific about riding/competing in it I can try and help in some way from my own experiences.


----------



## AutumnRose (11 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
Mothers are allowed to worry!! In fact it's part of the job description. 

[/ QUOTE ]

My mum won't watch xc/walk course and can barely cope with sj, i'm in my mid 20's and i think she has got worse over the years!! So sounds like you're doing well!!


----------



## kerilli (11 September 2008)

Kit279, very interesting, thankyou for that.

maybe we need a kind of neck-support that fits onto the exo, rather like the ones every F1 driver wears now, to prevent hyperextension.  i'd go for that.


----------



## seche (11 September 2008)

My mother does worry - I bark at her not too though - after all shes done things in life I wont dream of for years - like getting married and having children!!!!
Its not the horse, or my albility she worries about but the "it can and does happen to anyone" factor - My theory - lightening or a London bus is more likely to kill me...


----------



## mle22 (11 September 2008)

Thanks Autumnrose - My daughter is in her twenties also and like your mum I think I'm getting worse too as I get older.
 TrainrobberI used to fly round xc myself but watching her do it is a whole different matter!!


----------



## teapot (11 September 2008)

Interesting that one of the eventers that's quoted in H&amp;H today is Kitty Boggis who said that as a smaller rider (she is pretty tiny) she didn't want the extra weight on her and her horses. 

If they were made of carbon fibre I think more people would be inclined to buy. How many of us (myself included) have chosen hats that are lightweight &amp; have paid more for the priviledge? 

Also think that there are still quite a few of those who event that only ever wear their BP because they HAVE TO to go xc - they don't wear it hunting for example. They're not the most cheapest thing to buy as it is, let alone paying what almost £300 for one. For the average eventer who does it as their hobby and competes once, poss twice a month throughout the season - it's a lot of money. But like everyone has said, your own life is priceless.


----------



## Red_Arrow (11 September 2008)

My daughter events and I have to say that when I first heard about this new cage back protector I thought it was a very good idea.  My daughter is at intro level at the moment with a young horse, however if she does progress up the levels then I would invest in one of these for her (even though she's not very keen on them).  I have read the article in the H&amp;H today and my opinion hasn't changed.   I hope the cage design is improved and redesigned/resized to take into account any problems at the moment, because as a mum it would make me feel a bit better everytime she goes off XC.


----------



## bodycage (11 September 2008)

Firstly to introduce myself - I am (until next week!) the MD of Bodycage Ltd. - Alasdair Kirk.

A big thank you to the many emails / phone calls of support we have already received today regarding the product - I was not aware of how many people use it so regularly, nor how many feel that it really offers them the protection they desire, we have had great support and feedback from riders since we started work on this with the original idea back in 1999 and the company starting in 2001.

Horse and Hound have written an interesting article today - and I won't get sidetracked into  any of the whys and wherefores - Bodycage made a commercial decision earlier this year to stop involvement in the R&amp;D work they were doing - we are enormously pleased that the product has saved lives - there is great satisfaction in knowing that people are walking around today who might not otherwise have been, equally we are very sad that injuries continue. However the company has been a commercial business and there are times to make certain decisions, so we are delighted that the RDA share our passion for safety and concern for riders, and that they were able to be such a good home for the licence / patent. This means that they now control the ownership etc. of the product and we look forward to watching what may happen - it is in good hands.

In the meanwhile - some thoughts in response to comments in this thread...

---------------------------

The EXO has an allen key built into it each side, so you can always get to one as a medic - medics do not need to carry their own! -  with full instructions and green crosses on each side for easy guidance.

You don't need an allen key to get out of the EXO - the clips unclip - but the allen keys are there to allow a medic to remove parts of the EXO and leave the rest in place to help support spine etc. It is designed as a benefit, rather than a way around an issue...

Even in an event in 2005 when a rider had a 500kg horse land on her from a metre up in the air, there was no visible damage to the EXO and it could easily be unclipped and removed as normal.

BE ask every rider to notify when riding in an EXO - however I assume that there must be some other reason as the EXO carries two allen keys with it, so not for that...

---------------------------

regarding ownership and patents etc. - yup - very broad patent and nice and securely patented... but no longer owned commercially - owned by the Riding for the Disabled, though licensed to Woof Wear. The difficulty with having lots of companies making them is the cost needing to be invested in their manufacture - there is not a big enough commercial market for this to be viable for all manufacturers... And to be honest I don't see an issue in one company running with safety gear - in other industries such as F1 motorsport etc. there will be some gear which only one company makes - as long as the price is fair, not a problem - having a commercial involvement feeds more money back into R&amp;D - our spend over the time we developed this was primarily R&amp;D spend, and while a bit under what was reported by H&amp;H (not much though!) was considerably more than would have occurred had it not been a commercial approach...

if this had not been commercial - it would not have happened - for some people that would have been tragic...

---------------------------

They weigh four pounds more than a normal body protector, but due to the way in which they are constructed (using a 'rucksack style' of support system), that extra weight is not particularly noticeable in actual riding...

---------------------------

the concern in H&amp;H about wiplash is the first time this has been raised as an issue to me - I have spoken with a very large number of medics regarding this and it has not been raised with me before, that is not to say that it may not be an issue, merely that it could need exploring, but there may also be a choice to make - wiplash v crushing... in development the concept was passed by one of the world's leading spinal surgeons and this was not raised as an issue...

---------------------------

in response to kit279: a correction if I may - they are designed to help in the event of spinal injury - not hinder.
agree that the major issue is trauma - the big issue is the speed of the accident. As an illustration if I asked you to hold 1 kg in your hand, you could do so continuously (if fit!) for an hour, yet couldn't hold 60 kg for a minute / 3600kg for a second - i.e.take the same forces and  reduce the time increases the force per second on the body - this kills. The Exo was designed from the outset to: take force into the ground, slowing down the accident, then (if necessary and not so far) disintegrate gracefully (it was tested to distruction at SATRA with far higher forces) to take energy into destroying the cage, again slowing down the accident / impact, then finally leaving what is left of the impact for the ribs to deal with - they are very capable... so it is about stretching the impact over a longer period and lessinging the degree of force... The product went through a lot of detailed study by medics, including the top medics in the fields of injuries from horses / spinal work / equestrian sport etc. As mentioned above, in the event of an accident they are designed like a meccano set so that you can unbolt the top and use the bottom section as a spinal board...

---------------------------

In testing by the medics at Burghley Horse Trials, there was no issue in removing parts of the jacket / using in conjunction with a spinal board / etc. even though they liked the idea before testing they were impressed with how they could work with it.

---------------------------

Regarding PROs wearing them - a number have tried them on, and I have been known to jump on the stomachs of some quite famous people 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 however as one (very famous!) rider said - they are paid to win, not to avoid injury, and while BE allow choice, every pound will count, so if all wore them they would happily wear them, if not compulsory, none will be willing to put themselves ata  weight disadvantage - at the top level 4lbs can make a difference. At the end of the day - it will not happen unless someone makes it happen...

Definitely not lack of support...

---------------------------

Hopefully this clarifies one or two questions above - I will try to monitor this thread for a few days - so if you have other questions do ask - or feel free to email us / phone us, all our details are on our website and we are always happy to talk... however for future decisions / plans etc. no longer us - but the RDA - it couldn't be in better hands.

regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
BodyCage


----------



## SpottedCat (11 September 2008)

Thanks for replying to this Alasdair - nice of you take the time and trouble especially given the circumstances. As for BE requiring you to tell them you are wearing one - it is definitely about the allen keys - the lists at events have in some cases stated this. Whether it was originally about that or not I don't know, but that's what it has transmuted into! I think it stems from them being worried the paramedics won't know where to look for the allen keys/won't be able to release them. I know all TAs and paramedics have to have a separate one now and not rely on the ones in the body cage. 

Interesting that for the pros it comes down to weight (and in some cases vanity  
	
	
		
		
	


	




 the person I was referring to is definitely considered to be a top pro). I wonder if it makes that much difference - I can't see Mary King weighing nearly as much as some of the men on the circuit, so would it make any difference to her from that point of view? And I think it's a bit of a short-sighted statement to say you are paid to win not to avoid injury - after all, if you are off for months through injury, you certainly aren't winning, or in fact doing your job at all...there aren't many professions where you'd get away with saying that H&amp;S was less important than doing the job - in my job, we are told to walk off the job if we feel some aspect of H&amp;S needs improving. Just a thought, no real answers or questions, just general bewilderment that what seems to be an exceptionally good product just hasn't taken off in the way it should have done.


----------



## lucretia (11 September 2008)

i was just reading as you posted SC and thinking as well how nice it was for someone to come on here DISCUSS their product/issues and not hide behind a forum ID.  Thank you very much and i have found this thread most interesting. i thought there was some BE rule about saying you were wearing them but it just goes to show how much mis information there is as i fairly certain the reason for this was to make sure suitable keys were available, my whole view of them has changed now i know the key is part of the cage.
   thanks once again alistair.


----------



## SpottedCat (12 September 2008)

Another thought I've had - Kit279 maybe you can answer this - how is hyperextension of the neck possible any more or less than with a normal BP given that your skull hat must surely mean your head sits roughly the same distance away from the ground as the body cage makes the body sit (if you see what I mean). For sure as you're flying through the air your neck could hyperextend, but surely this is no more or less likely than with a normal BP - neither offers any neck support after all.


----------



## bodycage (12 September 2008)

Thank you 
	
	
		
		
	


	





For those concerned about allen keys / removal, we have a copy of the removal instructions (rather small, but legible) on our website:
http://www.bodycage.co.uk/images/EXO%20Removal%20Instructions.JPG
Woof Wear put a lot of time into ensuring some rather good instructive material...

Regarding hyper-extension, I think that you are right - weight on the head will increase the chance of this (so actually using a hat v. not will increase the chance of hyper-extension - rather like increasing the weight on a pendulum...) I am sure that the fear of the Exo causing hyper-extension is due to the cage making the garment sit further away from the body, but as mentioned, this should bring it in line with the helmet, potentially reducing hyper-extension, not increasing it... I am not a scientist, or a medic, so bow to the experience of those who are, and we had the Exo tested and evaluated in concept and reality by world leading experts in impact / spine / medicine / etc.

Protecting the neck is one of the holy grails in riding safety, as anything offering protection to the neck risks reducing mobility of the neck and that is a definite NO for riding, in F1 (as mentioned above) there is far more scope for neck protection as the driver's body / neck / head are reasonably fixed in position - they have mirrors to see behind them! In riding, the need for the rider to move with the horse / look over their shoulder / etc. makes it very difficult to offer neck protection, and anything which risks reducing neck mobility has the potential to increase the opportunity for or risk of accidents - counter-productive, that is why we did not pursue development of neck protection, though the Exo carries the fittings to allow other elements to be attached to it...

The Exo itself follows the contours of the ribs - it is literally acting as a second set of (stronger) ribs in the form of an exo-skeleton, but the ribs themselves don't move - the body flexes around them, but if they are moving, you have problems anyway 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 so, it works to have a rigid set which also do not move, it changes nothing in the way in which you ride... it allows you to fall in the same way - it still allows you to roll (a concern for some), though you end up rolling as though you were someone fatter than you actually are if that makes sense - so worth practising!

regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
BodyCage


----------



## kick_On (12 September 2008)

really interesting posting


----------



## mle22 (12 September 2008)

I agree this is really interesting and I really hope that this product continues to be available and perhaps in a greater range of sizes. I would certainly consider buying one if it was the correct fit. When you weigh about 9 stone I don't think a few pounds would make much difference to the horse, especially if you are not riding at the very top levels.


----------



## lucretia (12 September 2008)

the funny thing is that the EXO actually would protect you from a full on crush type injury where as you are lucky if the normal body protector does little to protoect from any sort of life threatening injury. they are after all made from materials designed to disapate (somewhat) the forse from a blow, i.e. a kick or possible even a high speed tread (as in racing as the field runs over a fallen rider) but urban legend has taken over. They really cannot 'protect the back' or anything else from the impact of half a ton (sic) landing directly on you at speed, but the EXO could i suspect and certainly the technology could be improved by use of carbon  fibre's etc so the weight difference was minimal, without any loss of weight bearing capabilty. 
  An opportunity missed by BE?


----------



## Joss (12 September 2008)

I have tried one but just found it way too heavy.  Its not becos my horse would notice a bit of extra weight but it just felt extremely odd &amp; out of balance with the top half of me weighing so much more than the bottom half (normally the thunder thighs keep the weight downwards!!)  I just could not imagine trying to ride XC wearing this contraption.  I think maybe the lighter you are the more you notice because the ratio of weight is greater.  As Kerelli says when they make a carbon fibre one I will be first in the queue.


----------



## Foxfolly (12 September 2008)

My main worry about these was the weight. I know I need to lose some weight anyway and was worried that the extra weight of the BP was just more strain on my horse.

But I definitely like the idea of it and always have I would rather a whiplash injury than a crush injury... although this appears to be a myth that it is anymore likely!

The cost is a lot but I wouldn't want to put a price on my life.
It is a shame that they haven't been more popular. 

Maybe BE and all the other Eventing bodies should look at making this type if protector compulory in view of the many fatal accidents in our sport over the last few years.

I would prefer this than getting so OTT about the falls that we end up making the fences so safe that the horses don't need to be bold and careful any more!! I am sure that is actually more dangerous!!


----------



## bodycage (12 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
the funny thing is that the EXO actually would protect you from a full on crush type injury where as you are lucky if the normal body protector does little to protoect from any sort of life threatening injury. they are after all made from materials designed to disapate (somewhat) the forse from a blow, i.e. a kick or possible even a high speed tread (as in racing as the field runs over a fallen rider) but urban legend has taken over. They really cannot 'protect the back' or anything else from the impact of half a ton (sic) landing directly on you at speed, but the EXO could i suspect and certainly the technology could be improved by use of carbon  fibre's etc so the weight difference was minimal, without any loss of weight bearing capabilty. 

[/ QUOTE ]

When we tested the Exo to the EN 1318 standard (which gives BETA level 3) at SATRA we were looking for the force which is transferred through to the sensor (rider's body) the standard allows a certain amount of force to be transmitted through, but no more...

The Exo gave readings of 0 - i.e. no force transmitted through - when the impact was on the exo, and standard readings on the foam sections... - they thought that the machines were broken initially 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[ QUOTE ]
An opportunity missed by BE? 

[/ QUOTE ]

mmmm 
	
	
		
		
	


	





Alasdair
Managing Director
Bodycage


----------



## AutumnRose (12 September 2008)

Thank you so much for posting bodycage, very interesting. It is making me thing very seriously about looking into them again. Do you have any plans to offer more sizes? Does the structure make sizing more difficult? Problem i have with all bp's is them being too long and i foundthis when i tried the exo.


----------



## TableDancer (12 September 2008)

Fascinating thread - my only thoughts are: 1) I was riding at Windsor that year you launched them Alasdair, you jumped on me as well as famous people (it was your party trick, as I remember!) It was just a shell then, and I never really followed it up once they launched, don't know why, never seemed a priority, can't really explain it. But they have been increasingly in my mind recently with all that's been happening, and particularly now I have a daughter getting more serious about the sport.
2) There are a lot of rumours and misinformation on the circuit about them, I've no idea whether they are planted maliciously or just been allowed to take root and spread naturally. However, FWIW, I don't think anyone, WoofWear or whoever, have been particularly pro-active in counteracting them and spreading their version of the good news: sad that the first we hear (for me anyway) of a life being saved is at the same time as we hear of the company being under threat. I realise this is a good, big news PR story now but feel it is a case of "too little, too late"... (Who was in charge of your PR Alasdair? I hope you weren't paying them much 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 I don't expect an answer to that, BTW)
3) If these things really are life-savers they need to be compulsory, end of. That would stop all the pros and cons arguments, weight etc, we'd all just have to get on with it, although fit is an issue (I also have a short back!) I assume the reason this hasn't happenend is all the vested interests which would lose out: BE not wanting to bite the hands that feed it in terms of sponsorship (Charles Owen, Champion/Toggi etc - big players!!), even more BETA politics: presumably rival manufacturers have been lobbying internally hard, people like KC Sports (Rodney Powell) also coming into play here? And that comes back to BE again because who sponsored was it the Int Champs at Gatcombe? Oh yes, BETA... So does the RDA holding the patent get over any of these problems of vested interests? Presumably, if they can grant licenses to more companies to produce the EXO protectors? Would love to know if any of these ramblings are close to the mark?


----------



## MissDeMeena (12 September 2008)

My reasons for not getting one are.
1) the fit, or lack of it. 
2) due to the lack of fit, it will effect my ability to ride
3) weight
4) i know a very bad reason, but the cost.


----------



## bodycage (12 September 2008)

AutumnRose - we developed and owned the rights to the Exo, but licensed them to Woof Wear. The rights and licence are now owned by the RDA. I can't predict therefore what there plans will be, but both are good copmanies to be involved, so do talk to them and express your interest, I am sure that the more who express interest with those organisations, the more chance of things happening - but no longer in our control...

TableDancer, I couldn't possible comment on all your points 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 say no more than it doesn't take too much effort to piece together who played what role, especially if you have followed some of the trade and other press over the last few years...

As I mentioned in my long and rambling post above, there will always be a challenge in commercial viability and desire to spread the technology, while I can't talk about how much Woof Wear have invested in bringing the product to market (not insubstantial), there isn't really the scope with this type of product to have a number of companies investing in its manufacture - the economics don't stack up if you have only a small share of the market. However I don't see an issue with only one manufacturer - as long as they don't abuse that position through charging silly prices (which they certainly don't!) then it is fair that the consumer pays a company to have their product - that money then allowing the company to do R&amp;D to develop the product further... If one says that anyone should be able to manufacture it - the economics do not work...

We were told by various people 'in authority' that they would be happy to endorse the product / make it compulsory etc. if we released the rights and allowed anyone to make it... I am not quite sure how they thought we could afford the hundreds of thousands of R&amp;D money! Perhaps they felt that we should pay for it out of the kindness of our hearts!

Plenty of other people out there making money out of products - so one has to look to why anyone might wish for us not to make money... the rest can be worked out... 
	
	
		
		
	


	





And as for jumping on famous people - Windsor was one of those places I was thinking of, there were many famous people I jumped on - consider yourself one of them 
	
	
		
		
	


	





Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
Bodycage


----------



## wizoz (12 September 2008)

This is an extremely interesting thread, well done SC for bringing it up.

Here are my own personal thoughts on the EXO...

I saw it at Badminton the year it was launched, took one look and told myself that it was far too bulky and would hinder my position and would be too heavy for me to carry around the xc course!  I did not try it 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 I'm not saying it's a bad idea here, I didn't give it much thought at the time.

After reading through the thread I do have some concerns about further neck damage, as we already have a Tetraplegic in the family (my brother) and paralysis is something that I am VERY aware of and would like to prevent at all costs. The way I see it, is the EXO sits a little too far away from the body or is bulked away from the body, so if you landed on your back, there would be room for the head to fall back at quite an angle, so if you sustained a neck injury it could be worsened by the fact that there is no support, whereas the normal body protector, in my case the Rodney Powell one, you may still incur a neck injury but as the body protector is a snugger fit, you would be more likely to have your head resting on the ground at not such an alarming angle, therefor the neck would be immobilised (Just my thoughts) But at the end of the day, this is a vital bit of kit, it CAN save lives. I personally think the design needs a bit of tweaking before I would wear one though.

I too think that if the EXO could be made of a lighter but sustainable material, competitors would definately buy them, I do think it comes down to weight, especially for the men.

And if everyone HAD to wear them, we would all look the same, so for those who are more worried about their image as opposed to their safety, well, they'd just look like everyone else


----------



## SpottedCat (12 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
After reading through the thread I do have some concerns about further neck damage, as we already have a Tetraplegic in the family (my brother) and paralysis is something that I am VERY aware of and would like to prevent at all costs. The way I see it, is the EXO sits a little too far away from the body or is bulked away from the body, so if you landed on your back, there would be room for the head to fall back at quite an angle, so if you sustained a neck injury it could be worsened by the fact that there is no support, whereas the normal body protector, in my case the Rodney Powell one, you may still incur a neck injury but as the body protector is a snugger fit, you would be more likely to have your head resting on the ground at not such an alarming angle, therefor the neck would be immobilised (Just my thoughts) But at the end of the day, this is a vital bit of kit, it CAN save lives. I personally think the design needs a bit of tweaking before I would wear one though.


[/ QUOTE ]

See I'm unconvinced about this - it only sits an inch or so away from the body - certainly no more than your skull does - so if you lie on the floor with a skull on and the BC on, I don't see how the neck can hyperextend/fall back at an angle? I am willing to be proven wrong, but I just can't visualise it.


----------



## LauraT (12 September 2008)

"My reasons for not getting one are.
1) the fit, or lack of it.
2) due to the lack of fit, it will effect my ability to ride
3) weight
4) i know a very bad reason, but the cost. "

Just thought I would say...
1) &amp; 2) I found it really comfortable, although different at the start I thought it was more comfortable than ordinary body protectors...also it didn't effect my ability to ride at all. 
But perhaps this might differ from person to person, and obviously MdM you found it less comfortable.

3) The weight...yes it weighs more, but as a rider you dont feel it as it is designed to hang off your shoulders so the weight isnt felt very much. For the horse...like I say for bramham i used weights in training because of the length of the course and the endurance required. i didn't use weights for training for normal 1days though as the endurance phase is not as long and it i didnt seem to have that much of an effect on 1day's. it was the CCIs with the longer XC that needed greater preparation i found-and i also did fitness preparation and weight to prepare myself.

4) the cost...it is less than entering a 3day i guess! 
but i see how that might intimidate people if they were not 100%sure about it.

it is interesting to here the reasons people dont get them


----------



## kit279 (12 September 2008)

Thanks to Alastair for addressing so many questions about the Exo.  I've not worn one of them so am no expert but in answer to Spotted Cat's query about hyperextension:- the most dangerous fracture of the neck occurs just below the skull.  The part of the brain that controls breathing is at that level of the spine therefore spinal damage above that level is invariably fatal. A lower fracture that compromises the spinal cord will result in paralysis. If you ever get the chance to look at a human skeleton (I have one under my bed, I kid you not) try tilting the skull back even a tiny tiny fraction and see how much the top 4 vertebrae move.  Therefore any query spinal injury must be totally immobilised immediately and Xrayed to see if there is a fracture and if it is displaced (ie. has moved at all). The human head weighs about 3.5kg and the leverage exerted on the spine is enormous. A body protector that was 1-2 inches thicker than normal would by my estimate extend the head back by that much and that is easily enough to move a fractured vertebrae. If you try tipping your head back 1 inch, you'll feel how hard your neck muscles have to work to support that.  That's why hyperextension, even a little, has to be avoided at all costs.  


Alastair - I did wonder though whether you could add on an extra inch to the back of the rider's helmet to reduce this problem. I do see the obvious difficulty of putting neck protection on a body protector.


----------



## Foxfolly (12 September 2008)

QR:

Having read this thread and the answers to all the bad points I'm with you on this SpottedCat. I can't see how it can be any worse than a normal BP when you have a sculll cap on especially now the sculls are getting more supportive to the base of the neck!

I think BodyCage has pretty much answered this in his replies which have been very interesting!

I had a nasty fall many moons ago at Dauntsey.. in the SJ so no I didn't have BP on... but I landed and hit the base of my spine in the corner of a Well type jump stand. I was lucky it hit where the pelvis comes round to meet the spine and although I get low back pain now I was fortunately fine,  I even managed to get back on and jump the offending jump... albeit a good 1/2 a stride too early as I was so determined on the 2nd attempt!

The Dr said if I had hit it a few inches higher I may well have bust my back or at least done some serious damage, but in view of that type of injury I am sure both a normal BP and BC would have the same protection but the BC has the added bonus of the protection from Rotational injury.

I would definitely consider one but I also would like them to be lighter in weight if at all possible as having tried on on like WizOz at Badminton when they were first released that was my main reason for not wanting one. Now I am a bit older and seen more injuries I think maybe i was a bit shortsighted!!


----------



## bodycage (12 September 2008)

wizoz - I can totally understand your concerns - esp. if you already have a Tetraplegic in the family. Some thoughts:

when a rider falls (assume no protective gear), they rarely hit the ground square on (we tested with SATRA's dummy to check this), so legs / torso / head will hit first.

If your head hits first, you are likely to have issues anyway as the torso will act as a pendulum and stretch the neck.

If you land on your side you could have whiplash - and then the weight of your head or head &amp; hat will be a defining factor

If you land on your feet less issues!

If you land on your torso, front or back first, then we are into the scenario you mention. for the Exo to cause issues here which are not present otherwise it would have to significantly increase the distance you head sat away from the ground to give more space for whiplash... now I am not going to say categorically that this will not happen - a) every accident is different b) every person's physique is different - but I will observe that i) no expert who looked at this (inc. spine / neck experts) raised this as a concern ii) no-one in testing the Exo (with my jumping on them they lie on their back in it with no helmet) has commented on their head being raised significantly from the ground iii) as SpottedCat mentions with a helmet on as well the difference is minimised...

Perhaps it is something to look at, but I would hope also that it is not a red-herring, and would encourage it to be looked at scientifically, not just on the basis of a feeling that it might happen - as mentioned, we have had some very impressive medics involved in the design and this has not been cause for concern...

eta:
Kit279 - see where you are coming from, but - if you are wearing no BP / no hat presumably head and torso are in balance? so adding the hat without a BP / shallow BP will give you an out of balance situation... a BP which matches the hat - should put you back in balance...

However bear in mind that larger helmets are more likely to cause whiplash through their extra weight in other scenarios, such as falling onto your side / extension of neck during flight through the air...

ultimately there is probably no ideal solution - other than not riding, and that would be boring )

regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
Bodycage


----------



## kerilli (12 September 2008)

Thank you so much for posting, Alasdair, especially as I guess you must be trying to look forward and not back at the moment! I think it is a seriously great product and I sincerely wish that BE had made them compulsory for all - then the weight wouldn't bother me so much at all. I didn't realise that the weight difference was only 4lb, i would have guessed it as being about 8lb. 

Re: "The Exo gave readings of 0 - i.e. no force transmitted through - when the impact was on the exo, and standard readings on the foam sections... - they thought that the machines were broken initially."

This did not surprise me at all. I have worn an Exo and had someone jumping up and down on my chest (was that you?!)  with no weight transferred through at all. Other back protectors offer absolutely no crush protection, there is no way they can, anyone who thinks they do is kidding themselves! 

I am hoping that RDA will push ahead with a carbonfibre one at the earliest opportunity, and will write to them about it.


The thought that the girl who died at Hartpury might still be with us if she had been wearing as Exo is haunting me at the moment.


----------



## wizoz (12 September 2008)

Alasdair, thank you for explaining that to me, as I said, it is a concern that is quite poignant to me, but only because of the fact that we have already dealt with a spinal injury in my family (not through a riding accident I hasten to add!)

I am sure that the EXO has been tested beyond belief and we should all be very grateful that someone has invented something that will potentially help to save our lives. As with most new ideas, there are always teething problems.

I think there needs to be an extended trial of the EXO at events to get a data report going. I think half of the field should wear the EXO and the other half should go as they normally do and a further study should be made of falls AND how competitors wearing it felt with regards weight and bulkiness etc.

If this product was made available to try, rather than having to buy, whilst this study was going on, you may find that more people will be willing to buy it for themselves after the study?

Or am I just in cloud cuckoo land?!


----------



## AutumnRose (12 September 2008)

I think that potentially that is a good idea wizoz although have no idea how it would work.

As i said if i could get one to fit i would be very keen to try riding in one. The fact that LauraT rode round bramham in one makes me think i'm stupid to think it will interfer with my riding at a lower level...but everyone is different.

The more this thread continues the more i think perhaps we are all completely insane for not wearing something that could save our life. Noone would go xc without a hat would they?!


----------



## bodycage (12 September 2008)

Kerilli,

If the person jumping up and down on you was devastatingly handsome, intelligent, warm hearted and kind - then that was me 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 more seriously we have had two adult men jumping up and don on a petite female rider (quite scary for her), there is no pressure...

I think that this was a point made most dramatically when a rider in 2005 was in a rotational fall with a 500kg horse landing on her from 1m up (1* event) - we could find no damage at all to the Exo - amazing really...

Do write to the RDA, I would love to see it developed further...


Wizoz,

credit for the invention should go to Matt Aspray the inventor who came up with the idea - I only did the business side of the company, so his bit worked, my bit didn't 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 I totally understand the thoughts on extended testing, but would also observe that it has been ridden in by a number of people - e.g. Kitty Boggis who is quoted in the H&amp;H article who rode with it at advanced levels - the only issues mentioned was weight, and only on the basis of in-equality between those wearing it and those not wearing it...

I think that there are opportunities to try the product - does Derby House not have an arena? but understand that this doesn't work for everyone, and is not the same as testing it in anger at an event...

you can always suggest this, but probably not an easy one commercially as if you decide not to then buy it, it might not be easy to sell a muddy body protector!

regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
Bodycage


----------



## kerilli (12 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]

The more this thread continues the more i think perhaps we are all completely insane for not wearing something that could save our life. Noone would go xc without a hat would they?! 

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree totally with the first point.

Hahaha to the second... how many times have I seen people jumping big fences at home, sometimes on youngsters, without a hat.

A LOT of riders have a definite "it won't happen to me, i'm too good" attitude, I think. Perhaps this failure to face the possible consequences is what keeps them brave enough to ride xc, I don't know. But the fact is that some very very good riders have had very bad falls (and fatalities) simply because they got it a bit wrong, or they got it right but the horse made a mistake.

Anyone who has seen Darren Chiacchia's fall (at a PN/N fence) will agree with me. He jumped the previous fences fine off good strides, he wasn't hurrying the horse at all, he jumped into a simple little xc combination fine, the horse for some reason decided to try to add another stride which simply wasn't there... consequence, 1 horrific fall.
I doubt any of us would have ridden that fence and that horse substantially differently. It was horse error.
And while we continue to ride horses (which, much as I adore them, I know are not smart enough to have worked out not to poo on their hay/in their water bucket yet), that danger will always be there.

the idea of trying the Exo xc is a very good one, i'd be game. I thought it was very comfy, fwiw.


----------



## hmk101 (12 September 2008)

Are they still available to purchase? I have been interested for a while, but actually haven't come across them locally at events / tack shops. I also heard that they are only available in 6 different sizes. That must limit their appeal somewhat.


----------



## Suechoccy (12 September 2008)

Earlier this year I did the BHS EFSAC course and the instructor seemed fairly anti- to the rigid one because it can't quickly be torn open/unvelcro'd to reveal the patient's chest for resuss, but you need the correct allen key for that frame and preferrably you need an allen key with every first-aid official so there is minimal time delay in administering resuss.

He was also anti-rugby shirts for similar reasons - being designed for rugby, they're designed not to rip, and in an emergency resuss situation you need to rip the fabric away from the chest. 

Underwired bras. Excellent for lung puncturing esp once the bra is a little worn and the rider falls and it pushes the wire through the worn fabric, inbetween the ribs and hey presto, punctured lung.


----------



## Natch (12 September 2008)

Do the RDA have the funds to develop the product further - but then am I right in thinking they licence it to Woof wear who are the ones investing in the product?

Alisdair, if you don't mind answering this, when does the patent expire? I completely 100% see your point of view on why you couldn't allow other companies to manufacture it, but the sad truth is competition would bring the price down and promote innovation. 

I truly hope the product thrives and it becomes compulsory, if it is as good as it sounds. How frustrating for you that for whatever reason it wasn't commercially viable for you.

On a slightly different note, does anyone know why body protectors are often referred to as back protectors? And if there is anybody who is working on a solution for back/neck injuries?


----------



## kerilli (12 September 2008)

Suechoccy, that is very interesting. anyone wearing an underwired bra for xc must be mad anyway imho, but i will rethink wearing my (favourite, ancient) rugby shirt!


----------



## Natch (12 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
Earlier this year I did the BHS EFSAC course and the instructor seemed fairly anti- to the rigid one because it can't quickly be torn open/unvelcro'd to reveal the patient's chest for resuss, but you need the correct allen key for that frame and preferrably you need an allen key with every first-aid official so there is minimal time delay in administering resuss.

<font color="blue"> It was mentioned earlier in the thread that the allen keys are provided in pockets on the product with symbols for use. </font> 
	
	
		
		
	


	





He was also anti-rugby shirts for similar reasons - being designed for rugby, they're designed not to rip, and in an emergency resuss situation you need to rip the fabric away from the chest. 

 <font color="blue"> 
Ok, but they should all carry a pair of tough cut scissors in their packs anyway? I do appreciate that this adds vital seconds on to resuss time though </font> 

Underwired bras. Excellent for lung puncturing esp once the bra is a little worn and the rider falls and it pushes the wire through the worn fabric, inbetween the ribs and hey presto, punctured lung. 

 <font color="blue"> Agree there and I have seen this injury in different sports too  </font>  

[/ QUOTE ]


----------



## SpottedCat (12 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
Suechoccy, that is very interesting. anyone wearing an underwired bra for xc must be mad anyway imho, but i will rethink wearing my (favourite, ancient) rugby shirt! 

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure I own any which aren't underwired....


----------



## Natch (12 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure I own any which aren't underwired.... 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]






 I own one, which is a quite expensive sports bra that I bought from DH, and I must admit it is really supportive (and I'm not that small in the chest area!  
	
	
		
		
	


	




)


----------



## kerilli (12 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Suechoccy, that is very interesting. anyone wearing an underwired bra for xc must be mad anyway imho, but i will rethink wearing my (favourite, ancient) rugby shirt! 

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure I own any which aren't underwired.... 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, what I meant was that most sports bras just flatten it all out, don't they? no wire, iirc. (not that i need one anyway!)

The fact about the underwire is the sort of thing that needs to be universally known imho. 
having had a punctured lung (from my own elbow apparently, nice) i wouldn't wish it on anyone!


----------



## seche (12 September 2008)

I ride in underwire sure - I have to! - I have absurdly large ones.... hate em! 
- But I hunt, XC, event in a sports bra - would dare ride for longer than 30 mins with out one I would knock my self out!! Plus the thought of a punctured lung gives me the heebeegeebees. 

I to be honest have been enlightened by this thread - &amp; product Iwish I had known more about it sooner - as TD said - Marketing dept - SHOCKING!!

I know after Rosie was flipped and escaped luckily on an Intermediate horse -  she tried one on - but the small was too long for her.  
My only qualm - the weight - make it out of carbon fibre (which I reckon will be LOTS more £$£$£) plus - make it colourful it will appeal to the masses!!


----------



## bodycage (12 September 2008)

hmk101,

yes, you can still buy them - there is a list of suppliers at www.woofwear.com
or contact them for suppliers near you...

they are available in 5 sizes as the tooling for the frame builds one size of each piece and then they slide in and out of each other like meccano to make it bigger or smaller 5 variances in size from one set of tooling is a limitation without opening up the possibility of making the product less strong... The cost is in building new tooling for new sizes - unless the demand is there it is not commercial - the current sizes cover a large part of the main riding market but unfortunately not all shapes...


Suechoccy,

can understand that concept but actually not 100% accurate as the device can be unclipped on both / either side to open it up - the need for the allen keys is purely to separate bits of the frame work... also - all the area of garment around the skeletal frame is standard Beta level 3 body protector foam / material which can be cut with appropriate knife as any other body protector - this leavs ample space to get to the chest as necessary... There is a lot of inaccurate information regarding the ability to deal with someone after an accident... you can deal with them - the approach is slightly different, but the ability is still there


Naturally,

I can talk for the RDA / Woof Wear, the RDA own the IPR (Intellectual property rights aka patent) and they own the licence with Woof Wear (meaning that they collect royalties as appropriate for sales of the item...) so a proportion of the cost of each one bought will go to the RDA.

The patent is granted for 20 years, so there is a good % of that still running, I can't remember the exact dates without checking - but it is in the region of c. 15yrs to run, however the patent is about who has the controll, the licence is about who can manufacture against that patent - and that is up to the RDA / Woof Wear etc. Woof Wear is the company to whom we licenced the IPR, they put a lot into the development of the product and their licence is still running - what will happen now though is between those two organisations.

I see where you are coming from - competition does help consumers, but it is the simple maths of it - if this product cost over £1 million to develop - which it will have done by the time you include all costs from all companies, and then you have to add on marketing / sales / distribution costs... you need to have the potential for a very large financial return to allow a number of companies to compete with their own products - it just will not happen economically, it is not commerccial sense - nothing to do with not wanting that - from our point of view (benefit to the rider) that would be ideal, you just wouldn't have the licencee putting in the investment without some form of protection for their investment in the form of exclusivity of one type or another.

The thing is that we are not talking about a simple product - e.g. a riding hat, in principle all riding hats work in the same way, the fundamental understanding is there, the design / testing work is around areas such as ventilation / area of cover / comfort / etc. not around the principle of the way in which the helmet actually protects you - they are all pretty much identical there, so it is possible for a number of companies to all innovate in the same market sector.

With the Exo, we took a principle from motorsport (rally car roll cages) and adapted it to the human body for riders. We were the first to develop the concept (many scientists said that it was impossible to do this....), we had to develop the testing, we had to find ways to keep rigidity but not restrict movement, we had to meet the Beta level 3 standards around the cage (if you didn't have the foam the product would be much lighter / better, but without the coverage it would not meet Beta Level 3 standards - ironic really), we had to work with metallurgists to find the optimum metal to be the ideal combination of: weight / cost / strength / etc. The product is made in Taiwan and Vietnam, and distributed in the UK, we had to work with riders to test it, etc. All of this adds up to a very expensive approach, from the initial university based computer modelling through to the final work on putting together the instructions - huge numbers of man hours / investment...

yes, it would be ideal to have a number of people doing it - I just can't see the maths stacking up...

yes frustrating for us - but immensely rewarding - there are those still alive after horrendous accidents who make it worth while.

I think that back protectors are named as such as the are the sequential development of products which started with a piece of foam people used to slide down the back of their jumpers... 
	
	
		
		
	


	





No knowledge of current work on neck injuries - but in our time developing the Exo the neck was very much the Holy Grail, but almost impossible to deal with - see my points above on this.

regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
Bodycage


----------



## MissDeMeena (12 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
 we had to meet the Beta level 3 standards around the cage (if you didn't have the foam the product would be much lighter / better, but without the coverage it would not meet Beta Level 3 standards - ironic really), 

[/ QUOTE ]

How stupid, as straight away it would apeal more to me!!
If there was a shop that stocked them, that didn't mind you riding in one and jumping a jump. i'd be much more interested..
Also, all body protectors come in custom colours now.  where as the Exo just comes in black??  i'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to make it in custom colours??


----------



## bodycage (12 September 2008)

Indeed - but esp. when new and unknown, to not have the Beta level 3 standard would have made people suspicious that the product was of lesser value than others...

we did pursue the idea of a Beta level 4 standard / parallel system for crush protection, but were told that because we had the exclusive international patent on protection against crushing, therefore no new standard could be considered as others had no ability to produce products to that standard... 
	
	
		
		
	


	





as for colours 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 this started among body protectors as a way of marketing them as different and has become very popular, but again it is the scale of economy - for the Exo to be priced at a reasonable price - it has to be made abroad, and therefore has to be made consistently, not knowing who will buy it...

many of the body protector manufacturers still operate as a 'cottage industry' with out workers sewing a body protector to order, so it becomes very easy to mix and match colours / fabrics / etc. in addition, the fabric &amp; foam is the body protector - for the Exo, it has to then have the skeleton inserted, so more complex...

regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
Bodycage


----------



## H-J (12 September 2008)

I would definitely be wearing this if the fit was slightly better.

It seems to sit so high above the shoulders and seems so bulky, im quite petite (size8) and I feel restricted in my RP let alone this!


----------



## SpottedCat (12 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
How stupid, as straight away it would apeal more to me!!
If there was a shop that stocked them, that didn't mind you riding in one and jumping a jump. i'd be much more interested..


[/ QUOTE ]

I really think they missed a trick here - put one of each size in every shop attached to a XC course (so for us Stockland Lovell say) and advertise that you can try them when you hire the course for schooling. So simple yet a brilliant way to boost sales I would have said. 

Maybe there was a logistical problem with this?


----------



## kerilli (12 September 2008)

SC, i hate to say it, but just how long do you think they'd stay there without getting nicked! 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 (oh, sorry, "driven off with by accident.")
You'd have to get £300 deposit every time someone waltzed out the door in one.

I can see why they only come in black, doesn't worry me, number covers most of my back protector anyway. I always wore my rugby shirt over my first (shorter) back protector.
Re: colour. If you had, say, 3 different colours, and 5 different sizes, you'd have to have a basic stock of 15 just to have 1 in every size, and it's s*d's law that 3 customers wanting a size 2 in navy will come along...!


----------



## AutumnRose (12 September 2008)

Hmmm i agree that trying one would be ideal but incredibly difficult to put into practice. 

i'm sure people would get over the colour thing if everything else was right, the fit is now the only thing that would stop me. 

Incidently i started wearing my bp over my xc top a couple of years ago after my trainer went on a first aid for instructors type course. The doctor there advised that everyone should do it this way round as it could save vital seconds in getting to your chest.


----------



## daisycrazy (12 September 2008)

I think these body protectors are a brilliant idea. My brother was in motorsport and has been frustrated for years that equestrian safety gear is so inadequate in comparison. I would have bought one sooner - the price is nothing when you think what it protects you from. 

I thought I would see them around at tackshops so I could try one on but never saw one. I forgot about them until I had a slow rotational fall in February and it was a complete fluke that my horse didn't land on me. I didn't ride for ages and am still seriously considering giving up competing, but recently decided that I would like one of these body protectors for if I do ride XC or back another young horse in the future. 

My local saddlery, Matlock Saddlery (Derby House), didn't have any in stock and didn't seem to know if they could get hold of them. I've been in various saddleries in the last few years and never seen one. I'm not prepared to buy without trying it on and I have been frustrated. I had been planning to contact you direct to find out how to get hold of one when I read the article in Horse &amp; Hound. 

I am really sorry to hear that you have made losses because the product deserved to make you a substantial profit. I recall, though, how long it took for people to accept that a safer riding helmet might have to have a larger profile than old fashioned caps and skulls. When I've discussed potential innovations in safety gear with my brother (also an engineer, nearly set up in business to do this) one of my main concerns was that it would not be profitable because (1) riders are reluctant to change, for various reasons, and (2) the governing and safety bodies are not quick to adapt and support, particularly when a product does not slot neatly into existing processes, systems and rules. 

I still believe that the technology and design in motorbike wear could be well used in eventing - helmets, gloves and clothing. It is a shame that a company which is willing to innovate to provide significantly safer gear is being rewarded with losses rather than encouraged to innovate further. Given the paranoia in eventing about safety and deaths you would think it was a pretty obvious way forward.

I would still like to buy one of these and I will find a saddlery who will stock them so I can try them on first.


----------



## Natch (12 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
The patent is granted for 20 years, so there is a good % of that still running, I can't remember the exact dates without checking - but it is in the region of c. 15yrs to run, however the patent is about who has the controll, the licence is about who can manufacture against that patent - and that is up to the RDA / Woof Wear etc. 

I see where you are coming from - competition does help consumers, but it is the simple maths of it - if this product cost over £1 million to develop you need to have the potential for a very large financial return to allow a number of companies to compete with their own products - it just will not happen economically, it is not commerccial sense 

yes, it would be ideal to have a number of people doing it - I just can't see the maths stacking up...


[/ QUOTE ]


See your point entirely. Out of interest, you talk about a niche market for this - why is that? Is the market for a BP considered to be a nice market? I would consider the product to be of interest to anyone who owns a Beta 3 BP.  
	
	
		
		
	


	





OK your primary audience is eventers and XC riders, but I'm interested in one and I rarely pop a small jump! I would imagine that in theory it would appeal to the masses - not just because it protects from horse falling on top of you but also from a kick or a hoof in the stomach - something that I would imagine was a lot more common in everyday riding accidents among "the masses".

Not to mention if you can get it into the racing industry.

anyhoo, just thoughts - as I said earlier, I hope it does take off


----------



## Natch (12 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
SC, i hate to say it, but just how long do you think they'd stay there without getting nicked! 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 (oh, sorry, "driven off with by accident.")
You'd have to get £300 deposit every time someone waltzed out the door in one.


[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm you're right, maybe you could get them to leave a valid credit card number, and could maybe do one-off covers stitched onto the basic cover that made it really unattractive, like "PROPERTY OF SO AND SO STABLES DO NOT REMOVE" in dodgy colours  
	
	
		
		
	


	




Or maybe its the wrong route to market - I wonder if Alistair or WW considered getting a team of reps to go and hold "have a go" sessions at riding club events, eventing, horse camps and the like? Maybe tag it on to BHS riding and road safety tests etc etc. Once it was into the market a bit more widely spread people would try their friend's ones on etc a bit.

Then again what was the launch process for BPs? I seem to remember they were slow coming out and catching on. How did the first company to launch that product get around it?


----------



## SpottedCat (12 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
SC, i hate to say it, but just how long do you think they'd stay there without getting nicked! 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 (oh, sorry, "driven off with by accident.")
You'd have to get £300 deposit every time someone waltzed out the door in one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seems reasonable to me - I've hired mountain boards before now - £20 for the hire and full cost of board put on my credit card and then voided when I returned it. Works fine, isn't difficult and solves the problem. 

As for colours - I agree, wouldn't bother me in the slightest as number bibs are black and cover most of the BP anyway. However Airowear now do a 'colour swap' pull on thing to change the colour of your airowear BP - would not be too hard to do a similar thing for the body cage http://www.airowear.co.uk/colour_swap.php


----------



## Santa_Claus (12 September 2008)

Leaving a credit/debit card with the shop whilst you schooled would make people stop 'frogetting' about them I would have thought 
	
	
		
		
	


	





I think they are a wonderful invention, If I ever actually start eventing (more and more unlikely) I would very seriously look at buying an EXO, I think they are an amazing invention and it just surprises me that it took until relatively recently for a working design to actually happen.

Lets just hope now with the RDA taking over the patent that development will be able to continue. What they really need is a equine friendly millionaire that could 'donate' a large sum to the RDA (seeing as the benefit now goes to charity not a business) with the specific caveat that it is for R&amp;D for the EXO!


----------



## Nando (12 September 2008)

Obviously you are always going to have the odd wrong'un who swans off with them but as mentioned, if you leave a deposit and become liable for the full amount then there is no reason why a ride and try before you buy shouldn't work. Might just get a few more people interested and save another life as a result?

Afterall, works for ski hire places and many others


----------



## bodycage (12 September 2008)

Some great ideas here about being able to try them... worth pushing these to Woof Wear...
Bodycage (the company) has always been in R&amp;D, the manufacturing / sales of the final product has been with Woof Wear...

daisycrazy
- if you have difficulty finding one - contact Woof Wear directly, they have always been terribly helpful in the past.
ultimately the losses are not important - only money 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 more frustrating is the belief that the product can help people but is not doing so - can you imagine how I feel every time I read of tragic accidents which might possibly have been avoided? Can be very sad - but the flip side is that there are those who have been helped, that is very rewarding.

I think that you are very accurate in your perceptions about adoption of safety wear. The reality is that an American study showed that you are 20x more likely to end up in hospital from a horse, than from a motorcycle! ... but you are more likely to have severe consequences of your accident on a motorcycle than on a horse... but it makes you think.



naturally
- is it a niche market or not? well, it depends, if you look att eh number of people who ride - it is not, if you look at those who event it is, when you look at the reluctance of many riders to wear safety kit, it is even more niche - how many of us know riders who continue to wear their 'comfortable' hat for 10 / 15 / 20 years, it is comfortable because the protective material has broken down and will be of no use! How many riders, despite their helmet coming with a warning to replace it after any damage / knock / accident, continue to ride in it - it is a reluctant market...

also, with the way the market is made up the equestrian companies out there are mainly small to medium size companies there are very few who are 'big companies' (think nike / adidas / etc.) who have the R&amp;D money needed... If more than £1 million needs to be spent - who has that money? For us, it was private money from directors / venture capitalists etc. we were the only venture capital backed equestrian startup company (not sure whether that still holds true...), but a VC wants a return on their money, and within 5 - 7 years, so you need a product which will hit a big market so that even if it develops slowly the return is sufficient... there was c. $30 billion of VC money waiting to be invested when we got our investment 5 years ago, but the investors mainly want to buy into big investments (e.g. when the AA was bought - multi billions), not invest in a high-risk, start-up company, with a product looking at safety (liability always comes to mind!), in a market they don't understand - isn't horses lots of mothers with little girls 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 so the situation is difficult, we were lucky to get investment, and it will not be easy for others...

racing industry is different - weight is v. important, and crushing accidents are less frequent, maximum ability to roll is high on the agenda to avoid hooves from following horses (you can still roll, but concern that it could slow down the roll is always in their minds) - the Chief medic of the Jockey club has had an Exo for testing a number of years ago.


Santa_Claus
Is your name fortuitous? 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 are you offering! I am sure that the RDA would be interested...

regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
Bodycage


----------



## kerilli (12 September 2008)

Daisycrazy makes some really valid points about the fact that riders (and governing bodies) are SO slow to change.
When I started going out with someone 14 years ago, he was into motorsports, and truly could not believe that the best skull cap on the market was about £50. He said a motorbike/racing one would be £300+.
I remember hunting in the early '80s and being the only one in the entire field in a skull cap. (Mum wouldn't let me go otherwise!)  It wasn't until another follower with the same hunt, wearing a beagler, had his horse slip over on the road with him, and died, that more people started thinking "forget what it looks like, i need the protection." 
	
	
		
		
	


	












i fear it is the same with body protectors. i reckon in 10 years everyone will be wearing an Exo for xc.


----------



## DebbieLewis (12 September 2008)

I had a rotational fall two years ago at Open unaffilliated level and have since stopped xc this particular horse.  I was lucky enough to be relatively uninjurd after being strechered to hospital.

If I was going XC again though this seems a brilliant idea however I have never even heard of them before.

Has any promotional / advertising work been done?

Cost should not put anyone off.  I would much rather have whiplash than die and there is no chance you would have chance to roll in a rotational fall.  I had a rotational fall and then the horse rolled back over me to get up, there was no chance I could move to get out of the way.

My only concern is that all unaffiliated events will not need to have the necesaary allen key but could this be somehow safely attached to the protector so the rider always had it on them.


----------



## kerilli (12 September 2008)

DebbieLewis, there are 2 allen keys attached to the Exo already, according to the manufacturer (in an earlier post.)

Must admit, the more I read this thread, the more I think the PR company did a truly terrible job! I cannot believe people have never heard of them, or have been unable to find a stockist to try one on!


----------



## SpottedCat (12 September 2008)

Debbie, sorry to hear of your fall. The body cage does have two allen keys on it, under patches with a green first aid cross on - so no danger of you not having one as there is one each side.


----------



## Santa_Claus (12 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
Santa_Claus
Is your name fortuitous? 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 are you offering! I am sure that the RDA would be interested...

[/ QUOTE ]

If I had the money I would, sadly the name cmoes from my old pony not the size of my wallet, although I think some people who may have previously been reluctant to invest might think about doing so now as the main beneficiary is 1) all the lives saved and 2) a worthwhile and deserving charity! Anyone know anyone with some spare money they could donate!?!?!


----------



## VictoriaEDT (12 September 2008)

I have seen their life saving capabilities and think they are great. Yes, they are heavy but if made in cardon fibre and better sizing I think they would be invaluable.


----------



## kerilli (12 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
I think some people who may have previously been reluctant to invest might think about doing so now as the main beneficiary is 1) all the lives saved and 2) a worthwhile and deserving charity! Anyone know anyone with some spare money they could donate!?!?! 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]

what a very very odd idea, not to say rather insulting to the people who set up the company and have invested (and lost) a LOT of money. (neither of whom i know from Adam, btw.)

i'd rather the money i spend when i buy one (when they are available in carbon fibre) went to the inventor/designer than to r.d.a. to be totally honest!

(btw i used to do a lot with a r.d.a. group, and although the charity itself is hugely wealthy, i know that our group (and all the others) had to pay affiliation to the organisation, and none of the money given to r.d.a. organisation (from wills etc) filters out to the groups - they have to do their own fundraising, and are frequently run on a bit of a shoestring.)

if one penny of the money from the sale of Exo body protectors actually makes a difference to a group, (which is where all the actual riding is done, of course) I will be impressed!

i know they are not alone in this, Guide Dogs for the Blind is another hugely wealthy charity but the low number of guide dogs actually out with people (which i think is where people who donate money, expect that money to go!) really shocked me.
I think if we found out the salaries that the big cheeses of these charities are paid, we'd have heart failure tbh.
*rant over*


----------



## daisycrazy (12 September 2008)

When you think of the investment in and hype about fence innovations such as the frangible pin, the understandable paranoia about rotational falls, particularly in the US, and the tragedy of rider deaths and serious injuries, it makes no sense not to support this product and encourage innovation in other safety products as well. 

It's all very well changing fence design and construction and it's crucial to educate riders to approach fences reasonably safely, but it is quite clear from the accidents that do happen that rider ability and fence difficulty/build do not entirely prevent these accidents. They help prevent accidents and/or reduce the severity of the consequences, but Darren Chiacchia's accident is a case in point.

I was wearing a beta 3 body protector in the rotational fall I had in February - ironically at a Lucinda Green XC the Safe Way clinic - I hit the deck very hard indeed, apparently directly on to my front. My ribcage felt crushed and I am still in pain where my ribs join my sternum. And that was without my horse landing on me (to the best of my knowledge). I suspect I would still have had a similar injury wearing the body cage because the crush injury was caused by the sheer force of impact (the same impact which broke my horse's neck). 

Fortunately, however, I was able to get up and walk away. If my horse had landed on me I would almost certainly have been killed or at least very seriously injured. The sensation of a crushed ribcage, albeit a much milder version of what I would have experienced if he'd landed on me, was enough to remind me how easily people are damaged and killed. The cost of the bodycage is nothing and it would save you. As Kerilli says, the comparative cost of safety gear in other sports makes this product incredibly good value. Given the cost of eventing, a decision not to purchase this product based on its cost is a false economy.

Rather than waiting 10 years for everyone to start using this, I think the FEI should make them compulsory for international events. Given the cost of competing at international events I think anybody who is in a position to enter them is also in a position to purchase this piece of kit. Would that be fair? Then its use should filter down to national competitions fairly rapidly. 

I would have thought that just as Goodyear have been a willing safety partner to BE, surely there must be a motor company willing to partner these sorts of developments? Most of the big manufacturers prepare cars for rallying, as well as other types of racing. Or alternatively companies which manufacture motorbike safety gear could be encouraged to develop their products for the equestrian world. Surely there would be some synergies to be gained for the partner and for riders? 

Might the Express Eventing be a good platform for it?


----------



## Santa_Claus (12 September 2008)

I agree with you BUT some people will not part with their money as said above if it is a commercial venture. I can imagine the work that was done to find VC's willing to contribute.

I do though know people who are far more willing to donate when its all part of a charitable cause.

end of the day you have £15,000 you have to give away (not to a personal friend/family etc). You have option to invest £15,000 in a might but might not go somewhere company that might give you a return in a long time but may result in nothing at all (as the VCs would have put majority money in before product was past initial design concept) OR you can give it to a charity to help fund an existing product that is shown to save lives and can continue to. To me its an easy choice.

Though to be honest 'IF' I had the money to 'spare' I would have given it anyway at the initial stage because I believe in the worthiness of the product. 

Yes perhaps my wording is bad but what I mean is it is a far more attractive donation prospect now there is a viable product that is proven to work. Yes I agree the designer should get the money as at the end of the day its a brilliant ingenious idea but maybe that was half the decision, give the patent in full to try and encourage further donation??


----------



## bodycage (12 September 2008)

kerilli,

kind of you to be supportive - really appreciated 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 - but I am not insulted at all by the comments - to be honest the reason why I have been prepared to talk to H&amp;H now, where I was not before is that I have moved on from this company with my other companies, yes money has been lost, yes it is  a shame, but - I would rather look at / see energy put into ways of helping people avoid injury or worse, rather than worrying about who gets rich from it...

I know nothing about the finances of the RDA (or the guide dogs!), when we looked for a organisation to whom we could donate the patent I liked the energy in the RDA and their desire to help those who perhaps are less able to ride otherwise - I also know one of the trustees for whom I have a lot of respect, and so it made a natural choice...

I am sure that it will be a safe pair of hands - and I am sure that many people will discuss with them what might be done - hopefully constructive decisions will come from that...

regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
Bodycage


----------



## dingle12 (12 September 2008)

My friend rides in one, she had a bad fall a few years ago and docs told her if she fell and hurt her back again she would prob be in a chair the rest of her life. She didnt take any notice and now rides in one. She says she feels very safe and once she rode in it a few times she got used to it and if it keeps her riding and protects her she will always wear one


----------



## lucretia (12 September 2008)

riding in one will be like riding in anything else new, you just have to adjust. i remember when skull caps were made compulsory loads of people bitched about the weight and the restricted vision cos of the harness and other such nonsense. sometimes people need to be led from on high. too much freedom of choice is not always a good thing.


----------



## bodycage (12 September 2008)

Santa_Claus,

some of that is right - people do often prefer to give money to voluntary causes - in fact we are a good nation when it comes to supporting charities...
but, if you look at where innovation / R&amp;D / new products come from - it is rarely from the charity scene, maybe some of the cancer / medical charities would argue an exception to that statement, but in reality more innovation still comes from the Drug companies who make a commercial return than from the charities.

If we look at cancer as an example, we would all say that we would want any breakthrough cures / drugs to be available to all, but which would we prefer:
- a breakthrough of a commercial nature the R&amp;D company making a profit from it - but able to save lives
- a breakthrough from a charity - but in reality less chance of a breakthrough because there is less money...

yes, we would prefer it from the charity, but most important is that the breakthrough happens at all.

In reality, commercial gain drives R&amp;D (and we are probably the best nation in the world for R&amp;D - UK innovates / USA funds / Far East perfects &amp; makes), so by having a commercial return there is more money to allow further investment...

If a charity invests in a product, but makes no gain - they will no longer have the money to invest in product no 2.
In effect by making it commercial the consumer who is gaining the advantage from the product is sharing the development cost, plus putting a little bit more back into new products

it just makes more sense...

What is also interesting to note is that we had ideas for a raft of other products - had we made the money on Exo - there would have been new products hitting the market. We developed the only stirrup to prevent damage to the meta-tarsals through a sideways rotational fall (developed to the stage where it was ready to sell), ideas elsewhere as well... some may pop up in later years, but for now those new products are lost because of the impossibility of getting the Exo to sell... no commercial return on product no 1 means no products no 2 / 3 / 4 / etc.

So, I understand what you are saying, but the decision to close down Bodycage was taken first and foremost as a commercial decision - if the company does not look likely to bring in a commercial return appropriate for the money / time / effort being put in, it is not worth running, I own a couple of other companies, so it has been more important to put my time to those. Once that decision had been made, then it was a matter of saying - lets protect the value inherent in the product, we don't wish it to die - so we donated it to the RDA.

The decisions were pragmatic - not based on encouraging further donations - what happens now is really over to Woof Wear / RDA / riders (the market!)

regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
Bodycage


----------



## Eccles (12 September 2008)

The issue that strikes me is that BE spend a great deal of time and money looking at the safety aspects of eventing.  I don't think there is anyone of us who would deny that riding cross country is incredibly dangerous and for whatever reason appears to be getting moreso.  So why on earth are they not supporting the use of this BP?   I see the point re. whiplash injuries but surely this pales into insignificance when compared to crush injuries.... 

I was aware that the Bodycage had come onto the market, but didn't really consider it at the time because they were not easily available (in tackshops) and so I forgot about them.  

I also don't buy the comfort or weight factor arguments.  I remember riding in the historic back protectors that were just that, they just strapped around your middle with velcro and covered your lower back.  Everyone complained about them then but people do adapt - even event riders!  But only if they have to.

The fact that BE didn't throw their weight behind the Bodycage makes no sense to me, the allen key excuse is bizarre and by the sounds of things totally inaccurate!  Am I missing some crucial piece of information here??  £300 to protect your life to the best of your ability along with the cost of affiliated eventing is nothing..... I really think BE are at fault and would be really interested in their honest take on this.... 
	
	
		
		
	


	





Thanks to Bodycage for his honesty and the information he has provided.


----------



## bodycage (12 September 2008)

Eccles,

thank you - I am not going to say anything about other organisations, other than to say that while there were individuals who were fantastically supportive in virtually every organisation, if you want to dig for the logic - then you right, you need to look beneath the surface comments...

there are some very perceptive comments from forum members above 
	
	
		
		
	


	





Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
BodyCage


----------



## teapot (12 September 2008)

I'm really surprised so few people have heard of the Exo. I'm a bog standard riding for hobby type person, no horse so don't compete etc and even I've heard of the Exo BP. 

Knowing that so many riding schools require BPs for jumping lessons, wonder whether it'll ever come in that no woman can ride in an underwired bra?


----------



## SpottedCat (12 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
The issue that strikes me is that BE spend a great deal of time and money looking at the safety aspects of eventing.  I don't think there is anyone of us who would deny that riding cross country is incredibly dangerous and for whatever reason appears to be getting moreso.  So why on earth are they not supporting the use of this BP?   I see the point re. whiplash injuries but surely this pales into insignificance when compared to crush injuries.... 

I was aware that the Bodycage had come onto the market, but didn't really consider it at the time because they were not easily available (in tackshops) and so I forgot about them.  

I also don't buy the comfort or weight factor arguments.  I remember riding in the historic back protectors that were just that, they just strapped around your middle with velcro and covered your lower back.  Everyone complained about them then but people do adapt - even event riders!  But only if they have to.

The fact that BE didn't throw their weight behind the Bodycage makes no sense to me, the allen key excuse is bizarre and by the sounds of things totally inaccurate!  Am I missing some crucial piece of information here??  £300 to protect your life to the best of your ability along with the cost of affiliated eventing is nothing..... I really think BE are at fault and would be really interested in their honest take on this.... 
	
	
		
		
	


	





Thanks to Bodycage for his honesty and the information he has provided.  
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]

Eccles - my take on this is that it was a political decision - BE have 3 BP manufacturers amongst the sponsors listed on their website, let alone all the pros who are sponsored by them. Can you imagine the outcry if BE effectively forced the market into a monopoly situation where only one company made a required piece of safety kit? Personally I think BE has been downright irresponsible in this too, and I agree with Kerilli that it is onyl a matter of time before these are standard wear XC.

FWIW I think those behind BodyCage have shown a great deal of strength of character by allowing the patents  to be donated to the RDA - it would have been very easy for them to pack up shop and this to sink without trace, as it is, at least there is the potential for the lifesaving benefits to be utilised in future by riders.


----------



## kerilli (12 September 2008)

Good points, SC.
I wonder if they ever took the idea to the AHSA (i.e. to America.)
I would have thought they would have really gone for it.


----------



## lucretia (12 September 2008)

good points, well presented.


----------



## bodycage (12 September 2008)

America - now that is an interesting one 
	
	
		
		
	


	




Liability insurance is very expensive... 
	
	
		
		
	


	





but...

http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/competitionnews/article.php?aid=257286
(for those who don't remember this - a family is suing over the death of their daughter from a rotational fall - not directly related, but still...)

Interesting article, and will be very interesting to see what comes of this, won't be long before this response is common over here... we are seeing an increasing amount of litigation in every part of life...

There are certainly people in the USA who have bought Exos from the UK...

regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
BodyCage


----------



## kerilli (12 September 2008)

Interesting. I knew about that case.
Perhaps the defendant can counteract with the fact that the mother or the rider were negligent in not having her wear an Exo...


----------



## Red_Arrow (12 September 2008)

I think this has been one of the most informative threads I have read on this forum.  I mentioned this to another livery on our yard tonight........who turned out to be Spotted Cat!  I also discussed it with my teenage daughter, who I honestly thought wouldn't ever consider wearing it (because she still refused to wear a back protector out hunting) - but after an fatality at an event near to us, she definately thinks they are a good idea.  I am actually impressed with the price. I had thought they were nearer to £500 - just under £300 is a small price to pay for more reasurance.  As someone else remarked on here, possible whiplash (if that has been proven) is a better outcome than what could happen.  I for one will be looking for the nearest distributor.


----------



## icestationzebra (12 September 2008)

I think it is a great shame that the company has decided to close - albeit handing over the design and patent to the RDA.  I think this is a great product - in theory as I cannot comment on it in practice although it is something I have considered for myself recently.  There can be some sniffiness in eventing about new safety products - like it makes you less brave or something or it diminishes the sport in some way.  This is rubbish - making our sport safer is a way of preserving it for years come!  If there were issues or concerns about this product it would have been wonderful if users could have given their feedback to the company and perhaps this situation could have been avoided, but it seems some quarters have set out to discredit this product and I think that is a great shame


----------



## Foxfolly (12 September 2008)

As I see it, if the RDA are fully behind this product then all they need to do is to offer to lease the patent to ALL the leading body protector manufacturers!!

Problem solved surely? 

You have the competiton throughout the different manufacturers which will keep the RRP competitive and also BE don't have the issues with the Sponsorship from those manufacturers, as the top BP manufacturers would be mad not to invest in such a topical and lifesaving safety product!!!!


----------



## kerilli (12 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
   There can be some sniffiness in eventing about new safety products - like it makes you less brave or something or it diminishes the sport in some way.  This is rubbish - making our sport safer is a way of preserving it for years come!  If there were issues or concerns about this product it would have been wonderful if users could have given their feedback to the company and perhaps this situation could have been avoided, but it seems some quarters have set out to discredit this product and I think that is a great shame  
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely agree with this. The sniffyness extends to the Lucinda Green helmet (the type Ruth Edge wears), I had one and this is the first year i've had a positive comment! (Can't find another one for love nor money, though)

I feel very sad that the company has closed, very let down by BE tbh - the safety of its riders should be more important than money from its sponsors. The rumours that went around seem very unjustified, as did the "tell us if you have an Exo because we need to tell the paramedics, the T.D. has to have an allen key etc" notice, if all Exos had 2 allen keys attached to them anyway! Very bad misinformation imho, certainly misled me.
New sponsors can be found, unfortunately I guess new riders will always come along too...


----------



## Dunkery (13 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
Earlier this year I did the BHS EFSAC course and the instructor seemed fairly anti- to the rigid one because it can't quickly be torn open/unvelcro'd to reveal the patient's chest for resuss, but you need the correct allen key for that frame and preferrably you need an allen key with every first-aid official so there is minimal time delay in administering resuss.


[/ QUOTE ]

Riding falls don't requite chest compressions, only heart attacks need those. I don't think heart attacks during riding are common, but giving someone who's just fallen chest compressions could be fatal. (Plus don't forget that there are the required allen keys plus instructions on both sides of an Exo, so first aiders don't need to carry them.)

[ QUOTE ]

He was also anti-rugby shirts for similar reasons - being designed for rugby, they're designed not to rip, and in an emergency resuss situation you need to rip the fabric away from the chest. 


[/ QUOTE ]
You don't need to expose the chest to give compressions. You only need to get to the skin to apply defib pads, and anyone carrying a defib (i.e. a paramedic) will also have scissors.

Don't take this as an attack on you, but an attack on bad information being given out by an instructor!


----------



## HisGreyness (13 September 2008)

The ugly reality of this situation is that, for whatever reason, the cruel world of the free market has turned thumbs down on this product.  Those who could most benefit from it, those most likely to incur rotational falls, professional and other riders who compete at the top levels of the sport have chosen not to adopt it.

I have seen no data to suggest that these body cage back protectors provide any more protection in any other kind of fall than regular body protectors.  In fact, concern has been expressed that the body cage may exacerbate neck injuries in some of these other kinds of fall.  Rigorous control group studies are not feasible to resolve these questions.  The only time I can see the body cage providing additional protection, other than from a horse falling on a rider after a rotational fall is if a horse steps on or kicks at the cage part of the protector after a rider is on the ground after a fall.

There may be a market for this product to risk-averse riders who want to feel "safer".  Whether it's big enough to support another manufacturer remains to be seen.


----------



## hairycob (13 September 2008)

I'd not heard of these before I suppose as son has been into SJ until now. He has his first cross country comp Sunday &amp; I'm with the other mothers on this one. £300 is nothing compared to my sons life. If after this Sunday he decides he wants to do a lot of XC I shall be contacting Woof Wear to find out where to get one. Only one question for now - can he wear them for Pony Club?
The world is full of products that took a long time to catch on &amp; as I hadn't heard of it the marketing men at Woof Wear must take part of the blame here. There is a lot of resistance to change &amp; some people have a downright head in the sand attitude to safety (not wearing Hi Viz for example) so the marketing men really do need to get their fingers out on that one.


----------



## Dunkery (13 September 2008)

There's clearly a very strong safety case for using the Exo. It's a good back protector AND protects against crush injuries in rotations, which seems to be the killer type of accident. Rumours like "it can cause whiplash" are clearly nonsensical and easily dismissed IF the right information is put out.

So there must be a large amount of blame on BodyCage here for not effectively marketing and defending their product (until now). Trying to offload that issue onto Woof Wear is a non-runner; making a successful product does not end with the R&amp;D. If BC wanted it to be a success they had to make sure that it was marketed properly.

Let's just hope that, if anything, BC closing will generate enough publicity for Woof Wear to sell more units. "There's no such thing as bad publicity..."

You can ring Woof Wear on 01208 262505. They'll be able to tell you where you can buy an Exo if you want one.


----------



## bodycage (13 September 2008)

Kerilli,

I see a more likely trend of suing organisers for not doing everything possible to maximise safety...
it has interesting implications.


Foxfolly,

I am not sure whether you noticed some of my replies above? I explain there in quite some detail (probably boring detail 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 ) why this wouldn't work - unfortunately the economics just do not stack up... this will probably always be a one-manufacturer product until technology moves on enough to make the development costs cheaper - might happen in the next 10 years, but unlikely. WIth a product like this you are dealing with such enormous forces (work out the impact force of a horse falling from up to 2.5m (above a 4* fence) at 450-500kg (average weight for an eventer) at the speed the horse is travelling ) that force will squash a car let alone a human body, so to protect against it was in fact a break through in engineering (credit to Matt Aspray who invented it!), it isn't a simple product which is cheap to make... shame, but unfortunately true.


HisGreyness

Welcome to the forums 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 I think that it is worth just getting some things straight here - maybe worth reading the H&amp;H article if you haven't already... It is not so much a discussion as to which riders have adopted it, but what else might have gone on in the industry... There are some good comments above worth reading as well. I am not sure who you are, but if you let me know, and it is relevant, I can provide lots of data on all sorts of things... 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 I have hard disks and filing cabinets full of tests / analysis / simulations / trials / etc. In fact we became known at the government test laboratories (SATRA) for turning up and getting them to develop new tests, the EXO was tested left / right and inside out (metaphorically speaking!), as mentioned above it sailed through the Beta Level 3 tests recording a perfect score with no impact being transmitted to the body (even through foam at times as the Exo holds the body protector away from the body, so even for its non-crush properties it can be clearly demonstrated that it offers better protection than any other body protector on the market.

The reality is simple, in a market sector where the alternative is a piece of foam covered in cloth, the Exo soars above them in the safety it offers - it is the first substantial breakthrough in body protection for the equestrian market. Lots of value has been seen in the product - probably the most esoteric suggestion is that it is brilliant in the bar after the event - you can always get through for a drink 
	
	
		
		
	


	





I agree with you - market forces speak, and the decision we made was purely commercially driven - I am a business man, I am prepared to develop business with risk, for the potential rewards, but I also know when to move on, as here. However, whether this is a debate about 'risk-advers' riders only, or the environment in which the product was on offer and why there were rumours about it / inaccurate information / etc. is for others to judge... It is not as simple as saying
 [ QUOTE ]
 "professional and other riders who compete at the top levels of the sport have chosen not to adopt it"  

[/ QUOTE ]
 the more interesting question is why - and then you have to start looking at the climate in which they made that decision, who was encouraging / discouraging etc.

regarding concern being expressed that it may exacerbate neck injuries - you do seem rather quick to accept that rumour, yet be solid on your stance of waiting for more data on the Exo's benefits. I can only repeat what I have said above - there has been no basis offered for any of these rumours about potential damage to the neck, there is discussion above (anecdotal maybe) which debates whether such a rumour is even logical, but as I mention above, the product went through a number of years of development and testing, including involvement from internationally leading spinal and other surgeons, there was not even the slightest question of neck issue raised at any time... I would always be very open to seeing evidence to suggest otherwise, but until then a couple of people voicin an opinion / rumour does not fact make. The simple physics says that you are far more likely to get hyper-extension of the neck from adding weight to the head - so don't wear a helmet if you are concerned.


Hairycob

I see no reason why these shouldn't be worn for pony club - they are standard Beta 3 body protectors, I am not aware of any view from Pony Club which says don't wear them - but do check with them.


Dunkery

Thank you for your comments - the only debate I would have is in accepting blame for marketing - the Exo is not our product.
We developed the concept, patented the IPR, and worked hard in developing the structure inside the jacket, however we were always an R&amp;D company, not a sales and distribution company. Woof Wear then licensed the IPR to build their own product... but it is probably not as simple as just saying that more marketing was needed - I think that it has been a far more complex set of circumstances. I have always been very careful to constrain my discussions to those in authority etc. so as not to interfere with the product of another company, once we licensed the IPR, it is not ours any longer.

The only reason for my discussion with H&amp;H was that they phoned me to talk about the Exo after two horrific accidents within a few weeks of each other - seemingly identical situations where one rider walked away and the other tragically didn't - the only obvious difference being that the second rider was wearing an Exo. H&amp;H obviously saw a story there - but in the discussion we talked about the company and when they learned that we were closing down the company, so this story developed... It is because the company will formally close next week (it has been struck off at our request, but the technical process means that the formal date is the 17th of Sep. though it has already happened earlier this year) that I am happy to now talk in more detail about the product, hence my involvement in this thread on the forum, as well as the article.

I won't talk in detail about where responsibility lies - others are aware of the details anyway - the simple reality on the one hand is that there were more people trying to prevent the product than promoting it, and unfortunately many of those aiming to prevent it were powerful people in one way or another, though I loved working in the industry, because of the so many amazing people - esp. the grass roots, the riders - it has also been a relief to no longer be having to fight some of the other influences - we have good evidence of much of what has happened - we will retain it, and hopefully never need to use it, but if there were to be court cases in the UK regarding rotational falls and their consequences - there might be some difficult explaining from certain quarters. Those people know who they are, and they know what they have done in the market, I won't be drawn into who / what / why, the purpose of the H&amp;H article was to raise questions (which it has!), this is not about apportioning blame.

So, I really hope that out of this - there will be increased awareness of the product and what it can offer, there might be some challenging questions asked, and hopefully the safety of our sport will move forward a little bit more... It is not the answer to all issues, and it is undoubtedly not a perfect product, but in an environment where I can only say sadly that we have lost track of the injuries and deaths through rotational falls (and other crushing accidents) as they seem to be on the increase, at this point in time it offers a choice for riders - a means (proven in action) which might just save their lives...


regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
Bodycage


----------



## kerilli (13 September 2008)

I really don't know what to say to a lot of that... I hope that those who actively opposed this (for self-interested monetary reasons, one assumes) will eventually be outed. The riders' lives should be more important than the sport, the sponsorship, etc.


[ QUOTE ]
Kerilli,

I see a more likely trend of suing organisers for not doing everything possible to maximise safety...
it has interesting implications.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is nonsensical to me, although I fear it may become true. We riders all know the risks, and choose to run on the day, based upon whether we think we and the horse are up to that level. If we aren't brave enough, we stick to hacking/dressage/whatever! Surely it is ridiculous to accuse organisers of making it dangerous when we have gone there for the test (do you fancy riding round a course of 22 nice easy logs, anyone?), and had a chance to assess the problems first and, crucially, decide whether to run or not.
The court case in the U.S. makes me LIVID, i would love to meet that woman for 5 minutes. Yes, it is very sad that she lost her daughter(s), but blaming the organisers... jeez. makes me mad.


----------



## bodycage (13 September 2008)

Kerilli,

I agree with you - however I think that unfortunately, this may be the way things are going - we have seen it in other arenas, the court case in the USA is indication it is coming into riding - if the plaintiffs win, it will change riding... 

If I was an estate owner on whose land an event was taking place - I would be very concerned about allowing it to run...

I could see the land owners insisting on conractually making sure that the organisers take full responsibility for anything, the organisers will pass on that responsibility - etc.

The problem is that we live in a litigious climate now...

regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
Bodycage


----------



## bennsboy (13 September 2008)

I would just like to say this must be the most interesting posts | have read on here. I would like to thank everyine who has contributed to this indepth, interesting and valuable disscussion.


----------



## PeanutButterDragon (13 September 2008)

I can honestly say this is one of the most interesting discussions I have ever read on HHO. It seems incredible to me that pro riders and BE did not get behind this product!! The amount of misinformation surrounding it is, I must admit, one of the reasons I never probed any further into finding out what it was all about purely out of interest. I know that there is a great deal of analysis going on at the moment as to how to make the sport safer - particularly in the US and there have been mentions of frangible pins on fences etc. But here is an opportunity to put the safety of the rider above all else! I hope that those who were deliberately obstructive of this innovation will in time see sense, and I hope this product receives the respect it so deserves!


----------



## TableDancer (13 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
The ugly reality of this situation is that, for whatever reason, the cruel world of the free market has turned thumbs down on this product.  Those who could most benefit from it, those most likely to incur rotational falls, professional and other riders who compete at the top levels of the sport have chosen not to adopt it.

I have seen no data to suggest that these body cage back protectors provide any more protection in any other kind of fall than regular body protectors.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have dipped back into the debate! Just wanted to make some comments re HisGreyness's post (good name BTW 
	
	
		
		
	


	




)...

I notice you are new to this forum - welcome! However, you seem (with respect) to have missed the point by some considerable margin, and I feel the comments you made do a disservice to the reasoned debate which has taken place thus far. I feel faintly suspicious that you may represent one of the other interests which is involved in this saga - if so, be brave and tell us!

Regarding the so-called "Free Market": Bodycage/Alasdair is right to point out that the interesting issue is not whether top riders have adopted but if not, why not. The answers, or at least some of them, have been well-aired already. Nevertheless, if the product is a life-saver, minor objections should be over-ruled and if the EXO was compulsory for all we would all get on with wearing it. Just as governments step in to regulate aspects of the free market for the good of the country, BE/FEI could step in to ensure the safety of riders.

You seem to dismiss the protection the EXO provides in the event of a rotational fall as barely relevant except to top riders. The fact is that most of us reading/joining in this debate could experience one of these falls: another poster on this forum suffered one in a training clinic; the rider featured in H&amp;H fell at the first fence in a Novice BE event - hardly the elite level. THese are the falls that haunt anyone with half a brain who rides cross country. We all know we will fall off from time to time, maybe even will suffer a horse fall but I, for one, pray never to experience a true rotational fall. Equally, we all know the possibility is there whenever we go through the start so a product that offers protection in the nightmare scenario is not to be dismissed so quickly.

I believe the rider sadly killed at Sapey last year died of head injuries but, to the best of my knowledge, ALL the other riders have died of crush injuries. It is the fatalities that make the FEI, IOC and sometimes the participants question the wisdom of continuing eventing, so if a product is available which can address this issue it seems ludicrous (now we have talked it all through - hindsight is a wonderful thing) that it isn't being driven forward by the sport's governing bodies. Other injuries from other types of fall will no doubt remain a part of eventing and we will live with them just as we always have.


----------



## seche (13 September 2008)

I for one am sad that the Exo hasnt taken off with eventers and the more I read this thread the more crazy I think we all are for not having them!?

Having fallen at high speed ( fortunatly never rotational!) from racehorses on gallops (not wearing a BP either....) - (Oh to be young and foolish in my teens!) you are throw far and fast enough the only risk is aside from the obvious is trampling by others. = TBH Exos would never take off in the racing world as I suspect (having not tried one) they dont bend of flex-like a racesafe - plus being heavier too - I dont think the likes of AP McCoy or Ruby could or would get much leaner to accomodate that weight. I just think its sad that such an genius product - designed to save lives - hasnt taken 

Seat belts are now compulsory -as are BPs XC - I think BE should consider making them compulsory... I dont want to change the sport itself anymore and as Kerilli has mentioned - NO 22 Log XC courses to be designed please - I will take up dressage instead.. and as for Canadas foam /made to look like a log/ fence... It will be lasers on fences next?


----------



## lucretia (13 September 2008)

yes i see what you are getting at but if you watch even a head first rotational, IN RACING the jockeys are usually thrown clear and are more in danger of treads from the other runners which as i said earlier in the thread is what the normal BODY protector (they are not BACK protectors) are designed to alliviate by spreading the area of impact. The other reason is that racing fences, while significant obstacles, have a certain amount of give in the fences (some courses more than others) but even this small amount means that by the laws of physics the horses momentum is stopped a fraction slower than with a slolid obstacle  which also helps to throw the riders clear. Think about how much racing there is and how few 'crush' injuries there are.  
    it is the regular rider and especially the eventer who is in more danger of being involved in the sort of fall the EXO is designed to alliviate damage in.
   I can see no good real reason why this has not been made compulsory kit.


----------



## _Amy_Rose_ (13 September 2008)

Hi all
Ive been following this post for several days now and thought i would brave and makea comment! I heard about the EXO a while ago, but i had no idea that it provided protection against rotational falls until i read this post. I'm just about to start eventing, got my first competition in two weeks time. It'l only be a pre novice but i'm already in the look out for one of these. Accidents can happen at any level. Even if it weighs a bit more and makes me look like the michiline man sp. at least if the worst does happen i might live to fight another day. I understand tha maybey its not viable at the moment, but i agree with many other comments about making them compulsory. Anything new feels odd, just takes a little getting used to.

Lol to Train_Robber. Imagine if we had a power cut half way through an event...all the jumps would disapear!
U~T


----------



## SpottedCat (13 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
The ugly reality of this situation is that, for whatever reason, the cruel world of the free market has turned thumbs down on this product.  Those who could most benefit from it, those most likely to incur rotational falls, professional and other riders who compete at the top levels of the sport have chosen not to adopt it.

I have seen no data to suggest that these body cage back protectors provide any more protection in any other kind of fall than regular body protectors.  In fact, concern has been expressed that the body cage may exacerbate neck injuries in some of these other kinds of fall.  Rigorous control group studies are not feasible to resolve these questions.  The only time I can see the body cage providing additional protection, other than from a horse falling on a rider after a rotational fall is if a horse steps on or kicks at the cage part of the protector after a rider is on the ground after a fall.

There may be a market for this product to risk-averse riders who want to feel "safer".  Whether it's big enough to support another manufacturer remains to be seen. 

[/ QUOTE ]

HisGreyness I have to agree with TableDancer - you seem to have entirely missed the point of this discussion. The only time the bodycage does provide additional protection is in the event of a crush injury - that said, the protection it offers in the event of any other injury is comparable to every other product on the market. So essentially we have a piece of kit available, which in the interim period between now and us coming up with a solution for preventing rotational falls, does a great deal to mitigate for the effects on the human body of said type of fall. And yet neither BE nor the FEI have seen fit to make it compulsory. This is not about the 'free market' as such, it is about such issues as the FEI thinking it is fine to introduce 'one fall and out' (an unproven device to improve safety) but have not seen fit to make compulsory the only thing available at the moment which has proven safety benefits. 

The neck injury issue I personally think is a complete red herring, and would hazard a guess as to where it has come from. It is nice to see new people posting on debates such as this, but I must also concur that you do sound somewhat as though you may have a vested interest in the BP market, and I'm afraid I too have some degree of suspicion about someone who joins to post on a topic such as this with comments which do not accurately reflect the debate in question. At this stage, I would hope those who feel the bodycage has some _disbenefit_ could contribute (as Kit279 has done) with reasoned arguement and an evidence base rather than simply adding to the rumour mill. 

For my part, I have no vested interest in any of the current BPs on the market, but I do wish that the bodycage had been more successful and therefore available to midgets like myself who would like to benefit from the technology! As for being risk adverse - yes, when there is a perfectly reasonable course of action for me to take which allows me to minimise the risk of injury but still participate fully in a sport, or indeed everyday life, I will take it. It's why I do things such as drive with a seatbelt on, rockclimb using ropes a helmet and a harness and cross the road using a crossing....which let's fact it, boils down to common sense really, doesn't it? The bodycage wouldn't stop me eventing, but it might just save my life if I had a crush injury....bit of a no-brainer from where I am sitting.


----------



## Acolyte (13 September 2008)

I had heard of this type of body protector before but really hadn't given it much thought if I am honest - and I have not been eventing this year as I haven't had a horse.  But this thread is definitely the most interesting I have read in my time on the forum, and has really made me think - as and when I get my next horse I shall be seeking one of these body protectors out (if they are still available).  The cost was a factor for me when I first heard about them, but I do think my life is worth more than £300 so why wouldnt you get one?


----------



## bodycage (13 September 2008)

To be fair to HisGreyness - he / she appears to be a regular poster on Chronicle of the Horse (USA based? forum)

regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
Bodycage


----------



## lucretia (13 September 2008)

Body cage you are very astute and i thought i was the only one who noticed!


----------



## SpottedCat (13 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
To be fair to HisGreyness - he / she appears to be a regular poster on Chronicle of the Horse (USA based? forum) 

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, well apologies if I've been unfair then re vested interests.


----------



## bodycage (13 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
Body cage you are very astute and i thought i was the only one who noticed! 

[/ QUOTE ]

not really 
	
	
		
		
	


	




I noticed that they had a thread similar (though less detailed) to this one, the same person has posted on there...

SpottedCat - I thought the same as you - it came across that way, so quite an understandable view...

regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
Bodycage


----------



## lrobson (15 September 2008)

I think these body protectors are a fab idea and every eventer should be made to wear one even if it is only for xc!! (much to there utter dissgust) i think i would rather have a bit of extra weight whilst riding xc (which you dont really think about) than knowing i could end up in a wooden box six feet under after a serious fall because i was too worried bout minor problems they cause!!! 
im actually gutted that they have decided to stop doing them!! I am a friend of kate hammer who fell at spring hill and my dad has watched the video of her falling and says that it is horific!! im so glad she was wearing one!! And i am happy to go and get one!!
i can understand peoples concerns about whiplash and the allen key. (which you only need if you cant stand) they open and close with out one otherwise. And i think they should have done a few more sizes. but otherwise they would are great. 
eventing will start getting to be know as really dangerous with the amount of riders that have died from a rotational fall. This is one prevention that could stop this!!


----------



## kerilli (15 September 2008)

lrobson, they aren't being taken out of production afaik, contact WoofWear because they are still in charge of distribution, I believe.
I would love to see the fall (not being ghoulish, honestly, just want to see how it happened and how they fell), perhaps it could be linked to the Bodycage or Exo website? the one on there is filmed from the far side of a fence so doesn't show it clearly.


----------



## daisycrazy (15 September 2008)

I've posted some links to motorbike body armour in a new thread above.

ETA http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/3515576/an/0/page/0#3515576


----------



## bodycage (15 September 2008)

lrobson

as mentioned by kerilli, nothing has stopped or changed, other than my company no longer owning the patent / licence which are now owned by the RDA.

kerilli

if anyone has a copy of the fottage / link, then I would be happy to put it on the Bodycage website.
it is a shame that the other is filmed from the wrong side of the fence - it just happened to be where the video company was shooting from...

daisycrazy

a good post in that other thread...
the one thing worth considering is that motorcycle gear is generally engineered to deal with abrasion / sliding / friction injuries, whereas eventing is more impact / crushing...
regarding airbags - there are a number of solutions on the market at present including a company which is interested in adding an airbag neck protector to the Exo so I have pointed them at RDA / Woof Wear. The biggest issue with airbag technology is how you choose to trigger the airbag, at present (as far as I know), the Dainese is unique in using sensors to trigger based on a computer model detecting you falling off - expensive but accurate. The others all rely on your being attached to the saddle and then triggering when the attaching cable is pulled... the problem with this is that you could potentially trigger the air bag when you are riding on the horse's neck / coming out of the seat over a jump / half falling off, and able to recover - in fact the triggering could hinder your ability to recover... these are all issues which I am sure will one day be resolved, but are there at present...

regards

Alasdair


----------



## daisycrazy (15 September 2008)

I disagree that motorcycle gear is generally engineered to deal with abrasion/sliding/friction injuries. It is indeed engineered to withstand those but it is also designed to deal with direct impact - such as when a motorbike goes straight into a barrier, or your motorbike flips and lands on top of you, etc.. Armour with the materials design and technology which enables people to get up and walk away from 100-200mph crashes must be able to deal with direct impact, at least to some extent. Some have built in crumple zones - surely a direct impact technology?

The neck protection and the general body armour - protection to hips, shoulders, etc. whilst retaining movement - is made using much more sophisticated materials than normal BETA 3 body protectors. I am not suggesting that these would be better than what we have now, and I'm certainly not suggesting them as an alternative to the Exo.

Ideally - body cage to prevent crush injuries combined with enhanced body armour and protection to neck, back, arms and legs, with ideas and technology applied from both motorbike armour and current equestrian armour to give the best possible protection.

Certainly when I have fallen from horses over the years it has not just been my back and head that have needed protection. Significant damage can be sustained to all parts of the body and, in my view, the more that can be protected without compromising freedom of movement the better. 

It is easy to become blinkered about alternative ideas because we don't understand them. I am certain that the companies manufacturing this armour for motorbikes and other sports would be happy to at least discuss the technology they use to enable decisions to be made as to whether it can be applied to and developed for equestrian sport.

I wasn't so interested in the air bags because I wouldn't want to be attached to an airbag with a horse thrashing round me. I've heard it's bad enough escaping from them when they go off inside a car. I struggle to see how the benefits could outweigh the risks - but wouldn't write off the possibility because I imagine the technology could be adapted.


----------



## Baileyhoss (15 September 2008)

I was thinking about this post over the weekend.  I think that part of the problem lies in the limits on the patent, i.e., only licensing to woof wear. Now, if you ask on here for recommendations on bp's, how often does ww come up? never, most people go for RP, racesafe, airowear etc. So, would it not make sense to allow other co's to purchase production rights on the patent, which will enable them to incorporate the exo technology into their own styles of bp's, thus increasing the competition and encouraging manufacturers to develop the designs further and give us choice and perhaps a more competatively priced product. Thinking along the lines of 'gortex' here - a technology, which is incorporated into loads and loads of products by loads of companies, why can't bodycage do something like that?

And daisy crazy, IMO you are spot on with what you are saying about other sports. My best friends hubby does motocross and his body armour is way more flexible and lightweight, yet offers much superior protection to riders safety gear. Some of that technology definetely should be looked at by horsy manufacturers and i am sure could qualify for beta approval. Mountain horse tried to do it with a jacket, but is was like wearing a cagoule laden with polystylene bricks!


----------



## teapot (15 September 2008)

Alasdair could I ask you a couple of questions that a friend and I were discussing yesterday re: the exo?

When the design was first implemented I assume they were tested under the full force &amp; weight that would equal a horse falling onto it? Have seen the posts about people having you jump up and down on them whilst wearing the exo but one man's weight is nothing compared to half a ton of horse coming down at speed. I'm sure they have but just wanted to double check.

Another one would be - they must as SOME point start to lose their strength, thus start to bend and eventually ultimately snap (as the laws of physics would tell you). So say for someone who did get landed on with the full force of a horse at 4* level so more height &amp; speed heading into the downwards fall. Would the exo be strong enough &amp; safe enough to offer the exactly the SAME amount of protection if the same fall over the same height of fence/same speed/same level (obviously you'll never get two identical falls that's neigh on impossible) happened again? Or would it be a case of knowing that you're going xc with a weakened BP? People don't like riding with weakened hats so why ride with a weakened BP? (and for some BPs, but not the Exo - a decent hat costs the same amount of money. You can buy one of the Air-O-Wear ones for £110, my hat cost £120 for example). 

You only have to look at crumple zones on the front of a car. They work brilliantly the first time, bounce back but future crashes/driving into walls even at a slower speed, they crumple even quicker as they've been weakened (if that makes sense?). I'm just thinking in the same way that if you whack your hat, you go and replace it as the foam inside never recovers FULLY. Surely that's the same for a piece of metal? 

Can you tell I've been thinking about this in science mode?  
	
	
		
		
	


	





In reply to whover said "wear the allan key around your neck" so it's always on the rider. If people weren't happy doing that (getting caught on trees, strangling yourself etc) what about putting it in your medical armband?


----------



## lrobson (15 September 2008)

kerilli, i will see what i can do about getting a vdeo for people to see! you will be able to see most of what happens!
as for them being stopped i understand they werent doing them but then that is only what i had heard. apparently from the 17th of this month.


----------



## CrazyMare (15 September 2008)

I've been reading this with interest. Given as I haven't ridden for 10 months I won't be rushing out to purchase one, however if I was eventing it would be strongly in my mind, providing I could get one to fit (24" waist means I'm in the childrens sizes, with a fuller bust makes life very difficult - I can't breathe very well in an ordinary BP!!!!)

Thinking about the BETA Standards, it seems very much like riding has stood still in its development of safety equipment. I have grown up with motorbikes and I remember my Dad replacing his leathers every 2 years, and his helmet needing replacing often to ensure its up to current standards. With riding hats I remember buying a new one to PAS015 when I was around 8, but now at 21 I go to shows and events and see that the PAS015 standard is still the required standard, so over 13 years there has been no progression on the minimum standards required?

The lack of progression in safety standards I think has led to the reluctance to accept new products - the Lucinda Green helment springs to mind, and the attitude of 'well I can get a hat up to standard for £100 less, so I'll get that'.

Riding is a sport soaked in tradition, hiviz and bright colours are something that is often looked upon as something new, I hack out dressed like a Christmas tree but have been frequently told I "look like an amateur happy hacker". I'd really rather come home, safe and sound dressed like a Christmas tree in hiviz head to toe.

I think I've gone off topic a little here though, but just my thoughts.


----------



## bodycage (15 September 2008)

daisycrazy,

I see your point about motorcycle gear - and it is definitely an industry worth watching / pinching ideas from, my comments ref. sliding / abrasion come from our dicsussions with motorcycle manufacturers when we were developing Exo and that was the general view then, it is surprising, but their general view (right or wrong) is that the helmet will aim to deal with impact, but generally otherwise they don't have the same views on impact as a rider would - yes they will do selectiv impact protection (generally the knobbly bits - spine / elbows / knees / bottoms - well they aren't generally knobbly, but still included 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 ) where a rider looks for less selective / more all around protection.

Not a disagreement - just another angle to consider, and certainly doesn't negate your correct assertion that it is an industry with many good innovations worth including...

The other issue though is convincing a motor cycle / gear manufacturer that the equestrian market is worth pursuing - yes it is a large market, but it is seen as amateur and fragmented, not commercially interesting - this is changing with the new chains of equestrian stores, but until now it has not been attractive to them.



Baileyhoss,

Understand where you are coming from - but maybe worth trawling back through some of my earlier posts on this in this thread - it is just not economically viable to have thie type of technology in the hadns of many companies - the more you split the market amongst several companies, the less the share of the market each has - considering that over £1 million pounds was spent on the development of this to get it to market in one set of sizes, and more money would be needed for tooling for other sizes etc. - there are very few companies who can afford those development costs. Of that £1 million+ not all was spent by Woof Wear, but they did spend a substantial chunk - we licensed them the IPR, not a physical product (though they did use our design), they developed the tooling / jacket / do the manufacture / marketing / distribution / etc.

we did talk to other body protector companies, but many of them are actually very small companies who just do not have the assets to afford to be able to do that kind of development - Woof Wear (part of the Gul group) is a far more substantial company, able to put in that kind of committment.

The comparison with Goretex is different - there (initially, as now there are competitor products), it was a material and the only committment needed by a licensing company was to order that material instead of another material and then continue to make their garment - i.e. the licencing company needed no additional financial committment other than paying the royalties...

Believe me - it would have been much better for us commercially as it would have been in every body protector instantly - but it just is not possible commercially.



teapot

good questions - but let me answer the last one first!

FOR ALL THOSE READING - THE ALLEN KEY IS NOT AN ISSUE - THERE ARE TWO BUILT INTO THE EXO 
	
	
		
		
	


	

















whew, got that out of my system, sorry for shouting! 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 the allen key issue is a total red herring - there are two built into the Exo - one in each flap on each side, with a green cross over the outside and full instructions in the flap...

right, back to science 
	
	
		
		
	


	





Interestingly no-one actually knows the exact force of a horse landing at speed... so simulations were done with the horse modelled as a human, for which data is extant.
when a horse lands on a human, the human suffers dis-proportionally, let me give an example

drop a chunk of metal into plasticene...
newton's laws state that for every action there is an equal and opposite action
therefore when two bodies collide the force is the same in both directions - yet the plasticene gets squashed, the lump of metal doesn't (because it is harder and the force in that direction goes into de-acceleration of the lump of metal)

now drop a lump of plasticene onto a lump of metal - the plasticene deforms as before...

in other words the weaker body suffers a disproportionate share of the impact.

So, when a horse lands on a human, a disproportionate amount of the force is transmitted into the human...
With an Exo on the human, there is now metal in the way - in the accident more of the force will transmit into the horse (ouch, poor horse! but generally being a bigger animal they can take it...) it minimises the impact to the human...

1 - The Exo, takes the first part of the impact around the Exo into the ground
2 - It will then start to break down (tested to do so in a manner as non-destructive to humans as possible - legally required for the CE / Kite marking)
3 - Finally the remain impact (if any) is left for the ribs to deal with

In fact in the 2005 accident (don't know about thi recent one) there was no apparent damage to the Exo with 500Kg horse from 1m, so only stage 1 in force.

However obviously even with no apparent damage, we would suspect probably some internal stressing to the metal...

The wording that comes with them is like that of a hat - if in an accident replace it...


(Now on a side note - want to know about hats, mmm poss not - might scare you to see the testing we did on those 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 Hat companies test hats fresh from manufacture, never worn, to check that they pass the impact test for certification... we are the only company that has carried out extensive tests to see how hats perform after an accident... to work out how little / big an accident will start to degrade your hat - we developed the testing with SATRA... a hat only has to be dropped from c. 25cm onto concrete to possibly start damaging the internal material and leaving it less safe than whn you bought it 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 mmm... I am sure that we all change our hats after any impact don't we!? 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 )



lrobson
The 17th of this month has nothing to do with Exo being stopped - that is when Bodycage Ltd. is no more...
The Exo marches on strongly as ever in the hands of the RDA / Woof Wear - all is as normal...
would love to see that video - if necessary I can host it on our website...




CrazyMare,

not off topic at all... we proposed two thoughts to BETA:
- development of a Level 4 standard
- development of a 'crushing standard' as a parallel standard

we were turned down with the comment that because we wouldn't licence / give our technology to all BETA members they couldn't do anything about developing a new standard...
so standards are not to do with levels of safety an item can offer - but commercial decisions, the simple answer is that commercial issues stand in the way...

perhaps it is time that the safety standards were maintained by a body which is not the trade body for the industry?

Claire Williams states in the H&amp;H article:
"...though its abilities to withstand a crushing fall have not been tested because a "crush test" is not part of the BETA standard."
Ms Williams knows (because we have given her the info) that the EXO has been through rigorous testing, computer simulation / real testing / laboratory testing / etc. and its abilities to withstand a crushing fall have been tested. She implies that they can not have been tested as such a test is not a part of the BETA standard, totally ignoring the fact that the BETA standard is not the only type of test possible to do - we spent considerable money with Bolton Institute (world leaders in impact testing) and SATRA (government test laboratories who also do the EN 13158 test - which gives you BETA level 3) and developed our own testing - to much harsher levels than any other body protector has been through...

The Exo is the only body protector in the world to have trasmitted impact readings of 0 in the Beta standards - the impact does not come through to the body when it is on the Exo... hardly surprising really as it is transmitted around the body - but still - leagues ahead of other body protectors.





I thought that for light relief people might like to see some photos of our very early testing...
I will stress that this is not scientific, and we did move on to test in laboratories - but it still makes a point.

Here we carried out two tests:
- we got 650kg of sand bags and laid them out to scale to the correct weight distribution of a full size horse - after all if the Exo can't take a horse lying on top of it, it won't do well with a falling horse!
- we also looked at some light weights (a 5kg log in this case) and compared what happened to a blood orange (rather gruesome I know and you try cleaning up a BP with bits of blood orange in it!) inside a normal Beta 3 body protector (this is the one I used to ride in), and inside the EXO - it is a quite dramatic illustration of the difference...

photos can be found at www.snipephotos.com
log in with username: horse / password: hound
to see them...


regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
Bodycage


----------



## lucretia (16 September 2008)

how interesting thanks for that link and the above points. i do like a bit of physics! i think those are a perfect illustration of why motorbike orientated technology has only a limited use in designing protection for horse riders.


----------



## daisycrazy (16 September 2008)

With regard to motorbike safety gear and crush protection, I would like to make it clear that I do not think for one moment that motorbike gear would protect you from being crushed. I have wholeheartedly endorsed the Exo and believe it should be compulsory.

My point with the motorbike gear is that some of the materials, technology and design used is a considerable improvement on the standard Beta 3 body protectors. I don't know about anybody else but I seem to recall a few knocks, scrapes and bruises from falling off over the years.

Employing some combination of the Exo with ideas and technology from existing equestrian and other sports safety gear could result in greatly superior all round protection. There are other kinds of fall apart from rotational falls which would be less painful/damaging with better designed kit and other materials may also improve freedom of movement.

BodyCage has already said that the Exo is much bulkier due to the Beta 3 requirements. There may be alternative materials (of which motorbike wear is simply one source of ideas) which are less bulky and may fit better with the Exo design, yet it seems these would not be testable by Beta and therefore wouldn't be certified. 

Beta won't develop a new test or a fourth level of protection because of conflicting commercial interests. The Beta standard is supposed to protect riders, not manufacturers. There is a clear conflict of interest here which must be overcome somehow to ensure optimum protection for riders against death and serious injury.


----------



## TableDancer (16 September 2008)

Obviously have continued to follow this thread with extreme interest. Some (not all) of the arguments seem to be getting a bit circular now, so the question I have left in my mind now is: How do we take this forward? What action can people take to try to force progress in this area, when it seems that vested interests are endeavouring to hold it back? I know S_C has written to H&amp;H this week but what else can we do? Ask questions at BE AGM? Thing is, it seems to me it could be easy for "the powers that be" to ride out this storm quietly and just do nothing, maintaining the status quo which is what some people want anyway. Bodycage, do you have some suggestions? After all, you can no longer be described as a vested interest in any way...

I should add that going out to buy an EXO as it stands isn't really an option for me, I don't think, at 5'2" with a short back (I have to get normal body protectors made to fit), but if they were compulsory and the sizing were sorted I'd be straight in there after this debate.


----------



## kerilli (16 September 2008)

the idea put forward on the other thread seems very positive - would it be feasible to sell the cage part, bare, to be fitted over a rider's standard foam protector, and covered by the number bib? i know it would be bulky but it might be cheaper and more welcome to most riders.


----------



## RLF (16 September 2008)

another: "what a fascinating thread" comment from me, I have never heard of the product before.   I will certainly be looking to purchase one before my next BE event, and personally don't give two hoots if its 'heavy' or not the 'right' colour I value my life over vanity and a bit of excess weight.  Thank you so much for the info!!!


----------



## SpottedCat (16 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
Obviously have continued to follow this thread with extreme interest. Some (not all) of the arguments seem to be getting a bit circular now, so the question I have left in my mind now is: How do we take this forward? What action can people take to try to force progress in this area, when it seems that vested interests are endeavouring to hold it back? I know S_C has written to H&amp;H this week but what else can we do? Ask questions at BE AGM? Thing is, it seems to me it could be easy for "the powers that be" to ride out this storm quietly and just do nothing, maintaining the status quo which is what some people want anyway. Bodycage, do you have some suggestions? After all, you can no longer be described as a vested interest in any way...

I should add that going out to buy an EXO as it stands isn't really an option for me, I don't think, at 5'2" with a short back (I have to get normal body protectors made to fit), but if they were compulsory and the sizing were sorted I'd be straight in there after this debate. 

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, I would like to take this forward and not let it die a death here on this board, and I'm willing to put time and effort into it, if others can provide some ideas! I will be interested to see whether my letter gets printed in H&amp;H or not, and then whether or not BE reply. For my part if BE do the SW talks again like they did last winter, I am willing to stand up and ask the powers that be why they have not made the body cage compulsory. 

TD - I reckon I was sold a dummy BTW by the saddlery where I tried on the BC - I was told it was the smallest size available, and I tried on an A1. It seems they also amke an A1S which is shorter back to front - the sizing charts are on the woof website and I plan to measure myself and if it looks feasible get my saddlery to order me one in to try. 

I think some serious lobbying is needed now - seems to me there are some fundemental issues that need resolving:
1. Why is the body which sets safety standards one which is a rep for manufacturers rather than being independent? 
2. Why have BE not embraced this technology and yet are happy enough to spend money with Goodyear and the like on the fences and research they are doing with Bristol Uni? I think that is worthwhile, but in the interim and until we can eliminate rotational falls, should we not be made to wear safety equipment which can be life saving in the event of such a fall? They happen at all levels - there was a rotational in an intro I was at last season.


----------



## Saratoga (16 September 2008)

I have been pointed in this direction from another forum, so at least the word is getting out about it!!

I totally agree with Tabledancer about finding a way to get this progressed. I for one would be very interested in purchasing an Exo for myself, but it would need to fit properly and not weigh too much for me to fork out for it.

I would also be concerned about buying one now, and then it being developed into something better for next yr etc for example and then having to buy a second one!!


----------



## SpottedCat (16 September 2008)

I was thinking about the price and decided people have no way to use that as an excuse. 

Lets say BE announced now it was to be made compulsory for 2009 at, lets say, Novice and above (for the sake of argument as I think all the deaths so far have been at Novice and above haven't they? I may be wrong on this). That gives people six months (give or take) to save up. Which is just under £50 a month. Which is less than the cost of one novice event per month....and most people manage to afford that through the summer, now don't they?


----------



## kerilli (16 September 2008)

SC, i'm with you on all that, and am happy to do whatever might be needed if you need another stirrer!
It is never going to be possible to "eliminate rotational falls" unless we really do end up jumping 'fences' made out of laser beams. i've seen rotationals over show-jumps, for god's sake, when a horse has come down on the back bar of a parallel, got the pole between its front legs, and tripped/flipped over it. Okay, it's very rare, but it happens.
If you are asking horses to jump fixed fences, sometimes the rider or the horse or both will make a mistake, and sometimes that mistake will be bad enough to cause a fall, and some of those - a very small percentage, but significant if you're in the plate! - will be rotationals. And then it is pure dumb luck whether you are thrown clear or landed on, and what kind of injuries you suffer.
This product is a genuine life-saver... why the HELL aren't we ALL ordered to wear one?
I can just imagine a F1 driver saying "no, thanks, i won't wear a HANS, i don't like it, and the fireproof suit makes me sweat, so i'll just drive with a bare neck in a t-shirt, thanks"...!!


----------



## bodycage (16 September 2008)

Daisycrazy,

I would endorse your thinking ref. motorcycle equipment - but the key is the bit you mention on all round protection - it needs to be a cohesive thought process to  look at 'whole rider protection' from impact to crushing to abrasion to bruising etc. (suit of armour anyone 
	
	
		
		
	


	




!) there are some exciting technologies around - just waiting now for someone to put them together...


TableDancer,
I see exactly what you are saying... some random thoughts if I may...

There is a real issue here that people will protect their own interests (which is understandable) however as we are talking safety, and specifically a safety product which has been demonstrated to save lives, and alongside that a number of accidents where people have unfortunately been killed, there is always the scary shadow of being sued (as per the current USA case). Now I am not suggesting that at all, but that will be in the minds of various people, and will make it difficult for them to take action which might suggest that they should have taken that action at an earlier date and therefore lives might have been saved... does that make sense as to why, once people have taken a specific route, they find it difficult to change direction...

I think that one positive step is opening up public debate and discussion - this H&amp;H article has certainly done that and there are threads on several other parallel forums as well... The more awareness there is of the issues surrounding injuries / possible solutions, the more people can make informed judgement.

I would suggest that if people contact RDA / Woof Wear showing interest in future development then there is much more likelihood of getting Generation II versions (poss. Carbon Fibre?) / different sizes etc.

I would definitely advocate debate on the issues surrounding safety standards being maintained / developed / in the trust of / etc. a trade body and all the associated issues that brings. In my view such safety standards should sit within a charitable / independent body. The reality is that it is impossible to combine commercial and safety standards within any organisation (one reason it has been difficult for us to say anything before when we had a commercial interest), there will always be conflict of interest.

I would ask questions at AGMs / contact organisations / etc.

I see no issue with a product succeeding or failing on the consumer market - i.e. does it offer what the punter wants or not - but questions should be asked as to why there is dis-information / rumour / etc. We can counter most of these if necessary as we have the testing / scientific stuff etc. it has been a remarkable fact that people in the industry will make 'factual statements' about the product based on little or no knowledge, with no reference to us, and with no attempt to discover the truth first. It is this rather dodgy approach to influencing the safety scene that should be challenged.

There is PERA (Professional Event Riders Association, but I am not aware of an equivalent for 'normal riders' and no offence meant there but we are not all Fox-Pitt! An organisation with the weight behind it of riders would have a lot more clout... 

I think that there are a number of options - the danger is as mentioned that it all goes quiet again...



Kerilli,
I will answer the thoughts on 'cage on its own' in the other thread... 
	
	
		
		
	


	





RLF,

thank you 
	
	
		
		
	


	






regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
BodyCage


----------



## SpottedCat (16 September 2008)

Isn't PERA now just ERA - i.e. it is for all of us? I am sure it has changed, I know I signed up so it can't be for pros? 

Hmm, good thought BodyCage, wonder how much help they'd be?


----------



## kerilli (16 September 2008)

Does anyone fancy being a member of the Amateur Event Riders' Association, then?
We should have a voice. If I stand up at the AGM everyone is going to think "who is this muppet wasting our time?". If I (or anyone else!) can stand up and say "I represent ___ members", the BE are surely more likely to listen...


----------



## SpottedCat (16 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
Does anyone fancy being a member of the Amateur Event Riders' Association, then?
We should have a voice. If I stand up at the AGM everyone is going to think "who is this muppet wasting our time?". If I (or anyone else!) can stand up and say "I represent ___ members", the BE are surely more likely to listen... 

[/ QUOTE ]

Kerilli - PERA is now ERA http://www.eventridersassociation.com/become-a-member.php

It is free to join and I think it would be far better all round if we all joined ERA and lobbied them to do soemthing about this - they've been established for a while after all. If they aren't interested, then I agree an independant group is the way to go. If I am free for the AGM I'll come with you if you like. It's all very well us saying BE should do more, but we need to stand up and be counted.


----------



## Saratoga (16 September 2008)

kerilli - definitely agree with you - if there is enough of us then they have to listen!!


----------



## kerilli (16 September 2008)

SC, the last time I looked at the PERA website there was a joining charge and, iirc, you had to be competing at 3* level. could have false memory syndrome though.
thanks for the link!


----------



## SpottedCat (16 September 2008)

It used to be - they changed it to make it more accessible and provide a platform for riders to voice their opinions at least a year ago, probably more. I've been a member for ages so it is deffo free!! PERA no longer exists and I am sure ERA is chaired by Clayton Fredericks who is always on about getting more people inolved in it. 

Yes, here we go: http://www.eventridersassociation.com/contact-us.php


----------



## kerilli (16 September 2008)

okay, fab, thankyou!


----------



## lucretia (16 September 2008)

i will be talikng to clayton probably tommorow about something else he is kindly helping me with, do you want me to ask him? in principle? then you could email a proper letter or something.


----------



## kerilli (16 September 2008)

Umm, I think I'll email him direct. The thing is, would he be likely to be balloted from Weston Park? I don't know how much time he has to think about the little people's problems!
I really do feel very strongly that if there is serious oversubscription of Autumn 1* and 2* events, and an Event Organiser who wants to run one and isn't being allowed to, something should be said. 
I suppose it depends whether Aldon is going to have to ballot the 1 stars, and whether 2* competitors were balloted at Weston (as I suspect), as there is no alternative for them.
there's a thread on the BE forum (which I unfortunately can't post on), 1 person paid for a full season's reg and membership, all 3 events they entered for were cancelled... i wonder if they'll get their money back?!


----------



## TableDancer (16 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
If I am free for the AGM I'll come with you if you like. It's all very well us saying BE should do more, but we need to stand up and be counted. 

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL I've just posted on K's other thread that I will go to AGM - think we need a HHO representation! Re ERA (BTW S_C is right on this), it makes sense on paper to go this route but the problem ERA already suffers from is people being too busy riding etc to take it on and/or progress it. Various ERA representatives both now and in the past (and I am NOT NOT NOT refering to Clayton) have been unpopular and/or not necessarily the best choice, but no-one else would do it. So is this the sort of organisation that we should entrust to look after our interests as far as safety is concerned? Does anyone at ERA have the time and passion to take this forward? I'm sure they would be interested in joining in the debate but we must be careful not to get bogged down again here. Also, top riders like Clayton have their own difficulties with divided loyalties - look at who tops his sponsors list, so he would have to be careful not to be seen to be stirring... I'm not blaming him but it must be factor he would have to consider.


----------



## lucretia (16 September 2008)

are we talking about the same thing Kerrilli? i was only asking if you wanted me to mfind out about what ERA's positon on the EXO might be before everyone goes to loads of trouble. as someone said any sort of comment to the powers that be needs some heavy weight endorsement. team fred are in deaville this week so it seemed like a good moment to bring it up when he will see alot of the top riders and maybe ask them abbout it. then if he gets an email he will know to what its refering. 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 not really sure what weston has to do with it!


----------



## kerilli (16 September 2008)

Ah, oops, misunderstood you, sorry. Mixing up my threads completely.
Yes, please, I'd like to hear ERA's position on it please, but I kind-of agree with TableDancer's point... can any of the Pros be seen as being totally unbiased, if they have sponsorship etc?


----------



## lucretia (16 September 2008)

i think clayton would given me his unbiased off the record opinion which would be of use wouldnt it? and as for ERA britsh chairperson and representative on BE's sports comittee well i will see rather more of him than i would like this weekend but if i get a chance i will ask him too.


----------



## kerilli (16 September 2008)

Great, thankyou.


----------



## Bounty (16 September 2008)

My two-penneth, not sure which thread this belongs on! ....

If potential customers really are concerned about the possibility of whiplash perhaps what is needed is a skull cap designed to be worn in conjunction with the EXO - one with an increased thickness at the back of the hat? Not sure how that would work with regards to weight distribution/balance though. Perhaps a hat cover could be manufactured which features a carbon fibre and foam 'box' at the back of the helmet - lightweight and removable (and not so expensive?!). This would reduce the possibility of whiplash surely?

However, if this was to be marketed I think it would have to be stressed, stressed and stressed again that this really IS optional - otherwise the whiplash rumour will gain even more momentum. The additional cost of the hat or hatcover could also put people off, I know that if it were me I would want to have the the whole caboodle as I would feel that optimum protection could only be achieved with both products used in conjunction.

Not sure if any of that makes sense - I am not good at putting my thoughts down in writing!


----------



## daisycrazy (16 September 2008)

lucretia I think that's a great idea - would be a good starting point to know what the pros think, and also some of their views as to why the Exo may not have been taken up?

I e-mailed the FEI at the weekend to ask them whether they had looked at the EXO and, if so, what their position is. Will be interesting to see if and how they respond.

I would be more than happy to put my name down for SC's suggestion re BE AGM as well. Can't imagine anything is going to change unless we at least try some collective action!


----------



## frittSkritt (16 September 2008)

In regards to the neck/whiplash issue... what if the rider also wore a neck protector? Rodney Powell makes one that's designed to prevent whiplash. Perhaps this additional padding will decrease the distance between the back of the neck and the vest and help prevent neck injury.






 

(I can't link directly RP's product page, but if you go to Body Armour -&gt; Essentials, it's right at the top).
http://www.powellprotec.com/


----------



## bodycage (16 September 2008)

Bounty,

see where you are coming from - but as far as I am aware there is absolutely no foundation for the rumour regarding whiplash.

whiplash is basically extra stress on the neck from increased momentum of the head in motion with the neck as the pendulum and the head as the bob (thinking like a clock)

2 things will increase this:
- weight on the head
- distance the head can travel

altering hats therefore will risk increasing whiplash through the former route.

the rumour about Exo increasing risk of whiplash comes from the concept that the Exo standing out more from the body pushes the neck further away from the ground giving more space for the head to travel - option 2.

However, the distances are not significant, and in many cases the Exo would be reducing distance as it balances out the effects of the helmet which has already affected that distance by adding substance around the head.

In addition:
- riders often do not fall directly on their back or front falling on the side it would make no difference as the across shoulder dimensions are not altered
- does the physique of the rider make a difference to whiplash? Would a large chested lady therefore be more at risk of whiplash if falling onto her front?
- does clothing affect it?
- does a normal body protector affect it - after all it is adding distance from ground

the reality is that the fractional differences are seen by most medics as insignificant regarding whiplash - now get them onto the topic of helmets and the weight of that and how it affects whiplash - especially a trend in some sports to heavier and bigger helmets - e.g. American Football with guards / polo with guards / motor sport / etc. the wight and bulk of those safety devices is far more of an issue for the increase of whiplash risk.

In reality the questions on whiplash are rumours no more until someone does a study to prove that Exo is significantly increasing your chance of whiplash - and those studies would have to satisfy the many international scientists and medics who are happy with the Exo design.

regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
Bodycage


----------



## lucretia (16 September 2008)

i will ask him then daisy and let you all know  x 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 also i will talk to kitty she was the first pro as far as i am aware to test one and wear it competively be interested to know what she thinks x


----------



## TableDancer (16 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
and as for ERA britsh chairperson and representative on BE's sports comittee well i will see rather more of him than i would like this weekend but if i get a chance i will ask him too. 

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL you are naughty, L! Is he at wedding of the year as well? Agree worth getting Clayton's unpublished views, but may be difficult to get him on the record. Cheers anyway.


----------



## lucretia (16 September 2008)

he is the best man! makes you wonder who the worst man is then...... x


----------



## TableDancer (16 September 2008)

PMSL 
	
	
		
		
	


	

















Have a great time anyway...


----------



## teapot (16 September 2008)

Thanks Alasdair  
	
	
		
		
	


	





That photo of the orange under the BP with the log just shows how little a BP will do to save you from crush injuries!


----------



## bodycage (16 September 2008)

Well 
	
	
		
		
	


	





to be fair, one hopes that the ribs of the average human might be stronger than a blood orange 
	
	
		
		
	


	





but yes, it does show quite starkly the differences in technology - ultimately, a foam body protector, however you dress it up is just extra padding - it is a piece of foam shaped inside a fabric outer.

it is designed to prevent bruising and minor injury - no more.

regards

Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
Bodycage


----------



## teapot (16 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
Well 
	
	
		
		
	


	





to be fair, one hopes that the ribs of the average human might be stronger than a blood orange 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]

True, but you've got to keep it all relative. Orange vs 5kg log. Human ribs and muscles vs half a ton of horse.

Oh and poor orange


----------



## bodycage (17 September 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
Oh and poor orange  
	
	
		
		
	


	









[/ QUOTE ]

It was buried with honour - well actually the dog eat it 
	
	
		
		
	


	




Thus ends the life of another stuntman  
	
	
		
		
	


	





Alasdair Kirk
Managing Director
Bodycage


----------



## Eventerchick (18 September 2008)

Just to add my pennies worth ...

I am a full time event rider and have been competing in an exo for three seasons now all the way up to advanced.
 Yes they feel odd to start with, but get on a horse and start riding and jumping and you really don't notice. I have had several falls in mine, thank god nothing dreadful but I can guarantee that you can definitely roll well in one and it works! This is yet another myth that seems to have grown legs and run. 
The key issue is ridiculous. you only have to use it in a real emergenecy if the paramedics could not move you after a fall. Not only do they carry allen keys but there is one inside a pocket on the actual body protector at all times. On a day to day basis I can put it on and take it off myself by simply clipping it on. 
It is a crying shame these have not been taken more seriously and so many rumours have been run with.

I certainly won't be changing back any time soon and am more than happy to answer people's questions from a riding point of view.


----------



## eckles (6 October 2008)

I event at pre-novice, and am certainly an amateur rider.
I bought my Exo 18mths ago for the princely sum of £150... twice a normal body protector, but who cares if it saves your life?

Yes it's bulky, and quite heavy.  I've got a plate in one wrist which means I have reduced flexibilty so sometimes I need help getting into it as I can't reach the side fastening easily, but you certainly don't need the allen key (one of which are located in the side panel under the big "first aid" label).  No it doesn't look so pretty in your photos.

I don't notice any of this when riding.  It was a little odd to start with but now once I'm in the plate I hardly notice I'm wearing it at all.  I know it currently comes in limited sizes, and the back length could be a problem for some people, particularly over drop fences where it may come into contact with the saddle, but I've had no probs.  I'm 5'6 so fairly average height.

BE is scaremongering with the need to declare you're wearing it, as there are instructions for emergencies as to how to open it printed under the big first aid label on the side.  
This is unhelpful for a product whic could save lives.

I will not go cross country without it.


----------



## OliviaHeywood (30 October 2008)

I have worn an exo body cage for 2 years completing CCI* and Intermediate events and would never ride cross country without one. Once you are riding you do not notice the slight additional weight vs other body protectors. You only notice this when you are trying it on in the tack shop. As others say, I would rather have a bit of whiplash than the horrific alternative. 
Why is our industry not investigating this?


----------

