Very concerning. Here is the relevant quote:
The 30-year-old Canadian rider was competing Only Me in a novice section at Nunney in Somerset on 14 June. The pair had a rotational fall at fence 7a on the cross-country course and Jordan suffered “fatal chest injuries”, the inquest found.
When returning a verdict of accidental death, Tim Hayden, assistant coroner for East Somerset, said: "The horse struck the jump with its front legs and slowly rotated across the jump and on to the other side, throwing its rider, Jordan McDonald, to the ground and landing full square on top of him.
“There were multiple fractures on each side of the ribcage, four on one side and five on the other and a laceration of the lung which made the process of resuscitation very difficult and subsequently impossible.”
Accident and emergency consultant Dr Michael Whitlock, who was on duty at the event, said that Jordan’s body protector – which was from Canada – would not have met British Eventing safety standards, set in 2000.
Does anyone have information on what kind of protector this rider wore compared to what meets British requirements?
Slightly different conclusions reported here:
Pathologist Christopher Meehan told the inquest Mr McDonald suffered multiple rib fractures and lacerations to his lungs, which were the main contributing factors to his death. He said the rider also suffered a pneumothorax, in which air collected outside the lung, along with a ruptured larynx.
He said the toxicology results came back clear.
The inquest was told that when medical staff arrived at the scene it was initially thought Mr McDonald had a head injury but that his condition quickly deteriorated and he lost consciousness. Several attempts were made to establish an airway but they were unsuccessful.
Dr Michael Whitlock, a consultant in Accident and Emergency Medicine at Queen Elizabeth Hospital, in Woolwich, and medical representative on the European Committees (CEN) for protective sports garments and equestrian helmets, was the first on the scene.
He said the helmet Mr McDonald had been wearing had passed the British Safety Standards but the body protector had not.
Mr Hayden asked Dr Whitlock, that if Mr McDonald had been wearing the required Level 3 standard of body protectors, would it have saved his life, he said it was difficult to tell as he had not seen the actual incident.
British Eventing’s sport operations manager, Chris Farr, told the inquest it was the responsibility of the riders to have the correct back and body protectors.
Mr Hayden said in his summing up he would be writing to British Eventing to ask the organisation to re-consider its regulations on checking back and body protectors of riders competing at its events.
After seeing this article I went looking for a Level 3 body protector and couldn’t find one. I’m sure they are out their but couldn’t find one. Some have an ASTM cert but Idon’t know how that compares with the Level 3 cert.
I figured it was a good time to look as my Tipp vest is vintage 97 and doesn’t really fit comfortably anymore.
[QUOTE=FitToBeTied;8147006]
After seeing this article I went looking for a Level 3 body protector and couldn’t find one.[/QUOTE]
A list of everything currently approved to the BETA standards (mostly to level 3, but there are a few level 1 vests in the list as well) is here:
It’s a British standard, so if you’re in the US somewhat harder to find. (I happen to have an extremely well-stocked Charles Owen dealer ready to hand (Adams Horse Supplies), but I imagine that’s the exception. Dover sells the popular sizes only, but even in those what’s in a given store is hit-or-miss.)
Off the top of my head, the Airowear Outlyne, the CO Kontakt, the Kanteq, and the Rodney Powell are all Beta 3. They are all also substantially heavier/ thicker than the Tipperary and similar models.
[QUOTE=FitToBeTied;8147006]
After seeing this article I went looking for a Level 3 body protector and couldn’t find one. I’m sure they are out their but couldn’t find one. Some have an ASTM cert but Idon’t know how that compares with the Level 3 cert.
I figured it was a good time to look as my Tipp vest is vintage 97 and doesn’t really fit comfortably anymore.[/QUOTE]
Thanks.
[QUOTE=amb;8147015]
A list of everything currently approved to the BETA standards (mostly to level 3, but there are a few level 1 vests in the list as well) is here:
It’s a British standard, so if you’re in the US somewhat harder to find. (I happen to have an extremely well-stocked Charles Owen dealer ready to hand (Adams Horse Supplies), but I imagine that’s the exception. Dover sells the popular sizes only, but even in those what’s in a given store is hit-or-miss.)[/QUOTE]
That list doesn’t seem complete as I know KanTeq are level 3 approved. Did I miss it on the list.
There is a big difference between my old Tipperary vest and my KanTeq one.
Maybe this will be some impetus to reconsider EX0 type designs.
I’ve just been to Amazon, and body armor seems to be quite common in motorcycle racing. Surely some crossover to horses would be possible. The motorcycle armor is also less than 1/2 the cost of most popular horse rider vests.
A universal standard would be nice.
[QUOTE=FitToBeTied;8147006]
After seeing this article I went looking for a Level 3 body protector and couldn’t find one. I’m sure they are out their but couldn’t find one. Some have an ASTM cert but Idon’t know how that compares with the Level 3 cert.
I figured it was a good time to look as my Tipp vest is vintage 97 and doesn’t really fit comfortably anymore.[/QUOTE]
My Charles Owen vest is BETA 3.
The Airowear Outlyne is BETA 3.
The Rodney Powell Pro Body is also BETA 3.
Maybe it is time for the non-certified vests to be given different names/designations much like the velvet hunt caps from the olden days.
Protective vests should mean a certain level of approved protection (whether ASTM or BETA). The others can be called decorative vests. 
[QUOTE=bornfreenowexpensive;8147072]
That list doesn’t seem complete as I know KanTeq are level 3 approved. Did I miss it on the list.[/QUOTE]
I have an older copy of that approved list (on paper!) that lists the KanTeq as being approved to the (older) BETA 2000 standard. It looks like for whatever reason they were not approved to the new standard. (Could just be they weren’t submitted for approval; I don’t know BETA but other standards organizations can be a right pain in the hind end to work with.)
The main difference is the Racesafe/Tipperary ones are pieces of foam stitched together wheres the Beta Level 3 (Rodney Powell etc.) is a solid piece of foam. I too am amazed at what is considered “safe” over here in the US and I specifically looked at what BE required for their affiliated events when I was looking to purchase a vest for eventing. Very sad for this particular rider, even more so if his injuries could have been avoided.
All about BETA standards; (BETA = British Equestrian Trade Association)
All Manufacturers would be members.
[URL=“http://www.beta-uk.org/pages/safety-equipment/body-protectors.php”]http://www.beta-uk.org/pages/safety-equipment/body-protectors.php
BETA 2009 – Revision to the BETA Standard
A revised version of the BETA 2000 was published and adopted by BETA in April 2009 and is to be known as BETA 2009. The existing version - BETA 2000 - will continue as a current standard for the next two years. Manufacturers wishing to retest will be able to manufacture these garments until July 2011. Garments made to BETA 2000 will still be able to be sold from shops after this date. It is however expected that most companies will convert to the latest version of the standard before these deadlines.
Revision changes:
It is to be emphasised that the 2009 revision is precisely that – a revision of the existing standard. It is not a new standard and the safety of the garment in terms of the amount of impact the garment absorbs remains unchanged, as does the main coverage of the body protector itself.
The main changes relate to the testing processes and the attention given during testing.
· More attention is given to the zip area so that those garments that do not already, are likely to see zip covers and additional padding over the zip area.
· The centre back panel must be in one piece from top to bottom of at least 4 inches wide. This may require a change in design from those garments featuring smaller blocks.
· The requirements for the design of the shoulder are more stringent about gaps and will likely see the closure positioned slightly differently.
What does this mean for you?
Immediately very little as the safety of garments is essentially unchanged.
You will notice that garments approved to the new 2009 revision will start to enter the market but garments currently approved to BETA 2000 however will continue to be approved and manufactured and will continue to be accepted by all riding organisations. Plenty of warning will be given if it is decided that the BETA 2000 standard should be withdrawn, however garments made to this will still be valid for their recommended lifespan of 3 – 5 years.
It says on kanteq’s website that it is beta 3 so I’m not sure what is correct.
[QUOTE=Equibrit;8146973]
http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/news/jordan-mcdonald-fall-body-protector-inquest-493007[/QUOTE]
What vest was he wearing? Looks like just an air vest??
I think the Exo is Level 3 as well, have to check the tag on mine but pretty sure it’s a purple one.
[QUOTE=amb;8147249]
I have an older copy of that approved list (on paper!) that lists the KanTeq as being approved to the (older) BETA 2000 standard. It looks like for whatever reason they were not approved to the new standard. (Could just be they weren’t submitted for approval; I don’t know BETA but other standards organizations can be a right pain in the hind end to work with.)[/QUOTE]
On their web site it says it is approved with the 2009 standard level 3.
[QUOTE=Jealoushe;8147331]
What vest was he wearing? Looks like just an air vest??[/QUOTE]
If you look closely, he has a tipperary underneath.
