Tell me of the Point Two Hybrid vest

[RAyers]

I want to clarify my position. I am not saying folks need to run away. I am saying do NOT trust the marketing materials. Do NOT expect the vest to do the things they claim. Do NOT rely on the vest as a sole source of safety (outside of competition where a standard vest is required).

There are some good folks who have worked on designs but the idea of an airvest has inherent risk above and beyond a standard vest regardless of design or improvement.

Reed

[JSwan]

In the article the sales people say its ok to wear it by itself.

People believe what the sales people are saying. That’s scary. This isn’t some overpriced vitamin powder guaranteed to make your pony gleam. They are mucking about with human lives.

But the way they are hawking this stuff is the same way nutraceuticals are hawked.

There was an instance of the lanyard causing a person to get hung up on the horse, I don’t remember the details.

And of course, Mandiba.

I know the plural of anecdote is not data. But the salespeople are relying almost exclusively on anecdote to sell the product, and don’t appear to disclose the instances in which the vest failed to deploy, or horse or riders have been injured.

I don’t recall this level of “puffing” with ASTM helmets or ASTM protective vests.

[BarbB]

@RAyers;6212203

Consider that whip lash is basically when the head moves to one side and LIFTS and STRETCHES the spinal column - the head keeps moving in one direction the the body goes another so it “pops” off the cervical vertebrae.

My horse is noise shy so I have not even been interested in reading about these. You could throw the vest and canister at her and she would just glare, but don’t go making any weird sudden noises.

After reading Reed’s description… thanks, Reed… I know I can get killed coming off, with my current track record I am more likely to get killed getting run over, but my head ‘popping’ off my spine? I may just take up knitting. :winkgrin:

[wildlifer]

Thanks for the clarification, Reed – my primary problem is with the marketing and the blatant misleading use of anecdotes and manipulation of unrelated statistics and spurious correlations. There ARE people who have died from the injuries the company claims that the vest prevents, so their dedication to their erroneous logic is simply ludicrous. They are making money hand over foot at the moment, so I fear that that is the top priority over concerns about causing accidents or deaths.

[deltawave]

I am also not advocating unequivocal rejection of this sort of product. Like any scientist, I am waiting for convincing evidence that it is an improvement upon what we already have. When and if that evidence comes in, I shall be first in line to buy one. UNTIL that evidence is there, no advertisement, endorsement, or sales figure statistics are going to convince me. It does get difficult to tell the difference, because advertising firms are staffed with very, very bright people that know their target audience and how to pull those strings. Which is why I pretty much ignore advertisements completely, and look elsewhere for the information I want and need.

We are very, very ruthless in my family about ads. My son came home from school this week wanting to buy an “advanced” yo-yo that cost $10. I told him it was his money and he’d better think over the claims and if he was convinced it was a $10 yo-yo, it was his money. Home he came with what appeared to be nothing more than a $2.99 Duncan. His assessment? “I got taken, Mom”. :lol:

[wildlifer]

Hey, that’s good kid training, right there.