Spinal cord injuries from mountain biking exceed hockey, other high-risk sports

It should also be noted that the technology for downhill mountain biking has exploded in quality and price -- probably also money from manufacturers sponsoring pros etc. Making it viable for super sketchy terrain (via tires, suspension, frame dynamics, braking) to be taken on and cliff drops to be attempted. Its probably the quickest advancing "extreme" sport happening right now - which would track with this finding since they are pushing the boundaries and the landings are HARD.

For example go see the highlights of red bull rampage for the current mtn biking zeitgeist.

100%.

I enjoy watching the UCI downhills races. And some of the RedBull stuff.

But I'll never attempt trails like those on my own. I don't have the equipment. I don't have the skill. I don't have the will (balls).

Almost all of the spinal cord injuries I've heard about have occurred when the mountain biker was airborne on purpose. And not just airborne on a natural 2 foot rock ledge, but engineered ramps/jumps/etc.

The "Everest : Hiking :: DH/freeride : mountain biking" analogy is correct.

Something like Chamonix, France for many other extreme summer & winter mountain sports (downhill MTB including) then.

People keep dying 'en masse' there, long term average is 60 per year in Mont Blanc range alone, but this includes all activities so heart attack during pleasant walk is there too. They compare it to whole US rockies in terms of mortality, not sure if it still holds. If folks focused purely on statistics whole place would be banned ad infinum due to world's easiest access to extreme terrain, luckily French folks have a different attitude to risks in what they consider 'noble' activities (which covers most mountain stuff).

I almost contributed to stats there last year too with my medium severity paraglider landing crash (both legs broken but missed massive rock by few cms which would end up much more severe).

> I wonder if the ergonomics or geometry of a bicycle could be modified to better protect a rider’s neck.

There has been a huge trend in this direction in recent years! For example in 2000 the head tube angle on a typical “trail bike” was something like 71 degrees, but today it’s more like 65 degrees, meaning the front wheel is a lot farther out in front of you. Bikes have also just gotten longer, especially in the front end which adds to this effect. This all means that (assuming you don’t ride more difficult terrain to compensate) it’s way harder to crash “over the bars” on a modern mountain bike than in the past.

Why "fix" mountain biking, when it's inevitably environmentally destructive? It needs to be banned, period.

Over the years the geometry has slackened, size of wheels length of wheelbase and size of cockpit have increased. Suspension has also evolved dramatically. This makes the bikes much safer and more stable at higher speeds. The bigger cockpit area has less responsive pitch and yaw, giving riders an increased sense of security. So the bikes are "safer". But this just means riders are going faster. The style of trail has evolved with this as well. Well manicured, wide bike park trails have got much faster with massive jumps. These types of trails are generally easier to ride than slower, more technical terrain and give maximum thrill at higher velocities. Amateur riders today are doing stuff even the best pro's could barely attempt 25 years ago.

I would like to see complimentary stats for age and years of experience riding, as it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of these folks are starting downhill as a midlife crisis and the modern bikes make them feel invincible. Everyone trying to do this sport at a higher level is going to get hurt at some point though.

They mention the costs, but what about the overall benefits to health, wellbeing and the economy.

Downhill is my main passion in life, it's so much more than just a thrill, and it's such a privilege to be able to enjoy it.

I mean, you can avoid going over the bars by riding a recumbent, but that's not going to be a viable solution for riding singletrack. The real trick is teaching people how to fall. I had a coach back in the 90's who was big on that, and it's become instinctual enough where the last time I went over the bars (mid-2023), I was able to manage my landing where I hobbled away with a massive bruise on my thigh, and not much else. I don't know that I've ever seen an MTB skills class that teaches you how to fall properly.

MotoX riders wear a device which prevents the neck from unnatural extension. I wonder if medical doctors could champion their adoption among MB riders.

Edit: some controversy of the effectiveness of neck braces in motox

Hey man, funny "seeing" you round these parts!

My kids do mountain bike racing, and one of the reasons I like they do it is because it is incredibly safe. For one, where I am there aren't "mountains"; it's essentially off-road biking. But additionally, the organization they race in is emphatic about safety. The worst injuries done is to dad's wallet when a wheel gets bent or a derailleur goes blooey.

The article says it's mostly men with an average age of 35. These are dudes who are pushing their own limits on some of the most difficult terrain. As you say, a radically different profile.

yeah, agreed: huge difference in downhill, freestyle, etc...and my XC group rides.

Also, BC, between Whistler and North Shore on Vancouver Island is pretty much mecca for this type of riding, bike parks, stunts, etc....

I'd be really curious what the stats are elsewhere, and broken out by what the rider was doing at time of injury.

As someone who played and still loves hockey, I wouldn't put hockey that high up on the list of sports that result in spinal cord injuries compared to other contact sports.

Spinal cord injuries absolutely happen, but I can think of plenty of sports that would have a higher incident e.g., surfing, skateboarding, motocross, horseback riding, gymnastics, cheer leading, etc..

It looks riskier than football - the article compared armature football in the US (the entire country) to just BC and find mountain biking worse. Football is not a safe sport (though they use a lot of safety gear in all the organized versions). BC is where people into mountain biking travel to so I'm not sure how much the BC stats are comparing the world.

Fair, but my intuition would say in Canada, hockey is more popular than mountain biking, I would even be willing to put money on saying "considerably more popular" to be honest. Hockey Canada reported 600,000 registered Hockey Players in 2019, Cycle Canada reported 22,000 in 2018.

58 mountain biking SCIs over 14 years (4.1 per year) in British Columbia 3 hockey SCIs over the same period (0.21 per year) in British Columbia

There is also a significant amount of personal risk tolerance involved. Casual riders can certainly have severe injuries, but easier trails are indeed easier.

Much less risk of falling meters and landing on your back playing hockey.

Source: played hockey and biked in BC

Almost certainly this, from the article

"As a spine surgeon at Vancouver General Hospital, the provincial referral centre for all spinal cord injuries in B.C., Dr. Kwon decided to conduct the study after witnessing the high number of injuries coming out of mountain-bike parks."

As others have pointed out, BC is somewhat of a downhill mountain bike Mecca with Whistler and various other parks running on the slopes during the summer https://www.mountainbikingbc.ca/ride-ideas-road-trips/bc-bik....

Without a doubt it is overwhelmingly downhill riders. Everyone I know who does it has suffered multiple broken bones.

I agree. Even within those types there are some types of rides that are massively different.

In MTB you have XC (cross country) which can be more about distance and grit. These bikes are lighter and have less suspension because you don't typically do a 10 foot drop on one.

Enduro racing is what I think of as similar to skiing or snowboarding. You can go do the green/blue/black at a resort. You can also do the equivalent of taking a helicopter to the top of a crazy mountain pass and jump out. Then there is park stuff. Snowboarders might hop into a rail in the park. Mountain bikers might ride a wooden feature.

The point being it's important to distinguish whether you're talking about the danger of taking a flowy green downhill or the danger of going off a 20 foot drop or the danger of hopping onto a narrow piece of Park stuff that's 30 feet off the ground.

Because the injury rate of people on double black diamond runs in BC with 30 foot tall one foot wide wooden features is just not relevant to me because I am not riding that kind of terrain.

That was my first thought too. Certainly this must be skewed towards downhill? Going high speed into jumps that send you 5-10+ft into the air must not have good outcomes if you miss the jump or landing. Most of the rest of mountain biking is fairly tame in my opinion.

I'd wager mountain bikers being able to use ski lifts to go uphill is almost certainly a much bigger contributor to inexperienced people doing 'stupid' things than e-bikes.

I literally see people deliver food on these things with no helmet on high traffic routes.

It’s like, you are a meat bag with a fragile coconut head traveling at least 25mph, like, please read the Humpty Dumpty story.

E-bikes that go too fast are already an issue.

Friends wife went for a walk on a pedestrian path, onlookers saw her hit from behind by someone on an e-bike going very fast. She still doesn’t remember anything.

Are people using e-bikes to go faster on downhill riding? Most of the mountain ebikers I’ve met are much more casual riders.

In every sport there always seem to be a few who almost get off on abusing their body.

Would you rather they be ashamed of it?

In Judo and gymnastics you're generally also traveling slower. Judo falls are also from a lower height and generally under control (just not yours, heh).

I grew up around horses and even rode some myself when I was in my youth. I think the average person does not realize how horribly dangerous horses are. Think like in the movie/book "Gone with the Wind." While useful animals, horses are responsible for countless deaths. And this is purely conjecture on my part, but I imagine horses were more dangerous than cars ever have been.

Even last year, my mother broke her neck from getting thrown, and miraculously made a full recovery despite almost severing her spinal cord. Her horse got spooked, bucked before she could react, and it was almost all over but the crying.

Horse riding is about 10x more dangerous, for time spent, than motorcycling, IIRC. It is a seriously dangerous sport.

>It might be interesting to compare rates in equestrianism and biking to other sports where falls are a significant risk such as Judo or balance beam.

So, in gymnastics you practice falling so you fall safer/more controlled. Falling correctly when you miss a skill was given as much weight as actually performing the skill. There was a policy in my gym that you fall unsafely in class (such as straddling the beam) you were required to do pushups for the rest of class.

Gymnastics also has spotters who can prevent catastrophic injuries.

Because of this, I think the risk of catastrophic injury in gymnastics is fairly low, especially at the lower levels.

I think the extra 3 feet from a horse makes all the difference. There's basically no way to use your arms to break the fall. I don't think there is any comparison with gymnastics because (I think) most gymnasts stop by their early 20s and are much lighter than an adult equestrian.