If I may suggest, let's put some things in perspective.
Second, what is happening with the head and neck restraint issue is an old story in the product development world, i.e. the science is ahead of the rules. History is full of parallels:
All these parties had very good reasons for saying what they said. They were not part of a conspiracy. It made complete sense at the time, given what they knew. It was the right thing to say and it was the right way think, and everyone knew it. It wasn't so much that they were wrong (boy, were they), they were simply behind the curve.
We have been engaged in product development work involving extremely critical applications for over twenty years, and have seen this same pattern occur repeatedly. It's human nature. By the time the rules catch up to the science, the rules are obsolete. The joke in the medical device industry is that FDA approval is a stamp of obsolescence. In the case of H&N restraints, SFI is working with old concepts from the last millenium, thinking the safest way to go is single point release. Again, it is not a conspiracy. They are just behind the curve. Events have shown the old concept to be not only wrong, but backwards. We hope they get it fixed before the body count goes higher.
Third, Kirk is right. The real issue is choice. We are not suggesting the HANS device be banned; we are suggesting that all high performance H&N restraints be allowed. If a racer doesn't like a particular product, fine; they should not be forced to use it.
Last, we find it continually amusing that the only people who express any concern about egress with an Isaac systems are those who have never used it. It's like a virgin complaining about sex. The total number of Isaac users who have availed themselves of our return policy because of egress issues is zero. Zip, zero. zilch, nada.
[/b]