In following up on the comment in the other thread about the FIM wanting harder shells more resistant to impact and puncturing, my first thought is the opposite should be more effective for preventing head injuries. All of us know brain damage occurs when the brain hits the inside of the head. A harder shell could absorb less impact, increasing the speed in which the floating brain slams against the inside of the skull. Unless their solution is 2-fold, and that is just part of it. If they want a harder outer shell more resistant to impact and puncturing, combined with new shock absorption standards/materials for slowing down the impact of the brain, then that is a different story. The helmet needs to be able to withstand the impact and not cave in or shatter, but aside from that its biggest purpose is to act like a shock absorber, or crumple zone. Imagine how hard the impact would be on the body if vehicles were made out of solid steel that couldn't absorb impacts. That is essentially what they are getting at here with wanting super hard shells. ...again, unless I am missing something.