Tag Archives: biomechanist expert witness

Biomechanist expert witness Dr. John Lloyd has served attorneys nationwide for 25+ years in biomechanics, human factors, helmet testing and motorcycle accident expert

Admissibility of Biomechanics Testimony on Causation of Injury

On the admissibility of biomechanics testimony the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, written jointly by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine and the Federal Judicial Center, states: “Specifically, one cross-disciplinary domain deals with the study of injury mechanics, which spans the interface between mechanics and biology. The traditional role of the physician is the diagnosis (identification) of injuries and their treatment, not a detailed assessment of the physical forces and motions that created injuries during a specific event. The field of biomechanics (also called biomechanical engineering) involves the application of mechanical principles to biological systems, and is well suited to answering questions pertaining to injury mechanics.” In the case Garner v Baird [910 N.Y.S.2d 762, 762 (N.Y. Civ. Ct. 2010)] defined biomechanics as “the application of physics and mechanical engineering to the human body.”

In a ruling of the 1st District Court of Appeals of Florida on July 19, 2012 [98 So.3d 115, Florida First District Court of Appeals, 2012] Judge Healey concluded, “that biomechanics expert, Dr. John Lloyd is qualified to offer opinions as to causation because the mechanism of injury fell within the field of biomechanics”. Moreover, in the case of Taylor v Culver Florida First District Court of Appeals, 2015 the appeals court ruling, which directly references Council states “the proffered testimony of the Appellant’s biomechanics expert was relevant to the disputed issues concerning velocity and direction of forces involved in the accident”. In the case Maines v Fox [190 So.3d 1135, Florida First District Court of Appeals, 2016], the ruling states: “Biomechanical opinions as to the general causation of a type of injury are admissible in a personal injury case.”

Biomechanical Analysis Athletic Protectors – Case Study

A male high-school athlete was participating in a team sport when a player from the opposing team attempted a goal. The male athlete was the only obstacle between the opposing player and a winning goal. The high speed shot, taken from less than 10 feet away, impacted the male athlete directly in the groin. He immediately fell to his knees in pain. Thankfully, he was wearing an new athletic protector (known colloquially as a “jockstrap”), which should have prevented injury even at such close quarters. Dr. John Lloyd was retained to perform a biomechanical analysis athletic protector.

lacrosse athletic protector

The athlete sat out the remainder of the game. Later that evening he became concerned as the swelling continued. The following day tests revealed that amputation of one of his testicles was medically necessary. As a young man, with his whole life ahead of him, the physical and emotional pain of losing a testicle was almost unbearable.

The young man had conducted his research before purchasing the new athletic protector. The packaging had promised comfort and protection. Why then did he sustain this life-changing injury?

Athletic protector biomechanics expert Dr. John Lloyd, was retained to evaluate a potential product liability case.

It was quickly discovered, interestingly, that there are no American Standards on the performance requirements of athletic protectors. Therefore, Dr. Lloyd devised a test method to evaluate exemplars of the subject jockstrap with comparison to models sold by other product manufacturers.

athletic protector testing

Balls were shot at various speeds from a pitching machine aimed at the athletic protectors affixed to a male mannequin. Each impact was recorded using a high-speed video camera, while Dr. Lloyd’s associate, standing behind the mannequin, measured the speed of each impact using a radar gun. A total of 70 tests were performed.

As the following high-speed video recording shows, the subject athletic protector deforms completely upon impact, providing the wearer with little, if any, protection from injury.

Several new design models also collapsed upon impact, while others cracked and broke

collapsed athletic protector
cracked athletic protector

broken athletic protector

Fortunately, the old style jock strap with which many of us are familiar was among the few models that held up to impact and actually provided adequate protection.

old athletic protector
old athletic protector testing

Based on biomechanical analysis I concluded, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, that the subject athletic protector provides inadequate protection of the male genitalia from injury associated with impact from a moderate speed ball. This conclusion is based on evidence of extreme deformation of the jock strap upon direct impact from a ball. 

Had the manufacturer evaluated their product under real-life conditions, as described herein, they would have learned that this product provides inadequate protection against injury to the male genitalia.  Further, comparative testing of other available athletic protectors identified products that provide better protection.