THE TEST OF POLICE BODY ARMOR SPONSORED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CHIEFS OF POLICE (IACP) WITH THE SUPPORT OF THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE, WAS INEPTLY CONDUCTED, AND ITS RESULTS MUST NOT STAND UNCHALLENGED. ALTHOUGH SUCH 'CONSUMER PROTECTION TESTING' IS GENERALLY BENEFICIAL, THE IACP RELIED ON INCONSISTENT TESTING METHODS WHICH DO NOT REFLECT ACTUAL OPERATING CONDITIONS OF BODY ARMOR. MOST POLICE WHO DO WEAR BULLET-RESISTENT VESTS, HAVE CHOSEN TO USE THE LIGHT WEIGHT STYLE OF VESTS. THE IACP TEST, HOWEVER, APPLIED STANDARDS TO THE LIGHT WEIGHT VESTS THAT SHOULD HAVE MORE PROPERLY BEEN APPLIED TO ONLY THE HEAVIEST GARMENTS. WHILE POLICE PREFER THE MORE CONCEALABLE ARMOR, WHICH IS STILL CAPABLE OF RESISTING KNIVES AND MOST HANDGUN BULLETS, THE IACP SUBMITTED SUCH ARMOR TO THE FORCES OF HIGH-POWERED WEAPONS THAT THE VESTS WERE NOT DESIGNED TO RESIST. LIKEWISE, THE LIGHT WEIGHT ARMOR WAS TESTED UNDER CONDITIONS THAT WOULD NOT NORMALLY BE FOUND IN ACTUAL POLICE WORK. VESTS WERE SHOT AT AFTER THEY HAD BEEN SOAKED WITH WATER THAT WAS FAR IN EXCESS OF NORMAL PERSPIRATION, AND THEN TESTED AGAINST THE MORE POWERFUL WEAPONS. FAILURES OF THE ARMOR UNDER SUCH TESTING CONDITIONS WERE TO BE EXPECTED, AND SHOULD NOT REFLECT UPON THE CAPABILITY OF THE PRODUCTS TO PERFORM WITHIN THE CRITERIA FOR WHICH THEY WERE DESIGNED. THE PUBLISHED RESULTS OF THE TESTING, HOWEVER, DID NOT INDICATE THAT THE ARMOR HAD BEEN SUBJECTED TO SEVERE PUNISHMENT, BUT RATHER STATED THAT MANY OF THE VESTS WERE 'DEFECTIVE.' IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT OFFICERS NOT ABANDON THE USE OF ARMOR, WHICH IS EFFECTIVE IN THE MAJORITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES. (TWK).