And alcohol and cigarettes can lead to cancer...

Rugby's issue is spinal injuries.

 

Correct...but that's also largely resulting from difference in the two games, how tackling style is influenced by game action in rugby versus football, and the existence of the scrum in rugby (which is FAR different from the action at the line of scrimmage in football).

 

As I see it, though, the games are still very comparable in their potential for head to head contact.

Game will be flag up until 9th grade.

 

 

I've read a report somewhere that most of the damage is done in the under 14 levels of playing.

How many boxers get concussed during a fight? MMA?

 

I bet plenty of boxers have CTE...

How many boxers get concussed during a fight? MMA?

 

I bet plenty of boxers have CTE...

 

Absolutely. CTE was known previously as dementia pugilistica...pugilistica referring to boxing pugilists.

 

Head injuries in boxing are also the origin of the term "punch drunk" due to the dazed and confused way some people act after a concussion or major blow to the head.

How many boxers get concussed during a fight? MMA?

 

I bet plenty of boxers have CTE...

 

Boxers always seem to go downhill quick after 50. Even before that you can usually tell that a large percentage of them aren't right in the head.

As much as I love the game, I'm thankful both my boys stopped playing at an early age for the love of other sports.

I would be curious to see studies of NFL players that have died (not from suicide) to see how many of them have CTE. And studies for all people who commit suicide. Does the CTE cause them to commit suicide or is it something completely different? Have studies been done on other sports as well to see how much those athletes have CTE?

 

I think for that to happen the families would have to ask for an autopsy. We may see that start to become more common.

As much as I love the game, I'm thankful both my boys stopped playing at an early age for the love of other sports.

 

I was telling MTGL recently how thankful I am that my oldest got through it with no injuries despite playing LB/DE against a big boy schedule.

 

He asked me what I would say NOW if I had a young son who said he wanted to play football. While I'd probably let him at some point (not too young) I would not do it without careful consideration.

How many boxers get concussed during a fight? MMA?

 

I bet plenty of boxers have CTE...

 

Study I read said in those two it is more "sub-concussive" than actual concussions. They all lead to issues with the brain.

I think we have to be careful saying that because Adrian Robinson played football and killed himself, that it is BECAUSE he played football that he killed himself. None of us know him and what he had going on in his life. I admit that it looks like there is a correlation when so many ex and current NFL players have CTE. Like someone else asked, does CTE cause people to commit suicide? Again, I admit that it appears so, but I do think we are now seeing people blame EVERY problem ex NFL players have on the evils of the NFL. The shield is an easy target to be sure and with incredibly deep pockets, you can bet people want to get in on the lawsuits.

 

Those who have read my previous posts regarding the NFL know how much I despise NFL ownership and the job Goodell has done so I am certainly not an NFL homer. I do think that after YEARS of the NFL looking the other way at injuries, the owners are beginning to at least TRY to make the game safer. I don't for one minute think it is because the NFL owners now have a conscience...it is strictly for business reasons.

He said that 88 of 92 NFL players whose brains have been tested there have shown evidence of CTE, along with 33 others who played college or high school football. The brains are studied posthumously when families seek testing.

 

The NFL better get that lawsuit settled quick. This stuff isn't going away.

The stats are very flawed. The tests I believe we're all taken from players that had known head injuries, of course the numbers will be high. It's like if I took a test to see how many adults had alcohol in their system and only took candidates who were at a bar drinking.

Continue to find ways to make a dangerous game less dangerous.

 

It's why we're seeing the rule changes.

 

Problem is that players continue to get faster, bigger and stronger. The kinetic energy of these collisions just keeps going up with every generation. Changes in equipment technology and rules cannot keep up.

The stats are very flawed. The tests I believe we're all taken from players that had known head injuries, of course the numbers will be high. It's like if I took a test to see how many adults had alcohol in their system and only took candidates who were at a bar drinking.

 

I don't disagree with you that chances are most, if not all of the tests were done on brain tissue belonging to players with known head injuries. However, that is a fairly common issue with scientific studies as a whole, so I think saying "very flawed" may be a bit of an overstatement.

 

For example...my wife has been doing research on a kidney disease called tuberous sclerosis for a decade now. It has a rate of occurrence of about 1:6000, but seeing as it can present itself in any number of ways, it is estimated that more than a half of the cases worldwide go un-diagnosed. Regardless, it is hard to find people to give their kidneys to the study of the disease unless they themselves are suffering from the disease...in other words, control samples are tough to come by. With the exception of some of the major diseases (known amongst medical researchers as the "rock star" diseases), many MANY scientific and medical studies are seriously lacking control samples.

 

Consider lung cancer. MILLIONS of people have been touched by lung cancer, and lung cancer is something the scientific community has known about since the 1800s. Since there have been so many lives affected by lung cancer, there have been enough people willing to donate samples of lung tissue to science, both with and without cancer, that they have been able to come up with conclusive answers about many causes of lung cancer. However, cystic fibrosis is a much more rare lung condition than lung cancer, and despite being identified as a disease almost 80 years ago, there still is not nearly enough known about it because it is so difficult to find study samples. Many people never known anyone with CF, and know even less about the disease as a whole...so why on earth would they donate their body tissues to the study of that disease? As a result, CF researchers are left to study the relative few samples of lung tissue that they get from people already known to suffer from CF since those are generally the only folks donating their lungs to the study of the disease.

 

Still, researchers have to do research, and they have to base information on their findings...regardless of sample sizes and control sample availability. Even when you have a situation like the one I described with cystic fibrosis, scientists have to continue with research to solve the problem. Fact is, until there are more ex-football players deciding to donate their brain tissue to the study of CTE, it looks like studies like this on are all we have to base our decision making off of.

I don't disagree with you that chances are most, if not all of the tests were done on brain tissue belonging to players with known head injuries. However, that is a fairly common issue with scientific studies as a whole, so I think saying "very flawed" may be a bit of an overstatement.

 

For example...my wife has been doing research on a kidney disease called tuberous sclerosis for a decade now. It has a rate of occurrence of about 1:6000, but seeing as it can present itself in any number of ways, it is estimated that more than a half of the cases worldwide go un-diagnosed. Regardless, it is hard to find people to give their kidneys to the study of the disease unless they themselves are suffering from the disease...in other words, control samples are tough to come by. With the exception of some of the major diseases (known amongst medical researchers as the "rock star" diseases), many MANY scientific and medical studies are seriously lacking control samples.

 

Consider lung cancer. MILLIONS of people have been touched by lung cancer, and lung cancer is something the scientific community has known about since the 1800s. Since there have been so many lives affected by lung cancer, there have been enough people willing to donate samples of lung tissue to science, both with and without cancer, that they have been able to come up with conclusive answers about many causes of lung cancer. However, cystic fibrosis is a much more rare lung condition than lung cancer, and despite being identified as a disease almost 80 years ago, there still is not nearly enough known about it because it is so difficult to find study samples. Many people never known anyone with CF, and know even less about the disease as a whole...so why on earth would they donate their body tissues to the study of that disease? As a result, CF researchers are left to study the relative few samples of lung tissue that they get from people already known to suffer from CF since those are generally the only folks donating their lungs to the study of the disease.

 

Still, researchers have to do research, and they have to base information on their findings...regardless of sample sizes and control sample availability. Even when you have a situation like the one I described with cystic fibrosis, scientists have to continue with research to solve the problem. Fact is, until there are more ex-football players deciding to donate their brain tissue to the study of CTE, it looks like studies like this on are all we have to base our decision making off of.

 

Flawed may have been the wrong word to use. Misleading would have been a better word.