more from Frontline on CTE - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: more from Frontline on CTE (/thread-7908.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: more from Frontline on CTE (/thread-7908.html)
Pages:
1
2
more from Frontline on CTE - 82 Card - 09-30-2014
Frontline is airing another episode on CTE today.
www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sports/concussion-watch/76-of-79-deceased-nfl-players-found-to-have-brain-disease/
Re: more from Frontline on CTE - 81alum - 10-01-2014
(09-30-2014, 09:01 PM)82 Card link Wrote:Frontline is airing another episode on CTE today.Wow. This gets more and more discouraging. I wonder if there will ever be a techno-fix or if this is eventually going to lead to the death of the game, as the data grows.
www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sports/concussion-watch/76-of-79-deceased-nfl-players-found-to-have-brain-disease/
Here is an interesting question. If you are a young man and are offered a lucrative NFL contract that will make you and your family rich forever, would you take it if you knew to a certainty that you would suffer CTE by the time you were middle aged? I know that many players do know that they will suffer a high rate of arthritis and heart disease and take the money anyway. But will they sacrifice their brains?
Yup. That was one unending downer - Redrum - 10-01-2014
I'm pretty much done with the NFL for reasons not related to the whole CTE thing. None of the revelations about the NFL side of the story surprised me. Money and power beget abuse. But the implications about the condition itself, its origins and implications really take the edge off my long term college football fandom. At minimum, I think holding young kids out of football is a great idea. My folks (and, in retrospect, a very prescient doctor) colluded to do that to me when I was young. Drove me nuts! Of course, back then the issue was permanent skelatal injuries. Brain damage was never mentioned.
As for college and Stanford football? Don't ask a crack addict to give up his drug. But we definitely need to invest more in finding out if and how significant possible damage is at the college level. Maybe Stanford was onto something when it gave up football and played rugby for 11 years around WWI.Â
P.S. The part with former Giants LB Harry Carson talking about the violence of the game and his view looking back on his career -- or any NFL player's career-- was really powerful. Thank God he doesn't seem to have any CTE and his words were like a scalpel cutting through bull****.
Re: Yup. That was one unending downer - BostonCard - 10-01-2014
(10-01-2014, 07:49 AM)Redrum link Wrote:I'm pretty much done with the NFL for reasons not related to the whole CTE thing. None of the revelations about the NFL side of the story surprised me. Money and power beget abuse. But the implications about the condition itself, its origins and implications really take the edge off my long term college football fandom. At minimum, I think holding young kids out of football is a great idea. My folks (and, in retrospect, a very prescient doctor) colluded to do that to me when I was young. Drove me nuts! Of course, back then the issue was permanent skelatal injuries. Brain damage was never mentioned.
As for college and Stanford football? Don't ask a crack addict to give up his drug. But we definitely need to invest more in finding out if and how significant possible damage is at the college level. Maybe Stanford was onto something when it gave up football and played rugby for 11 years around WWI.Â
P.S. The part with former Giants LB Harry Carson talking about the violence of the game and his view looking back on his career -- or any NFL player's career-- was really powerful. Thank God he doesn't seem to have any CTE and his words were like a scalpel cutting through bull****.
I have not seen any evidence that rugby is safer than football when it comes to concussions (and thus presumed CTE). It is alleged that it is safer because there are fewer head collisions since there is no helmet (and thus players are safer), but the very limited academic data I could find showed that rugby also carries a high risk of concussion. As does soccer (I think we had a women's soccer player retire because of repeated concussions), as is basketball (we had a point guard transfer after she wasn't cleared to play here because of concussions).
The question is not safe versus dangerous. Other than sports where there is no chance to collide at a high speed with another person, there is no completely safe sport. We should look at it as a continuum of safer versus less safe, and seek to move all sports towards the safer end, through a combination of technology, rules changes, etc.
BC
Re: more from Frontline on CTE - washingtonismoney - 10-01-2014
Soccer is a bit tricky. Having to regularly head balls that are whizzing at you at 70 mph cannot be good for your brain health. But, at the same time, there seems to be fewer anecdotal stories like we hear from the NFL. Part of that is Europe being beyond on the issue of traumatic brain injury in sports; I think we've only just gotten to the point where there's outcry over obviously concussed players going into the game. (GK Hugo Lloris went back into the game a couple years ago; earlier this season CB Dejan Lovren re-entered the game despite obvious concussion symptoms.)
To my knowledge, we've only seen two players posthumously diagnosed of CTE (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/early-lead/wp/2014/09/23/brazilian-soccer-star-bellini-has-cte-diagnosed-just-as-fifa-revamps-concussion-protocol/), but perhaps we'll see more.
My guess is that there's less, but we really have only just started thinking about the issue. (The whole issue of brain health in general is neglected; I was shocked doing some reporting a few years ago at how primitive it seemed.)
Re: more from Frontline on CTE - Stymie - 10-01-2014
When I played rugby 40 years ago at a realtively high level (for the USA, at least), it was far less dangerous than football due to the fact that high speed/high impact collisions were rare as the game was largely played at speed on angles and at strength within distnaces that did not allow for speed. I suspect that 100 years ago (when Stanford played rugby rather than football) this was more of the case. These days, rugby is just as dangerous as football, as the players are bigger and faster and the tactics demand more contact at speed and more wrestling at strength. I have several friends and relatives whose children play high level junior rugby, and they are all fearful as to what might happen to their sons.
Re: more from Frontline on CTE - Nan3cy - 10-01-2014
I saw part of the show last night and it was terrifying. Made me once again so glad that my kid decided to go out for cross-country and track rather than football. Now at 33 he has a gimpy knee, but his brain is in great shape...
Rugby - Redrum - 10-01-2014
I only brought up the subject of Stanford's rugby interlude because the "issue" of violence was put on the public stage very early on, not because there was at the time any medical argument for or against rugby vs. football.
My impression, as a participant for a short time and a fan who has watched it played for years, is that it is less prone to violent collisions because-- as mentioned above-- when the game is being played well, it really is all about angled attacks matched up with angled defenses responding.  I'm not smart enough or motivated enough to rigorously compare a game with set, periodic, predictable episodes of high impact contact (football) vs. rugby, featuring near-constant action with unpredictable instances of high impact contact. I can believe that there might be a similar concern about CTE in rugby.
But my sense, and experience tell me that overall, rugby would have fewer CTE instances. Don't know about the odds for other types of future-limiting injuries. Maybe better data would show my view is completely cockeyed.
Re: Yup. That was one unending downer - Rally - 10-01-2014
(10-01-2014, 11:43 AM)Boston Card link Wrote:[quote author=Redrum link=topic=10762.msg100086#msg100086 date=1412174951]
I'm pretty much done with the NFL for reasons not related to the whole CTE thing. None of the revelations about the NFL side of the story surprised me. Money and power beget abuse. But the implications about the condition itself, its origins and implications really take the edge off my long term college football fandom. At minimum, I think holding young kids out of football is a great idea. My folks (and, in retrospect, a very prescient doctor) colluded to do that to me when I was young. Drove me nuts! Of course, back then the issue was permanent skelatal injuries. Brain damage was never mentioned.
As for college and Stanford football? Don't ask a crack addict to give up his drug. But we definitely need to invest more in finding out if and how significant possible damage is at the college level. Maybe Stanford was onto something when it gave up football and played rugby for 11 years around WWI.Â
P.S. The part with former Giants LB Harry Carson talking about the violence of the game and his view looking back on his career -- or any NFL player's career-- was really powerful. Thank God he doesn't seem to have any CTE and his words were like a scalpel cutting through bull****.
I have not seen any evidence that rugby is safer than football when it comes to concussions (and thus presumed CTE). It is alleged that it is safer because there are fewer head collisions since there is no helmet (and thus players are safer), but the very limited academic data I could find showed that rugby also carries a high risk of concussion. As does soccer (I think we had a women's soccer player retire because of repeated concussions), as is basketball (we had a point guard transfer after she wasn't cleared to play here because of concussions).
The question is not safe versus dangerous. Other than sports where there is no chance to collide at a high speed with another person, there is no completely safe sport. We should look at it as a continuum of safer versus less safe, and seek to move all sports towards the safer end, through a combination of technology, rules changes, etc.
BC
[/quote]
Interesting observation. I have a friend who played football for Columbia (might have been NYU, I forget) in the no helmut days. He believes the concission problem is caused by the helmuts. He says that although most of his teammates have passed away none of then suffered brain damage, of course, concussion may not have been discussed much back then, and they did eat better, but his point is interesting. He was also a 5' 6" 160 lb fullback, and didn't face 300+ lb linemen. So there is that. Remember The Bus? I forget his name but was a loneman some NFL team used as a running back, to ,uch sensation many years ago. Was he that much bigger than power rushers today?
Re: more from Frontline on CTE - Leftcoast - 10-02-2014
"The Bus" was Jerome Bettis, a large Steeler Running Back from Notre Dame famously stuffed by Stanford safety Lynch in one of Stanford's early wins at South Bend.Â
I think you mean William "The 'Frig" Perry, a Chicago Lineman whom Head Coach Mike Ditka occasionally rewarded with goal line carries. Perry weighed 335-350 pounds, well above any modern day running back.
Re: more from Frontline on CTE - OutsiderFan - 10-02-2014
I'm pretty sure that Frontline re-aired the original report this week. Did they provide an update?
Last week Colin Cowherd said someone he knows in New Jersey told him one area youth football program couldn't find enough kids to form a league this year. He was quick to point out that football is actually responsible for fewer concussions than other sports, but that football has lost the narrative and it is starting to show in the form of fewer kids playing the sport.
Soccer, which IIRC Cowherd said has as many concussions, is growing and football is shrinking because the NFL and NCAA has done such a poor job handling them. The images of the Michigan QB this week going back in the game after being knocked out, are exactly the kinds of things the dolts in charge of the game do that give the sport such a bad reputation these days.
Re: more from Frontline on CTE - needle - 10-02-2014
Football is just way more dangerous than soccer, CTE or not.
Quote: A football player on Long Island has died in connection with an injury suffered in a varsity game. More troublingly, 16-year-old Tom Cutinella became the third player in the span of one week to pass away following a gameday injury or afflication.
Earlier this week both Rolesville (N.C.) linebacker Isaiah Langston and Henderson (Ala.) cornerback Demario Harris died after collapsing on the field during warmups and in the second quarter, respectively.
http://www.13wmaz.com/story/sports/high-school/2014/10/02/football-death-injuries-high-school/16576369/
Re: more from Frontline on CTE - CTcard - 10-02-2014
(10-02-2014, 06:26 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:... He was quick to point out that football is actually responsible for fewer concussions than other sports,
He may have been quick to point that out, but is it true?
My wife (pediatrician) tells me she sees soccer concussions, but more from football despite having far fewer patients who play football. Of course that is the rough impression of just one doctor in one corner of the country.
Re: more from Frontline on CTE - washingtonismoney - 10-02-2014
(10-02-2014, 06:58 AM)CTcard link Wrote:My wife (pediatrician) tells me she sees soccer concussions, but more from football despite having far fewer patients who play football. Of course that is the rough impression of just one doctor in one corner of the country.
Suspect there's a reporting bias there as well. At least in this country, football players are acculturated to be tough, etc. etc. Soccer players less so*
*(though of course in, say, England, we see similar lauding of super-tough dudes who refused to come out etc. etc.: http://www.thehardtackle.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/terry_butchercave-itdotnet.jpg)
Re: Yup. That was one unending downer - CTcard - 10-02-2014
(10-01-2014, 07:49 PM)ferrari link Wrote:I have a friend who played football for Columbia (might have been NYU, I forget) in the no helmut days.Â
Is he your younger friend??
Looking around a bit it seems helmets, if not helmuts, were at least almost universally worn in college football in the 1930s.
I found toss-off phrases such as "Helmets were not mandatory until the 30's", but it's hard to gauge the accuracy of these comments.
http://www.pasttimesports.biz/history.html
Wikipedia says 1939 in a manner that sounds authoritive, but I cannot check their reference right now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_football_helmet
To push things, I'll do a rough estimate of your friend's age as 110 putting at 20 in 1924. Helmets were certainly around then but apparently significantly not-universal.Â
Of course you may have been talking about the advent of plastic helmets, which seems to have been invented in 1940 and really come into use on the order of 1950. But that might let your friend only be in the 80s range, and where's the fun in that?
Re: more from Frontline on CTE - 82 Card - 10-02-2014
Outsider is right. The film making the rounds this week on PBS is a rerun of the show from a year ago. It appears to have been edited down slightly. Any updates are only in the web site.
Needle's post about other hazards in football brought back memories of the day, years ago, I was walking home from my high school's varsity game and was passed by an ambulance carrying one of our players, never to return. The player had been in a head-on collision on a kickoff. He was taken out of the game. Unknown to those of us watching, he continued to deteriorate on the sideline. He died later in the hospital. The story later was that the player had been in a car accident the night before and didn't tell the coach.
Re: more from Frontline on CTE - Kathy - 10-02-2014
We're running a story in our current issue about changes Missouri schools are making to address concerns over concussions. In Missouri, football is far and away the leading sport for head injuries among students in seventh through 12th grade. Wrestling is second with a fraction of the football injuries; soccer is further down the list.
Top 7 Sports For Head Injuries Among Missouri Students (7th to 12th Grade)
|
Sport/Activity Number of Head Injuries [table][tr][td]Football   1,325 Wrestling 218 Girls Basketball 209 Girls Soccer 198 Boys Soccer 194 Boys Basketball 174 Cheerleading 169 |
Source: Missouri State High School Activities Association 2012-13 Interscholastic Youth Sports Brain Injury Report[/td][/tr][/table]
Padding on the outside - gocard14 - 10-02-2014
One thing I've never understood from a physics perspective:Â Why not have padding on the outside of helmets?
The padding on the inside helps when recieving hits, but having, say, 1/2" of dense foam around the helmet could increase time of impact (reducing impulse) and spread out the area of impact (reducing pressure) for both recieving and delivering hits.
I'm sure this wouldn't solve the problem, but it seems like an easy step in the right direction.
Re: Padding on the outside - BostonCard - 10-02-2014
(10-02-2014, 08:19 AM)gocard14 link Wrote:One thing I've never understood from a physics perspective:Â Why not have padding on the outside of helmets?
The padding on the inside helps when recieving hits, but having, say, 1/2" of dense foam around the helmet could increase time of impact (reducing impulse) and spread out the area of impact (reducing pressure) for both recieving and delivering hits.
I'm sure this wouldn't solve the problem, but it seems like an easy step in the right direction.
Concussions are not caused by the impact per se, but by the sudden acceleration and deceleration of the brain within the skull. Perhaps counterintuitively, there is at least as much of a risk to the brain tissue on the opposite side of the point of impact (the countercoup) as their is to the area directly under impact (the coup). Thus, spreading the impact over a wider area won't prevent head injury, although an additional layer of foam might absorb energy and reduce the internal forces the brain is subjected to. It is worth noting, however, that a large portion of head injury in a concussion is due to rotational acceleration/deceleration (thus, rotational forces) and not linear forces.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countercoup
BC
Re: more from Frontline on CTE - gocard14 - 10-02-2014
I understand your point, but once again go back to the equations. If neuronal injury occurs due to rapid acceleration/deceleration, by definition increasing the time of impact reduces your acceleration (delta V / T).
Interestingly enough, that same principle also would argue that the advice I was always given in high school was counterproductive. I was always told to keep my helmet as inflated as possible. Using the above logic, that would just argue that acceleration forces would just be transmitted to the head faster, rather then having a bit of a crumple zone in a more loosely fitted helmet.