Study from Feb 2018 journal Brain showing hits not concussion cause CTE
Concussion, microvascular injury, and early tauopathy in young athletes after impact head injury and an impact concussion mouse model
My embed kungfu is no good... perhaps yours is much better.
If you are interested hit this link...
https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awx350
There is a 4 min video embedded in this study (which was published with a public link... i.e. you have full access.) which I can't scrape for this post (or at least 20 mins of looking couldn't get it done.)
The video is a pretty good summary. I will diarize later if I have time but there is nothing here that a layperson can't wrap their heads around.
This is the sort of publishing Journals should do for all public health studies IMO.
TL;DR - Concussions don't cause CTE. The raw contact does. Concussion protocols don't protect players from CTE risk.
Time to think about flag football Saturdays perhaps. I for one would like to see Ultimate made a varsity sport. Regardless this is good science and is well written.
This study should have some media impact if it hasn't already.
Go Blue!
February 2nd, 2018 at 10:09 AM ^
And there is a reason(s), that popularity is diminishing. Many obective measures support this diminished popularity as fact. One of the biggest is youth participation. It's doing more than dwindling. It's tanking.
It's reasonable to conclude the more facts people know via scientific study (didn't exist when the sport grew to it's greatest heights on all fronts), the less they like it.
February 2nd, 2018 at 10:30 AM ^
That's a whole bunch of "diminished popularity."
(Source: http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/15210245/slight-one-year-increa…)
February 2nd, 2018 at 3:12 PM ^
Any way to compare the population growth vis-a-vis growth in kids enrolling to play football?
February 2nd, 2018 at 6:48 PM ^
That provide those statistics. It should be pretty straight-forward to figure out.
Nevertheless, it seems as though participation waxes and wanes over time. The ESPN article showed that participation was slightly higher than in the previous year; but a more recent study I saw (not ESPN's, so I don't know if it's reputable) seemed to indicate that it declined slightly in 2016.
February 2nd, 2018 at 4:12 PM ^
if you started covering cross country, you wouldn't really need to change the name of your blog!
February 2nd, 2018 at 9:11 AM ^
Very, very few people who play football ever make any money off it. In fact the percentage who do is so small that in that regard it's no different from other youth sports. Also the theory that football teaches different lesson than other sports is largely a construct of those who play and coach football. As to who cares about what sport, if you're playing because others care so much about you playing, that's more an issue for you than someone seriously into a sport like cross country/track
February 2nd, 2018 at 9:35 AM ^
a) The difference is that there are 53 players on every NFL team, and there are 32 NFL teams. The percentage might be small, but the opportunities are much more abundant. Add on the coaching and administrative staff - that also usually requires playing experience - and you're talking about a lot more people than the NBA,
b) I disagree. There are some aspects of football that cannot be taught through the vast majority of other sports.
c) Lots of people care about who's watching. There's a reason people gravitate to sports, performing arts, etc. that get eyes on them. Badminton and tennis are essentially the same sport, if you don't care who's watching. But one of them has Wimbledon, and one of them has...the Olympics? Is badminton in the Olympics anymore? Some people are motivated by how much attention they'll get and how much pressure they'll feel when playing or performing.
February 2nd, 2018 at 10:06 AM ^
Point b is just feelingsball bullshit you tell yourself to justify watching football. The fuck you get taught in football that can't be taught in other sports?
The rest of the world just not learning these lessons? The 99.9% of the population of the world who doesn't play football are just missing crucial life building skills?
February 2nd, 2018 at 10:38 AM ^
And that is before you get to the culture around football that causes coaches to prioritize winning over everything else including the lives of their players and other people around them.
Is the culture that allowed Baylor, PSU, and MSU one of those life lessons? Is it the lessons learned about coaches pushing medical staffs to clear players earlier and harming their bodies? Is it the lessons about pushing through pain using drugs creating lifelone dependency problems with drugs and pain part of those awesome life lessons? The way football is glorified by some in the community is nauseting and one of the negatives about it.
February 2nd, 2018 at 10:21 AM ^
Your kid is not going to be Tom Brady (and btw his wife makes more than him) but if you look at world wide $$ opportunities and length of career I would think basketball, baseball, golf and soccer offer more financial opportunites. All of them are miniscule so I hope this never enters into a parent's thought process.
February 2nd, 2018 at 11:29 AM ^
"All of them are miniscule so I hope this never enters into a parent's thought process."
Well, you might hope, but I'm sure there are a lot of parents who see their kid playing sports when they're young and are like, "Well, this kid might just be able to make it to the pros." I think virtually any father who was an elite athlete lets that idea run through his mind: Can my kid be as good or better than I was?
I do a piece on TTB every year around this time that talks about the sons of famous athletes who are going on to play FBS football. I'm sure the idea of football greatness doesn't just pop into their heads once the kid turns 18 and heads off to college for fall camp.
February 2nd, 2018 at 3:13 PM ^
Sure if they are genetically blessed with mom or dad's freakish size or speed (hormonal greatness) the idea of their kid being a pro enters their minds when they are the best on the field at a very young age. Heck that is just as true of kids whose parents who have no ability at all but have early developing kids.
That still doesn't change the fact the odds of making more than the taxi squad (using football, but it applies to all sports) when they are 20 are very low. If the kid wants it and isn't sacrificing their class room studies or seriously endangering their long term health, then great - but that is not what I generally observe.
February 2nd, 2018 at 8:49 AM ^
February 2nd, 2018 at 9:23 AM ^
February 2nd, 2018 at 9:36 AM ^
Hockey is defintely part of this discussion, but there aren't nearly so many children participating in MMA and boxing.
The fact that you describe it as a freak accident means that it's very unlikely. Evidence is suggesting that's less the case with football. It would be kind of like saying you could get bit by a shark by swimming at the beach in the ocean, it's happened to people; therefore, it's fine to let children fight angry sharks in a tank.
February 2nd, 2018 at 9:41 AM ^
February 2nd, 2018 at 9:54 AM ^
But our inability to control some things shouldn't preclude us from considering controlling the things we can. Sometimes a deer runs out in front of your car and you get in an accident that was beyond your control; so should we just eliminate all safety-based traffic laws because sometimes accidents can't be controlled?
February 2nd, 2018 at 9:49 AM ^
Yep, I have the same question. It's all about football, but people get slammed into boards, get into fights, get cross-checked, etc. in hockey, and it doesn't seem to be a major issue. I have two football players who also do boxing (Tom Zbikowski!), and some who have dabbled in MMA. The opportunity to get hit in the head is prevalent in a lot of places.
February 2nd, 2018 at 10:07 AM ^
have you watched a college, Olympic, international, or NHL game lately? The governing bodies of all these leagues are trying to make the sport more about skill and less about violence. It still has a long way to go but the game is changing.
Football on the other hand is in trouble with the NCAA and the NFL commisioners setting the future course of the sport coupled with referees who don't enforce serious penalties consistently, or at all.
February 2nd, 2018 at 8:54 AM ^
February 2nd, 2018 at 9:04 AM ^
More people can and do play football than jet ski.So the spotlight and people's reaction will be more for football than jet ski.
February 2nd, 2018 at 9:14 AM ^
I've always thought the trade off at the NFL level is great. If you are smart with your money*, you can set your grandkids up. I'd trade 10 years off the end of my life if it meant my grandchildren were going to be well off.
The problem is below that level, you can still incur the damage to cause CTE. And 99.8% of all football players never make it to the NFL. IMO, the NCAA needs to monetize likeness, and "pay the players" with lifelong medical care, put in place upon graduation. Below that level, well, kids are screwed. Educate them on the dangers, ensure proper equipment and proper use/fit of said equipment.
I think football is a great game. I played two years and knew it wasn't for me. Even in middle school I knew it was too dangerous for my liking, that the probably of injury was not worth it for me. And that is the choice to be made. Are you good enough, do you love it enough to risk injury?
*I know athletes go broke, but damn. You have 3 years minimum at a university, take a finance course!
February 2nd, 2018 at 9:59 AM ^
That's the question, though. There are stories about NFLers going off the deep end, turning suicidal, etc. that are attributed to CTE, but a lot of those guys played football and took those hits for about 30 years of their lives.
Is it a problem when a kid plays football from 10 to 18 and then never steps on the field again? How much CTE do they develop, and how much does it hurt them later? I haven't seen much/any evidence that playing football in high school leads to long-term brain injuries that significantly increase the chances of suicide, dementia, etc.
If I'm going to die at 65 instead of 75 but I get to be a millionaire in the NFL, then maybe I make that trade. If I'm going to die at 74 instead of 75 but I get to play a sport that I love in high school, then maybe I make that trade.
I think the biggest question might be, "What happens to the 50 football players in your high school if they can't play football?" What do they do instead? Do they stop playing sports altogether? Do 10 of them go play another sport, while the other 40 don't do anything? If those good athletes in football go and play another sport, what's the trickle-down effect when they take spots away from kids who used to run cross country or play soccer or basketball?
Football creates significantly more opportunities at every level than any other sport.
February 2nd, 2018 at 10:52 AM ^
That is where the study needs to take place, but that isn't where the money is. I want to know how many 8 year long football pre-college careers lead to CTE. Then compare those figures for hockey, basketball, soccer, etc.
My thought is that the numbers will be higher than you think for all sports, but highest in football/hockey.
February 2nd, 2018 at 11:12 AM ^
"Is it a problem when a kid plays football from 10 to 18 and then never steps on the field again?"
For some the answer appears to be yes.
"How much CTE do they develop, and how much does it hurt them later?"
Current evidence seems to show that it varies drastically from individual to individual, and we do not know why...and have no way of determining which individuals are which.
February 2nd, 2018 at 8:58 PM ^
on any of your CTE arguments.
But what do all those HS athletes do without football?!
They play soccer, lacross, hockey, tennis, track, skiing, baseball, swimming, basketball, biking, mountain climbing, frisbee, speed skating, bowling, ninja warrior or whatever the hell they want to.
There are a finite amount of HS boys, but there are countless other sports for them to participate in and even thrive.
The rest of the developed world is a pretty good example of what happens to athletic young men when there is no American Fottball to play. Somehow they survive.
February 2nd, 2018 at 10:13 AM ^
February 2nd, 2018 at 10:41 AM ^
February 2nd, 2018 at 11:20 AM ^
HIGH SCHOOL FALL SPORTS
DIRECT INJURIES PER 100,000 PARTICIPANTS
MALE
1982-83 – 2010-2011
SOCCER
Fatalities: 0.10
Non-Fatal Catastrophic Injuries: 0.04
Serious Injuries: 0.08
FOOTBALL
Fatalities: 0.29
Non-Fatal Catastrophic Injuries: 0.87
Serious Injuries: 0.8
Football
2.9x the fatality rate
21x the Non-Fatal Catastrophic Injury rate
10x the Seerious Injury rate
February 2nd, 2018 at 11:03 AM ^
and the panic when someone starts doing CTE studies of soccer players is going to be hilarious.
Playing high-level competitive sports is tough on your body.
February 2nd, 2018 at 6:50 PM ^
This is nonsense, there's a big difference between football where the goal is to smash into eachother and get hit constantly and the three forms of skiing you mention where nobody is trying to smash into you.
February 2nd, 2018 at 8:49 AM ^
For some reason, mgoblog is deleting my text when my comments gets posted, leaving only the subject line. Makes me sound like an idiot. In this case I'd written two paragraphs, and I'll be damned if I'm going to recreate them so: (1) mgoblog fix this damn it; and (2) really, I'm not an idiot.
Short version: I really like the video, it makes the science accessible.
February 2nd, 2018 at 8:58 AM ^
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/02/opinion/sunday/nfl-cte-brain-damage…
Now that we have so much more information than was available when her husband played, parents can make informed decisions, as can current pro players. I think she makes a persuasive argument for not allowing your kids to play, but I still believe it's an individual's decision, player or parent. I do hope her husband finds treatment to alleviate his symptoms. If he had known the risks, he may have chosen not to play.
February 2nd, 2018 at 9:26 AM ^
I'm starting to be a little torn on the parent's decision part. When does it become unreasonable to allow a parent to make decisions for their children that will result in their harm? If asbestos licking contests became a popular children's activity, would we say it's up to parents to decide if their children should participate or would we think of that as clear child abuse? I'm not saying football and CTE are to that level, but the more we learn, the closer it gets. If football weren't popular and no one was emotionally invested in it, would people be defending it? I don't know.
February 2nd, 2018 at 9:52 AM ^
I see your point. I personally would not let my kid play. But for argument's sake, football's safety can be improved. Whether the football industry (including pee wee all the way up to pro, and everything in between) takes that on in any serious way is still to be determined. Licking asbestos is dangerous whether you do it a little or a lot. There's no way to make it safer.
February 2nd, 2018 at 9:57 AM ^
And I certainly hope that challenge is taken on to improve the safety. But parents aren't deciding to let their kids play hypothetical safer football right now; they are deciding to let them play the current hyperbolic-asbestos-licking version.
February 2nd, 2018 at 10:02 AM ^
Parents are letting their kids eat McDonald's and Burger King. Should we also take away their right/ability to feed fast food to their children? Obesity is a bigger problem in America than football.
February 2nd, 2018 at 10:15 AM ^
Hmm, that's an interesting point and warrants some thought. But I think they're not quite the same thing. The option to eat fast food would be more like if a kid was allowed to play the occasional game of football. If eating unhealthy food were an organized activity where kids were compelled to eat junk several times a week and then scientific studies started showing that a lot of those kids became obese, people would probably have a problem with that kind of organized activity.
My point is not to say football should be banned, anyhow. My point is that the discussion shouldn't end with "let the parents decide, no need to consider anything else."
February 2nd, 2018 at 9:15 AM ^
February 2nd, 2018 at 9:17 AM ^
February 2nd, 2018 at 10:35 AM ^
discouraged my kids from participating in all of these activites for multiple reasons including injuries, cost, time commitment, and high testosterone coaches. Had they been really persistent about participating in these activities, I may have reconsidered but it never came to that.
They were multi- team sport athletes and now play D3 varsity and D1 Club soccer, water polo, and swim (with academics as the priority). Were there injuries in these sports? Absolutely. But in my observation the severity was far less serious, and prolonged, than in football.
Also these "other sports" allowed them the opportunity to continue to play competitively well into their adulthood which is a great benefit.
February 2nd, 2018 at 10:24 AM ^
If it weren't pimped like crazy for the willing sports consumer, it would be on the fast tracked to being banned, if not banned right now. Let's be real.
The apologists are using weak arguments to support something they love. But those arguments are way more convincing because the world is populated by many other people who love it too.
I know people with ALS, dementia, and related illnesses. They can't go choose spinach salad and more walking to get rid of a few extra pounds or control their cholesterol.
There is no turning back toward improvement when the brain goes. The existences of the victims becomes progressively more painful and dehumanizing.
That fast food example is almost insulting.
February 2nd, 2018 at 11:19 AM ^
I love all these sports (soccer, football, rugby etc.) but they could all be improved by figuring out ways to reduce head injuries and the kind of "micro-trauma" that all the research points to as the culprit for CTE.
My kids play soccer - I grumbled about the elimination of headers for a while but you know what? It's just a different good game without them. And don't get me started on the idiocy of tacklng technique in football vs. rugby.
February 2nd, 2018 at 10:50 AM ^
February 2nd, 2018 at 11:21 AM ^
and tweak these games to reduce/mitigate head impacts.
February 2nd, 2018 at 11:31 AM ^
Very few people are saying "Don't tweak the game at all." The question is about how much tweaking it takes before it's not football anymore, or before the sport just simply doesn't exist.
February 2nd, 2018 at 2:27 PM ^
February 2nd, 2018 at 11:00 AM ^
News at 11.
February 2nd, 2018 at 12:03 PM ^
Just like all of the other CTE posts that have happened on this board, this thread is pretty dumb for a bunch of smart people.
Yes Magnus, we know you love football. We know you will defend it and any harm it does all for the sake of the game.
Yes, we know there is an adamant minority that think football needs to be immediately banned for the sake of everyone.
Yes, there is a balanced majority saying, someway, somehow there has to be a middle ground.
Instead, we get ridiculous extreme arguments all trying to justify some point or position which isn't even grounded in trying to find a solution to a very real problem.
How about we get rid of the helmets and some of the pads and play it like we did growing up in the backyard?