steelerfury.com
http://www.steelerfury.com/forum/

110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE
http://www.steelerfury.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=8910
Page 1 of 2

Author:  Still Lit [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 11:28 am ]
Post subject:  110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fu ... le/2645104

110 out of 111 brains of deceased former NFL players donated for study evinced CTE.

Let the armchair discrediting and dismissing begin!

I don't know how many will find this study convincing, but at a certain point it seems to me that the empirical evidence is going to reach an inflection point.

Author:  SteelPro [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 1:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

Still Lit wrote:
http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2645104

110 out of 111 brains of deceased former NFL players donated for study evinced CTE.

Let the armchair discrediting and dismissing begin!

I don't know how many will find this study convincing, but at a certain point it seems to me that the empirical evidence is going to reach an inflection point.


I don't buy it. I don't see how anyone that played in the NFL could not have a brain injury.

Author:  Steelcody36 [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 3:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

SteelPro wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2645104

110 out of 111 brains of deceased former NFL players donated for study evinced CTE.

Let the armchair discrediting and dismissing begin!

I don't know how many will find this study convincing, but at a certain point it seems to me that the empirical evidence is going to reach an inflection point.


I don't buy it. I don't see how anyone that played in the NFL could not have a brain injury.


Evinced means there WAS evidence of damage, correct?

Author:  SteelPro [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 3:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

Steelcody36 wrote:
SteelPro wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2645104

110 out of 111 brains of deceased former NFL players donated for study evinced CTE.

Let the armchair discrediting and dismissing begin!

I don't know how many will find this study convincing, but at a certain point it seems to me that the empirical evidence is going to reach an inflection point.


I don't buy it. I don't see how anyone that played in the NFL could not have a brain injury.


Evinced means there WAS evidence of damage, correct?


Correct. Which means one somehow didn't. Probably a kicker

Author:  Steel Drummer [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 3:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

Yes.

Author:  jebrick [ Wed Jul 26, 2017 9:06 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

The report is heavily biased in that the family members donating the brains had stated they thought their loved on had brain damage. Can they spread this out to cover boxing, MMA, soccer, and combat vets/soldiers? Basically any profession that get concussions more often than the average person.

Not saying that this wrong or bad data. CTE is caused by repeated concussions. But this particular report is heavily biased.

Author:  Kodiak [ Wed Jul 26, 2017 10:01 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

jebrick wrote:
Can they spread this out to cover boxing, MMA, soccer, and combat vets/soldiers?


And I've wondered what impact PED's have as far as elevating the risk and/or severity.

But, yeah, without random sampling and control groups you can't gauge how much higher the risk is. Obviously NFL players have higher risk of CTE than office workers, but they need to quantify the increased chance of CTE and the chance it causes problems (i.e. all NFL players could have some amount of CTE, maybe grade 1-10 and only grade 10 presents significant risks).

Anyway, we're probably only 10-15 years away from our "pro athletes" being robots controlled by nerds who never played a sport in their life.

Author:  Steelcody36 [ Wed Jul 26, 2017 10:52 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

Steelcody36 wrote:
SteelPro wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2645104

110 out of 111 brains of deceased former NFL players donated for study evinced CTE.

Let the armchair discrediting and dismissing begin!

I don't know how many will find this study convincing, but at a certain point it seems to me that the empirical evidence is going to reach an inflection point.


I don't buy it. I don't see how anyone that played in the NFL could not have a brain injury.


Evinced means there WAS evidence of damage, correct?


Correct. Which means one somehow didn't. Probably a kicker[/quote]

I didn't understand your comment. "I don't buy it". You don't buy what? Only one didn't show damage, and the study is biased. It only had families who lost a former player. They were all damaged goods. The majority don't have that damage.

Author:  Kodiak [ Wed Jul 26, 2017 2:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

Steelcody36 wrote:
They were all damaged goods. The majority don't have that damage.


That's not necessarily a true statement. The majority didn't show outward signs of impairment, at least not enough for the family to consent to an autopsy.

100+ players is still a lot, and there were enough issues for the family to volunteer, and those issues were confirmed. I've not heard of a large number of players in other sports having these issues.

Author:  Steelafan77 [ Thu Jul 27, 2017 7:40 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

Worth a view...

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/latest-rou ... 03329.html

Author:  Still Lit [ Thu Jul 27, 2017 10:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

Steelafan77 wrote:


Nothing more than loose correlation in the study I linked, but the evidence is mounting.

A study that showed HS players do not end up with these problems is unimpressive bc CTE is likely cumulative and if you only play 4 years of serious contact ball, you aren't begin exposed as much.

It is staggering that 110/111 brains evince CTE and all these dudes just happened to play professional football. This is not a slam dunk. but it is disturbing.

My wife will not let our boy near football.

Author:  Steelcody36 [ Thu Jul 27, 2017 12:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

Still Lit wrote:
Steelafan77 wrote:


Nothing more than loose correlation in the study I linked, but the evidence is mounting.

A study that showed HS players do not end up with these problems is unimpressive bc CTE is likely cumulative and if you only play 4 years of serious contact ball, you aren't begin exposed as much.

It is staggering that 110/111 brains evince CTE and all these dudes just happened to play professional football. This is not a slam dunk. but it is disturbing.

My wife will not let our boy near football.


Is she also going to ban your kid from driving? You know in case of an accident.

Sorry, this isn't a good lesson for your kid, but I could see banning football until middle school.

Author:  Still Lit [ Thu Jul 27, 2017 12:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

Steelcody36 wrote:
Is she also going to ban your kid from driving? You know in case of an accident.

Sorry, this isn't a good lesson for your kid, but I could see banning football until middle school.


"Sorry" is not something that justifies a premise.

And no, she is not going to keep my kid from diving because diving is not a contact sport that requires a helmet and virtually guarantees repeated blows to the head inside a helmet.

We will provide plenty of occasions for our son to exercise courage and endurance and toughness so that he does not end up overly soft. But thanks for you concern! It really does take a village!

Author:  Steelcody36 [ Thu Jul 27, 2017 3:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

Still Lit wrote:
Steelcody36 wrote:
Is she also going to ban your kid from driving? You know in case of an accident.

Sorry, this isn't a good lesson for your kid, but I could see banning football until middle school.


"Sorry" is not something that justifies a premise.

And no, she is not going to keep my kid from diving because diving is not a contact sport that requires a helmet and virtually guarantees repeated blows to the head inside a helmet.

We will provide plenty of occasions for our son to exercise courage and endurance and toughness so that he does not end up overly soft. But thanks for you concern! It really does take a village!


I wasn't calling your parenting into question, just the ideal that playing football is a stone cold lock to cause irreversible damage.

That's simply not the case. The 1800's and early 1900's? Abso-fuckinlutely it was a death wish. There are a lot more safe guards today than even 5 years ago.

Author:  jebrick [ Thu Jul 27, 2017 3:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

I think you will see helmets change radically in a year or two. They are testing out a new helmet designed to prevent concussions.

Author:  fractalsteel [ Thu Jul 27, 2017 3:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

Looks like another NFL player called it quits quite early in their career.
John Urschel from the Ravens retired this week after the report came out. In the article provided he didn't mention that concussions were the prime reason but he talks about how his mental process was diminished by a concussion.
Urschel has something to fall back on and he was probably the most intelligent person in the league.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/27/spor ... .html?_r=0

Have to say I worry about brain damage for I have suffered about 8-9 bad concussions in my life. Thankfully the last one was about fifteen years ago when I slipped on the sidewalk(downslope) during Winter and smacked my head hard. I missed a week of work and was so out of sorts those first few days that I have no memory of them.

Author:  R S [ Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

I don't think any helmet is going to be completely safe unless it's full body bubble.

So what's the end game here? I don't get it. Maybe I'm dense.

Football, and contact sports cause damage to the brain. Those that play longer, ie: professionals, have more signs and symptoms than someone who stops in high school.

Boxing, MMA, and soccer to a lesser degree also can damage the brain. I recall studies showing brain damage from heading balls repeatedly in soccer and some people were calling for outlawing the header.....

So, once again, what is the end game? Outlaw the sports? Ban head punches in boxing? Flag football?

Are they still doing studies to find out if Boxing is healthy for the brain???


How about we recognize there is some danger, make the games as safe as possible with REASONABLE rule changes that won't change the entire point of the game, and move on.

These things seem to be happening already?

Author:  Steelcody36 [ Fri Jul 28, 2017 9:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

R S wrote:
I don't think any helmet is going to be completely safe unless it's full body bubble.

So what's the end game here? I don't get it. Maybe I'm dense.

Football, and contact sports cause damage to the brain. Those that play longer, ie: professionals, have more signs and symptoms than someone who stops in high school.

Boxing, MMA, and soccer to a lesser degree also can damage the brain. I recall studies showing brain damage from heading balls repeatedly in soccer and some people were calling for outlawing the header.....

So, once again, what is the end game? Outlaw the sports? Ban head punches in boxing? Flag football?

Are they still doing studies to find out if Boxing is healthy for the brain???

How about we recognize there is some danger, make the games as safe as possible with REASONABLE rule changes that won't change the entire point of the game, and move on.

These things seem to be happening already?


Bingo.

Author:  Laying the Wood [ Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

I think the solution is, many parents, like Lit and Mrs. Lit, will refuse to let their kids play football, and the sport will die out.

Author:  fortythree [ Sun Aug 13, 2017 2:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

My son won't be allowed to play football.

My rule, but my wife supports it.

Cody's snarky comment about driving is dumb because driving is pretty much a necessity in our world today whereas no one needs to play football.

Author:  Steelcody36 [ Sun Aug 13, 2017 9:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

fortythree wrote:
My son won't be allowed to play football.

My rule, but my wife supports it.

Cody's snarky comment about driving is dumb because driving is pretty much a necessity in our world today whereas no one needs to play football.


How's it a necessity? Public transportation, flying, walking, riding a bike, are all more safe.

How many idiots kill themselves and others driving under the influence compared to those who die because of football? The answer is there's no comparison, and scared parenting aint gonna end football.

Author:  JPPT1974 [ Mon Aug 14, 2017 1:24 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

If you ask me, the league is not doing enough at all!

Author:  R S [ Mon Aug 14, 2017 1:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

fortythree wrote:
My son won't be allowed to play football.

My rule, but my wife supports it.

Cody's snarky comment about driving is dumb because driving is pretty much a necessity in our world today whereas no one needs to play football.



There are thousands of things that are potentially dangerous that are not a necessity. It's each parents right to say no to them, whether it be riding ATVs, boxing, MMA, soccer, or gymnastics. Football is the new whipping boy. MMA exploded in the last 10 years and you don't hear a peep about the safety of getting your head beat in with fists, elbows and knees.

Author:  COR-TEN [ Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

R S wrote:
fortythree wrote:
My son won't be allowed to play football.

My rule, but my wife supports it.

Cody's snarky comment about driving is dumb because driving is pretty much a necessity in our world today whereas no one needs to play football.



There are thousands of things that are potentially dangerous that are not a necessity. It's each parents right to say no to them, whether it be riding ATVs, boxing, MMA, soccer, or gymnastics. Football is the new whipping boy. MMA exploded in the last 10 years and you don't hear a peep about the safety of getting your head beat in with fists, elbows and knees.
Did you see the vid of the south african body builder who snapped his neck trying to do a backflip on a mat? He died. It sure was ugly.

Author:  Still Lit [ Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 110 out 111 former player brains evince CTE

R S wrote:
fortythree wrote:
My son won't be allowed to play football.

My rule, but my wife supports it.

Cody's snarky comment about driving is dumb because driving is pretty much a necessity in our world today whereas no one needs to play football.



There are thousands of things that are potentially dangerous that are not a necessity. It's each parents right to say no to them, whether it be riding ATVs, boxing, MMA, soccer, or gymnastics. Football is the new whipping boy. MMA exploded in the last 10 years and you don't hear a peep about the safety of getting your head beat in with fists, elbows and knees.


In all fairness, only utter morons think MMA might not be extremely hazardous to your health.

The driving example is silly because you do not have your head knocked about every time you drive, whereas during a game of football, it is pretty much required. Who cares whether it is necessary.

It's not about parenting from a "scared" attitude. It's about being prudent about your kid's activities. You can't too much shelter kids from physical danger because then you run the risk of turning them into adults with dispositions more soft than is appropriate. But my response to Cody, to which he has no good response, is that there are many ways of exposing your kid to physical endurance that requires courage that does not involve the risk of repeated micro-head trauma.

There is nothing especially noble about football. So the risks associated with it outweigh the glory. I'd rather have my kid do, say, BMX racing, which is damn risky, takes balls, but involves less head trauma. Sure, break your arm, wrist, hand a few times en route to glory. But you won't end up possibly a vegetable. Or high school wrestling. I mean, it's not like football is the only option. Now if my kid wants to join the Marines, I won't like it, but now the nobility is real and makes the risk worth it, even beautiful. Football? Who gives a shit, really.

In short, the idea that one must allow his or her kid to engage in a sport that carries a real risk of head trauma in order to teach him endurance, courage, toughness, camaraderie or the idea that if one chooses not to let their child play football that it follows with any scintilla of necessity that they parent "scared" is risible, unimaginative, plodding, and fails even a cursory round of logical analysis.

Gymnastics carries as high a risk as football or MMA for head trauma? Really?

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/