CTE in nearly 90 percent of football players

[dave mcbride]

this reminds me of a topic debated on ppp. Climate change. No actual science beyond a simple snapshot. It's nothing at all I'm concerned with until Leonardo DiCaprio tells me to worry

no they won't. Those dainty parents would have never let them play football.

Da Nile -- it ain't just a river in Egypt.

you don't know much about science do ya?

 

Protip: sample size is crucial so scientific fact vs scientific theory.

Wtf? This is gibberish.

[Malazan]

Wtf? This is gibberish.

 

Science is only "real" science when it confirms what I want to believe. You should also never let facts get in the way of a good crusade. These are big mistakes that "scientists" make all the time.

[dave mcbride]

The level of denial in this thread is embarrassing. Why can't people simply admit that they like following a sport that is obviously hazardous to human health?? I admit it. It ain't pretty, but it's the truth. As I've long maintained, I would have likely been a gladiator fight fan in ancient Rome, but I like to think that I would have been holdimg my thumb down (symbolizing swords down) when the Editor asked the crowd for a vote on the fate of the loser. But at least I admit that I probably woild have been a gladiatorial combat fan.

 

Science is only "real" science when it confirms what I want to believe. You should also never let facts get in the way of a good crusade. These are big mistakes that "scientists" make all the time.

Please explain your point with evidence. I suggest reading this if you get a chance, btw -- https://www.amazon.com/Death-Expertise-Campaign-Established-Knowledge/dp/0190469412 . Whatever mistakes scientists may make, they're far more reliable than skeptics of science (because - get this - scientists aren't correct 100 percent of the time!) on the internet who basically don't have a clue about what they're talking about. I could go on. Edited July 26, 2017 by dave mcbride

[ExiledInIllinois]

The level of denial in this thread is embarrassing. Why can't people simply admit that they like following a sport that is obviously hazardous to human health?? I admit it. It ain't pretty, but it's the truth. As I've long maintained, I would have likely been a gladiator fight fan in ancient Rome, but I like to think that I would have been holdimg my thumb down (symbolizing swords down) when the Editor asked the crowd for a vote on the fate of the loser. But at least I admit that I probably woild have been a gladiatorial combat fan.

Please explain your point with evidence. I suggest reading this if you get a chance, btw -- https://www.amazon.com/Death-Expertise-Campaign-Established-Knowledge/dp/0190469412 . Whatever mistakes scientists may make, they're far more reliable than skeptics of science (because - get this - scientists aren't correct 100 percent of the time!) on the internet who basically don't have a clue about what they're talking about. I could go on.

So true! Thanks for the book recommendation.

 

He can say this again!

 

"Nichols has deeper concerns than the current rejection of expertise and learning, noting that when ordinary citizens believe that no one knows more than anyone else, democratic institutions themselves are in danger of falling either to populism or to technocracy-or in the worst case, a combination of both. The Death of Expertise is not only an exploration of a dangerous phenomenon but also a warning about the stability and survival of modern democracy in the Information Age."

[HardyBoy]

 

No, Thurman Thomas has CTE symptoms.

 

CTE can't be diagnosed without an autopsy...and last I checked, he's not dead.

This study has some flaws with regards to sample bias, but I think it shows a very stark reality...if you show symptoms of CTE and played football, regardless of the other confounding variables, then you very likely have CTE.

 

That's not nothing, and should open a lot of doors for earlier access to behavioral therapies to hopefully preserve as much function as possible, for as long as possible.

 

Symptoms don't mean you're crazy, they mean you have a diagnosable condition that would benefit from therapy. This study should help get those therapies covered by insurance using symptoms as a diagnosis criteria.

[Kemp]

weren't those who got checked the ones having issues?

 

It would be like people with stomach pains going to the doctor and being told they had an intestinal blockage...90% of the people they checked had intestinal blockages...of course because tehy are only checking those who had issues...

People with stomach pains have a 90% chance of an intestinal blockage?

 

Less than 5% would be a much more accurate number.

[plenzmd1]

The level of denial in this thread is embarrassing. Why can't people simply admit that they like following a sport that is obviously hazardous to human health?? Whatever mistakes scientists may make, they're far more reliable than skeptics of science (because - get this - scientists aren't correct 100 percent of the time!) on the internet who basically don't have a clue about what they're talking about. I could go on.

Dave, I am not debating the science, only debating the fact that they tested 111 brains, 110 had CTE, therefore 99% of NFL players will end up with CTE. Unfortuntely, that is how it is being portrayed. I like the CBS morning news, and their doctor was just on and the left that same impression...no mention of how/why the 111 brains were donated etc...just the 110 out of 111 stat. And I think that is dangerous for other sports etc that could play a factor in getting CTE as well if no other control group or random studies are done.

This study has some flaws with regards to sample bias, but I think it shows a very stark reality...if you show symptoms of CTE and played football, regardless of the other confounding variables, then you very likely have CTE.

 

That's not nothing, and should open a lot of doors for earlier access to behavioral therapies to hopefully preserve as much function as possible, for as long as possible.

 

Symptoms don't mean you're crazy, they mean you have a diagnosable condition that would benefit from therapy. This study should help get those therapies covered by insurance using symptoms as a diagnosis criteria.

Awesome points

[boyst]

Da Nile -- it ain't just a river in Egypt.

 

Wtf? This is gibberish.

alright boy genius. Science. How does it Work?

 

If untested 111 Boston residents and found 110 of them love the Patriots does that make 99% of all in Massachusetts a queer?

[boyst]

The level of denial in this thread is embarrassing. Why can't people simply admit that they like following a sport that is obviously hazardous to human health?? I admit it. It ain't pretty, but it's the truth. As I've long maintained, I would have likely been a gladiator fight fan in ancient Rome, but I like to think that I would have been holdimg my thumb down (symbolizing swords down) when the Editor asked the crowd for a vote on the fate of the loser. But at least I admit that I probably woild have been a gladiatorial combat fan.

Please explain your point with evidence. I suggest reading this if you get a chance, btw -- https://www.amazon.com/Death-Expertise-Campaign-Established-Knowledge/dp/0190469412 . Whatever mistakes scientists may make, they're far more reliable than skeptics of science (because - get this - scientists aren't correct 100 percent of the time!) on the internet who basically don't have a clue about what they're talking about. I could go on.

I can admit whatever the reality is. In my eyes

 

NFL is filled with thug retards, mentally imbalanced and chemically altered ogres who play a sport that leads their body to be damaged. They make choices to take drugs and meds to make a living. We all make choices. These are grown men who are absolutely no different than you and I. The only difference is a physical gift of speed, size or athletic ability.

 

So, CTE being linked to football? Spare me. I could care less what a man decides to do. I cheer the team. Not the player.

[NoSaint]

weren't those who got checked the ones having issues?

 

It would be like people with stomach pains going to the doctor and being told they had an intestinal blockage...90% of the people they checked had intestinal blockages...of course because tehy are only checking those who had issues...

Right but if that was a large percentage of the entire towns population it would still be a red flag of sorts.

[plenzmd1]

Right but if that was a large percentage of the entire towns population it would still be a red flag of sorts.

Correct, but 110 brains out of how many NFL players that have died in that same span...i would hope that if NFL players are truly concerned about this, 100% of them would donate their brain (except those with religious beliefs that might prevent it) , as well as athletes from soccer, hockey, water polo etc.

[papazoid]

is there any player today who doesn't know hits to the head are bad ? if not, shame on NFLPA.

 

therefore legally , aren't they subject to PLAY AT YOUR OWN RISK ??

 

also, many if not most, have it BEFORE they get to the NFL.

 

the NFL combine tests for bad hearts....why not brains ? (while alive)

Edited July 26, 2017 by papazoid

[mead107]

Flag football or robots? would you pay season tickets ?

[CommonCents]

alright boy genius. Science. How does it Work?

 

If untested 111 Boston residents and found 110 of them love the Patriots does that make 99% of all in Massachusetts a queer?

Finally I'm in the 1 percentile! Line the ladies up! Just make sure you tell them size don't matter!!

[Big Gun]

is there any player today who doesn't know hits to the head are bad ? if not, shame on NFLPA.

 

therefore legally , aren't they subject to PLAY AT YOUR OWN RISK ??

 

also, many if not most, have it BEFORE they get to the NFL.

 

the NFL combine tests for bad hearts....why not brains ? (while alive)

You never know, Kyrie Irving thinks the world is flat.

[Bills_Chick]

This makes me really really sad. It may be the reason I eventually stop watching football. WHY IS BASEBALL SO BORING?!

is there any player today who doesn't know hits to the head are bad ? if not, shame on NFLPA.

 

therefore legally , aren't they subject to PLAY AT YOUR OWN RISK ??

 

also, many if not most, have it BEFORE they get to the NFL.

 

the NFL combine tests for bad hearts....why not brains ? (while alive)

 

At what point do we draw the line on assumption of risk. Things like MMA and boxing are legal (and probably worse) for the brain than NFL football. But we don't accept death matches under the "assumption of risk" theory -- why not though? I mean if two dudes enter a ring knowing it is a fight to the literal death, shouldn't we let them do it? They are assuming the risk aren't they?

We in society have to draw a line on monetizing inherently dangerous activities. Is wrong to pay people to undertake serious health risks? It is something I struggle with as a sports fan for sure. Especially when they start out as kids as you noted. Kids and a lot of them in poverty and don't know better.

[CommonCents]

This makes me really really sad. It may be the reason I eventually stop watching football. WHY IS BASEBALL SO BORING?!

Maybe we should make a list of occupations that lessen the quality of life for persons working there for any extensive amount of time. Then we could all take a stand against everything! Rise up!

Edited July 26, 2017 by Commonsense

[Bills_Chick]

Maybe we should make a list of occupations that lessen the quality of life for persons working there for any extensive amount of time. Then we could all take a stand against everything! Rise up!

 

Right but NFL is pure entertainment. It serves no greater practical purpose. At least coal miners are mining coal for electricity so life can continue. And yes, we should be concerned with the safety of all workers and make their jobs as safe as possible. That is the right thing to do as a human being.

[CommonCents]

 

Right but NFL is pure entertainment. It serves no greater practical purpose. At least coal miners are mining coal for electricity so life can continue. And yes, we should be concerned with the safety of all workers and make their jobs as safe as possible. That is the right thing to do as a human being.

I think you had it right in your last post, whatever people agree to do for a price then that is on them as long as they are educated on the risk. It's far more practical than thinking a guy worrying about his bottom line is going to prioritize his employees health and longevity over his own bank account.

[4_kidd_4]

For those hung up on the selection bias, from the NYT article;

 

The set of players posthumously tested by Dr. McKee is far from a random sample of N.F.L. retirees. Theres a tremendous selection bias, she has cautioned, noting that many families have donated brains specifically because the former player showed symptoms of C.T.E.

 

But 110 positives remain significant scientific evidence of an N.F.L. players risk of developing C.T.E., which can be diagnosed only after death. About 1,300 former players have died since the B.U. group began examining brains. So even if every one of the other 1,200 players would have tested negative which even the heartiest skeptics would agree could not possibly be the case the minimum C.T.E. prevalence would be close to 9 percent, vastly higher than in the general population.

[dave mcbride]

For those hung up on the selection bias, from the NYT article;

 

yup.

[26CornerBlitz]

@JeffDarlington

Thomas Davis on CTE studies: "I would be lying if I said I didn't get nervous about that stat. But this game, I just love it so much."

[row_33]

 

Science is only "real" science when it confirms what I want to believe. You should also never let facts get in the way of a good crusade. These are big mistakes that "scientists" make all the time.

 

Every thought of mine is science, every thought of yours that I don't agree with is rank superstition.

[boyst]

This makes me really really sad. It may be the reason I eventually stop watching football. WHY IS BASEBALL SO BORING?!

 

 

At what point do we draw the line on assumption of risk. Things like MMA and boxing are legal (and probably worse) for the brain than NFL football. But we don't accept death matches under the "assumption of risk" theory -- why not though? I mean if two dudes enter a ring knowing it is a fight to the literal death, shouldn't we let them do it? They are assuming the risk aren't they?

 

We in society have to draw a line on monetizing inherently dangerous activities. Is wrong to pay people to undertake serious health risks? It is something I struggle with as a sports fan for sure. Especially when they start out as kids as you noted. Kids and a lot of them in poverty and don't know better.

100000% disagree. If two willing adults want to play a sport in which they're left incapacitated or dead so be it. Free will and Darwin and lots of great positive attribute associated.

 

@JeffDarlington

 

Thomas Davis on CTE studies: "I would be lying if I said I didn't get nervous about that stat. But this game, I just love it so much."

thebsecond he says he is suffering after his career or has any lingering effects I'll be glad to tell him.this.

 

Davis gets it let's see if he is man enough to stick to his word down the line or just stupid enough to think we will let it slide when he reneges.

[row_33]

100000% disagree. If two willing adults want to play a sport in which they're left incapacitated or dead so be it. Free will and Darwin and lots of great positive attribute associated.

 

Sounds good, but when they are old and pathetic the juries will feel sorry for them.

 

Cheering them on to this obvious end down the road makes us kind of culpable as well.

[boyst]

 

Sounds good, but when they are old and pathetic the juries will feel sorry for them.

 

Cheering them on to this obvious end down the road makes us kind of culpable as well.

only if you feel guilt or you're they're momma

[Malazan]

The level of denial in this thread is embarrassing. Why can't people simply admit that they like following a sport that is obviously hazardous to human health?? I admit it. It ain't pretty, but it's the truth. As I've long maintained, I would have likely been a gladiator fight fan in ancient Rome, but I like to think that I would have been holdimg my thumb down (symbolizing swords down) when the Editor asked the crowd for a vote on the fate of the loser. But at least I admit that I probably woild have been a gladiatorial combat fan.

Please explain your point with evidence. I suggest reading this if you get a chance, btw -- https://www.amazon.com/Death-Expertise-Campaign-Established-Knowledge/dp/0190469412 . Whatever mistakes scientists may make, they're far more reliable than skeptics of science (because - get this - scientists aren't correct 100 percent of the time!) on the internet who basically don't have a clue about what they're talking about. I could go on.

 

Is this how far we've fallen that a post dripping in complete and utter sarcasm is taken as serious...

 

...checks a certain fellas twitter....

 

Oh, sorry, I should have used some sarcasm smileys or something. It can be tough to tell.

[Talley56]

The way I see it, if the players know the risk and still play, I am okay watching. Much like spectators watch a stunt performer do life threatening tricks they themselves would never try. But I would never call someone who walks away from the game at any level a quiter. I may call them smart.

[CanadianFan]

The way I see it, if the players know the risk and still play, I am okay watching. Much like spectators watch a stunt performer do life threatening tricks they themselves would never try. But I would never call someone who walks away from the game at any level a quiter. I may call them smart.

 

Yes. exactly. I'm the same.

[Benjamin Franklin]

For those hung up on the selection bias, from the NYT article;

 

 

Yeah but it's important for people on the Internet to feel smarter than scientists. Does the article address that?

 

And continuing to beg the question: How can anyone let their kid play football in the face of these staggering odds?

[GaryPinC]

Yeah but it's important for people on the Internet to feel smarter than scientists. Does the article address that?

 

And continuing to beg the question: How can anyone let their kid play football in the face of these staggering odds?

Since 2011, just under 1,700 players are on rosters in the NFL each year. Over 1 million kids play high school football and over 73,000 play college football each year . http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/research/football

 

Does the research address that?

 

I am one of the probably hundreds of millions of kids/men who played high school football and suffer no CTE-like symptoms. Does the research address that?

 

Does it address the tens of millions of college football athletes out there not suffering CTE symptoms?

 

According to the CTE website, over 425 brains have been donated, 270 have CTE. https://www.bu.edu/cte/brain-donation-registry/ Only over 100 were presented from football players in this study. Does the research address that?

 

Medical standard of care for concussion assumes that highest risk of permanent damage is when more head trauma occurs while a person is recovering from a concussion. Does the research address this?

 

What the research does is diagnose CTE in over 100 brains donated by football players. Most were likely donated because the person suffered behavioral/neurological deficits consistent with CTE. That is a highly biased, highly limited sample.

 

Is there a big problem here? Absolutely. Does this mean I am smarter than the scientists who did the research? Nope, just trying to realistically frame and understand it.

 

Does this mean there are "staggering odds" my son will have CTE from playing high school football? Nope.

 

But go ahead and question other's intelligence. I am certainly questioning yours.

[DC Tom]

Yeah but it's important for people on the Internet to feel smarter than scientists. Does the article address that?

 

And continuing to beg the question: How can anyone let their kid play football in the face of these staggering odds?

 

Certainly smarter than people who didn't read "the science" but think they understand it.

 

The study was facile. Useful...but simplistic and hardly conclusive. The Times' article is less scientific than Gary's post, above (which wouldn't be winning any medals for its scienceyness anytime soon.)

[CanadianFan]

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/20170808/baltimore-ravens-offensive-lineman-john-urschel-retires-abruptly

 

In a related story, Ravens OL John Urschel retired due to CTE study. He's the mathematician doing PhD in MIT on math.

 

 

In August 2015, he suffered a concussion when he went helmet-to-helmet with another player and was knocked unconscious.

"I think it hurt my ability to think well mathematically," Urschel said. "It took me about three weeks before I was football-ready. It took me a little bit longer before my high-level visualizations ability came back."

 

What he's going to find is, this impairment will come back later on. He is now more susceptible to even minor bodily jolts or shocks. His relative youth will negate the impact of this MTBI he suffered from football for now - he is still likely undergoing the last growth stage of the brain and that stage will help he not feel the impact of MTBI. And so, because of that he will think it is "cured"

 

But he will feel its impact in adulthood. His mental faculties will get impaired from time to time. He is going to find that there will be times he can't understand his own work. He will feel confused and betrayed. And unable to grasp what is happening because you literally have mental short-wiring.

 

I applaud him. This is John choosing the rest of his life - my guess is he still has 60-75 years more to live. Live well John.

Edited July 27, 2017 by CanadianFan

[row_33]

only if you feel guilt or you're they're momma

 

see the cigarette trial juries....

[jimmy10]

What's the study show in non football players of the same demographic? Other athletes?

[PS 56]

Link to a great analysis of the study:

 

 

http://www.acsh.org/news/2017/07/25/be-skeptical-will-99-nfl-players-really-develop-cte-11608

[row_33]

I have people who were angry I still watch football after I watched that dumb movie.

 

Good riddance.

[major]

I still think there is no football in 25 years

[DriveFor1Outta5]

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/20170808/baltimore-ravens-offensive-lineman-john-urschel-retires-abruptly

 

In a related story, Ravens OL John Urschel retired due to CTE study. He's the mathematician doing PhD in MIT on math.

 

 

What he's going to find is, this impairment will come back later on. He is now more susceptible to even minor bodily jolts or shocks. His relative youth will negate the impact of this MTBI he suffered from football for now - he is still likely undergoing the last growth stage of the brain and that stage will help he not feel the impact of MTBI. And so, because of that he will think it is "cured"

 

But he will feel its impact in adulthood. His mental faculties will get impaired from time to time. He is going to find that there will be times he can't understand his own work. He will feel confused and betrayed. And unable to grasp what is happening because you literally have mental short-wiring.

 

I applaud him. This is John choosing the rest of his life - my guess is he still has 60-75 years more to live. Live well John.

To play devil's advocate it's an easier decision for a guy with a PhD to walk away. Football presents many other guys with the best and often times only options they have in life. I don't want to debate the merits of CTE as I am not a professional. There remains a lot to be learned about CTE.

 

My issue is the way in which the media has presented the problem. Condemning the sport of football isn't what should be happening. The focus should be on creating safer equipment. The sport of football has provided millions of young men with the best years of their life. A life that many could only dream of. There is a downside with this blessing as is the case with everything in life. That doesn't mean the sport of football should be torn down.

[CanadianFan]

To play devil's advocate it's an easier decision for a guy with a PhD to walk away. Football presents many other guys with the best and often times only options they have in life. I don't want to debate the merits of CTE as I am not a professional. There remains a lot to be learned about CTE.

 

My issue is the way in which the media has presented the problem. Condemning the sport of football isn't what should be happening. The focus should be on creating safer equipment. The sport of football has provided millions of young men with the best years of their life. A life that many could only dream of. There is a downside with this blessing as is the case with everything in life. That doesn't mean the sport of football should be torn down.

 

I agree re: Urschel. He needs to salvage the rest of his life. Mind you math doctors don't make 10% of the salary Mds make though. Or 5% of NFL.

 

I don't want to make a blanket statement on "media". I thought this article was fairly factual. Football isn't going to die, because paying customers want to see the violence. See the growth of MMA.

 

Risk in MMA is real. Risk in Football is real. They are just discovering other aspects of it and reporting it now.