CTE at high school level

[World Citizen]

15 hours ago, ThunderRam said:

 

I knew i was gonna get the “this is a football board” reply. I almost preemptively mentioned it to take it away. Obviously I should have. 

Both you and @World Citizen have been around these parts long enough to know that non-football topics are brought up and discussed all the time. That excuse doesn’t play.

Besides, my response wasn’t targeted at you for posting the thread but rather all the news articles/stories about it — which is what creates discussion and spawns threads like this one. They are overwhelmingly targeting tackle football. I’ve seen some attention on youth soccer, primarily girls soccer, but nowhere near the same level. I’ve never really seen any focus on teen driving and questioning whether parents should allow it. Yet tackle football is always under question. Largely by the same faction ignoring these other activities. That is my point.

Regarding your reply on soccer, you’re missing my point. It’s not about a helmet. Perhaps soccer is as safe as it’s ever gonna be (likely not). For a brief moment pretending that it is, the detractors need to get off their soapbox at some point and allow parents and children the choice to participate at their own risk (like they do for soccer and teen driving) instead of constantly trying to legislate it out of existence just because they don’t want their own kids to participate. 

There’s no talk of girls youth soccer needing to be ‘preserved’ due the potential threat of abolishment. Yet it still carries a lot of risk for concussions and sub concussions. There’s no talk of teen driving going away despite the myriad of tragic injuries and death every single day. Therefore the same should be the same for tackle football. That’s the point.

I’m speaking in general and not toward you.

 

 

They are being avoided. Maybe not by you, but by the masses leading the daily charge against tackle football. 

See my response to Columbia about this being a football forum. Neither one of you have limited all of your content and opinions on this site to ‘just football’. You know that. Thats just an easy way to deflect the point I’ve made.

Not deflecting at all, it's just that the topic was about having safer equipment for youth football as it concerns CTE.  My point is that I feel better equipment is a good thing and should be agreed upon by everyone.

Next, I clearly agreed with the point about doing whatever can be done, within reason, to continue to make all sports/activities safer. But once a plateau is reached, the answer shouldn’t be a movement to discontinue said sport/activity. The answer should be to educate and allow the choice to participate. However, if discontinuation is gonna be the path, then apply it uniformly. But that’s not the direction it’s been going.

If you agreed with the point about doing whatever can be done then that is all you had to say.  I made no point about nor did I advocate for any movement to discontinue the sport.  I have no interest in doing that.

Again, not saying you are guilty of hypocrisy, but many are and I continue to bring that point to light each time this subject is brought to light.

Lastly, the teen driving example is most certainly relevant and makes sense. It’s a highly dangerous and risky activity that parents can choose to allow their minor children to do or not do even though the child can’t fully comprehend all the risks involved. If they allow the far more dangerous activity over the other, it’s beyond hypocritical and not fully protecting the kids. How can you not see that?

How is it even possible to have a conversation about having better equipment for youth football as it concerns CTE AND also bring up everything that could be thought of that might be a danger to kids, such as soccer, driving, etc.  Why not bring up deep sea diving and stick fighting as well.  It's not like we were advocating for girls to get concussions in soccer by simply omitting them in our discussion.  However, if you start a girls soccer thread I would join in and I would be for their safety as well.

The equipment that youth football use and the possible need for it to be better was all that I was talking about.  No more or less.  And again I don't think driving needs to be discussed when we are talking about youth football because the dangers of driving are obvious and self evident.  

 

 

[World Citizen]

10 hours ago, HawgGoneIt said:

I do agree with ThunderRam here. Football seems to be under attack from many angles. 

Undoubtedly true but that was not what I was advocating.  My point is that if better equipment helps reduce concussions in youth football it is a good thing. That was it.  I don't want the game to change or go away.

We all know it's dangerous, and, we all know the NFL intentionally hid data from it's players for years. 

This next isn't aimed at any posters, but just at the world in general.

Now... the knowledge of CTE has left the station. It's out there as far as football is concerned. Why keep beating that drum now though?  It does take something away from the credibility of those both studying ways to lessen CTE and those that appear to care so much about the youth since they appear to do just as ThunderRam said... either not mention, appear to not care as much about other sports that have similar risk factors but less of a spotlight. 

Football players wear soft shell helmets for 7 on 7 tourneys even, where there is no intentional contact. 

Where are the CTE activists at on soccer? Are we not as worried about the young men and ladies playing those sports? Why aren't we forcing them to wear goofy looking soft shell helmets?

Where are the CTE activists at on soccer? I don't know where the soccer activist are but maybe they are on a soccer board or something.  Omitting soccer isn't an implication that nobody cares.  

Mouth guards?  Etc. 

 

We all know it's dangerous, and, we all know the NFL intentionally hid data from it's players for years. 

This next isn't aimed at any posters, but just at the world in general.

Now... the knowledge of CTE has left the station. It's out there as far as football is concerned. Why keep beating that drum now though?  It does take something away from the credibility of those both studying ways to lessen CTE and those that appear to care so much about the youth since they appear to do just as ThunderRam said... either not mention, appear to not care as much about other sports that have similar risk factors but less of a spotlight. 

Football players wear soft shell helmets for 7 on 7 tourneys even, where there is no intentional contact. 

It definitely seems like an anti-football movement. And the apparent lack of concern for the other athletes in other sports only helps to solidify that line of thought.

Not sure how it is apparently a lack of concern for other athletes in other sports.

IMO, just because CTE and football is brought up it shouldn't mean that every other sport or the kids who play those sports have to be brought up as well.  That would be too time consuming to list every dangerous activity a kid can face, esp something like driving as that is so far from the topic.

 

[BUFORDGAWOLVES]

Add girls lacrosse to the concussion incidents. 

Pissed off girls on their cycle.... with sticks. 

Regards

 BGW

[ThunderRam]

8 hours ago, Belly Bob said:

I wonder if the higher rate of concussions among girls has something to do with the anatomy or physiology of girls' skulls or brains. Maybe girls are more likely to get concussions given similar collisions or blows to the head. 

 

HBO Real Sports ran a story on it a couple years ago. The research pointed to weaker neck muscles that allow the head to move more violently upon contact (header) or when they fall to the ground from collision. They’ve been trying to remove headers from the girls game, but you can’t stop collisions or falling to the ground.

[ThunderRam]

15 hours ago, Belly Bob said:

Link?

Someone posted a doc that showed data on injuries in youth sports and I don't remember seeing girls soccer in the top 10. If I remember correctly, football was no 1 by a wide margin, both in terms of rates of injury and in seriousness of injury. It included data on concussions. Again, I feel like I remember football being the clear no 1 there as well. 

 

When I have time, I’ll try to dig up something for you. But @HawgGoneIt is on the right track in that I was referring to rate, not volume. There are more boys playing tackle football (25 - 50 per team on average) than girls playing soccer. But the rate per player is higher. So it’s more likely thus more of a risk. Which was the point. 

While people keep trying to tell me that teen-driving isn’t relevant, even though it clearly demonstrates hypocrisy of parents allowing their child to participate in an even more dangerous activity, take a look at the volume of those serious injury and death numbers. Not just suffered by teens themselves but to those they injure due to distracted driving, drunk driving and pure inexperience.

I continue to say, if we’re solely focused on safety and abolishing activities we think others have no right to choose for their children, then let’s be consistent and fair and do it across the board. Don’t just target the activities you don’t like and overlook the activities that make life more convenient.

[HawgGoneIt]

12 minutes ago, ThunderRam said:

 

When I have time, I’ll try to dig up something for you. But @HawgGoneIt is on the right track in that I was referring to rate, not volume. There are more boys playing tackle football (25 - 50 per team on average) than girls playing soccer. But the rate per player is higher. So it’s more likely thus more of a risk. Which was the point. 

While people keep trying to tell me that teen-driving isn’t relevant, even though it clearly demonstrates hypocrisy of parents allowing their child to participate in an even more dangerous activity, take a look at the volume of those serious injury and death numbers. Not just suffered by teens themselves but to those they injure due to distracted driving, drunk driving and pure inexperience.

I continue to say, if we’re solely focused on safety and abolishing activities we think others have no right to choose for their children, then let’s be consistent and fair and do it a cross the board. Don’t just target the activities you don’t like and overlook the activities that make life more convenient.

I feel this way about it too. 

It seems like people always like to find a boogie man to blame for the bad things. The bad things just happen to be the flavor of the day in this case, which is football concussions and CTE. This makes football the boogie man. 

We want to cherry pick where we concentrate or which boogie man needs killed first and we ignore the one under the bed. 

I guess like everything else, it's just human nature. We bite onto the flavor of the day and chew on it until we get tired of it or it's gone, then we move on to the next flavor of the day. 

 

[Belly Bob]

18 hours ago, ThunderRam said:

 

When I have time, I’ll try to dig up something for you. But @HawgGoneIt is on the right track in that I was referring to rate, not volume. There are more boys playing tackle football (25 - 50 per team on average) than girls playing soccer. But the rate per player is higher. So it’s more likely thus more of a risk. Which was the point. 

While people keep trying to tell me that teen-driving isn’t relevant, even though it clearly demonstrates hypocrisy of parents allowing their child to participate in an even more dangerous activity, take a look at the volume of those serious injury and death numbers. Not just suffered by teens themselves but to those they injure due to distracted driving, drunk driving and pure inexperience.

I continue to say, if we’re solely focused on safety and abolishing activities we think others have no right to choose for their children, then let’s be consistent and fair and do it across the board. Don’t just target the activities you don’t like and overlook the activities that make life more convenient.

I think there's an important difference between playing football and driving, namely, the latter but not the former is an essential skill that young people need to develop in order to flourish in our society. Given that fact, it wouldn't be hypocritical for a parent to allow his son to drive but not to play football, even if driving is more dangerous than football. 

[Cat_Scratch]

On 5/3/2019 at 1:01 PM, Belly Bob said:

I wonder if the higher rate of concussions among girls has something to do with the anatomy or physiology of girls' skulls or brains. Maybe girls are more likely to get concussions given similar collisions or blows to the head. 

The fluid between the skull and the brain is the difference. The less fluid the less concussions. That's why the term "thick headed." It doesn't mean less brains. Just less space for the Brain to move in the cranium and a lesser impact inside the skull. Less impact lesser bruising of the brain. At least that is what I was told by my sports Dr. about torunament fighting. 

girls have smaller heads and smaller brains. Not meaning less intellligent. Just more fluid between the skull and Brain. I'm guessing that's not true in every woman, just like men, but probably more often than men.

[Cat_Scratch]

I should add that neck mass was also on point.

21 hours ago, ThunderRam said:

 

HBO Real Sports ran a story on it a couple years ago. The research pointed to weaker neck muscles that allow the head to move more violently upon contact (header) or when they fall to the ground from collision. They’ve been trying to remove headers from the girls game, but you can’t stop collisions or falling to the ground.

 

[ThunderRam]

16 hours ago, Belly Bob said:

I think there's an important difference between playing football and driving, namely, the latter but not the former is an essential skill that young people need to develop in order to flourish in our society. Given that fact, it wouldn't be hypocritical for a parent to allow his son to drive but not to play football, even if driving is more dangerous than football. 

 

Shenanigans. It’s not essential at all. Not as minors the ages of 15, 16 and 17. They still live at home. Parents can get them where they need to go just as they always have done. It’s just a convenience. Convenience shouldn’t circumvent safety if a parent is gung ho serious about protecting their kids (and others) while they aren’t adults and/or capable of fully understanding all risks and consequences — which is the argument Dr. Bennet Omalu has made towards youth football.

Why many can’t see the relevance and hypocrisy is beyond me. IMO therein lies the problem.

There are families out there, probably a lot more in Texas than anywhere else, that consider football more essential to their child and family than teen driving. Priorities can greatly vary. Whatever side someone falls on, it doesn’t change the fact that both are elective activities that come with heavy risk.

I’ll argue that the typical 15 - 17 year old isn’t responsible enough to handle a 2 ton lethal weapon — especially in this day and age of distracting mobile phone devices — which makes the activity not only far more dangerous to them but also to the masses. Every single day there are tragic stories of teen related driving injuries/fatalities yet we as a society are far more focused on an activity that affects far less children and cases of immediate death are far more rare. Go figure.

[BUFORDGAWOLVES]

Buford uses padded helmet covers during practice, is that what’s coming?

I’m thinking yes....

BGW

[mustangman21]

Fun article for the doomsday "football must change" folks. 

 

http://footballscoop.com/news/study-cte-found-people-no-history-contact-sports/