110 of 111 NFL Brains Show Signs of CTE

[Jack Watson]

I dunno anymore.  I used to be into football and have fantasy crap and that but anymore I find it boring except the championship games and Super Bowl.

Playoff hockey is way better to me.

Soccers a rough game.  At least it was when I was playing as a kid.  Love it though.  Good to watch also imo.

Edited July 28, 2017 by Jack Watson

[Zekez]

On 7/26/2017 at 4:18 PM, kpaulhus said:

Did you play hockey growing up? I've played the last 20 years and all it did was make me a degenerative golfer now. Unless your kid is going on to play juniors or something at that level I would say Hockey is one of the safer sports. Much different than football, and even today's hockey is less physical and more finesse. I wouldn't hold my kids back from hockey if they wanted to. How else are they going to learn the be a team player and the other assets in life that come with being in team sports? 

So they can't learn how to be a "team player" outside of sports?  I find this thought laughable, that kids need sports to become better people.  They can get those assets in may other ways besides subjecting themselves to violent action.      

Any parent who allows their kids to play football is doing a huge disservice to their kids.  

[iacas]

5 minutes ago, Zekez said:

Any parent who allows their kids to play football is doing a huge disservice to their kids.  

I wouldn't go that far.

[Zekez]

34 minutes ago, iacas said:

I wouldn't go that far.

Why not?  Setting your kid up for brain trauma is ok?

[iacas]

21 minutes ago, Zekez said:

Why not?  Setting your kid up for brain trauma is ok?

When did you stop beating your wife? I never said setting your kid up for that was okay.

You can play football without the brain trauma. Flag football, etc.

Even soccer players are getting concussions. Guess kids should all play golf? Oh wait, back trauma. Hmmmm, checkers?

To a point I agree with not playing football, but your statement went too far IMO.

[Zekez]

7 minutes ago, iacas said:

When did you stop beating your wife? I never said setting your kid up for that was okay.

You can play football without the brain trauma. Flag football, etc.

Even soccer players are getting concussions. Guess kids should all play golf? Oh wait, back trauma. Hmmmm, checkers?

To a point I agree with not playing football, but your statement went too far IMO.

I don't think it did.  There are plenty of things in life for your kid to do.  Playing tackle football isn't a smart choice.

What's the upside to letting your kid play tackle football?  As opposed to brain trauma.

[jsgolfer]

30 minutes ago, Zekez said:

I don't think it did.  There are plenty of things in life for your kid to do.  Playing tackle football isn't a smart choice.

What's the upside to letting your kid play tackle football?  As opposed to brain trauma.

You're assuming that the 110 of 111 is the norm for all players who have played tackle football, but the numbers don't add up, IMO.  If you're taking the 99% number as fact, then there is something else going on, otherwise we'd have a crisis of epic proportions right now from more football players who are alive.   There are around 500 Div I/II/III football teams plus pro's, NFL, CFL, arena football etc.  Along with High Schools/Pee Wees, there must be 70,000-80,000 or more people playing football and add other contact sports, way more.  There is a problem for sure, but I'm not sure a blanket statement that everyone should avoid football or other contact sports is necessarily the way to go.  

"There is still a lot to learn about C.T.E. Who gets it, who doesn’t, and why? Can anything be done to stop the degeneration once it begins? How many blows to the head, and at what levels, must occur for C.T.E. to take hold?"

[billchao]

11 minutes ago, jsgolfer said:

You're assuming that the 110 of 111 is the norm for all players who have played tackle football, but the numbers don't add up, IMO.  If you're taking the 99% number as fact, then there is something else going on, otherwise we'd have a crisis of epic proportions right now from more football players who are alive.   There are around 500 Div I/II/III football teams plus pro's, NFL, CFL, arena football etc.  Along with High Schools/Pee Wees, there must be 70,000-80,000 or more people playing football and add other contact sports, way more.  There is a problem for sure, but I'm not sure a blanket statement that everyone should avoid football or other contact sports is necessarily the way to go.  

"There is still a lot to learn about C.T.E. Who gets it, who doesn’t, and why? Can anything be done to stop the degeneration once it begins? How many blows to the head, and at what levels, must occur for C.T.E. to take hold?"

Yea, I think in the study or an article I read about the study, the author states that the figure needs to be taken with a grain of salt since the brains studied were donated to them largely because those people showed symptoms of brain trauma in the first place.

---

That said, and I'm paraphrasing here, but even if every other current or former NFL player shows zero signs of CTE in their brain, it still represents a higher rate of CTE in football players vs the general population.

[iacas]

1 hour ago, Zekez said:

I don't think it did.  There are plenty of things in life for your kid to do.  Playing tackle football isn't a smart choice.

I disagree. I think your statement went too far. And I like how you snuck "tackle" in there.

1 hour ago, Zekez said:

What's the upside to letting your kid play tackle football?  As opposed to brain trauma.

The same upsides exist as always. Learning teamwork. Exercise. Learning to follow rules. Learning power dynamics (coach is boss).

There are positives.

---

Again, don't get me wrong. I started the topic. It's just going too far, IMO, to say things like what you said.

[Zekez]

17 hours ago, iacas said:

I disagree. I think your statement went too far. And I like how you snuck "tackle" in there.

The same upsides exist as always. Learning teamwork. Exercise. Learning to follow rules. Learning power dynamics (coach is boss).

There are positives.

---

Again, don't get me wrong. I started the topic. It's just going too far, IMO, to say things like what you said.

Snuck tackle in?  I think that you were disingenuous by referring to flag football when the entire discussion is about tackle football.  And those upsides can be learned in many other ways and groups.

100, 200 , 300 years from now i can see the human race looking back and saying, "why did those people allow themselves to smash into each other and inflict potentially life-threatening injuries to each other? 

 

[MuniGrit]

How many people in outside of NFL have CTE signs?  I tend to think a lot of people do. 

[iacas]

12 minutes ago, Zekez said:

Snuck tackle in?  I think that you were disingenuous by referring to flag football when the entire discussion is about tackle football.

Six year olds playing football aren't hitting each other particularly hard, nor are they even doing all of the little micro-impacts on the line of scrimmage that many think contribute to CTE. As others have said, tens of thousands of kids play football every year. I think that saying the things you've said goes too far.

And yes, you snuck "tackle" in. The discussion is about football, and some of the leagues around me have already converted to flag football to surprisingly later ages.

Again, I too agree that parents need to be cautious about everything. I started the topic. But you went too far, IMO, in saying "Any parent who allows their kids to play football is doing a huge disservice to their kids." You know what they say about "always/never" type statements.

12 minutes ago, Zekez said:

And those upsides can be learned in many other ways and groups.

Sure, but why should they have to be? Athletics are good at teaching certain things.

4 minutes ago, Zekez said:

100, 200 , 300 years from now i can see the human race looking back and saying, "why did those people allow themselves to smash into each other and inflict potentially life-threatening injuries to each other? 

I feel like you're just ignoring centuries of human history to say something like that.

We've had far more grotesque things than football for a long time, and they're still going on. We have boxing. We have MMA. We have all kinds of stuff.

The studies are still ongoing. Nowhere near 100% of everyone who plays football develop any signs of CTE. It's too soon for you to make blanket statements, or else statements like "Any parent who drives their child in a car is doing a huge disservice to their kids" are also fair game.

Every activity has risks. Football's risks are higher than many, sure, but you can't make blanket statements that impugn the parenting of others. It's going too far.

[RussUK]

I remember reading an article in a newspaper a while ago that the number of brain injuries in football (soccer) was increasing now that medical technology has made diagnosis easier.

Many of the footballers were from the 60's and 70's when the balls were made of real leather and got heavier when wet. My dad used to say it was like heading a medicine ball when he played at school in the 50's.

I remember heading a fairly modern ball in the 90's and that wasnt nice either.

In rugby they have brought in new rules in regards to the scrum to limit injuries to heads and necks (pre-engaging before going into the scrum and banning intentional collapses).

Thing is without completely sanitising sport, especially contact sports like rugby and American Football (which im sure no one really wants), there is always going to be the risk of injury.

 

[Zekez]

7 minutes ago, iacas said:

Six year olds playing football aren't hitting each other particularly hard, nor are they even doing all of the little micro-impacts on the line of scrimmage that many think contribute to CTE. As others have said, tens of thousands of kids play football every year. I think that saying the things you've said goes too far.

And yes, you snuck "tackle" in. The discussion is about football, and some of the leagues around me have already converted to flag football to surprisingly later ages.

Again, I too agree that parents need to be cautious about everything. I started the topic. But you went too far, IMO, in saying "Any parent who allows their kids to play football is doing a huge disservice to their kids." You know what they say about "always/never" type statements.

Sure, but why should they have to be? Athletics are good at teaching certain things.

I feel like you're just ignoring centuries of human history to say something like that.

We've had far more grotesque things than football for a long time, and they're still going on. We have boxing. We have MMA. We have all kinds of stuff.

The studies are still ongoing. Nowhere near 100% of everyone who plays football develop any signs of CTE. It's too soon for you to make blanket statements, or else statements like "Any parent who drives their child in a car is doing a huge disservice to their kids" are also fair game.

Every activity has risks. Football's risks are higher than many, sure, but you can't make blanket statements that impugn the parenting of others. It's going too far.

Well that's me.  I sometimes go too far.  And in the case of parents letting their kids play tackle football I will not change my stance nor my opinion.  Don't even get me started on boxing or MMA nonsense.

I'll give you another blanket statement about people that has nothing to do with this topic, but sheds light on my thought process when it comes to making decisions that affect other living creatures (kids included):

  Anyone who owns a cat and lets that cat run freely outside should not own a cat and is doing a terrible disservice to their cat..

Parents will absolutely not admit this, but I firmly believe that most dads want their sons to play football so that they can inflict pain and punishment through violent contact on other kids.  The male species seems to harbor a genetic disposition towards physical superiority and playing football satiates that lust for physical dominance.

It's not the only reason dads want their sons to play tackle football, but it's probably the main one for most.

And again, most dads will not admit this for any number of reasons.  They will provide the stock reasons of , "it's to foster team work", etc..  but deep down they get a thrill when their boy lays someone out.

 

6 minutes ago, Zekez said:

Well that's me.  I sometimes go too far.  And in the case of parents letting their kids play tackle football I will not change my stance nor my opinion.  Don't even get me started on boxing or MMA nonsense.

I'll give you another blanket statement about people that has nothing to do with this topic, but sheds light on my thought process when it comes to making decisions that affect other living creatures (kids included):

  Anyone who owns a cat and lets that cat run freely outside should not own a cat and is doing a terrible disservice to their cat..

Parents will absolutely not admit this, but I firmly believe that most dads want their sons to play football so that they can inflict pain and punishment through violent contact on other kids.  The male species seems to harbor a genetic disposition towards physical superiority and playing football satiates that lust for physical dominance.

It's not the only reason dads want their sons to play tackle football, but it's probably the main one for most.

And again, most dads will not admit this for any number of reasons.  They will provide the stock reasons of , "it's to foster team work", etc..  but deep down they get a thrill when their boy lays someone out.

And when does the crowd cheer the loudest?  Yep, when a huge hit occurs.

6 minutes ago, Zekez said:

 

 

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, Zekez said:

Well that's me.  I sometimes go too far.  And in the case of parents letting their kids play tackle football I will not change my stance nor my opinion.  Don't even get me started on boxing or MMA nonsense.

I'll give you another blanket statement about people that has nothing to do with this topic, but sheds light on my thought process when it comes to making decisions that affect other living creatures (kids included):

Anyone who owns a cat and lets that cat run freely outside should not own a cat and is doing a terrible disservice to their cat..

Whatever.

The thing is, when people make extreme statements like you've made, particularly when it doesn't seem as though you're willing to listen to or consider any other point of view, it devalues their opinion.

But hey, go ahead and wrap your kids in a bubble. Don't drive them anywhere. That might be unsafe. Never give them fast food. Don't let them watch TV. Don't let them have more than 30 minutes of "screen time" even if it's for educational purposes. Never play the lottery. Don't let your children go outside, because the sun emits UV rays 100% of the time. And on and on and on…

You went too far, and in doing so, it devalues your contribution to the discussion.

I'm cool with that if you are.

(And no, none of this matters all that much. This conversation won't change your life or mine, or anyone else's, most likely. So I try to keep it in perspective all the same.)

[RussUK]

2 minutes ago, iacas said:

Whatever.

The thing is, when people make extreme statements like you've made, particularly when it doesn't seem as though you're willing to listen to or consider any other point of view, it devalues their opinion.

But hey, go ahead and wrap your kids in a bubble. Don't drive them anywhere. That might be unsafe. Never give them fast food. Don't let them watch TV. Don't let them have more than 30 minutes of "screen time" even if it's for educational purposes. Never play the lottery. Don't let your children go outside, because the sun emits UV rays 100% of the time. And on and on and on…

You went too far, and in doing so, it devalues your contribution to the discussion.

As a father of 2 boys under 5 yrs old i have to agree with you Erik. Kids need to be kids and find out how far they can push their boundaries, providing its done in a safe and sensible way.

When it comes to the topic here i think educating people on the potential risks is more important than changing how a sport is played.

an example. My Dad is an old biker, knows the isle of Man TT course like the back of his hand (now in his 70's). Back in the late 60's he watched his friend who was competing crash into a lamp post at Govenours dip. He died instantly. One of many deaths on the course over the years. Did they change the course to slow it down? no, other than more straw bales around the lamp posts, the riders were educated on the risks, the course conditions and parts of the course where caution should be taken during rider briefing.

Football and rugby etc. are obviously a different kettle of fish but still, they all involve some degree of risk of injury. If players are educated on those risks and what injuries can occur and how, it gives those involved a better understanding on how to avoid them.

Even us golfers are at risk everytime we step out on the course. but we accept them as calculated risks and most of us have been educated on how to avoind them.

[jamo]

33 minutes ago, Zekez said:

Well that's me.  I sometimes go too far.  And in the case of parents letting their kids play tackle football I will not change my stance nor my opinion.  Don't even get me started on boxing or MMA nonsense.

I'll give you another blanket statement about people that has nothing to do with this topic, but sheds light on my thought process when it comes to making decisions that affect other living creatures (kids included):

  Anyone who owns a cat and lets that cat run freely outside should not own a cat and is doing a terrible disservice to their cat..

Parents will absolutely not admit this, but I firmly believe that most dads want their sons to play football so that they can inflict pain and punishment through violent contact on other kids.  The male species seems to harbor a genetic disposition towards physical superiority and playing football satiates that lust for physical dominance.

It's not the only reason dads want their sons to play tackle football, but it's probably the main one for most.

And again, most dads will not admit this for any number of reasons.  They will provide the stock reasons of , "it's to foster team work", etc..  but deep down they get a thrill when their boy lays someone out.

 

And when does the crowd cheer the loudest?  Yep, when a huge hit occurs.

 

I know it's off topic, but now I'm curious about this cat thing.

[Zekez]

59 minutes ago, jamo said:

I know it's off topic, but now I'm curious about this cat thing.

Cat owners who allow their pet cats to run loose outside using BS reasons like "oh it's good for them, it's their nature, etc.."  The reality is that many of these cats wind up dead for various reasons.  I have hit and killed a few cats that I know where owned by a person and it really shook me up.  And it pisses me off that these cats are running loose getting run over or mauled by other animals or dying from drinking antifreeze that some asshole put out because he/she hates cats.

1 hour ago, iacas said:

Whatever.

The thing is, when people make extreme statements like you've made, particularly when it doesn't seem as though you're willing to listen to or consider any other point of view, it devalues their opinion.

But hey, go ahead and wrap your kids in a bubble. Don't drive them anywhere. That might be unsafe. Never give them fast food. Don't let them watch TV. Don't let them have more than 30 minutes of "screen time" even if it's for educational purposes. Never play the lottery. Don't let your children go outside, because the sun emits UV rays 100% of the time. And on and on and on…

You went too far, and in doing so, it devalues your contribution to the discussion.

I'm cool with that if you are.

(And no, none of this matters all that much. This conversation won't change your life or mine, or anyone else's, most likely. So I try to keep it in perspective all the same.)

The old false equivalency examples.   It really devalues your argument much, much more than my statements devalue mine.  Frankly it's just a lazy response.  And so true that Internet debates and discussions will not likely change anyone's opinion.