Head Trauma in Sport

[snowychap]

11 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Accidents happen

It's not about 'accidents'.

[bannedfromHandV]

8 minutes ago, snowychap said:

It's not about 'accidents'.

Oh okay, so this conversation / proposal is to avoid all the deliberate onsetting of dementia and other head traumas right? 
 

So like when I used to line up an opponent in a scrum and I’d think to myself, ‘I’m gonna go out of my way to increase the possibility of dementia in this guy when he reaches old age’, it’s to eradicate that right? 

[NurembergVillan]

On 09/12/2020 at 19:02, mjmooney said:

The "heed tha ba'" problem may stem mainly from that 1960s generation, when footballs were very different from those of today. I'm old enough to remember playing with wet, heavy leather caseballs, lacing and all, which made the modern equivalents look like balloons. I'd be surprised if the brain damage statistics remain high for today's players. 

It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.  My limited understanding of CTE is that the weight of a football would make minimal difference, though, as the issue is caused more by the repetition of the brain hitting the inside of the skull.  Rattling around, if you like.

There are two distinct areas of head trauma in sport - concussion, which is an immediate (or relatively soon after) effect from a heavy blow; and CTE which is much more subtle in its acquisition but can have devastating effects.

If you've got Netflix and haven't already watched the docu-series about Aaron Hernandez it's well worth checking out.  It covers other challenges faced by pro athletes too, such as sexuality and mental health.  It's eye-opening stuff.

[NurembergVillan]

3 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Oh okay, so this conversation / proposal is to avoid all the deliberate onsetting of dementia and other head traumas right? 
 

So like when I used to line up an opponent in a scrum and I’d think to myself, ‘I’m gonna go out of my way to increase the possibility of dementia in this guy when he reaches old age’, it’s to eradicate that right? 

The blows to your head, such as falling off your bike, were accidents.  The were unfortunate and unexpected.

The repeated blows to the head that cause CTE and dementia aren't accidents but are part and parcel of some sports.  The long-term outcome of any of those individual impacts is unintentional, but it's right that the topic is explored to understand if some sports can or should be modified to mitigate the cumulative number of impacts.

As per my last post there are two main areas of head trauma in sport - blunt impact / heavy force likely to cause unconsciousness or concussion, and repeated impact likely to cause CTE or dementia.

It's important we recognise this and understand the differences if we're to have a meaningful debate.

[JB]

29 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

So like when I used to line up an opponent in a scrum and I’d think to myself, ‘I’m gonna go out of my way to increase the possibility of dementia in this guy when he reaches old age’, it’s to eradicate that right? 

I know you’re being sarcastic but I think you’re missing the point. People haven’t realised the damage they’re doing to themselves and others. While the effects are not intended, they’re not accidents - they’re the result of deliberate actions. 

We’re just beginning to understand the long-term effects of repeated head trauma and the aim is to educate on and mitigate the risks in whatever ways possible. If it means fundamental changes to the game, then so be it. I’ll miss it but that’s inconsequential.

I’m very sceptical about the informed consent/consenting adults arguments. I’ve experienced the external pressures that come with rising through the ranks in rugby and it’s not as easy as simply walking away. 

Edited December 15, 2020 by JB

[bannedfromHandV]

Just now, JB said:

I know you’re being sarcastic but I think you’re missing the point. People haven’t realised the damage they’re doing to themselves and others. While the effects are not intended, they’re not accidents - they’re result of deliberate actions. 

We’re just beginning to understand the long-term effects of repeated head trauma and the aim is to educate on and mitigate the risks in whatever ways possible. If it means fundamental changes to the game, then so be it. I’ll miss it but that’s inconsequential.

I’m very sceptical about the informed consent/consenting adults arguments. I’ve experienced the external pressures that come with rising through the ranks in rugby and it’s not as easy as simply walking away. 

Some people scale mountains without any safety harness, some people jump off high cliffs into the ocean, there’s risk to everything, particularly in sport, people know this but choose to do it anyway because guess what, it’s fun. Take away the contact, the risk and guess what, it’s less fun.

 

Have a discussion about it fine, but to go and demand compensation (in a time when economics are really shit in the sports area) and to demand major changes, sorry but no, not for me, it’s contact sport, you are supposed to get hurt at some point, it’s part of life’s learning curve.

[bannedfromHandV]

25 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said:

The blows to your head, such as falling off your bike, were accidents.  The were unfortunate and unexpected.

The repeated blows to the head that cause CTE and dementia aren't accidents but are part and parcel of some sports.  The long-term outcome of any of those individual impacts is unintentional, but it's right that the topic is explored to understand if some sports can or should be modified to mitigate the cumulative number of impacts.

As per my last post there are two main areas of head trauma in sport - blunt impact / heavy force likely to cause unconsciousness or concussion, and repeated impact likely to cause CTE or dementia.

It's important we recognise this and understand the differences if we're to have a meaningful debate.

So what’s the end goal then of having the discussion, what do you see as a satisfactory outcome? 

[lapal_fan]

1 minute ago, bannedfromHandV said:

So what’s the end goal then of having the discussion, what do you see as a satisfactory outcome? 

To reduce the number of sports people ending up with dementia once they retire maybe? 

I mean.. a discussion brought about shin pads, mouth guards, ear plugs, goggles, helmets, boxes, gloves, body armour and everything else in sport which aims to protect the players.. Look at cricket to see how the death of Phil Hughes made the sport instantly bring neck-guards to the helmets, so if the ball hits your neck, you don't die.

I don't understand why you're struggling with the "discussion" aspect to be honest   

[bannedfromHandV]

4 minutes ago, lapal_fan said:

To reduce the number of sports people ending up with dementia once they retire maybe? 

I mean.. a discussion brought about shin pads, mouth guards, ear plugs, goggles, helmets, boxes, gloves, body armour and everything else in sport which aims to protect the players.. Look at cricket to see how the death of Phil Hughes made the sport instantly bring neck-guards to the helmets, so if the ball hits your neck, you don't die.

I don't understand why you're struggling with the "discussion" aspect to be honest   

Yeah fair points, but I guess looking at the two specific current topics which is t rugby lawsuit and an campaign to reduce heading in football - I don’t see how protective equipment can change it, rugby players are pretty well padded up these days, in the NFL they practically wear a suit of armour and still get hurt and injured. And to reduce heading in football would be a major change to the game. It’s more the endpoint of the discussions rather than the discussions themself that bother me.

[snowychap]

45 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Oh okay, so this conversation / proposal is to avoid all the deliberate onsetting of dementia and other head traumas right? 
 

So like when I used to line up an opponent in a scrum and I’d think to myself, ‘I’m gonna go out of my way to increase the possibility of dementia in this guy when he reaches old age’, it’s to eradicate that right? 

Here's an idea: try reading what other people have written and then have a conversation about that rather than a) not bother reading and have a good old rant that has little to do with the conversation and/or b) make up some absolute tripe and start a discussion with yourself about said tripe.

[bannedfromHandV]

1 minute ago, snowychap said:

Here's an idea: try reading what other people have written and then have a conversation about that rather than a) not bother reading and have a good old rant that has little to do with the conversation and/or b) make up some absolute tripe and start a discussion with yourself about said tripe.

Okay cheers 

[snowychap]

20 minutes ago, JB said:

I’m very sceptical about the informed consent/consenting adults arguments. I’ve experienced the external pressures that come with rising through the ranks in rugby and it’s not as easy as simply walking away.

If, however, it's the other way around, i.e. that one doesn't begin to take the risks until one can properly consent (so it's not a compulsory sporting activity at school, for example), then that would take away some of those pressures, wouldn't it?

[StefanAVFC]

52 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said:

If you've got Netflix and haven't already watched the docu-series about Aaron Hernandez it's well worth checking out.  It covers other challenges faced by pro athletes too, such as sexuality and mental health.  It's eye-opening stuff.

Yep, the situation in the NFL is like the football/rugby discussion x 1000

[NurembergVillan]

34 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

Yep, the situation in the NFL is like the football/rugby discussion x 1000

I worked at one place where a team were trying to mitigate the impact of heat build-up inside an NFL helmet and the issues that was causing for players.

58 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

So what’s the end goal then of having the discussion, what do you see as a satisfactory outcome?

I don't know. That's why I want to have the discussion - so I can learn more about the topics and ensure that any subsequent opinion I hold is informed.  That's the same as any discussion I enter into about a topic which as yet doesn't have a definitive answer.

[villa89]

Interesting documentary on ex rugby player Steve Thompson on bbc tonight. Early onset dementia caused by playing rugby. And he's not the only one. Tip of the iceberg. 

Interesting isn't the right word, harrowing would be more appropriate. 

Edited October 5, 2022 by villa89