Truth Doesn't Have a Side

[noreply66]

We have enough of these kids setting around all day pushing and pressing with their fingers. Take these sports away and we will have double the do nothing kids if not more.

There are many non-contact sports available to children that would provide them with a more suitable outlet for exercise.

wimpy , wimpy, wimpy

[formerfcfan]

Is letting your child play football "child abuse"? Hell no; it's not.

Now, is forcing your child to play football, particularly at the HS level, somewhat neglectful? Sure, it is. We had a guy, whose kids have since graduated, who made his youngest son play HS football on a roster that was varsity only (not enough kids for junior varsity.) The unsettling thing about this case is the kid stood no more than 4'11 his freshman year, and never grew any bigger past 5'4 by the time he graduated high school and it probably was not until the student's senior season that he actually had the strength and build to actually protect himself on the field. I'm not against parents emphasizing and demanding extracurricular involvement on their kids, but there's sense and sensibility to be had.

The other fork on this topic that I issue with how some parents treat football as being a latchkey, of sorts. I don't see this happen too much at the high school level, but at the middle school level I've known parents who pretty much saw football as a place to dump junior off for 2-3 hours after school because they personally were inadequate/disinterested in providing any quality time with their child(ren) during the school week. Quality parenting is not letting sports act as a substitute for family involvement; instead, quality parenting is allowing sports to act as a supplementary, value-building experience for a child's life with direct involvement and interaction with the parent(s).

Then there's also the crowd of dads who make their kids play football because they personally are football fans, and want another avenue of entertainment toward the sport that isn't college football or the NFL. Even if the kid doesn't want to play, and instead would rather read a book or play an instrument.

- - -

The only thing I can really surmise as being truly "abusive" about football is parents not taking a direct involvement nor attention heed toward the well-being of their child playing the sport. But even that is more so neglectful than "abusive." I believe every parent should be required to take the same training and education that the coaches do as it relates to concussions. I think there is one toxic element of the current state of affairs surrounding football and concussions: the rhetoric of "toughing it out" and stigmatization that comes with telling an adult "I'm not feeling alright after that helmet/helmet clash from a few plays ago." I think this is further compounded with the fact that, often times, you have complete lummoxes (read: daddy ball coaches) running youth/MS football that don't prioritize players' safety because it can come at the expense of a) winning a game or b) finishing a game/season (more so true for low roster numbers.)

If there was a rule country wide that set the age of tacking at let's say 14 than we could get somewhere possibly. Part of me though watches these pee wee games and I just don't see those hits coming to cause concussion until that 6th-8th grade level and above as kids are putting on the mass.

There has been some discussion on other boards about possible ways to police tackle football nationwide. My personal opinion is it's a very complex, tricky and possibly unlikely issue that will see resolution on the national level. For instance, where is the line drawn? Age as the criteria makes sense, if not for the fact that we don't divide our football (let alone sports) on an age basis (we do it on a grade basis... loosely.) Let's say that there shouldn't be tackle until ninth grade/freshman year. That is probably the most black-and-white, no room for gray area rule. But two obstacles are then presented: a) do we make it federal law, or instead a rule to be policed via the National Federation of High School Sports and other relevant governing bodies surrounding interscholastic football; b) do sports such as hockey and soccer also stand to be litigated as such?


As an aside: 'can't say I'm too much a fan of the "kids these days" rhetoric that's surrounded this discussion for years (not just on this thread.) "Oh... kids these days would rather play Xbox"; "oh... these kids are weak and coddled." The common denominator between the so-called "lazy" kids and the kids playing football is the fact there is a parental unit/guardianship that steers and encourages the decisions of their children. If anything, it should be "parents these days". They're the ones who ultimately make the final choice; they're the ones that don't have to be buying their kids video games for Christmas, but still do otherwise. If anyone is truly outraged about the mythical absolution of work ethic across generational lines, get on the darn parents... at least talk to them. Who permits the current generation to go about their youthful, leisurely activities? The generation above.

[formerfcfan]

I didnt read through all this, but I have a thought Im not a doctor so I dont know its just a thought. I watched the 48 hours special on Aaron Hernadez the other night. They talked about his brain and how it looked and it was because of football. Early in the special the talked about how he was a chronic weed smoker as well as a user of other mind altering drugs. They keep doing research on all these football and even wrestlers about how their brains are affected by concussions. Have they done any research on how drugs might affect the brain in combination with the concussion? I mean maybe the drug and alcohol abuse helps to speed up CTE you know what I mean. Maybe without the drugs these cases would not be so bad. I dont know Im not a doctor so Im just posting a question you know.

I'm not an MD either, but I can provide a little bit of explanation on general drug usage and the effect on the brain. I am less qualified to speak on the bivariate of concussion + drug usage = ???

The short answer is: long-term alcohol or cocaine usage pose the biggest detriment on a person's brain health. Marijuana is not more dangerous than either of the two, but that doesn't mean its necessarily harmless.

The long answer is: marijuana does have some detriment to the brain's function and health, short-term and long-term. The long-term effects are variable to the volume of weed smoked, the length of time and frequency (along with when usage starts.) THC, which is what gets you "high", is the psycho-active compound present in MJ that has the most effect on the brain. The chemical, which is actually released through the brain, carries in such a way that it bonds in lipids (read: the "fatty" stuff) and directly affects the cognitive aspect (short-term) with possible consequence to mood regulation and emotion. The only real threat that is posed short-term, in rare cases, is not brain deterioration but instead mental health issues (schizophrenia, schizo-affective disorder etc.) Unless Aaron Hernandez constantly smoked since the age of, like, 14 or would smoke a quarter-pound daily... I just don't see the likelihood of it being detrimental to his brain given the age at which he died. His mental health, sure... possibly.

I haven't watched the 48 Hours special on Hernandez, but I'd bet the house that he probably did his fair share of drinking in HS, college and in the pros. And not just the occasional Bud Light, either. Alcohol is more detrimental to the brain's functioning and health. Depletion of gray matter in the brain (responsible for muscle movement and decision making) can (and does) erode with long-term alcoholism, and the cerebral cortex (rational thought processor) can get whittled away too by drinking.

In sum, it probably wasn't the weed. If he did LSD or psilocybin (aka 'Shrooms), it would probably depend on how much and for how long... but even then the effects on the brain still would be minor compared to the effects of alcohol. My guess is alcohol usage most definitely accelerates CTE, whereas marijuana may just make the mental health aspects of it worse.

[danicalifornia]

In the above photo, Dr. Chris Nowinski (far left) has helped me obtain additional information concerning CTE resources as well.

Chris Nowinski wasn't far left. He was the younger guy in the back. Glad you know who you were talking to lol

CTE is no joke, I wouldn't let my child play football (besides flag) until they were at least in high school and then I would let them make their own decision. But, before making that decision, I would present them with as much information on head trauma and injuries as possible.

Football can be a great game, but it is insanely violent and dangerous for long term health.

[Tigercannon71]

I didnt read through all this, but I have a thought Im not a doctor so I dont know its just a thought. I watched the 48 hours special on Aaron Hernadez the other night. They talked about his brain and how it looked and it was because of football. Early in the special the talked about how he was a chronic weed smoker as well as a user of other mind altering drugs. They keep doing research on all these football and even wrestlers about how their brains are affected by concussions. Have they done any research on how drugs might affect the brain in combination with the concussion? I mean maybe the drug and alcohol abuse helps to speed up CTE you know what I mean. Maybe without the drugs these cases would not be so bad. I dont know Im not a doctor so Im just posting a question you know.

I'm not an MD either, but I can provide a little bit of explanation on general drug usage and the effect on the brain. I am less qualified to speak on the bivariate of concussion + drug usage = ???

The short answer is: long-term alcohol or cocaine usage pose the biggest detriment on a person's brain health. Marijuana is not more dangerous than either of the two, but that doesn't mean its necessarily harmless.

The long answer is: marijuana does have some detriment to the brain's function and health, short-term and long-term. The long-term effects are variable to the volume of weed smoked, the length of time and frequency (along with when usage starts.) THC, which is what gets you "high", is the psycho-active compound present in MJ that has the most effect on the brain. The chemical, which is actually released through the brain, carries in such a way that it bonds in lipids (read: the "fatty" stuff) and directly affects the cognitive aspect (short-term) with possible consequence to mood regulation and emotion. The only real threat that is posed short-term, in rare cases, is not brain deterioration but instead mental health issues (schizophrenia, schizo-affective disorder etc.) Unless Aaron Hernandez constantly smoked since the age of, like, 14 or would smoke a quarter-pound daily... I just don't see the likelihood of it being detrimental to his brain given the age at which he died. His mental health, sure... possibly.

I haven't watched the 48 Hours special on Hernandez, but I'd bet the house that he probably did his fair share of drinking in HS, college and in the pros. And not just the occasional Bud Light, either. Alcohol is more detrimental to the brain's functioning and health. Depletion of gray matter in the brain (responsible for muscle movement and decision making) can (and does) erode with long-term alcoholism, and the cerebral cortex (rational thought processor) can get whittled away too by drinking.

In sum, it probably wasn't the weed. If he did LSD or psilocybin (aka 'Shrooms), it would probably depend on how much and for how long... but even then the effects on the brain still would be minor compared to the effects of alcohol. My guess is alcohol usage most definitely accelerates CTE, whereas marijuana may just make the mental health aspects of it worse.

Thank you for your answer.

[greygoose]

There's a problem with the data that is being acquired for the study of CTE. Current studies on CTE is pertaining to those individuals who played football under different rules and different times. Gone are the days of 2-3 practices a day for so many weeks and full contact practices every time you stepped out onto the field, gone or at least in this area is the Oklahoma drill which provided more violent hits on a regular basis then any 1 game would do and it done that to everyone on the team not just to those who would get the playing time. There is now governing bodies of work that says you can only full contact during the week for X-amount of time, you can't go full contact in back to back days. A new tackling style is being implemented from the highest level to the lowest levels, gone are the days of teaching someone to bury their helmet in the ball carriers chest as he's lowering his helmet causing more helmet to helmet contact hits. The targeting rule is now in place which has been impactful as well. Guess my point is these rules are so young there's no way to tell what impact they will have on the game, will it eliminate CTE?? No, but can we drastically reduce the cause and effect and the % of players that have it absolutely. Only time and data will be able to tell though. To say this player or this player had it yeah they've all played under different rules of the game and for that you have to have different guidelines in which your data is acquired.

[Orange and Brown]

There's a problem with the data that is being acquired for the study of CTE. Current studies on CTE is pertaining to those individuals who played football under different rules and different times. Gone are the days of 2-3 practices a day for so many weeks and full contact practices every time you stepped out onto the field, gone or at least in this area is the Oklahoma drill which provided more violent hits on a regular basis then any 1 game would do and it done that to everyone on the team not just to those who would get the playing time. There is now governing bodies of work that says you can only full contact during the week for X-amount of time, you can't go full contact in back to back days. A new tackling style is being implemented from the highest level to the lowest levels, gone are the days of teaching someone to bury their helmet in the ball carriers chest as he's lowering his helmet causing more helmet to helmet contact hits. The targeting rule is now in place which has been impactful as well. Guess my point is these rules are so young there's no way to tell what impact they will have on the game, will it eliminate CTE?? No, but can we drastically reduce the cause and effect and the % of players that have it absolutely. Only time and data will be able to tell though. To say this player or this player had it yeah they've all played under different rules of the game and for that you have to have different guidelines in which your data is acquired.

Good post

[Phoenix31]

Comcussion Lawsuits Are Coming To Youth Football...it's only the beginning for football concussion lawsuits.

https://melmagazine.com/the-frontline-t ... 891e58100b

[Phoenix31]

ABSOLUTELY, when you make a statement it is your belief, so what makes you believe we should omit ourselves to current areas you comment on?? You still acknowledge only what you want to. I'm glad in this post you didn't refer to child abuse, good for you, and yes you read shut your mouth correctly if you kept referring to it that way. Oh I know it's not going away, you do know what a security blanket is right?? That's why I say try and help make it safer be apart of the solution. You want to focus on cult you are following and heeding the word of your $10 book "dr". Don't you think baseball should be added to that, kids get his by pitches, misjudge the ball get hit in the face and head, grounder pops up and hits them in the head.


"The term cult usually refers to a social group defined by its religious, spiritual, or philosophical beliefs, or its common interest in a particular personality, object or goal."

I have left baseball out of this for now, but you could have included Ryan Freel into the discussion. Even more so, Lou Gehrig developing ALS was more or less due to no batter's helmet 90 years ago.

Baseball is not a collision sport regarding repetitive blows to the head. Sure a batter could get beaned with a 100+ MPH fastball but the repetitive aspect is not there to rival the number of blows to the head in football. Homeplate collisions are rarer still nowadays.

Football cannot be made safer. As long as running backs plow the line of scrimmage into a linebacker filling a gap there will always be an irrestible force crashing headfirst into an immovable object. We cannot get around Newton's 3 laws of motion:



The brain slams forcefully into the skull everytime a collision occurs. The equal and opposite reaction is the brain damage suffered by repetitive blows.

Football will eventually be banned for children. It may take 30-50 years for it to happen, but it will occur.

[Phoenix31]

http://www.espn.com/blog/carolina-panth ... ain-injury

Curious if your "dr" read into or has looked into this research. This is one I'm curious about especially with the studies they done with high school teams and the ones who wore it vs the ones who didn't and the data they gathered. Could it be a start, maybe let's hope.

I have read about this. I believe that this will help with older football players.

I do not believe that this device should be applied to children in their developmental stages.

I understand the physics behind it, but I am skeptical about its use in youth football considering the increased blood flow pressure to the brain.

[Phoenix31]

I didnt read through all this, but I have a thought Im not a doctor so I dont know its just a thought. I watched the 48 hours special on Aaron Hernadez the other night. They talked about his brain and how it looked and it was because of football. Early in the special the talked about how he was a chronic weed smoker as well as a user of other mind altering drugs. They keep doing research on all these football and even wrestlers about how their brains are affected by concussions. Have they done any research on how drugs might affect the brain in combination with the concussion? I mean maybe the drug and alcohol abuse helps to speed up CTE you know what I mean. Maybe without the drugs these cases would not be so bad. I dont know Im not a doctor so Im just posting a question you know.

Very good point.

Interesting because one could make the argument that drugs and alcohol helped with easing some of the pain early on, but the player, like most addicts, needed more. This could have produced an increased catalyst for the TBI to occur.

This could be part of a controlled group study in the future. Tough to do, but worthwhile to investigate.

Personally, I know that with my own TBI, it is football, baseball, wrestling, boxing, fighting, etc. related because I have never smoked, done drugs of any kind; however, I did drink some...probably 2 to 3 times a year so nothing overwhelming.

Again, that is an interesting hypothesis, Tigercannon71.

[Phoenix31]

We have enough of these kids setting around all day pushing and pressing with their fingers. Take these sports away and we will have double the do nothing kids if not more.

There are many non-contact sports available to children that would provide them with a more suitable outlet for exercise.

wimpy , wimpy, wimpy

In your opinion maybe, but in addition to playing football I also played baseball, basketball, tennis, golf, swimming, volleyball, cycling, track and field, and some others that I may have forgotten over the years.

The kids can play non-tackle football until 8th or 9th grade IMO....however, there is too much money being made in our capitalist society (I am a conservative...not a socialist) for the equipment companies to back away from a showdown in the future.

[Phoenix31]

In the above photo, Dr. Chris Nowinski (far left) has helped me obtain additional information concerning CTE resources as well.

Chris Nowinski wasn't far left. He was the younger guy in the back. Glad you know who you were talking to lol

CTE is no joke, I wouldn't let my child play football (besides flag) until they were at least in high school and then I would let them make their own decision. But, before making that decision, I would present them with as much information on head trauma and injuries as possible.

Football can be a great game, but it is insanely violent and dangerous for long term health.

Oh well....I have never met him personally and I was quickly reading the caption incorrectly.

Here he is:

[danicalifornia]

In the above photo, Dr. Chris Nowinski (far left) has helped me obtain additional information concerning CTE resources as well.

Chris Nowinski wasn't far left. He was the younger guy in the back. Glad you know who you were talking to lol

CTE is no joke, I wouldn't let my child play football (besides flag) until they were at least in high school and then I would let them make their own decision. But, before making that decision, I would present them with as much information on head trauma and injuries as possible.

Football can be a great game, but it is insanely violent and dangerous for long term health.

Oh well....I have never met him personally and I was quickly reading the caption incorrectly.

Here he is:

Just trying to toss some fun into this thread lol

But, as a former WWE fan, he is recognizable to me. The worst part is that there is a match where you can tell when he started to have his concussion issues and it is really hard to watch looking back. Thankfully he seemed to get out while mostly healthy and is doing great things now to raise awareness.

[Phoenix31]

There's a problem with the data that is being acquired for the study of CTE. Current studies on CTE is pertaining to those individuals who played football under different rules and different times. Gone are the days of 2-3 practices a day for so many weeks and full contact practices every time you stepped out onto the field, gone or at least in this area is the Oklahoma drill which provided more violent hits on a regular basis then any 1 game would do and it done that to everyone on the team not just to those who would get the playing time. There is now governing bodies of work that says you can only full contact during the week for X-amount of time, you can't go full contact in back to back days. A new tackling style is being implemented from the highest level to the lowest levels, gone are the days of teaching someone to bury their helmet in the ball carriers chest as he's lowering his helmet causing more helmet to helmet contact hits. The targeting rule is now in place which has been impactful as well. Guess my point is these rules are so young there's no way to tell what impact they will have on the game, will it eliminate CTE?? No, but can we drastically reduce the cause and effect and the % of players that have it absolutely. Only time and data will be able to tell though. To say this player or this player had it yeah they've all played under different rules of the game and for that you have to have different guidelines in which your data is acquired.

There are instances with individuals who recently died in their mid 20's having CTE. The most recent one occurred a couple of months ago:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/leeigel/20 ... -football/

This is the most disturbing part about your argument, greygoose. Another generation of youth football players are at risk because of the "perceived need" for more data.

CTE is about the number of repetitive blows to the head and not so much the severity of the blows that cause the severe concussions. Those are dangerous, too. However, CTE is about the brain continually sloshing around against the skull over and over and over and over again.

There is no getting around Newton's 3 laws of motion. How the brain will stop banging into the skull after each hit without additional pressure added to the brain (aka, Luke Kuechly's experimental neck brace)? This is pressure that a developing child cannot risk.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... QsB3tfIcvW

[Phoenix31]

I agree.

Just trying to find a solution for current and future football players.

[greygoose]

http://www.espn.com/blog/carolina-panth ... ain-injury

Curious if your "dr" read into or has looked into this research. This is one I'm curious about especially with the studies they done with high school teams and the ones who wore it vs the ones who didn't and the data they gathered. Could it be a start, maybe let's hope.

I have read about this. I believe that this will help with older football players.

I do not believe that this device should be applied to children in their developmental stages.

I understand the physics behind it, but I am skeptical about its use in youth football considering the increased blood flow pressure to the brain.

There is several articles out about this and yes some are skeptic about the increased blood flow pressure to the brain but they are also trying to fight the problem by fighting it from the inside and trying to make it so the brain doesn't have those collisions against the skull. I've enclosed a couple more articles one where they fit players of St. X with the Q-collar and with Moeller who didn't have the Q-collar. Study was also run on youth hockey players as well.

https://www.wcpo.com/news/insider/dyer- ... ams?page=2
https://www.si.com/edge/2016/06/15/conc ... all-hockey


“Changes indicate alterations in the tissue and the axons that could represent brain injury,” Myers says. “What we saw was that those boys that wore the collar did not have significant changes in the structural component of their brain, whereas those that didn’t wear the collar, we did see a significant change.”

The participants chosen for the football study included 21 players from St. Xavier High (Cincinnati) and the same number from nearby Moeller High. The St. Xavier Bombers were Ohio High School Athletic Association champions in 2005 and ’07, and rival Moeller Crusaders have nine state titles, including back-to-back wins in 2012 and ’13. Bombers players, who received 16,983 recorded impacts over their season, were fitted with the Q-Collar, while Crusaders players, with 17,750 hits, were not.


This is the continuing technology I refer to, the rules the coaches all of these play a part. They won't allow youth to use the Q-collar under a certain age at this time, still have to go through FDA approval to even make it available to everyone. However, you have to admit if those numbers can hold up and we can gather more data that it sounds very promising. As a parent/coach when I was watching a panther game and they discussed what Kuechly was wearing I immediately took to the internet to do some research. The long term effects football can have on people is nothing to take lightly as someone who has a son that absolutely loves the game I want to research and do everything possible to try and make it safer.

[greygoose]

Comcussion Lawsuits Are Coming To Youth Football...it's only the beginning for football concussion lawsuits.

https://melmagazine.com/the-frontline-t ... 891e58100b

Lawsuit has already been field against Pop Warner on a case in Wisconsin back in 2015 and in 2014 lawsuit was started in Illinois wanting schools to have on-call doctors for practices, computer-based concussion screening and other changes sought by the former prep quarterback who is suing the group.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/concussion ... ois-judge/
Just another but was dismissed by the judge. .

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/09/us/pop-wa ... index.html
The woman in the pop warner case ended up settling out of court in 2016 for undisclosed amount

All of these are cases where it already has happened so it's not ground breaking news especially in light of what is going on with CTE someone wants to place the blame and someone wants to get a buck so it's not real shocking.

[Phoenix31]

http://www.espn.com/blog/carolina-panth ... ain-injury

Curious if your "dr" read into or has looked into this research. This is one I'm curious about especially with the studies they done with high school teams and the ones who wore it vs the ones who didn't and the data they gathered. Could it be a start, maybe let's hope.

I have read about this. I believe that this will help with older football players.

I do not believe that this device should be applied to children in their developmental stages.

I understand the physics behind it, but I am skeptical about its use in youth football considering the increased blood flow pressure to the brain.

There is several articles out about this and yes some are skeptic about the increased blood flow pressure to the brain but they are also trying to fight the problem by fighting it from the inside and trying to make it so the brain doesn't have those collisions against the skull. I've enclosed a couple more articles one where they fit players of St. X with the Q-collar and with Moeller who didn't have the Q-collar. Study was also run on youth hockey players as well.

https://www.wcpo.com/news/insider/dyer- ... ams?page=2
https://www.si.com/edge/2016/06/15/conc ... all-hockey


“Changes indicate alterations in the tissue and the axons that could represent brain injury,” Myers says. “What we saw was that those boys that wore the collar did not have significant changes in the structural component of their brain, whereas those that didn’t wear the collar, we did see a significant change.”

The participants chosen for the football study included 21 players from St. Xavier High (Cincinnati) and the same number from nearby Moeller High. The St. Xavier Bombers were Ohio High School Athletic Association champions in 2005 and ’07, and rival Moeller Crusaders have nine state titles, including back-to-back wins in 2012 and ’13. Bombers players, who received 16,983 recorded impacts over their season, were fitted with the Q-Collar, while Crusaders players, with 17,750 hits, were not.


This is the continuing technology I refer to, the rules the coaches all of these play a part. They won't allow youth to use the Q-collar under a certain age at this time, still have to go through FDA approval to even make it available to everyone. However, you have to admit if those numbers can hold up and we can gather more data that it sounds very promising. As a parent/coach when I was watching a panther game and they discussed what Kuechly was wearing I immediately took to the internet to do some research. The long term effects football can have on people is nothing to take lightly as someone who has a son that absolutely loves the game I want to research and do everything possible to try and make it safer.

Awesome that it has worked in practice for Catholics in Cincinnati.....

[Phoenix31]

Comcussion Lawsuits Are Coming To Youth Football...it's only the beginning for football concussion lawsuits.

https://melmagazine.com/the-frontline-t ... 891e58100b

Lawsuit has already been field against Pop Warner on a case in Wisconsin back in 2015 and in 2014 lawsuit was started in Illinois wanting schools to have on-call doctors for practices, computer-based concussion screening and other changes sought by the former prep quarterback who is suing the group.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/concussion ... ois-judge/
Just another but was dismissed by the judge. .

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/09/us/pop-wa ... index.html
The woman in the pop warner case ended up settling out of court in 2016 for undisclosed amount

All of these are cases where it already has happened so it's not ground breaking news especially in light of what is going on with CTE someone wants to place the blame and someone wants to get a buck so it's not real shocking.

Awesome....just a matter of time for more to come forward as a class action suit.....nothing has changed.