CTE Solution To Prevent The End Of The NFL?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-09-2017, 12:12 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: #4 is the exact reason we do not need the concussion protocol and it should be left up to the players and teams how they wish to handle each situation.

There isn't a test for Kawasaki disease, either, but it is fatal without treatment.

Don't conflate the concussion protocol with you argument less off season practice increases injuries or the new practice restrictions had nothing to do with head injuries or CTE. How many times do you want to be incorrect in one day? And can you stay on one topic?

[StLucieBengal]

(08-09-2017, 02:12 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: There isn't a test for Kawasaki disease, either, but it is fatal without treatment.

Don't conflate the concussion protocol with you argument less off season practice increases injuries or the new practice restrictions had nothing to do with head injuries or CTE. How many times do you want to be incorrect in one day? And can you stay on one topic?

Injuries are increased with the new cba. You are the one trying to bring the chargers rookies into this ..... one has been hurt and the other was hurt probably because he hasn't been able to work with the team freely.

My thoughts on the concussion protocol are my thoughts. I don't see the need for it at all. Players know the risks.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-09-2017, 07:46 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Injuries are increased with the new cba.

Are injuries increased because of the practice rules as you claimed? Or are injuries increased because of players targeting knees to avoid penalties for helmet to helmet hits as you also claimed? You don't know. Claiming injuries are up because of decreased practice is uninformed and lazy.

Quote:You are the one trying to bring the chargers rookies into this .....

You're the one who claimed the practice rule changes were to rest veterans and had nothing to do with head injuries. I just used two rookies as examples your logic is flawed at best.

Quote:one has been hurt

Williams' injury happened during OTAs even before minicamp.

Quote:and the other was hurt probably because he hasn't been able to work with the team freely.

At best that is completely false. At worst, completely laughable. Discs don't herniate and ACLs don't tear because "probably because he hasn't been able to work with the team freely."

These are significant injuries that require a great amount of force to tear tissues completely in two.

Quote:My thoughts on the concussion protocol are my thoughts. I don't see the need for it at all.

Your thoughts on the concussion protocol are completely out of touch with current medical practices developed by numerous board certified neurologist independent of the NFL. The NFL didn't come up with the concussion protocol, they adopted the best practices of doctors that didn't have anything to do with the NFL. What education, training, or experience do you have that makes you more qualified than any of the thousands of neurologists who use the concussion protocols that have been developed over decades? Absolutely none.

Quote:Players know the risks.

After hearing Jamal Adams answer a question regarding head injuries recently, I really doubt that is true. After hearing one player say dinosaurs aren't real, but mermaids are real; I know that isn't true.

You don't think concussion protocols are necessary so I know you don't know the risks, either. A person who doesn't know the risks claiming other people you have never met know the risks has zero credibility.

[grampahol]

Researchers are very close to being able to detect cte (spell check just had to make cte into first 'cute' then 'credit' and finally cte.)   and medical technology has grown by leaps and bounds in just the past few years. To say it's completely undetectable in live humans is a bit premature. https://www.google.com/amp/www.techtimes.com/amp/articles/44563/20150407/cte-detection-in-living-may-now-be-possible-pet-scan-detects-abnormal-brain-proteins.htm

All this aside football being a multi billion dollar industry it's not going away.  As I once mentioned before as long as there are young people willing to get paid to entertain the masses with violence or join armies and die to protect the wealth of billionaires the billionaires are never going to let the goose that lays golden eggs for them die off.
If you have a goose laying golden eggs you DON'T eat the damned thing for dinner. 

[PV Bengal]

(08-10-2017, 03:02 AM)grampahol Wrote: Researchers are very close to being able to detect cte (spell check just had to make cte into first 'cute' then 'credit' and finally cte.)   and medical technology has grown by leaps and bounds in just the past few years. To say it's completely undetectable in live humans is a bit premature. https://www.google.com/amp/www.techtimes.com/amp/articles/44563/20150407/cte-detection-in-living-may-now-be-possible-pet-scan-detects-abnormal-brain-proteins.htm

All this aside football being a multi billion dollar industry it's not going away.  As I once mentioned before as long as there are young people willing to get paid to entertain the masses with violence or join armies and die to protect the wealth of billionaires the billionaires are never going to let the goose that lays golden eggs for them die off.
If you have a goose laying golden eggs you DON'T eat the damned thing for dinner. 

Having read the article, it clearly states that clumps of tau proteins are "indicators" as to the presence of CTE. Not definitive proof ... simply a "well, it may be there".

So the only way to positively know is to wait till these guys die, then perform the CTE test. If the CTE test turns out positive in 100% (or close) of the cases, then yes, there is a correlation.

The article, unfortunately, did not say how old the players were ... so we may need to wait 20 years for them to die.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-09-2017, 10:50 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Are injuries increased because of the practice rules as you claimed? Or are injuries increased because of players targeting knees to avoid penalties for helmet to helmet hits as you also claimed? You don't know. Claiming injuries are up because of decreased practice is uninformed and lazy.


You're the one who claimed the practice rule changes were to rest veterans and had nothing to do with head injuries. I just used two rookies as examples your logic is flawed at best.


Williams' injury happened during OTAs even before minicamp.


At best that is completely false. At worst, completely laughable. Discs don't herniate and ACLs don't tear because "probably because he hasn't been able to work with the team freely."

These are significant injuries that require a great amount of force to tear tissues completely in two.


Your thoughts on the concussion protocol are completely out of touch with current medical practices developed by numerous board certified neurologist independent of the NFL. The NFL didn't come up with the concussion protocol, they adopted the best practices of doctors that didn't have anything to do with the NFL. What education, training, or experience do you have that makes you more qualified than any of the thousands of neurologists who use the concussion protocols that have been developed over decades? Absolutely none.


After hearing Jamal Adams answer a question regarding head injuries recently, I really doubt that is true. After hearing one player say dinosaurs aren't real, but mermaids are real; I know that isn't true.

You don't think concussion protocols are necessary so I know you don't know the risks, either. A person who doesn't know the risks claiming other people you have never met know the risks has zero credibility.

1. Injuries are up since the cba. Go back and read, you crying about it will not change the numbers.

2. The practice rules were put in place to favor vets. Not all teams gave veteran days off, this rule didn't affect the bengals much since marvin has always have the vets more time off in season. The off season rules are what hurt development and lead to injuries.

3. Williams injuries were found in the ore draft process by some teams.

4. When you go from doing nothing into doing everything it puts a stress on the body. Not having the ability to get physical before camp puts people at risk when they have to push and pull when theg are already fatigued.

5. The only reason we have the concussion protocol is because of the lawsuit. So outside of the protecting the league against another lawsuit what exactly is it even doing?

6. Maybe Jamal Adams doesn't care? I am sure almost all players would keep playing if they dropped the concussion protocol. Why are we supposed to care about the players health and well being? It's their health I trust them to make their own healthcare decisions

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(08-08-2017, 09:55 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: This. You don't even need to be hit in the head to sustain this type of injury. Think whiplash injury for example. Seat belt prevents your head from hitting the dash, but you sustain a concussion from your brain smacking against the inside of your skull. The "whip" aspect of the whiplash is a force multiplier because it dramatically increases the acceleration of the head.

Yes, same as concussions sustained by race car drivers even though they're strapped in with a 5 point harness and a device to eliminate whiplash and basalar skull fracture.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-10-2017, 12:09 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: 1. Injuries are up since the cba. Go back and read, you crying about it will not change the numbers.

Explaining correlation is not the same as causation isn't crying. Looking at three years of data during a six year period ignores half the data.

Quote:2. The practice rules were put in place to favor vets. Not all teams gave veteran days off, this rule didn't affect the bengals much since marvin has always have the vets more time off in season. The off season rules are what hurt development and lead to injuries.

Please show me a NFLPA statement claiming the off-season practice changes were made to "favor the vets." You are literally the only person I'm aware of who has made this claim.

Once again, correlation doesn't equal causation. You have made the unsubstantiated claim reduced practices cause more injuries. You have also made the claim injuries will go up because players will target knees because of the rule change the prior to the new CBA. Show me the evidence which indicates injuries are up because of less practice instead of players targeting knees as you claimed. I don't believe that data exists and thus your unsubstantiated claims are exactly that; unsubstantiated.

Quote:3. Williams injuries were found in the ore draft process by some teams.

That's interesting because the injury was reported to have occurred during OTAs. Plus I haven't seen a single source other than you report teams found a herniated disc in Williams back before the draft. Show me a source.

Quote:4. When you go from doing nothing into doing everything it puts a stress on the body. Not having the ability to get physical before camp puts people at risk when they have to push and pull when theg are already fatigued.

As someone who diagnoses orthopedic injuries, I can tell you unequivocally herniated discs and ACL tears aren't caused by deconditioning. Period.

Quote:5. The only reason we have the concussion protocol is because of the lawsuit. So outside of the protecting the league against another lawsuit what exactly is it even doing?

I have explained this to you multiple times. Stop feigning ignorance. The NFL didn't develop the concussion protocol. Neurologists completely unaffiliated with the NFL develop it. Its purpose is to allow a mild traumatic brain injury to heal before the athlete returns to competitive sports. The protocol allows the athlete's return to sports to be individualized to the patient because every concussion in every patient heals at its own rate. As someone who claims to be a former collegiate football player, former football coach, and former PE educator how can you not know this?

Quote:6. Maybe Jamal Adams doesn't care? I am sure almost all players would keep playing if they dropped the concussion protocol. Why are we supposed to care about the players health and well being? It's their health I trust them to make their own healthcare decisions

You claim to know what the players know so you tell me if Adams does or doesn't care. Players who aren't in the concussion protocol are retiring. Claiming they would keep playing if the protocol they aren't in was dropped is just false. No one asked you to care for the players health so stop that straw man right now. No one is suggesting players can't choose their own healthcare. An employer not allowing an employee to work when they are sick or injured doesn't take away an employee's healthcare decision making ability. That employee can go see any doctor they want and choose any treatment they want. They can't force an employer to allow them to work when the are too sick or too injured to work. That's another straw man.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-10-2017, 07:17 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Explaining correlation is not the same as causation isn't crying. Looking at three years of data during a six year period ignores half the data.


Please show me a NFLPA statement claiming the off-season practice changes were made to "favor the vets." You are literally the only person I'm aware of who has made this claim.

Once again, correlation doesn't equal causation. You have made the unsubstantiated claim reduced practices cause more injuries. You have also made the claim injuries will go up because players will target knees because of the rule change the prior to the new CBA. Show me the evidence which indicates injuries are up because of less practice instead of players targeting knees as you claimed. I don't believe that data exists and thus your unsubstantiated claims are exactly that; unsubstantiated.


That's interesting because the injury was reported to have occurred during OTAs. Plus I haven't seen a single source other than you report teams found a herniated disc in Williams back before the draft. Show me a source.


As someone who diagnoses orthopedic injuries, I can tell you unequivocally herniated discs and ACL tears aren't caused by deconditioning. Period.


I have explained this to you multiple times. Stop feigning ignorance. The NFL didn't develop the concussion protocol. Neurologists completely unaffiliated with the NFL develop it. Its purpose is to allow a mild traumatic brain injury to heal before the athlete returns to competitive sports. The protocol allows the athlete's return to sports to be individualized to the patient because every concussion in every patient heals at its own rate. As someone who claims to be a former collegiate football player, former football coach, and former PE educator how can you not know this?


You claim to know what the players know so you tell me if Adams does or doesn't care. Players who aren't in the concussion protocol are retiring. Claiming they would keep playing if the protocol they aren't in was dropped is just false. No one asked you to care for the players health so stop that straw man right now. No one is suggesting players can't choose their own healthcare. An employer not allowing an employee to work when they are sick or injured doesn't take away an employee's healthcare decision making ability. That employee can go see any doctor they want and choose any treatment they want. They can't force an employer to allow them to work when the are too sick or too injured to work. That's another straw man.

Dear lord when you just make your posts larger and larger it's pointless to responds.

He NFLPA isn't going to tell the truth about their plan because they would be replaced if they did..... the owners fleeced them and all they got was less practice.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-10-2017, 09:09 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Dear lord when you just make your posts larger and larger it's pointless to responds.

I guess it is much easier to just make false claims in less than 140 characters like you do. Point taken.

Quote:He NFLPA isn't going to tell the truth about their plan because they would be replaced if they did..... the owners fleeced them and all they got was less practice.

In other words, when asked for evidence to support your false claims you make another false claim stating the NFLPA won't admit the truth thus you can't provide the evidence. How convenient.

[BonnieBengal]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/08/10/vicis-helmet-makes-its-nfl-debut/ Just saw this on PFT. Apparently they are working to create a safer helmet.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(08-11-2017, 12:22 AM)BonnieBengal Wrote: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/08/10/vicis-helmet-makes-its-nfl-debut/  Just saw this on PFT.  Apparently they are working to create a safer helmet.

The Plan...

Stage 1:


Stage 2:


Stage 3:

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-11-2017, 12:40 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: The Plan...

Stage 1:


Stage 2:


Stage 3:

I see your bubble boy and I raise you a dark helmet.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(08-11-2017, 12:52 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I see your bubble boy and I raise you a dark helmet.

Oh, so then you already saw the military's version of the plan on how to reduce concussions.  

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-11-2017, 01:08 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Oh, so then you already saw the military's version of the plan on how to reduce concussions.  

Somehow the plans were leaked.

[*SHRacerX*]

(08-08-2017, 03:46 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: It's not really a solution because it doesn't fix the problem and it might lower the quality of play because good players might not get to play as long, but, instead of just shutting down the league because of damage to players' brains, what about forcing a player to get a brain scan before the start of every season and, if the damage is noticeable and enough where it will cause problems, force the player to retire.

I understand that a lot of good players would be forced to retire why they're still playing at a high level, but it would save lives down the line and prevent a shutdown of the NFL. which seems inevitable.  

It would also cause players to use their head a lot less if they know that they'd be done with any damage to their brain that is noticeable.  

Thoughts?

This is what a smart person would do to protect themselves, but this is not what greedy owners and league officials will do.  Plus, a vast majority of the players come from backgrounds that would not allow them to have the lifestyle they live without football.  

I think in the end a modification to the helmets is the next step...make them lighter, but stronger, with a padded "concussion cap" like that one player used to wear.  It looked like a mushroom on his head, but it protected him.  Hard to believe the league hasn't adopted that across the board just because it looks weird.  When padded surface would hit other padded surfaces, it would greatly reduce the impact of the hits.  

Legislating the so-called "target area" helps, but then the knees are being taken out.  Do they take that out, too?  You can live without your knees but you sure can't play without them...

[Au165]

(08-11-2017, 09:34 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: This is what a smart person would do to protect themselves, but this is not what greedy owners and league officials will do.  Plus, a vast majority of the players come from backgrounds that would not allow them to have the lifestyle they live without football.  

I think in the end a modification to the helmets is the next step...make them lighter, but stronger, with a padded "concussion cap" like that one player used to wear.  It looked like a mushroom on his head, but it protected him.  Hard to believe the league hasn't adopted that across the board just because it looks weird.  When padded surface would hit other padded surfaces, it would greatly reduce the impact of the hits.  

Legislating the so-called "target area" helps, but then the knees are being taken out.  Do they take that out, too?  You can live without your knees but you sure can't play without them...

Again, helmets at the NFL level will make very little difference on the concussion issue. A brain inside a body moving at 17 MPH will continue to move at 17 MPH when the body rapidly decelerates to 0 MPH causing it to smash into the inside of your skull. Your brain is like a person driving down the highway in a car without a seat belt. When the car hits a wall the person gets ejected through the windshield into said wall, your brain does the same thing into the inside of your skull. It doesn't matter how good we make the exteriors of the car in absorbing the force (helmets), you are still going through that windshield without a seat belt on.

Now the reason the target area changes matter is because a shot to the head multiplies that force in the opposite direction. If a guy gets hit in the head the momentum of their skull is redirected back towards the brain which is still traveling at that same 17 MPH. This creates even more force when the brain impacts the skull versus getting hit in the waist and your body and neck slightly allowing for deceleration, think of this as cars being built to collapse to try to decelerate.

[*SHRacerX*]

(08-11-2017, 09:54 AM)Au165 Wrote: Again, helmets at the NFL level will make very little difference on the concussion issue. A brain inside a body moving at 17 MPH will continue to move at 17 MPH when the body rapidly decelerates to 0 MPH causing it to smash into the inside of your skull. Your brain is like a person driving down the highway in a car without a seat belt. When the car hits a wall the person gets ejected through the windshield into said wall, your brain does the same thing into the inside of your skull. It doesn't matter how good we make the exteriors of the car in absorbing the force (helmets), you are still going through that windshield without a seat belt on.

Now the reason the target area changes matter is because a shot to the head multiplies that force in the opposite direction. If a guy gets hit in the head the momentum of their skull is redirected back towards the brain which is still traveling at that same 17 MPH. This creates even more force when the brain impacts the skull versus getting hit in the waist and your body and neck slightly allowing for deceleration, think of this as cars being built to collapse to try to decelerate.

What you are saying is largely accurate, but if you don't have a study comparing TWO concussion cap helmets hitting with the same force of non-concussion cap helments, what you are saying is just your opinion.  The half-inch pad around the helmet hitting the half inch pad on the other helmet would have a substantially greater reduction on the trauma of the brain.

To use your automotive analogy, I remember when the third generation Camaro and Firebird were being designed.  It became apparent to the engineers that having glass all the way over the top of the dash was actually safer (and this was proven by crash test dummies with sensors) than the steel roof edge.  Why?  The head of dummies (without belts or airbags) would not decelerate as quickly when it hit safety glass because it was partially fracture the glass and go slightly in to the windsheild, without going through it.  

The extra inch between two helmets would absolutely "soften the blow".  

[Au165]

(08-11-2017, 11:21 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: What you are saying is largely accurate, but if you don't have a study comparing TWO concussion cap helmets hitting with the same force of non-concussion cap helments, what you are saying is just your opinion.  The half-inch pad around the helmet hitting the half inch pad on the other helmet would have a substantially greater reduction on the trauma of the brain.

To use your automotive analogy, I remember when the third generation Camaro and Firebird were being designed.  It became apparent to the engineers that having glass all the way over the top of the dash was actually safer (and this was proven by crash test dummies with sensors) than the steel roof edge.  Why?  The head of dummies (without belts or airbags) would not decelerate as quickly when it hit safety glass because it was partially fracture the glass and go slightly in to the windsheild, without going through it.  

The extra inch between two helmets would absolutely "soften the blow".  

It's not just opinion, it is actually physics. The inside of the brain can not be padded so your analogy doesn't work. The safety glass you're referring to would be the skull and we can't change it. As I pointed out the foam caps you refer to is actually more like the crumble zone that is built into cars now, it can decelerate the vehicle but not the person inside if they aren't secured. The issue is the brain in the skull floats in fluid and it will keep going much like the person not wearing a seat belt.

[*SHRacerX*]

(08-11-2017, 11:24 AM)Au165 Wrote: It's not just opinion, it is actually physics. The inside of the brain can not be padded so your analogy doesn't work. The safety glass you're referring to would be the skull and we can't change it. As I pointed out the foam caps you refer to is actually more like the crumble zone that is built into cars now, it can decelerate the vehicle but not the person inside if they aren't secured. The issue is the brain in the skull floats in fluid and it will keep going much like the person not wearing a seat belt.

We just seem to be talking about two different things.  You explain what happens in a concussion, which I already know, and I am trying to say that softening the blow, even by a little, could make an impact.  Have you ever seen those giant inflatable balls that kids wear and run in to each other?  Those kids reverse direction quickly as well, but the balls ease the impact.