Slashdot Mirror


NFL Players With Long and Short Careers Have Similar Death Risk, Study Finds (reuters.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: The study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association compared 2,933 athletes who played in the National Football League for an average of five years to 879 "replacement players" who filled in for three games during a mid-1980s strike, finding no statistically significant difference in rates of death from all causes. Critics said the research had several flaws and pointed to a study released last year that found 99 percent of deceased former NFL players whose brains were analyzed post-mortem showed signs of chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), a disease linked to repeated hits to the head that can lead to aggression and dementia. The latest study found that the leading cause of death among the NFL career players was cardiometabolic disease, which entails greater risk of heart attack and stroke, followed by transportation injuries and unintentional injuries.

"This new study seems to support other previous studies that have not shown an increase in mortality among NFL players when compared to similar cohorts," an NFL spokeswoman said. "As with all new research on this topic, we will look at it closely to see what we can learn to better enhance the well-being of our current and former players," the spokeswoman said.

145 comments

  1. It's time. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's time we start ending school sponsored football programs. There are plenty of other sports that don't involve brain damage. I'm not saying outlaw it, just don't promote it at schools.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re: It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have the wrong idea. We should instead encourage more lethally dangerous sports. It's the only way to evolve as a species. We've tamed the world, we must now find our own challenges among ourselves.

    2. Re: It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry about the swirlies football players gave you, now give me your lunch money or it swirly time

    3. Re: It's time. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Sorry about the swirlies football players gave you, now give me your lunch money or it swirly time

      Hey, no hard feelings about the swirlies. It wasn't anything a decade of therapy couldn't fix. Besides, now it's my fetish. ;)

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    4. Re: It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So you enjoy watching people kill themselves for your entertainment?

    5. Re:It's time. by stephanruby · · Score: 0

      It's time we start ending school sponsored football programs.

      It's also time we stop awarding half of a player's NFL pension to a wife who divorces him.

      If you don't want to take care of a husband with brain damage, I completely understand.

      But you better leave his pension alone.

    6. Re: It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The risks have been published and it is up to the individual to decide if he wants to accept the risk. Enough with the nanny state bullshit. Everyone dies. Unless there is some sort of behavioral regimine that ensures immortality I will continue to decide the level of risks I am willing to accept.

    7. Re: It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. And I would enjoy watching someone kill you too.

    8. Re: It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I know it! And what with these seat belt laws anyways? Who do they think they are? And furthermore, I object to all this sex on the telly. I mean, I keep fallin' off.

    9. Re: It's time. by SeaFox · · Score: 2

      So you enjoy watching people kill themselves for your entertainment?

      I knew it was more than a coincidence that modern football stadiums have such a likeness to the Colosseum.

    10. Re:It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI: Football is subsidizing education, not the other way around.

    11. Re:It's time. by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Why should a pension being treated differently from any other marital asset?

    12. Re: It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. I enjoy killing people for my entertainment.

    13. Re: It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you want the same treatment that the last high school football jock that tried that got?

      You aint so hot when you can't run after a snap kick to the knee,

    14. Re:It's time. by rikkards · · Score: 1

      And full contact hockey.

    15. Re:It's time. by Hal_Porter · · Score: 0

      Nonsense. They say the Battle of Waterloo was 'won on the playing-fields of Eton'. A bit of physical aggression is entirely natural in citizens of a world power.

      To be quite honest I'd be up for arming the football players. Or enhancing them with cybernetic cannons. According to my calculations the 21st century will be 27.2% bloodier than the 20th.

      At the very least we need to legalise steroid use.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    16. Re:It's time. by argStyopa · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Or maybe let people make up their own minds instead of taking a nanny state approach?

      My father played football, including division 1 collegiate, until he was knocked cold while tackling Jim McNamara. He woke up the next day in his dorm room, had trouble reading ever since (which we know now for sure was a result). At age 70, he suffered a massive paralyzing stroke which may very well have been a result of umpteen concussions.

      I played football in high school and was being recruited for college play but was unable to continue due to significant injuries to my knees and back, as well as a dislocated shoulder, broken ankle, and 7 bones in my hands on one instance.

      My oldest son played football in high school and college, having an injury free career until 2 concussions left him with some memory issues.

      My sister asked us all the other day at dinner if we would play again, knowing what we would have to suffer. My answer was easy, as my injuries have only left me now a little pain & slow to get up it 50. Even I was surprised when both my father and son absolutely, immediately, said yes as well.

      So maybe you don't choose for us, and let people make their now better informed choices by themselves ?

      --
      -Styopa
    17. Re: It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha you wish that was what happened don't. You keep wishing it went that way. But it didn't. Your feeble, pathetic attempt at a kick was easily avoided. With a laugh, the athletes giving you a deserved lesson for being a nuisance backhanded you across the face, and you fell stunned on the bathroom floor. There you were defecated upon and pictures of your feces-smeared face were posted to everyone you happened to know. That's what really happened.

    18. Re: It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have west coast Democrats that can't understand why I support seatbelt laws and simultaneously don't support motorcycle helmet laws.

      I support seat belt laws because while seatbelts help increase your odds of surviving an accident, they also secure your body to the vehicle. This prevents your body from being ejected from the vehicle and increasing the debris field on the road. This reduces to overall risk to other users of the roadway by creating fewer hazards.

      A motorcycle helmet only serves to increase your probability of surviving an accident. It does not reduce the hazard or risk to those around you.

    19. Re: It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      really? thats how it went ? Odd because I went on to become a pro kick boxer and fought in Japan and Thai land.

      Most football jocks are big and physically stupid who cant do anything apart from football.

    20. Re: It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF???

    21. Re: It's time. by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      "A motorcycle helmet only serves to increase your probability of surviving an accident. It does not reduce the hazard or risk to those around you."

      My cousin., who yesterday passed away, spent more than 15 years being cared for in an institution because he was not wearing a helmet as he rode his motorcycle. The brain injury he suffered left he barely able to interact with others.

      Should he have been compelled to wear a helmet by law? In hindsight, yes. But we do not enjoy the luxury of hindsight in all things, and for those riders I know who have never ever worn a helmet for over 50 years of riding, I have no retort save for 'it could happen to you'.

      And some of them have executed legal documents intended to prevent resuscitation in the event of an injury that leaves them unable to survive without significant life support. Which solves nothing.

      Seat belts are intended to restrain YOU, not to prevent you from becoming a missile and endangering others, but to minimize your injuries. Expanding the purpose beyond that is to claim a 1% solution is a driving factor. But head injuries in motorcycle accidents are virtually certain in the majority of instances. Not a good comparison.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    22. Re: It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Iâ(TM)ve had so much fun playing this game and itâ(TM)s sequel: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speedball_(video_game)

    23. Re: It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seat belts are intended to restrain YOU, not to prevent you from becoming a missile and endangering others, but to minimize your injuries. Expanding the purpose beyond that is to claim a 1% solution is a driving factor. But head injuries in motorcycle accidents are virtually certain in the majority of instances. Not a good comparison.

      Different AC, but what they are intended for is actually quite irrelevant in this particular discussion. What matters, is the justifications that one can come up with to explain why "OMG NANNY STATE OVERREACH!" does not apply.

      People should be free to take stupid risks, so long as those stupid risks do not endanger others. Not wearing a seatbelt has a chance of endangering others. Not wearing a helmet does not.

      Or were you trying to argue against both helmet laws and seatbelt laws?

    24. Re: It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the seatbelt is not just there to protect you, but also to keep you in place so you can continue to try and drive the vehicle in the early stages of accident prevention. If the car starts to skid, and it's all you can do to stay in your seat, or you have to cling to the wheel to keep from being thrown out of your seat, or you slide out of your seat and into the passenger space (this was a huge problem with bench seats prior to seat belts), you're not going to be able to work to avoid the possibly upcoming accident.

      Secondly, I'll add that as a firefighter (16 years of service in March), I've never in my career cut someone out of a car wearing a seatbelt who didn't survive. Of my 17 fatals (and I can pull that number up in my mind in a heartbeat), at least 7 were directly due to not wearing a seatbelt (i.e. the victim was ejected from the vehicle). The others it's not clear if the seatbelt would have saved them, but they weren't wearing them, so we'll never know.

    25. Re:It's time. by Shotgun · · Score: 3, Interesting

      When I was in high school, I noted that football was the only sport that had an ambulance on standby. I found that mind blowing, even at the time. They pretty much ASSUMED that within the next two hours someone was going to be injured badly enough to need an ambulance. How the HELL was this EVER supported by the school administration?

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    26. Re: It's time. by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      I'm not arguing against seat belt laws, these are reasonable and prudent. Helmet laws are also, but there is a pervasive culture that resists them. The issues are virtually identical, but the cultures are very different, and the arguments are mostly emotional, and so legislation is perceived as a blunt instrument.

      There are some other issues with similar situations, marijuana as a salient example. There is no clear 'solution', merely choices.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    27. Re: It's time. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      A seatbelt is proven to save lives. And, as a benefit to "the people", seatbelts are proven to reduce ER bills, including unpaid ER bills.

      Helmets are not proven to save lives. They are strongly suspected to do so, but motorcycles are rare enough, compared to cars, that the numbers aren't there. And helmets are proven to increase hospital bills. People without helmets die quicker, and those with helmets rack up larger bills.

      For every one of your cousin, there are 10 who lived your cousin's life because of a helmet.

    28. Re: It's time. by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      They have? Really Potsy. Even though the NFL for years had denied CTE and even covered it up?

      Fuck off.

    29. Re:It's time. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Or maybe let people make up their own minds instead of taking a nanny state approach?

      I which universe does suggesting schools not promote something count as being a "nanny state approach"? The nanny state approach would be prohibiting young people from playing football. I'm simply suggesting that schools not promote it. People would still be able to put their kids into football leagues if they choose, just not ones supported by tax dollars.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    30. Re:It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So maybe you don't choose for us, and let people make their now better informed choices by themselves ?

      So you are saying permanent damage to CNS with no threshold and bodily harm is a ok because what, adrenaline is fun? On the other hand letting your kids walk home alone can get you into massive shit with social services and cops.

    31. Re:It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe let people make up their own minds instead of taking a nanny state approach?

      As long as those who suffer medical consequences are paying for the related immediate and long term care out of their own pocket, without any assistance from any public or private insurance.

    32. Re:It's time. by Hussman32 · · Score: 1

      So maybe you don't choose for us, and let people make their now better informed choices by themselves ?

      I have two broken bones, one torn ACL, and a torn labrum from football (played from 4th grade to 9th grade). Luckily I wasn't a running back or receiver, so most of the headshots I took didn't lead to concussions. I stopped playing in high school because I got tired of visiting the doctor.

      Here's the problem, we are better informed, but we are far from informed completely and there were deliberate efforts to suppress that knowledge. In addition, kids under 18 don't know the consequences, and many of the parents pushing them into football are living vicariously through their kids and the kids never know the risks until it's too late.

      Let adults play if they wish, and even high school kids if they get appropriate unbiased information. However, having kids under 14 play tackle football, in retrospect, should not have been allowed..

      --
      "Who are you?" "No one of consequence." "I must know." "Get used to disappointment."
    33. Re:It's time. by JD-1027 · · Score: 1

      $



      Cat got your tongue? (something important seems to be missing from your comment ... like the body or the subject!)

    34. Re: It's time. by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

      People without helmets die quicker, and those with helmets rack up larger bills.

      For me personally, the one time I ever needed it my helmet saved me both money and a lot of pain and facial scaring. I'm glad this wasn't my face.

    35. Re:It's time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you. That explains why you post stupid shit all the time.

    36. Re:It's time. by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      A pension plan is a safety net for your twilight years. In the US, not everyone gets one. To my lay knowledge, a pension is the only asset that can not be lost during bankruptcy proceedings. Repeated brain injuries can lead to a serious disability later in life. In my opinion, the one who suffered those injuries while married is the one who should receive most of those payments.

      And I would be saying the exact same thing if, for instance, an NFL player's wife was more prone to get early dementia than her husband. In such a case, whether due to genetics or to a serious car accident, I would allocate more of that pension to her if I thought that was the case.

      But I suppose, it's also a question of fairness. Since those brain injuries are directly related to the NFL career and to the NFL pension. And the couple wouldn't be receiving that generous pension without the husband receiving those brain injuries in the first place, I think the allocation of the pension during a divorce would need a more reasoned approach (instead of a simple blind 50% split).

  2. risk of death by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    100%

  3. A football career doesn't start in the NFL by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They start their competitive career in inducing brain damage in high school.

    Why would it kill you any sooner? Headaches aren't lethal and you don't need to be a genius to get old. It's about quality of life, not duration. Of course for NFL millionaires it might all be worth it, it's the much larger number of players who don't get drafted but are still forced to live with migraines and other fun consequences of concussions who are the real losers.

    1. Re: A football career doesn't start in the NFL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you say is true. However, players at the college and high school levels tend to be smaller and slower than NFL players. The collisions are less violent. There's also less effort by the players to go for big hits instead of just making solid tackles. The hits at those levels should be less severe, yet they probably still lead to CTE. I suspect that no amount of football is safe. Either the hitting has to come out of football, or the leagues and conferences should cease to exist. While hockey and soccer have their own issues, it's not as serious. Soccer can be played without heading the ball. Hockey can be played without checking, and that's how women's hockey is already played. Watch some of it in the Olympics and you'll see it's quite entertaining. But hitting is so much of the essence of football that I don't know if it can be so readily removed without damaging the product severely. Sure, there's flag football or two hand touch football, but those aren't what fans want. The collisions are really part of the essence of football, and they're inherently dangerous. It's also not even the big hits always, but the collective impact of lesser but repeated collisions. They happen with the linemen on every play, and even without the big hits, they're still dangerous.

    2. Re: A football career doesn't start in the NFL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hockey can be played without checking, and that's how women's hockey is already played

      That's how it should be played, but some of the women take cheap shots and hope not to be penalized. And since the target doesn't expect to be hit, damage is rather severe. A local player here retired at 20 due to multiple concussions, and she was at the top of the game.

    3. Re:A football career doesn't start in the NFL by Aighearach · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And guys like these "replacement" players, who were obviously already playing frequently. It isn't like the brought in tennis players during the strike, they were all still football players putting enough time into it that they were aspiring pros! So even if the problem was early death rather than quality of life, this would still not really be very significant; just comparing players with fancy uniforms to players who only got to wear fancy uniforms a few times.

    4. Re:A football career doesn't start in the NFL by Kiuas · · Score: 5, Informative

      They start their competitive career in inducing brain damage in high school.

      Why would it kill you any sooner? Headaches aren't lethal and you

      Erm... as someone who's had cerebral palsy since birth due to damage to the motor cortex caused during a premature birth I have some news for you: the consequences of brain damage are not limited to headaches and migraines.

      It's about quality of life, not duration.

      Exactly. And if you look at what chronic traumatic encephalopathy, which to my knowledge is the most common neurodegenerative condition for contact sport athletes with repeated head injury causes, you'll find a whole host of symptoms, quoting the wiki:

      Symptoms of CTE, which occur in four stages, generally appear 8 to 10 years after an athlete experiences repetitive mild traumatic brain injury.

      First-stage symptoms include attention deficit hyperactivity disorder as well as confusion, disorientation, dizziness, and headaches. Second-stage symptoms include memory loss, social instability, impulsive behavior, and poor judgment. Third and fourth stages include progressive dementia, movement disorders, hypomimia, speech impediments, sensory processing disorder, tremors, vertigo, deafness, depression and suicidality.

      Additional symptoms include dysarthria, dysphagia, cognitive disorder such as amnesia, and ocular abnormalities, such as ptosis.

      The condition manifests as dementia, or declining mental ability, problems with memory, dizzy spells or lack of balance to the point of not being able to walk under one's own power for a short time and/or Parkinsonism, or tremors and lack of coordination. It can also cause speech problems and an unsteady gait. Patients with DP may be prone to inappropriate or explosive behavior and may display pathological jealousy or paranoia

      Now, I don't know about you, but to me these are all things which impact one's quality of life significantly and are far more serious than headaches.

      --
      "It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
    5. Re: A football career doesn't start in the NFL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, exactly. They compared American football players who were almost good enough to play full time in the NFL against American football players who do play full time in the NFL.

      It looks like they ruled out the NFL as a cause of CTE. Studies to show whether or not American football causes CTE to be completed.

    6. Re: A football career doesn't start in the NFL by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      The risks of competitive sports are well understood, and players at the highest levels tend to be extremely well paid. Noone is forced to play sports, they knew the risks and made a choice.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    7. Re: A football career doesn't start in the NFL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's incorrect, at least in regard to CTE.

      Yes, it's been common knowledge for a long time that football has a lot of violent collisions that can cause serious injury. That's why so much safety equipment is worn, to mitigate those injuries. This is obvious.

      However, for a long time, the concern over head injuries was mostly in regard to concussions. Helmets are one way of trying to mitigate concussions. More recently, rules have been added to limit hits to the head of a defenseless player (targeting in college football) and to require that players who may have concussions to be examined immediately (the NFL's concussion protocol). One issue is that teams don't always actually follow the NFL's concussion protocol, especially if losing the player to injury significantly reduces their chances of winning the game. And the focus has largely been on concussions, the dangers of which has been known for a long time.

      The dangers of CTE, however, have not been widely known. Furthermore, the NFL has attempted to discredit and suppress studies that link football to CTE. Only within the past decade or so have doctors become aware of just how widespread CTE is in football and hockey players. That's because doctors have started examining the brains of deceased players, which hadn't been done to this degree previously. Unlikely concussions, which are the result of a single violent blow to the head, CTE is the cumulative effect of collisions, most of all of which may not cause concussions. It hasn't been widely known that less violent hits have a cumulative effect that causes permanent damage.

      While it's long been known that former NFL players often have cognitive difficulty, this was generally assumed to be the result of concussions. Therefore, player safety has been focused on reducing the violent hits that are most likely to cause concussions. It wasn't widely known that players were suffering from CTE due to the cumulative effects of less violent hits that didn't cause concussions.

      So, no, the players weren't actually aware of the dangers of CTE and it's causes. This is relatively recent, and the NFL has attempted to deny and cover up many of the studies that link football to CTE. I've compared the NFL to tobacco companies in a few other posts for exactly that reason.

      Sorry, but your post is incorrect, at least in regard to CTE.

    8. Re:A football career doesn't start in the NFL by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      Kids where I grew up started in Middle School. And where I live now they've got PeeWee teams all over the place. I imagine the intensity is lower at these levels but the risk of head injuries is still there.

    9. Re:A football career doesn't start in the NFL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you're right. They include being a complete dick too, who deliberately implies a limit that was never said nor implied, just to have an excuse to be a dick.

      Yeah, disabled people can be assholes too.

    10. Re:A football career doesn't start in the NFL by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      They start their competitive career in inducing brain damage in KINDERGARTEN.

      FTFY.

      Reference top of page 15. TINY MITE: 7 years and under.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    11. Re:A football career doesn't start in the NFL by iMadeGhostzilla · · Score: 1

      Perhaps those with longer careers make more money and use it to offset the harm created by longer playing, longevity-wise.

      It's not for us to judge though. I'm sure there are NFL players with great careers who suffered greatly after they stopped playing and still think every second of it was worth it. And there are others who regret they ever stepped on the field. It is for each person to make the call.

    12. Re:A football career doesn't start in the NFL by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      You're the one offering that sort of judgement, instead of saying it isn't for you to judge and then judging, why not just not say either?

      If we were talking about the death rates after jumping off buildings, it would also be about the death rate and not about any judgment of it. If you don't value their life, why not keep it to yourself?

    13. Re:A football career doesn't start in the NFL by iMadeGhostzilla · · Score: 1

      Judgement is whether something is right or wrong, it's prescriptive, what you should do. My observation about money to offset the harm, if true, is merely descriptive, what happens. There is no right or wrong attached to it.

      What I'm saying is it is not for us to say whether playing a rough sport is right or wrong. I would prefer people to be alive and healthy and safe, but I also want them to find thrill and sense of purpose in life, rather than being safe and depressed. Those two goals are sometimes mutually exclusive.

      I believe we should let all our observations known, and then let the adult players decide for themselves.

  4. On the bright side ... by Hugh+Jorgen · · Score: 0

    We all die!

  5. Another possibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Football players are known for consuming massive quantities of food and (alcoholic) drink. Excessive glucose consumption is now thought to accelerate the aging of the brain, as well as the heart, even if much of the calories are "burned off" during practice and competition. And while athletes probably dial down the meal portion sizes after they retire, it would be surprising if most of them cut back to the level that their doctors might recommend.

  6. The two studies are orthogonal to each other by SlaveToTheGrind · · Score: 1

    One says lifespan is the same. The other says quality of life suffers. These are not mutually exclusive.

    The league is perhaps being a bit deliberately obtuse given that they're sitting on a potential liability powder keg.

    1. Re:The two studies are orthogonal to each other by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The league didn't 'obfuscate' the point here, the summary says critics did ...e.g. the study spoke of 'lifespan' & the critics go 'but this other study shows CTE'...as you noted these aren't the same thing so why would critics 'point at a different study' in an attempt to say this study is somehow 'flawed'...its not 'flawed' it wasn't looking at the question the critics of the study think it should have...

    2. Re:The two studies are orthogonal to each other by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      In other words, if you're an NFL athlete.

      The bad news: Your relatives, the younger ungrateful ones that have been mooching from you for your entire career, will be the only ones left to take care of you until you're 80 or 90 years old.

      The good news: You'll have early Alzheimers and you won't remember a thing anyway.

  7. PROOF of Important Black Contributions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    CTE is a terrible brain disease caused by football. For those who don't know, CTE was discovered by a BLACK AFRICAN scientist named Dr. William Smith, who was discriminated by the football association, for exposing CTE. The disease is caused by the helment, which was invented by white people, specifically designed to injure black football players.

    1. Re: PROOF of Important Black Contributions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, this is not a racial issue.

      However, you're accidentally correct that helmets may contribute to the problems. Players are more willing to engage in violent collisions because they're wearing helmets. Therefore, that can lead to more collisions and harder collisions, and greater injury of players. The helmets may, indeed, be part of the problem, but not at all for the reasons you suggested.

    2. Re: PROOF of Important Black Contributions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fcking nazi racists cant stand to hear anything good or inspiring about Black people. I am so litterally done with this toxic dumpster I literally cant even

  8. Football will be gone in 10-20 years by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The CTEs don't kill you (unless you count the suicides), but they will turn you into a drooling wreck like Jim McMahon.

    The main thing that's been keeping the NFL afloat is gambling, and thanks to the much higher incidence of injury, the gamblers are finally starting to abandon it for more interesting games, like basketball, baseball, hockey. As a veteran fantasy football player, I can tell you that practically all of the skill has been taken out of it, making it much less fun. This year, I lost my stud, #1pick running back, David Johnson very early in the season, and I only made the playoffs because the other good players also lost their best picks as the season wore on.

    And football continues to be a game of exploitation. Parents are putting their kids in football programs in the same numbers any more (except in the South, where brain damage is less noticeable) and I expect football to go the way of boxing. Another fine sport that just got to be too depressing to enjoy.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:Football will be gone in 10-20 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're wrong. Football will most likely be the most popular sport in the USA in 20 years, same as it today. That's because the game has a LOT going for it and it fits well into the American psyche.

      Yes, it has at least one very bad thing - CTE.

      The Super Bowl is this weekend and there have been random stories all week leading up to it, from journalists all over the world. Today, a German reporter asked the Patriots' coach Bill Belichick how he intended to handle the Eagles' star tight end. Belichick basically smirked and said he didn't intend to give away the game plan just yet.

      Can you think of another major sport where the "game plan" is such a big deal? In baseball, hockey, basketball, teams know what the other team is going to try to do. In baseball, the only secret is what the next pitch is going to be, and that is basically the selection of a pitcher's known repertoire of maybe 3-4 different pitches. Not so with football. In football, everything is a secret, with misdirection (fake handoffs, called "play action") and trick plays, even novel formations sometimes.

    2. Re:Football will be gone in 10-20 years by sjames · · Score: 1

      I remember a Braves game where the Twins were so taken by surprise at a suicide squeeze they asked the ump if it was legal.

      The local news tonight seemed more excited about the puppy bowl.

    3. Re:Football will be gone in 10-20 years by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      You managed the Ugga Wugga just fine, but it doesn't sound like you've ever actually watched a complete baseball game.

      Before you defend yourself, if you have actually seen it and didn't figure out that any strategy is happening, that says something even worse about you than if you're just a blowhard who is guessing.

    4. Re:Football will be gone in 10-20 years by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Wow, that was a really nasty slur to use against the part of America where all the black people live.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    5. Re:Football will be gone in 10-20 years by quantaman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The CTEs don't kill you (unless you count the suicides), but they will turn you into a drooling wreck like Jim McMahon.

      CTE leads to dementia, and that will shorten your life expectancy.

      There seems to be two main criticisms of this study. First they're talking about players from the mid-80s, so even if they were 30 at the time they'd still be early-to-mid 60s, more likely they're late 50s. That's earlier than you'd expect CTE to really start shortening life expectancy (plus you might not have enough deaths to detect a smaller difference).

      Second, they're comparing people who played football at a very high level to people who played football at a slightly higher level. If one group has CTE issues I'd expect both to.

      The main thing that's been keeping the NFL afloat is gambling, and thanks to the much higher incidence of injury, the gamblers are finally starting to abandon it for more interesting games, like basketball, baseball, hockey. As a veteran fantasy football player, I can tell you that practically all of the skill has been taken out of it, making it much less fun. This year, I lost my stud, #1pick running back, David Johnson very early in the season, and I only made the playoffs because the other good players also lost their best picks as the season wore on.

      And football continues to be a game of exploitation. Parents are putting their kids in football programs in the same numbers any more (except in the South, where brain damage is less noticeable) and I expect football to go the way of boxing. Another fine sport that just got to be too depressing to enjoy.

      The attraction isn't gambling it's culture. Especially in the US South it's extremely ingrained into communities and football does have a number of fairly unusual characteristics among sports:
      1) Virtually every male body type is well suited towards a position on the football field.
      2) It has large rosters so significant portions of high school populations can participate.
      3) It creates a very strict social hierarchy.
      4) It has a much higher level of planning and organization than other sports

      However, the large rosters are also its weakness, I expect CTE worries to drop a lot of schools below the critical mass of kids needed, and a lot of regions are going to lose high school football. And the kids who didn't play football will become adults who don't watch it, and football will become a regional sport in the south.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    6. Re:Football will be gone in 10-20 years by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      the part of America where all the black people live

      Have you ever been to the US?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    7. Re:Football will be gone in 10-20 years by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      I know a lot of people who stopped watching NFL games because of the kneeling, as a result I don't think I've heard a single conversation about the Super Bowl at work this year. While I support the protesting players philosophically, I'm pretty happy to not have to hear about football all day at work. I read mostly news sites that my co-workers would consider left leaning and I can only recall a single article which was actually about the commercials instead of the game. The game plan for both teams though is entirely predictable, score more points than the other team by a combination of preventing the other team from scoring and successfully scoring yourself.

      Everyone thinks their sport or hobby is complex, and I suppose to some degree they're right. I just can't find the energy to give a crap about any of them. Sure baseball is boring as hell, so is football, and soccer. Although I'm not sure any of them can compare to NASCAR, a "race" that lasts for hours and hours and is just cars going in circles endlessly. At the fan level it all looks like Tribalism for the sake of Tribalism to me, and at the owner level it's all about extorting as much money as possible out of the fans sense of tribalism and their politicians in the form of subsidies.

  9. Soccer, too. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's time we start ending school sponsored football programs. There are plenty of other sports that don't involve brain damage.

    Soccer, too. That involves hitting the ball with your head, hard, repeatedly, and was shown to be causing brain damage even before (pigskin-style) football.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:Soccer, too. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's time we start ending school sponsored football programs. There are plenty of other sports that don't involve brain damage.

      Soccer, too. That involves hitting the ball with your head, hard, repeatedly, and was shown to be causing brain damage even before (pigskin-style) football.

      Soccer has an easy fix, just prohibit hitting the ball with your head.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    2. Re:Soccer, too. by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      Or for soccer, just change the rules if that's the case.

    3. Re:Soccer, too. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Informative

      Various professional football (soccer) bodies are looking at banning heading the ball for this reason. A lot of trainers don't allow younger players to do it already.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:Soccer, too. by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      It doesn't help that in a set piece such as a corner, it's not one player going up for the ball, it's four or five, and all of them are tracking the ball, not each other. Head-to-head collisions are the result.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    5. Re:Soccer, too. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      Various professional football (soccer) bodies are looking at banning heading the ball for this reason. A lot of trainers don't allow younger players to do it already.

      Football is for feet!

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    6. Re:Soccer, too. by Hussman32 · · Score: 1

      I saw a Real Sports story about the concussion dangers of soccer, and the concussions don't come from heads hitting the balls, they come from heads hitting other heads and the poles of the goal. Same game event, different cause.

      --
      "Who are you?" "No one of consequence." "I must know." "Get used to disappointment."
  10. Who the fuck CARES! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    How is this news for nerds...

    1. Re:Who the fuck CARES! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is this news for nerds...

      When taken with the study about long-term brain damage from sports, it means that in the long run nerds win and jocks lose.
      That is, nerds fighting over jobs that no longer pay much above survival wages because every expense other than nerdy hobbies has been subject to significant inflation, while jocks live out their lives as cranky children with fancy toys.

      Wait, how was this supposed to be a good thing again?

  11. Fuck You Kneelers by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 0

    This is not the place for viral superbowl advertising, even if I didn't dislike traitorous kneelers.

    1. Re:Fuck You Kneelers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Free speech = unAmerican.

      America is officially dead.

      RIP

      numbnuts

    2. Re: Fuck You Kneelers by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

      In football, as with many other sports, both teams will often kneel if a player is injured. Especially so if it is a major injury. Religions around the world have you kneel to pray, and people have been kneeling before royalty for centuries. Kneeling shows respect and a measure of subservience or devotion to the target of your kneeling. So why should it be "disrepectful" to kneel for the national anthem? If anythung, that should be more respectful than standing for it.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    3. Re:Fuck You Kneelers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Free speech = unAmerican.

      America is officially dead.

      RIP

      numbnuts

      Actions by employees are not protected by free speech.

      Imagine what happens to a checkout cashier at a supermarket who starts making political statements that anger about half the supermarket's customers.

    4. Re: Fuck You Kneelers by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      A) They were kneeling in protest of the national anthem. B) Americans are subservient to nothing, thus it is treasonous to kneel.

    5. Re: Fuck You Kneelers by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      "One nation, under god"? Besides, the flag/national anthem represents the nation (not the military) so bowing before them shows reverence for the country.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    6. Re: Fuck You Kneelers by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      A) They were kneeling in protest of the national anthem.

      And no, they weren't. They specifically said they choose to kneel rather than sit during the anthem out of respect for the anthem. They are protesting the fact that they believe the ideals of the anthem are no longer extended towards their community, especially police brutality. And with the militarization and adversarial nature of police these days, who can blame them? Hell, even white Australian female tourists are being shot by police now!

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    7. Re: Fuck You Kneelers by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      They expressly declared they were kneeling to protest America and refuse to recognize the flag. This is some marvelous attempt to shift the goal post you've made though.

    8. Re: Fuck You Kneelers by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      They expressly declared they were kneeling to protest America and refuse to recognize the flag. This is some marvelous attempt to shift the goal post you've made though.

      You've drunk too much of the kool-aid. And don't forget, Trump's hated the NFL ever since the USFL days (when a decision he made pretty much forced the league out of business)

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    9. Re: Fuck You Kneelers by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      You've drunk too much of the kool-aid. And don't forget, Trump's hated the NFL ever since the USFL days (when a decision he made pretty much forced the league out of business)

      As a nerd, I've hated football since I first learned of its existence. You know how I know you don't belong here?

    10. Re:Fuck You Kneelers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess what happens when most of the cashiers do the same? It's called change and THAT is why you hate it. You know if enough kneelers group up, they'll get the patriotic sham show changed.

      Oh and fuck your tired old employees aren't protected argument. In the same breath you guys will follow that shit up with corporations having free speech. The employees used to be protected but you union busting asshats have ground that down to almost nothing. Vengeance will be ours, wait and see.

  12. The NFL is the new Philip Morris by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think we're going to find that no amount of hitting is safe. Even at lower levels of football where the players are slower and smaller than in the NFL, the hits have a significant impact. Hockey has a similar issue to football, where a lot of players end up with CTE. The difference is that you can take the checking out of hockey and still have a very entertaining product that looks like hockey. In fact, checking is prohibited in women's hockey, and although the game is different, it's still a very good product.

    The hitting is reduced in the Pro Bowl, but the product is generally considered inferior. Some of that has to do with restrictions on schemes and play calling, such as no stunts or blitzes. I'm just not sure football would adapt as well to reducing the hitting.

    As for player health, football players are often addicted to painkillers from the injuries they sustain. It's also not healthy to have 300+ pound offensive linemen that are massive and continue to get larger. Being an offensive lineman pretty much requires not having a healthy body, and that carries over to some other positions as well, such as defensive tackles. That contributes to the cause of death cited in the summary.

    Particularly damning is that the NFL, especially under Roger Goodell, has tried to cover up and suppress studies that demonstrate the dangers of playing football. The NFL operates a lot like the cigarette companies in this respect, pulling in increasing revenues and profits while trying to discredit studies that show their product is dangerous. The NFL has done an awful job caring for the health and well-being of retired players. Contracts often aren't guaranteed and players get cut very quickly when they're injured. Careers are shorter than in other major sports, and players lose that income when they're injured playing a violent sport. While some former players and coaches like Mike Ditka should be applauded for their concern for former players, the league as a whole has done a truly awful job on this respect. Players take one hell of a beating, and then get kicked to the curb when they retire.

    I love sports, but the NFL in its current form needs to go away. I have no problem with leagues being successful and bringing in massive revenues. MLB has done a great job of monetizing their product online with streaming video like MLB.TV. It's not perfect, but they should be applauded for trying to innovate and produce a better product for fans. Meanwhile, the NFL is easily the most restrictive in allowing fans to view their product. And while MLB is putting up larger nets around their stadiums to protect fans from line drives, the NFL continues to deny the dangers of their product.

    The NFL is the new Philip Morris. They're clinging to an outdated business model that involves a dangerous product. The NFL continues to cover up the dangers of their product. One can only hope the league will dramatically reform or cease to exist. I really do enjoy football, so I'm hoping for the former, significant reforms that include Roger Goodell no longer being commissioner.

  13. Re:I don't give a fuck about sportsball players by Immerman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Mostly because athletes get glorified in our society, encouraging mimicry by impressionable youth and idiots, while their celebrity insulates them from the consequences of their actions. That hits on two fronts.

    First, you get a bunch of kids too young and stupid to know better inflicting brain damage for the chance at home-town celebrity and the perks that accompany it. And oft-times their parents aren't a whole lot better informed.

    Second, that brain damage makes it much more likely that Joe McSportsball player is going to violently beat his girlfriend or that guy who looked at him funny at the bar, while his celebrity will get him off with a slap on the wrist and a lot of publicity. That sends a message to people everywhere that such violence is actually acceptable behavior.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  14. Yeah right by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

    Billions of dollars are at stake with the NFL. You think that is just going to evaporate?

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    1. Re:Yeah right by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      It wouldn't be the first time that billions of dollars went up in smoke overnight.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    2. Re:Yeah right by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Billions of dollars are at stake with the NFL. You think that is just going to evaporate?

      Boxing was the biggest sport in the world at one time. At all levels from CYO to Golden Gloves to amateur to pros. At all weight classes. In our lifetime. Now they struggle to find enough boxers to fill a card, and it's just a footnote. Yes, it can all evaporate. Pop Warner and high school programs are already hurting in most of the US because kids don't want to play football or their parents won't let them. Maybe it will become a regional sport, like NASCAR, but the end is just over the horizon for football as a national sport.

      I love football, but it's on its way out. I don't think there is a way to save it.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re: Yeah right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, I think you're probably right. Hitting and collisions are so much of the essence of football that it would be really hard to remove them and retain a comparable product. Hockey has a similar problem with CTE and painkiller addiction. However, it's still a really entertaining product without the hitting. In the case of hockey, you end up with a faster game and more end-to-end action when it's less physical. It's definitely different, but fans will probably adapt to it much better than football without hitting. I think hockey without hitting will appeal to a lot of fans who enjoy a game that will require finesse and skill. The NHL might end up with a better product. Football probably won't be able to adapt in the same way.

    4. Re: Yeah right by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      I think hockey without hitting will appeal to a lot of fans who enjoy a game that will require finesse and skill.

      Correct. As a former Chicagoan, I went to a lot of Blackhawks games. Early in the Toews/Kane era, you could already see that they were transitioning away from needing an enforcer. Yes, they had Dustin Byfuglien for a while but when he left they didn't replace him. They certainly didn't have a designated thug the way teams like Boston had with Lucic. It was just fast skating, precise and flashy puck-handling and a lot of scoring. No need to drop the gloves when you're blasting past opponents like they were standing in sand.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    5. Re:Yeah right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Billions of dollars are at stake with the NFL. You think that is just going to evaporate?

      Like it or not, the evaporation is well on it's way, to the point where NFL stadium are full of paying customers disguised as empty seats:

      There were so many empty seats at the start of the Cowboys-Redskins game

      Thursday’s game between the Redskins and Cowboys in Arlington kicked off in front of a mostly empty stadium. Reporters at the game certainly took notice.

      That's one of the most heated rivalries in the entire NFL - by two teams that pretty much avoided the politics of the NFLs national anthem protests no less - and there were empty seats. Not only that, the Cowboys and Redskins are two of the most valuable NFL franchises because they both have large, rabid fan bases.

      Used to be there wouldn't be an empty seat in any Cowboys-Redskins game no matter what the team's records were.

      And TV networks are having to rebate ads because of missed ratings:

      Fewer NFL Viewers Force TV Networks to Give Away Ads

      Oh, yeah, that's from 2016 and it was worse in 2017.

    6. Re:Yeah right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe it will become a regional sport, like NASCAR, but the end is just over the horizon for football as a national sport.

      Where regional is 30 out of 50 states? Mmkay. Yeah, sure, it's too bad for Alaska and Hawaii, but they're too far away to ship cars, the Pacific Northwest has weather issues, the Mountain West lacks population, and nobody even wants to live in Ohio, let alone race there.

    7. Re: Yeah right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Monroe speedway in Washington state does NASCAR.

    8. Re:Yeah right by dyslexicbunny · · Score: 1

      My observation is that players have been getting bigger and bigger (at least in some positions) since I was a kid. How much do you think weight limits on players would impact things? Or suppose we removed all the shoulder pads so players wouldn't hit as hard?

    9. Re:Yeah right by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Bigger and faster. You've got guys over 300 lbs in the NFL who can run a 40-yard dash in 4.8 seconds. Jadeveon Clowney goes about 270 lbs and can run it in 4.5. Someone like that hits you at speed and something's gotta give. It's just physics.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    10. Re: Yeah right by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      I watched the NHL all-star game this year, and it was 3 on 3 with no hits. I have to say, it was damn entertaining. The passes and shots you can take when you're not getting slammed around are works of art.

      Full-speed, behind the back pass, hidden by the fake slapshot that came after it. Charging the net, lifting the stick, curling left to fake a shot in the top corner, all while the puck just slides through the 5-hole.

      There were some truly stunning plays in that game. Sure, it helps that they are all-stars, but the ability to make shots was a major component. It's not the same game, but it was damn fun to watch. The question is if sports can drop some of the physical violence and improve other aspects enough to keep or improve the entertainment. I'm not sure that soccer could ban headers or the NFL could limit hits and still keep the same interest level. I know I don't go out of my way to watch flag football.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    11. Re:Yeah right by dyslexicbunny · · Score: 1

      I didn't even think about speed improvements. I suppose you could regulate player weights (overall or per position) but you'd be unable to do anything about speed and that's going to be the bigger hitter. Well short of playing in knee deep water....

      Wonder if reduced padding might also help to mitigate some of the intensity of the hits.

  15. Re: I don't give a fuck about sportsball players by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Part of the problem is that the NFL has tried to cover up the dangers of their sport and suppress studies that report on the harmful effects of playing football. Just like to tobacco companies and big oil, they stand to lose out on much of their revenue and profit of the real harm of their product is exposed.

  16. Re: I don't give a fuck about sportsball players by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And not much different from, "I have friends who have coal mines," either.

  17. So? by Kohath · · Score: 1, Insightful

    NFL players don’t spend their time worrying about your problems. And if they did, wouldn’t you tell them to mind their own business?

    1. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NFL players aren't the only ones affected by this. Highschool kids who practice daily with dreams of the NFL, who sure as shit don't know any better. Curb the selfish attitude.

    2. Re:So? by Kohath · · Score: 1

      There are no high school kids in the NFL. Stop using “think of the children” as an excuse to mind everyone else’s business but your own.

  18. "Replacement players" don't practice? by whoever57 · · Score: 1

    compared 2,933 athletes who played in the National Football League for an average of five years to 879 "replacement players" who filled in for three games during a mid-1980s strike

    These replacement players would have been playing and practising when not playing in the NFL. They probably received a similar number of head impacts. Why would anyone expect a different mortality rate?

    It's not the NFL that's dangerous: it's the sport.

    The NFL are scum: I recently heard an NFL doctor claim that head impacts are just as common in other sports such as soccer. Outright lying because they know that they are promoting a sport that is going to destroy the quality of life for many of its participants.

    Note that recent research shows that concussions are not required for CTE. Lower-level head impacts over a long period will cause CTE.

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    1. Re:"Replacement players" don't practice? by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      It is the sport, but also, soccer is really bad too. Add hockey, and it is probably the only three popular modern sports that include lots of head injury.

    2. Re:"Replacement players" don't practice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly, boxing does not include much head injury. Did you hear about the time a boxer got punched in the head by another boxer? Nope. Because it never happened.

    3. Re:"Replacement players" don't practice? by rikkards · · Score: 1

      The three are the worst sports not because of the head injuries but because of the fact that kids are indoctrinated so early. Even though contact is not condoned early on (well less so in Hockey and Soccer than Football) accidents happen and when you include the fact these are maturing brains involved the injuries are even more concerning

    4. Re:"Replacement players" don't practice? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      Well, head impacts ARE just as common in soccer, if not more so. Unlike soccer, in football it is now against the rules to intentionally have a head impact (either. In soccer, head impact (heading the ball) is actually one of the strategies which is practiced

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  19. Re:I don't give a fuck about sportsball players by sjames · · Score: 1

    In part because the league spent years denying the damage and covering up the evidence. They made a choice, but it wasn't an informed choice.

  20. Injuries during practice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Players don't play rough only in games. The practice sessions can also be rough. I don't know what % of total brain injuries come from practice sessions, but if it's a large %, then that would explain why men who played vs. didn't play in most games had the same number of injuries.

    The Canadian Football League is trying to reduce injuries sustained during practice.

  21. So it's not exclusively playing in the NFL? by adfraggs · · Score: 1

    But clearly these were all still players with long football careers, certainly having played from high school through to going pro, so still likely to have similar issues due to many years of head smashing activity. This hardly redeems the NFL of responsibility, it just means that for the problems to occur doesn't require playing at the highest level.

  22. How Much Death Risk Is That? by Greyfox · · Score: 2

    I'm guessing 100%, just like everyone else?

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:How Much Death Risk Is That? by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      I don't know if I trust your extrapolation. We only have data on something like 13 out of every 14 people who have ever lived. That's a long way from 100%.

      While you didn't include any decimals, you're betting that there's less than a one in 7.5 billion chance that someone's genetically immortal. Seems like a risky gamble to me. Have you ever counted 7.5 billion of anything? It turns out that it's rather a lot.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    2. Re:How Much Death Risk Is That? by Greyfox · · Score: 1
      I'm guessing they find out in the next couple decades that the telomere is in place as a biological defense against cancer. So assuming you don't have one of those (like those jellyfish, or the naked mole rat,) AND you don't just eventually melt into a cancerous puddle, that's not going to keep you from getting hit by a bus or falling off a ladder or any of a billion other things that eventually kill so many of us before we die of old age. It probably also doesn't protect us from any of the really nasty diseases we can get while aging. Statistically, eventually something's going to get you even if you don't age. The system is very much designed to kill us. Evolution is looking for an answer, and we're not it.

      Some billionaires are looking into having their heads or entire bodies frozen to try to survive until we can cure them, but that's really not much further along than building a pyramid for a dead king. Probably less so when you consider that a couple thousand years from now we'll still remember that dead king's name. I don't think the billionaires of today will be as well remembered.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  23. RUNNING MAN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They made it a movie, it's so popular. And then, ooops! they did it again!

    Billy Bob Ray
    Redneck Rubbernecker

  24. Replacement players? by Bert64 · · Score: 2

    Did those replacement players only ever play 3 games, or did they only play 3 games at professional level?
    Chances are those "replacement players" were just second rate players who weren't quite good enough to play for the major teams, but still played regularly as amateurs or for lower tier teams.

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    1. Re:Replacement players? by DrStrangluv · · Score: 1

      Back then there wasn't as much opportunity from organizations like Arena Football or the Canadian Football League. Those organizations existed, but with lower numbers of teams and roster sizes, and there were fewer private club leagues. Most of the replacements were recent NFL cuts (and this group was counted as a regular NFL player vs simple replacement player) or had played in college, but otherwise were not directly involved with football.

    2. Re:Replacement players? by Radical+Moderate · · Score: 1

      Guaranteed they played 4 years of college plus high school and probably younger, so yeah, they had plenty of opportunities to get their bells rung.

      --
      Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
  25. so which study did the nfl owners pay to conduct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    under tobacco company rules?

  26. Re: 5 minutes of rest between 15 seconds play by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Knew a fag rugby fan would show up

  27. CTE isn't death by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where's the flaw?

  28. Re:5 minutes of rest between 15 seconds play by Travelsonic · · Score: 1

    Eh, I personally like rugby better because of the continuous action - ball changes possession, or one team scores, the game goes on until the period is up - none of this stopping or starting bullshit, plus it just feels easier to understand because it feels like it is one game tat was kept simpler. Easier to understand, for me, how the ball can or can't travel, how things like lineouts and rucks work is straight forward, and it feels like a game where everybody has to be deeply involved, and coordinated to succeed. (nothing against fans of American football of course, just personal preference). (and that's without mentioning things like the form used in the rugby tackle, vs what is commonly seen in American footbal, and how that has the potential to not outright eliminate the risk of injury by any means, but can seriously reduce the risk.

    --
    If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
  29. First thought after reading summary... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't everybody's death risk pretty similar? Something like 100%?

  30. Re: 5 minutes of rest between 15 seconds play by Travelsonic · · Score: 1

    Hey dude, we go on and off the pitch without any padding at all, rain, sleet, or shine. "fag rugby fan" indeed.

    --
    If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
  31. Re: 5 minutes of rest between 15 seconds play by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    American football is as boring as shit.

    I remember when they tried to introduce it in a big way to Australia in the 80's.

    Lololol....we laughed it off. No self respecting man would be caught dead playing that boring pansy game.

    It might have a future as a womans sport though maybe ?

  32. And yoga is bad for your knees by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had to have surgery in my 30's because of this

  33. CTE doesn't kill you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It just makes you stupid and violent.

  34. Who PAID for the "research"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just want to know who PAID for the "research" that was published?

  35. Nannies Win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's follow your logic a bit further, as all high school sports except chess seem to invite injury, so let's ban them all. In fact, we should put everyone in scooters to prevent slips and falls. We could all look like the fatties in Wall-E.

    No, your bigotry is blatantly obvious. You don't like people who want to play football, and you want to marginalize them. Odds are pretty high that it's just bigotry, as you probably went to a very white high school with white football players beating you up for being a jerk (yes, a jerk, not just a nerd) and not that you're a racist piece of shit who thinks football is a black people's sport and despite it thus.

  36. NONSENSE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even getting a small position in the NFL involves years of football before making it to the NFL. In my area we had a junior high football team as well as a senior high team and most players need college football as well to get into the NFL. So even stand in players in the NFL have surely had thousands of head impacts before being admitted to the NFL.. The fact is that football should be banned as a sport on both the school and college level as well as the pro level. Football has a higher injury and death rate than even pro boxing.

  37. Split Interpretation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This could be interpreted as, "head hits don't cause CTE, or at least football doesn't cause CTE."

    It could also be interpreted as, "the damage to the player's brains was mostly caused when they were younger and more vulnerable."

  38. Missing a "minor" detail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Headline: " found 99 percent of deceased former NFL players whose brains were analyzed post-mortem"

    Actual: " found 99 percent of deceased former NFL players whose brains were analyzed post-mortem who were suspected of suffering from CTE"

    It's just irresponsible reporting to distort that story. The story was literally about brains that were analyzed because CTE was suspected already. That is a significant difference from 99% of NFL player...period.

    It's also important because at least 1 of the brains in that study was from a 23 year old who actually DIED FROM A MOTORCROSS ACCIDENT

  39. Rugby by Travelsonic · · Score: 1

    Eh, I personally like rugby better because of the continuous action - ball changes possession, or one team scores, the game goes on until the period is up - none of this stopping or starting bullshit, plus it just feels easier to understand because it feels like it is one game tat was kept simpler.

    None of the complications of downs, and all those extraneous rules that I just have difficulty following.Easier to understand, for me, how the ball can or can't travel, how things like lineouts and rucks work is straight forward, and it feels like a game where everybody has to be deeply involved, and coordinated to succeed. (nothing against fans of American football of course, just personal preference). (and that's without mentioning things like the form used in the rugby tackle, vs what is commonly seen in American footbal, and how that has the potential to not outright eliminate the risk of injury by any means, but can seriously reduce the risk.

    --
    If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot