A recent article in the NY Times highlights the recurring issue in football, and all sports, of the danger of head injuries. You can read the article here: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/sports/football/super-bowl-at-media-day-spotlight-on-head-injuries-grows.html?hpw&_r=0
A specific quote that I relate to is this: “You keep playing football, you’re going to have your injuries, no one is exempt from that,” he said. “You’re going to have concussions. You’re going to have broken bones. That’s going to happen. But I think for the most part, we know what we signed up for.” As a collegiate and semi-pro athlete, I know personally how injuries, specifically head injuries, affect your performance on and off the field. I have pushed myself through multiple shoulder dislocations, surgery, a fractured spine, countless sprains and strains, and 3 concussions, all for the love of the game. Have I been advised that I should stop playing? Of course. The toll that elite sports take on your body is enormous. However, we all know the dangers of the game and choose to play anyway. The only question is, where does a line get drawn between protecting the players and allowing the ferocity of competition to continue?Two of my three concussions have been severe. My first, I was knocked out in a soccer game when I was table-topped (flipped over while in the air) and landed on my head. My parents were terrified. I was only a sophomore in high school, which is when the level of intensity really starts to move into high gear. Players get faster, stronger, and the tackles get harder. It’s a necessary progression in the game if you want to continue to play at a high level. There was a period of time when my parents made jokes that we should just rent a room in the ER for my numerous injuries, and I was questioned whether the sport was worth the pain. It always has been worth it for me. I’ve never held any illusion that the sport I play, especially at a high level, will not have the potential of me getting seriously injured.
Ever since I started my collegiate soccer career, we’ve had intensive pre-concussion screenings that help to monitor brain functioning should a head injury occur. I’ve specifically done imPACT testing for every team I’ve played for in the past 4 years, including my semi-pro team. It’s an issue that sports takes very seriously. Fouls that could result in serious injuries are monitored by referees and players are expelled or suspended from games for causing such tackles. But should the game be limited further than that? According to the Times article, new provisions are being discussed to limit the game of football, and other sports will probably follow. (The fact that President Obama feels he needs to offer his opinion on a sports issue that has absolutely no relevance to the government is beyond me, but that’s in the article too).
I don’t think that provisions should be placed on football based on head injury prevention. Obviously, I think that doctors and players need to communicate more on the severity of a head injury and the dangers of returning to the game too early, which is the biggest problem in sports following a concussion. But changing the intensity of the game for protection is going to permanently alter the core of the game. Football is a brutal sport. Every single one of the players knows it, and the fans know it too. The brutality is what makes it entertaining to watch. The same is true of many other sports.
The biggest issue here is NOT the intensity of the game, which is what will be changed, but rather the information available to players about head injuries. Athletes are pretty single-minded when it comes to their sport. We have been taught to fight through injuries and grit it out on the field, and then ice it off when the game is over. That cannot be the way players are educated about concussions, which are life and death issues at times. Athletes know about the risks taken by playing elite sports. They DON’T know about the medical reasoning behind taking time off for concussions. They aren’t doctors, they just want to get back on the field and do their job. It’s so easy to not report head injuries. I’ve done it with some minor collisions myself, even when I knew that I had a headache and felt a little dizzy. It’s stupid and irresponsible, especially because I have been educated about traumatic brain injuries and I want to be a physician, but I just didn’t want to be sidelined.
What do you guys think? What is the best way to handle this epidemic of head injuries in athletics?
What do you guys think? What is the best way to handle this epidemic of head injuries in athletics?
Stop fielding athletic teams for those sports where head injuries are common.
That would solve the problem – if nobody plays the games at that level of intensity, the number of injuries incurred by playing those games will drop towards zero.
So… I gather from this comment that you DON’T have a real solution for the head injury problem, just wistful dreams of seeing sports decline to nothingness.
My Dear Sir – you asked what I thought was the best way to handle the problem of head injuries and I gave you my answer – which was to stop performing the activities that cause those injuries.
While I understand that you, as a sports aficionado, might not like my proposed solution, you can hardly argue that it would not end this epidemic.
I want to first address your passing reference to President Obama. The President was asked a question about the subject, which is why he offered his opinion. It seems to me that a President is entitled to opinions even on things that “have absolutely no relevance to the government”; he is, after all, still a citizen, and it’s not like he was proposing legislation. Beyond that, though, you may not be aware of the fact that modern American football came perilously close to being outlawed early in the 20th century as the result of a rash of deaths and serious injuries; which led to the involvement of President Theodore Roosevelt in reforming and saving the game. So I’m not as sure as you are about football having “absolutely no relevance to the government”.
As to the larger issue: professional football players are highly-paid gladiators who know the risks they’re running, college football players are gladiators in training who aren’t quite so aware of the risks as they should be, and so on down the line. On the one hand, if you change football drastically and take the violence out of it, it may lose popularity; on the other hand, if serious injuries continue to mount, fans may be put off by that, too. As usual, I think we Americans want to have our cake and eat it too: we enjoy the brute physical force of the sport and the fierce competitiveness of its participants (I know I do), but we feel guilty about encouraging players to risk life and limb for our entertainment (I know I do)–so we want, somehow, for that risk to be eliminated or at least minimized. I’d say that we’re torn between our primitive instincts and our more civilized inclinations, but I’m not so sure about the existence of the latter. All of which means: I have no idea how to deal with the issue. But no one is likely to legislate out of existence a multi-billion dollar a year enterprise.
I don’t enjoy watching football and it wouldn’t bother me a bit if the sport were never played again.
I wouldn’t legislate it out of existence, though, since I think that people have the right to be damn fools and do damn foolish things.
Interesting historical info, thanks. I didn’t know that about T.R.
Apparently pro football makes my cable bills higher. We might get people to think seriously about banning it for THAT reason, even if we don’t care about the players’ safety.
I’ll comment on the same line as JohnE, <i<we enjoy the brute physical force of the sport and the fierce competitiveness of its participants (I know I do),, Unlike JohnE, football is one of my favorite sports to watch although I never played on an official team. My son plays on the NAIA college level. His team was ranked as high as #1 in the country for NAIA this past season.
He’s an offensive lineman, so he does a lot of brute physical force stuff, but not a lot of spectacular stuff. My favorite part of the game is when someone does something you can hardly believe. It happens nearly every game. (Remember Jerome Simpson flipping over the defensive back into the end zone a couple of seasons ago?) So far, he’s had no serious injuries. Once we thought he might have a concussion, but it turned out to be a bad sinus infection. But, I do count the days until I won’t have to worry about it again.
He loves it though. It’s a sport he was built to play and play well. He knows the dangers and has strategies and techniques to minimize the dangers. But, ultimately, you hit and get hit.
I don’t know if we should be taking any advice from someone who may be dain bramaged. ;)
Popular Science has a good article on football and football helmets, including some in development that could make a big difference. Ironically, product liability is actually hindering progress in this area.
NFL players have been getting a lot of attention lately, but I”m not sure other sports and activities aren’t a greater threat to the average American. 90% of deaths from bicycling are due to head injuries. Up until about age 14, baseball is quite dangerous. Skiing and snowboarding produce lots of injuries. The son of a co-worker suffered a critical head injury snow boarding at Perfect North Slopes in Indiana. (He’s OK, considered normal, but will never be the same.) My son nearly knocked himself out falling on the same slopes. These slopes are so easy that for good skiers and boarders they are only useful for keeping your skills from rusting away.
When I whitewater kayaked, not wearing a helmet was so rare I never say it on anything over a Class II river. Head meets rock wouldn’t be a pretty sight. I’m sure my helmet saved my life a couple of times where I flipped upside down and hit my head on a rock so hard that I knew at the very least I would be unconscious and drown if not for my helmet.
We just need to be educated to the risks and make intelligent judgements. In mountaineering, at least, Europeans see death and injury as something that routinely happens when doing dangerous things. In the past people often passed through formal or informal initiation rites in order to enter adulthood. I see sports as one of the ways this is accomplished in our society. We need the risk and potential negative consequences to make in meaningful. (Did you know the non-contact sport of tennis has an incredibly high rate of knee injuries? More people die fishing than any other sport.) This is how we learn to be tough and to persevere. I firmly believe that learning to persevere through sports has helped me immensely in meeting the challenges of parenting, career and divorce amongst other things.
As far as Obama and other politicians commenting on issues that has absolutely no relevance to the government, they believe nothing is exempt from governmental control. We all belong to the government, as one Democrat said at the convention.
Most of the people who die fishing are NOT sport fishermen, they do it for a living, such as it is.
You forget the fishermen who get pulled out of the water with their pants unzipped and an impressive blood alcohol level. All in all, there are worse ways to go.
There is money at stake for the pro football players also, not just the owners. I think they will find a way to resolve this. What I am not so sure about is high school and college football. If your kid really has no chance of playing at the next level, do you risk having the kid play? How will schools be able to afford even one or two suits? I think parents and kids can decide to take that risk if they want, but schools may not be able to afford it.
Steve
My son’s high school required we purchase a very cheap insurance policy or sign a waiver. We bought the policy. I think it was under $30. It did help pay for his most serious injury, which happened in the weight room, not on the field. (As an ER doctor, you might be interested. It was an anterior avulsion fracture of the pelvis. I think I got that right. It happened his freshman year in H.S. when the connection of his hamstring to the pelvis wasn’t strong enough to support the weight he was squatting. He was squatting up to 375 lbs as a freshman. The radiologist, a friend, said, he had never seen that injury and probably won’t again, although he will practice another 25 years. Tell the young kids to go light on the weights. Fortunately, he recovered 100%.)
I have always been under the impression that you cannot totally waive the right to sue. MI or a real lawyer might know. All it would take is a few parents to win some suits claiming the risks were not adequately presented. i hope not, but think it possible and maybe even likely.
Steve
You are correct about the right to sue.
Especially where the prospective victim is a minor.
Back in the day, a friend of my sister was on the football team and his family didn’t bother buying the available insurance.
If I recall correctly, the young man broke his arm during play and some sort of necrosis set in that cost him the use of his limb. They had to bear expenses that would have otherwise been covered had they bought the insurance.
Any NCAA athlete is required to have health insurance before participating. NCAA also provides additional insurance should any traumatic injury occur during intercollegiate play.