Live data from Hacker News

110 N.F.L. Brains

nytimes.com

11–20 of 206 posts

Re: 110 N.F.L. Brains

#11
post #5
post #2

There's always been the possibility of selection bias in finding CTE in football players' brains. Many of the brains are studied at the request of the family of the deceased player, presumably because they had noticed symptoms of mental degeneration. And there are cases where the player themselves requested the scans in their will. Junior Seau didn't leave behind a suicide note, but he did kill himself in a way that…

Isn't that still selection bias? Presumably CTE sufferers have a higher risk of dying — their healthy peers may still be alive and thus not included in that 1,300.

From 1960-2013 there were about 23,000 players[1]. I don't know much about the growth of the NFL over time, let's say there were 30,000 ever.

[1] https://opendata.stackexchange.com/questions/5875/get-season...

Re: 110 N.F.L. Brains

#12
I want to push back on the "every sport is dangerous" argument I'm seeing in here.

There's a difference between "you might die right in the middle of this very fun activity" and "you might die slowly and horribly years from now when you're retired and in the midst of raising a family."

I ski pretty aggressively, and of course I might die doing that. But every day I go home and know, "well it wasn't today! Today was just great clean fun." If I had a nagging thought of "but today might give me a mental disorder in 20 years" then I'd be much less inclined to participate in the sport.

Re: 110 N.F.L. Brains

#13
post #6
post #4

Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy in American football has been getting lots of media attention over the past few years, and the counterpoints to whether or not this is a serious issue will rely mostly on emphasizing the survivorship bias of those who enjoyed a high quality of life despite possibly (or assuredly) suffering such injuries, but in many ways almost all athletic sports represent feats of corporeal risk to…

>might only change youth and amateur level competition. Professional leagues will probably continue apace, even amid full disclosure of well-known hazards. You don't see a direction link between the grassroots levels to the pro level? If you kill the interest, or participation at the grassroots level, there will never be a compelling pro league to source from. Good riddance to a lame game of consisting of mostly low…

I feel like you're really not giving credit where it is due.

Yes, the trope is that football consists entirely of meatheads. The infamous movie The Blind Side comes to mind where they falsely treat Michael Oher like moron in spite of his capability does nothing to put this to rest. However there is a lot of strategy from the coach picking the play to the individual match-up right on the field.

And to say that it is low skill - that's just a plain insult. Find me a 6'5", 325 lbs person who can deftly keep someone of equal or larger size from encroaching upon the quarterback's territory. Find me an Average Joe capable of consistently catching passes against two defenders. Find me another Average Joe capable of ball placement when their receiver has two defenders guarding them.

Re: 110 N.F.L. Brains

#14

I want to push back on the "every sport is dangerous" argument I'm seeing in here. There's a difference between "you might die right in the middle of this very fun activity" and "you might die slowly and horribly years from now when you're retired and in the midst of raising a family." I ski pretty aggressively, and of course I might die doing that. But every day I go home and know, "well it wasn't today! Today was j…

It's even worse when it's "you will die slowly and horribly years from now", which is what football is starting to look like. There's no "risk"; you're just storing up your consequences for later.

Re: 110 N.F.L. Brains

#15
My dad played both college and professional football. He had early signs of dementia 15 years ago, but it became really bad about 10 years ago. After a long struggle, he died just earlier this year.

It's hard to deal with

Re: 110 N.F.L. Brains

#16

I want to push back on the "every sport is dangerous" argument I'm seeing in here. There's a difference between "you might die right in the middle of this very fun activity" and "you might die slowly and horribly years from now when you're retired and in the midst of raising a family." I ski pretty aggressively, and of course I might die doing that. But every day I go home and know, "well it wasn't today! Today was j…

Yes, this is why the "but many other things are dangerous and people do them knowing full well that [...]"

Of course the problem is that you can go half a life time doing this thing, and then it sneaks up on you and there's no reversing the damage. The danger isn't presented as clear or present as with anti-smoking messaging, or with something like solo free climbing which needs no warning.

Re: 110 N.F.L. Brains

#17

I want to push back on the "every sport is dangerous" argument I'm seeing in here. There's a difference between "you might die right in the middle of this very fun activity" and "you might die slowly and horribly years from now when you're retired and in the midst of raising a family." I ski pretty aggressively, and of course I might die doing that. But every day I go home and know, "well it wasn't today! Today was j…

It seems likely that some activities are orders of magnitude more dangerous than others for CTE.

Maybe you'd rather your kid play football or learn boxing than lay on the couch. If the risk is 10x that of baseball, and 50x that of track and field, however, you might steer them to different activities.

Re: 110 N.F.L. Brains

#18
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that still selection bias? Presumably CTE sufferers have a higher risk of dying — their healthy peers may still be alive and thus not included in that 1,300.

The NFL isn't a 10 years old league, there's plenty of players who passed away. If anything there would be more examples since equipment was worse before and there were less rules that protected players, especially top/crown helmet leading tackles which started getting penalized with 15yd only in 2013.

I think the prevalence of concussions in football compared to rugby is proof that "better equipment" doesn't prevent concussions. It has the paradoxical effect of causing them. Better shoulder pads allow for people to launch their bodies without fear of separating their shoulders. Conversely, helmets are not designed to protect the brain, only to prevent skull fractures. Thus, I don't think your argument holds water.

Re: 110 N.F.L. Brains

#19
The prevalence of CTE in the NFL brains is irrelevant until we can compare it to the prevalence in the general population. And the issue is it's being more closely examined in the NFL brains currently. General population prevalence estimates are likely underestimated.

Re: 110 N.F.L. Brains

#20
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>might only change youth and amateur level competition. Professional leagues will probably continue apace, even amid full disclosure of well-known hazards. You don't see a direction link between the grassroots levels to the pro level? If you kill the interest, or participation at the grassroots level, there will never be a compelling pro league to source from. Good riddance to a lame game of consisting of mostly low…

Football is only 5th on this list of dangerous sports: https://www.thetoptens.com/most-dangerous-sports/ The real issue is that football trauma has effects over longer time periods and the long term effects are discounted in the near term. >Good riddance to a lame game of consisting of mostly low skilled athletes Having played up to college, it's tremendous fun and has roles for a range skillsets. While not necessari…

I liked that football has a role for a large variety of body types from lean and fast to just big. Height is usually an advantage but not everywhere.

As for the mental part there is so much crap going on on large parts of the field that you have to remember at a moment's notice.

Much of football at lower levels relys on tons of memorization but this is the argument I made to my o line coach:

"So every year we face around 4 standard defenses. We play carnagie which runs a oddball one and you have us defending the zone blitz as well because you think a team is going to use it. So that's 6 defenses. Every d lineman can shade at least 3 ways but let's just call that 12 and not go permutations and let's skip the line backers that also covers mirroring of the d. We run essentially 15 run plays each direction for the purposes of the linemen rembering and 10 special plays so 25 plays... And we run them both ways so 50.

So we have 61250 = 3600. So basically you want me to memorize, recognize and recall and use within 1/2 of a step's notice 3600 things with 2 weeks of practice.

And every week you throw in 3 special plays and sub optimizing changes because of special players which ends up being 200-1200 changes.

Do you see how that might be difficult?"

But this is what most places do till you get up higher. After teaching my coach permutations math I said:

"Can you just tell us for each play what is the most dangerous thing to it and specifics for that week? That's really only 50*3 things total and about 12 things extra a week."

Reply "so you want me to teach you to be coaches basically"?

Me: "we are at a top ten University who plays football against carnagie and University of Chicago... I think we can use our brains pretty well"

Anyway yes it requires a ton of mental. I did as much studying each season of football in college as I did to pass orgo 1&2.

Post reply on HN