Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

N.F.L. Tried to Influence New Concussion Research, Congressional Study Finds

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 70 posts

Re: N.F.L. Tried to Influence New Concussion Research, Congressional Study Finds

#31

Post by dluan »

cmsmith wrote: post #25
dluan wrote: post #11

In 200 years, when we look back on how science was funded, it will seem backwards and poorly designed. Big money has infiltrated politics, media & journalism, and of course science, but for some reason the public regards scientific research as still somewhat authentic and immune to corruption. This is far from the truth, especially in the U.S., there is hardly any authentic science left. Even those well intentioned r…

>there is hardly any authentic science left I'm sorry, but what? You list a half dozen of the hottest-button research areas, but those represent (with the exception of pharma) probably less than 2-3% of non-proprietary research. The rest of the iceberg is just normal scientists working on hard problems that aren't going to make anyone rich, and scraping by on whatever money they can find. And keeping the 'science=cor…

Would you like me to list more? The point isn't hot button topics, like gun control research, GMOs, transportation, etc, the point is that it's a feedback loop. The system is set up so that the rich get richer. The top 20 research institutions by NIH grant funding (representing 0.7% of receiving inst.) haven't changed in decades, combined receiving 20%+ of total grants [1], meanwhile the bottom is dropping out.

The reason why the NFL (or gun lobby, or energy lobby, or whatever button topic you want) go to those particular universities or researchers is because of their publishing clout, making it more likely for their findings to be accepted, making it more likely that they'll receive more grants.

[1] http://www.genengnews.com/insight-and-intelligence/the-top-5...

[2] http://grantome.com/blog/rich-getting-richer

Re: N.F.L. Tried to Influence New Concussion Research, Congressional Study Finds

#32

Post by ArkyBeagle »

karmajunkie wrote: post #10
cheeze wrote: post #3

The problem that I see with the NFL is that they are essentially a monopoly on American Football. As a fan, I don't really have any choices. I detest many things that the NFL does, can't believe some of the players are allowed to play the game after what they do outside of work, etc. yet I have no option if I want to watch football. Combine this with the fact that NFL football is culturally ingrained in many peoples…

I imagine there were some very progressively-minded patricians in ancient Rome saying much the same thing about gladiators in the coliseum.

I wonder, but I doubt it. Gladiator stuff originated as funerary ritual. So being religious, there's pretty much already a monopoly.

Re: N.F.L. Tried to Influence New Concussion Research, Congressional Study Finds

#33

Post by tlb »

themartorana wrote: post #22
tlb wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vast majority of science research doesn't affect public policy. It's toward some goal, like making a process work better. Those scientists still need to be honest, but nobody is throwing big money at them to sway their agenda. Then sometimes, suddenly, huge money depends on a question of science. I assume concussion research was like this for a long time: they were just trying to find the best way to heal brains…

When an organization "funds" research that comes to a conclusion said organization knows to be false, that is fraud, outright. We should not accept fraud as "par for the course" or "we should expect no better." Actively attempting to defraud customers, employees, or government should be a crime .

How could they know something to be false, when their own scientists said it was true?

They should have known it was bullshit (in Frankfurt's technical sense [0]), though.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Bullshit: "As such, bullshit can be neither true nor false; hence, the bullshitter is someone whose principal aim—when uttering or publishing bullshit—is to impress the listener and the reader with words that communicate an impression that something is being or has been done, words that are neither true nor false, and so obscure the facts of the matter being discussed"

Re: N.F.L. Tried to Influence New Concussion Research, Congressional Study Finds

#34

Post by oxide »

r00fus wrote: post #9
cheeze wrote: post #3

The problem that I see with the NFL is that they are essentially a monopoly on American Football. As a fan, I don't really have any choices. I detest many things that the NFL does, can't believe some of the players are allowed to play the game after what they do outside of work, etc. yet I have no option if I want to watch football. Combine this with the fact that NFL football is culturally ingrained in many peoples…

> I would gladly support a league of slightly worse players if it wasn't as scummy as the NFL has proven itself to be. Isn't this what the USFL and XFL were intended to be? Even if the other league were to focus on niches (like indoor football). I don't see how this changes without some anti-trust kind of oversight by a higher authority than the already profit-focused (with the consequential ethically blinders) NFL.

USFL was fine as a spring league and would have probably continued to this day if it was left as a spring league.

There is a pretty good documentary[1] on Netflix about the USFL and how attempting to make it a fall league competing directly with the NFL essentially handed it a death sentence.

I don't want to spoil anything, of course, so you'll have to watch it yourself to see who's bright idea that was.

It's really a shame, IMO. An alternate spring league would have been great.

[1]: http://espn.go.com/30for30/film?page=small-potatoes-who-kill...

Re: N.F.L. Tried to Influence New Concussion Research, Congressional Study Finds

#35

Post by ArkyBeagle »

rcarrigan87 wrote: post #27
karmelapple wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

College football, although it feeds the NFL, still has some rules in place that reduce some of the bad behavior. Of course, there's plenty of problems there, too, but these days I feel much less guilty cheering for a university team than for a pro team.

College football is much worse than the NFL. Players get paid nothing and still burden the same risks mostly. The idea that players are "getting an education" simply just isn't true when you consider some of the majors these guys are enrolled in. We need a minor league where players can make money. College football is insanely profitable.

Decouple the football teams from the colleges. Make 'em fully pro, with the scholarships and all intact but the team only licenses the team from the university and pays for its use of facilities, plus "holy cow those are high" licensing fees. The university still acts as alumni funding agent.

Re: N.F.L. Tried to Influence New Concussion Research, Congressional Study Finds

#37

Post by joshkpeterson »

cheeze wrote: post #3

The problem that I see with the NFL is that they are essentially a monopoly on American Football. As a fan, I don't really have any choices. I detest many things that the NFL does, can't believe some of the players are allowed to play the game after what they do outside of work, etc. yet I have no option if I want to watch football. Combine this with the fact that NFL football is culturally ingrained in many peoples…

You're welcome to watch another sport. There's plenty of good ones, you might not miss football.

Re: N.F.L. Tried to Influence New Concussion Research, Congressional Study Finds

#39

Post by ArkyBeagle »

dluan wrote: post #11

In 200 years, when we look back on how science was funded, it will seem backwards and poorly designed. Big money has infiltrated politics, media & journalism, and of course science, but for some reason the public regards scientific research as still somewhat authentic and immune to corruption. This is far from the truth, especially in the U.S., there is hardly any authentic science left. Even those well intentioned r…

Macroecnomics is a public policy discipline. It's inherently political. And I'd say there's plenty of macro critical of the present ... regime, but that's not the sort of people who become, say, Fed governors.

If anything has been political, it's been the anti tobacco lobby. Seen these "truth.com" or "truth.org" ads? Full-metal propaganda. Quite creepy, really. All the tobacco companies did was curry doubt.

Re: N.F.L. Tried to Influence New Concussion Research, Congressional Study Finds

#40

Post by dluan »

tlb wrote: post #33
themartorana wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When an organization "funds" research that comes to a conclusion said organization knows to be false, that is fraud, outright. We should not accept fraud as "par for the course" or "we should expect no better." Actively attempting to defraud customers, employees, or government should be a crime .

How could they know something to be false, when their own scientists said it was true? They should have known it was bullshit (in Frankfurt's technical sense [0]), though. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Bullshit : "As such, bullshit can be neither true nor false; hence, the bullshitter is someone whose principal aim—when uttering or publishing bullshit—is to impress the listener and the reader with words that c…

Maybe when the stakes go up, it's harder to call something out as bullshit. One $10M study saying the NFL is safe for mental health will outweigh 100 $10k studies too scared to state the opposite.

tbh, the NFL was smart to lump so much money as a promise to the NIH, pitting all of the institutes against one lab at BU.

Post reply on HN