But 3x higher chance sounds a lot more than it is
You can have these horrific conditions whatever you did in life
... and in Other Football News
- Thread starter Gone For A Walk
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
But 3x higher chance sounds a lot more than it is
You can have these horrific conditions whatever you did in life
Rugby is changing - big court cases coming up and amateur participation is at a low point because parents worry about injuries.
I think the issue is that recent evidence shows that continual low level head trauma over a long period of time is a major contributing factor to these illnesses. Footballers talk about getting stars in their vision after headers, but playing on and continuing to head the ball in games and in training.
My great uncle raced motorbikes with a leather helmet.. compared to the helmet nowadays and the body armour.. sports adapt to protect the participants or at least minimise the damage done.
The biggest survival change in motorsport is the hans device
Literally saves lives
The only thing you can do with football is ban heading
Or wear crash helmets
But helmets wouldnt stop cte
You need to stop the brain moving against the skull so youd need a hans device
I assume you write this as a young, healthy man, Kalman (apologies if I'm wrong). My experience of elderly, dying folk is that they'd give up all material wealth to spend more quality time with family and loved ones. Several rugby players in their 40s, who are world cup holders, are also saying it as they're losing grasp of their families.
K
Kalman
Guest
True. However, there’s a lot of things people do that can shave years of our life and cause health issues later down the line. Drinking, smoking, eating unhealthy food, taking drugs etc. etc. Some do these things in moderation; others don’t. Even in moderation they can be harmful.
We shouldn’t promote unhealthy behaviours in people and we should explain the risks of them and try to mitigate against them if possible but I think trying to prevent them entirely is a pointless battle. Smokers, for example, pay a significant amount in taxes on tobacco which all goes into the public coffers from which the NHS is funded. Footballers and boxers all pay tax and most probably have private healthcare insurance anyway.
The emotional affect it has on the people close to them like family and friends is a personal matter for them to decide. Quitting smoking, drinking or boxing/football for your spouse and children because of the associated risks is a decision for the individual to make.
Sitting in an office etc is incredibly bad for your lifespan
Not to mention the effects on bones and joints etc
Life is full of risks
3x higher chance makes it go up by like half a percent
I’m not arguing for or against it, I just felt that the ‘we all die sometime’ line doesn’t take into account all the possible consequences.
K
Kalman
Guest
You’re right that I’m young and (sorta) healthy. I quit smoking a few years ago and moved onto vaping, which has its own risks I’m sure as the effects of vaping are still being researched. However, I’m of the opinion it’s a better alternative to cigarettes.
That’s an entirely valid point you make. However, I still think that’s a decision for individuals to make and we should definitely as a society explain the risks with full transparency with the evidence we currently have available. A lot of people wished they didn’t work as much and spent more time with family and friends. Not having a healthy work-life balance is something which is harmful as well but it’s a personal decision many still choose.
Ye I totally agree that personal decisions and own risk analysis has to be the ultimate deciding factor. I think the FA issue was that the evidence was there after the Jeff Astle inquest and that the FA haven't done enough to promote understanding of the cause. I guess under 12s being restricted is because that age range aren't considered able to make these kind of decisions.
K
Kalman
Guest
Under-12s having no heading is something I’m fine with and there needs to be more transparency and information from the governing bodies with expert opinions from neurologists and studies on the incidence and effects of CTE in footballers. But ultimately, once the information has been communicated, it’s a risk vs reward thing for adults to make a decision using their own personal risk assessment.
The ball is so light these days that I don't think heading it is a danger at all. It was different back in the day when the old leather balls held water, in comparision todays footballs are more like beach balls.
If this thread is indeed about dementia, then peronally, I think there are far more causes of it then playing football for a few years when you were young and relatively fit. I know of dementia suffers who have never wore a pair of football boots in there life, and even at my age I'm still playing a form of football with fellas well into their 60's, 70's and in some cases 80's, and they have played all of their lives.
If this thread is indeed about dementia, then peronally, I think there are far more causes of it then playing football for a few years when you were young and relatively fit. I know of dementia suffers who have never wore a pair of football boots in there life, and even at my age I'm still playing a form of football with fellas well into their 60's, 70's and in some cases 80's, and they have played all of their lives.
Repetitive heading of a football has been identified as having a possible link to certain forms of dementia. It's never been suggested that it's a sole causing factor, but there is evidence that it contributed to some dementia sufferer's conditions.
Taking this into account then introducing some straightforward risk management strategies such as no heading of a football on the day before and after a professional game seems a sensible and proportionate move.
Outlawing heading in the game or altering the rules of play is not a proportionate response and I don't think anyone credible is suggesting it.
Taking this into account then introducing some straightforward risk management strategies such as no heading of a football on the day before and after a professional game seems a sensible and proportionate move.
Outlawing heading in the game or altering the rules of play is not a proportionate response and I don't think anyone credible is suggesting it.
It’s a difficult one, as many have a very different perspective to health risks when young enough to be still be playing compared to someone a bit older.
The risk of litigation will ensure that the risks for all sports can not be ignored, so as others have said will have an impact on them.
Last edited:
guys younger than half the players
and he got a team from hamburg promoted unlike..
i hope tim is a massive success
but hamburg are like 50x bigger than their city rivals st pauli
I know this is a bit of an odd thing to say, but can I just congratulate this forum - for once! - on having a really well thought out discussion on a really serious issue without it imploding into nonsense.
I normally have a wish to add something to this sort of discussion, but I have absolutely nothing useful to add, everyone has made really valid sensible appropriate comments.
There’s hope for us yet!
.. said by drunk bloke shortly before going to bed, with no knowledge of the whole discussion the following morning
