Kids playing football

[besserheimerphat]

The only longitudinal data we have though suggests it doesnt. If my kid was a hell of a center I would have a serious talk as it isn't something I think anyone should do for 20 years. Playing wide reciever in youth football I have no problem.

Do you happen to remember where you saw the longitudinal data? I'm not doubting or disagreeing with you, I am just curious what kind of data they were looking at. For example, did they just look at the population of 75+ year old former players versus non-players, or did they look at the onset of symptoms? I wouldn't be surprised if both populations had similar rates of cognitive decline at old age. But if the former players started showing symptoms at 40 while the general population didn't show symptoms until 70, that would be a major difference. I certainly understand that the "onset of symptoms" data may not have been available since they weren't looking for anything like this 10+ years ago. We can collect this data now, but it might take 20 years to get it compiled and analyzed.

I'll poke around a little over the weekend and see if I can find references to a study like what you described.

 

[Angie]

I'm not trying to doubt your facts as I'm sure you got them somewhere, but can I ask where? 1 in 5 seems ridiculously high. Over my 4 years of high school football, there were 2 concussions on our ~50 member team. I understand that's only MY experience, but I didn't hear of many other local concussions either. Is it maybe more common somewhere like Texas or Alabama where the skill & competitiveness is at another level?

And to make your comparison more accurate, wouldn't you have to look at chances of a 15-18 year old being in an accident? Unless that's what you did & just worded it differently.

I'd grabbed some stats from several sites, but Headcasecompany.com was where I found that one - it's a grass-roots organization. I found some good stats from other sources just now, though- LINK LINK (Can't believe I linked Fox News.)

I couldn't find applicable stats for a wide range of ages for car accidents, which is why the info is different.

The short version is that saying things like, "I played and I am fine" are dangerous at best. When we know better, we do better - would anyone think of transporting a baby without a car seat these days? No. But there are people who say, "We didn't have car seats back in my day, and I'm just fine." Yeah, that's because the people who weren't fine aren't here to say so. We can improve this situation, and should. A little extra padding isn't sufficient with injuries on the rise.

 

[CloneinWDSM]

I played flag football in 5th and 6th grades, then tackle football from 7th-12th grades. I would do it again. I'm not going to force my future kid to play and I'm not going to stop him from doing so if that's what he wants to do. It's a much safer sport than what it used to be, but I understand the risk. I just don't understand why a parent would tell a boy (or girl) who really wants to play that he/she can't.

Pretty much my thoughts exactly. I want my kids to play as many sports/activities if possible. I do think tackle football before 5th/6th grade is a little excessive. I didn't start tackle football until 7th grade.

Growing up in a small town, if my parents told me I couldn't play football where literally ALL of my friends were, I would have resented them for years. High School sports is one of the greatest things growing up for a boy.

 

[Angie]

HS Football produces 11 concussions per/10,000 "events" (games or practices). Soccer is over 6, so is girls basketball, lacrosse is over 7 every sport including swimming produces risk if brain injury (.2/10000). If you are suggesting that driving is even remotely safer than playing football you are wrong. Compare death and serious injury stats of the two. Driving is a risk we all take because the reward is greater. I was where you are at with a kid in the 10th percentile for height through age 4 (by the way he is 90th the now at 9), felth the same way. But seeing him play and want to play and enjoy it I can say that the reward is about him enjoying life with his friends not monetary. You have no way of knowing now the reward factor in your equation until your kid gets older and shows an interstate or not. Odds are he won't want to play or try it and not like it. But if he does? Yeah I am not going to ban it. But I am really worried about driving alone as a teen and not sure what I will allow.

What if your son wants to be a cheerleader?
Unfortunately, a cheerleader is 18 times at greater risk of being injured than a football player (craziest stat of the day, granted this has no info on severity but the report was using hospital admission data, I had no idea)

There seem to be different rates depending on which study you look at. When you count up camp, before and after school practices, and so on, how many exposures does one student have? Then multiply that by, what, 50 kids per team? The numbers add up rapidly.

The odds of my son getting hurt are a lot greater than of him going pro, so I feel pretty safe with the rewards equation.

I think female cheerleaders are more often injured (I had a cousin who was a U of I cheerleader but had to quit after she was dropped and received a bad concussion). I don't find stats indicating that they are at 18 times greater risk, but it's definitely something we would review. A dance team that doesn't do throws or pyramids is one thing.

 

[Tailg8er]

I'd grabbed some stats from several sites, but Headcasecompany.com was where I found that one - it's a grass-roots organization. I found some good stats from other sources just now, though- LINK LINK (Can't believe I linked Fox News.)

I couldn't find applicable stats for a wide range of ages for car accidents, which is why the info is different.

The short version is that saying things like, "I played and I am fine" are dangerous at best. When we know better, we do better - would anyone think of transporting a baby without a car seat these days? No. But there are people who say, "We didn't have car seats back in my day, and I'm just fine." Yeah, that's because the people who weren't fine aren't here to say so. We can improve this situation, and should. A little extra padding isn't sufficient with injuries on the rise.

Ok, so it's safe to say your post was misleading at best. Comparing straight 5% to 20% isn't really fair when one number likely includes 4 years while the other only has 1.

Thanks for the links, I'll definitely check those out when not busy with work. I'm still interested in the 1 in 5 number. Like I said before, I'd be shocked if concussions don't happen more often in southern states where football is often described as a way of life.

 

[mustangcy]

HS Football produces 11 concussions per/10,000 "events" (games or practices). Soccer is over 6, so is girls basketball, lacrosse is over 7 every sport including swimming produces risk if brain injury (.2/10000). If you are suggesting that driving is even remotely safer than playing football you are wrong. Compare death and serious injury stats of the two. Driving is a risk we all take because the reward is greater. I was where you are at with a kid in the 10th percentile for height through age 4 (by the way he is 90th the now at 9), felth the same way. But seeing him play and want to play and enjoy it I can say that the reward is about him enjoying life with his friends not monetary. You have no way of knowing now the reward factor in your equation until your kid gets older and shows an interstate or not. Odds are he won't want to play or try it and not like it. But if he does? Yeah I am not going to ban it. But I am really worried about driving alone as a teen and not sure what I will allow.

What if your son wants to be a cheerleader?
Unfortunately, a cheerleader is 18 times at greater risk of being injured than a football player (craziest stat of the day, granted this has no info on severity but the report was using hospital admission data, I had no idea)

Thank you for providing some real insight. Football is no more dangerous than just about any other activity/sport and in some cases less dangerous. Real Sports on HBO just did a piece on concussions in youth soccer (two players going for the ball head butt style being a huge issue)...should we stop playing soccer? No. My boy plays soccer, football, baseball and basketball. I would never tell him he couldn't play a sport. If anything I worry about baseball more than football.

Everybody complains that we are raising a generation of whimpy kids with helicopter parents dictating every move. Well...it's not hard to see why. I wouldn't tell someone how to raise their kids but this current generation of parents just baffles me sometimes.

 

[mustangcy]

I'd grabbed some stats from several sites, but Headcasecompany.com was where I found that one - it's a grass-roots organization. I found some good stats from other sources just now, though- LINK LINK (Can't believe I linked Fox News.)

I couldn't find applicable stats for a wide range of ages for car accidents, which is why the info is different.

The short version is that saying things like, "I played and I am fine" are dangerous at best. When we know better, we do better - would anyone think of transporting a baby without a car seat these days? No. But there are people who say, "We didn't have car seats back in my day, and I'm just fine." Yeah, that's because the people who weren't fine aren't here to say so. We can improve this situation, and should. A little extra padding isn't sufficient with injuries on the rise.

I understand your point but comparing playing a sport that millions have played and still play to putting a child in a car seat is not a good one. In fact there are dramatically different.

 

[cyfanatic13]

I played flag from 4th-6th grade and then tackle from 7th-12th. I can only think of a couple kids that got very minor concussions the whole time I played. Everyone's different, but I would do it all over again if I could, and I was a lineman, because spending Friday nights on the field with my teammates and all the other things throughout the season (Friday nights after games with teammates, team meals, etc.) made it awesome.

 

[jkclone]

I want to add this. Just because someone gets a concussion doesn't mean they will have long term effects either. Yeah it is more likely, but it seems some act like if you get a concussion you will have significant long term effects.

 

[Gossamer]

Thank you for providing some real insight. Football is no more dangerous than just about any other activity/sport and in some cases less dangerous. Real Sports on HBO just did a piece on concussions in youth soccer (two players going for the ball head butt style being a huge issue)...should we stop playing soccer? No. My boy plays soccer, football, baseball and basketball. I would never tell him he couldn't play a sport. If anything I worry about baseball more than football.

Everybody complains that we are raising a generation of whimpy kids with helicopter parents dictating every move. Well...it's not hard to see why. I wouldn't tell someone how to raise their kids but this current generation of parents just baffles me sometimes.

I'm struggling with whether you and I agree or do not...

I don't know that you are qualified to make such an argument (bolded above) any more than I am to say "football is terribly dangerous and nobody should play it". The fact is, we could both find statistics to support our argument. And that Real Sports did any sort of piece really doesn't really say anything. That show is hardly objective.

I do agree that society may be different in how we are raising our children, but if you step back and are more objective about it in the case of sports, you'll find that there is more data to support the notion that a sport or sports could be more dangerous than originally thought. After all, an argument without data is really nothing more than an opinion...right? I would argue parents are making more informed decisions in many cases, not restraining kids.

Additionally, you need to remember that kids are playing sports at younger ages and at higher levels than in the past. Parents are actually engaging their kids in uber-competitive events at early ages, sending them to camps, off-season activities, etc...which increases the likelihood of injury. So many parents are doing the exact opposite of what you claim and living vicariously through their kids and I will argue forever that is irresponsible and unsafe.

I wouldn't ever keep my kids from doing something they love. What I do feel is my responsibility is to help mitigate risk when I can...and at the very least, be sure my kids understand the risks they are taking on. That's my role and I'm sure how you view it as well.

I too played soccer for 18 years and football for three...both at a higher level than high-school...and know first hand that football does have the potential to cause injuries greater than that of soccer. I've seen it in front of me. Doesn't mean it will happen to everyone. But it also doesn't mean that trying to channel your kids into something else that is both competitive and team oriented is being a "helicopter parent" or raising a "whimpy" kid. It means you're doing the job the best you can.

 

[IAStubborn]

really? There aren't thousands and thousands of movies featuring violence, available at all hours of the day that I can watch with my child, and enjoy together?

I mean, that's what you're talking about, right? How can I enjoy football, but expect my kid to understand that it's dangerous and they're not allowed to play? Yeah, it's called using context. My daughter thinks sharks are awesome. We watch all kinds of shark shows. She loves them. Do I think she's confused when I tell her that they're dangerous and she's not allowed to swim with them?

Sharks get a bad rap, cattle kill 20 people a year on average sharks 1.5. This is why i do not ket my kids swim with cows. But if my kid wanted to surf, I would say sure but if you want to make a career out of it and do it every day for 30 years you may (albeit unlikely) lose a limb or life. I feel the same way about football. Though I have second thoughts all the time because that's what parents do.

 

[Angie]

Ok, so it's safe to say your post was misleading at best. Comparing straight 5% to 20% isn't really fair when one number likely includes 4 years while the other only has 1.

Thanks for the links, I'll definitely check those out when not busy with work. I'm still interested in the 1 in 5 number. Like I said before, I'd be shocked if concussions don't happen more often in southern states where football is often described as a way of life.

It's not over four years, though. I believe that the 20% of concussions in football is in one given year, over four years of ages. The driving was in one year, over one year of age. That's not misleading really - if I included 14 and 15 year olds driving, that wouldn't be apt, because they don't drive. That would skew the numbers.

 

[besserheimerphat]

...bad concussion...

...concussions...

...concussions in youth soccer...

...very minor concussions...

We need to separate the risk of CTE/decreased cognitive function from concussions. All of the research I've seen indicates that REPEATED SUB-CONCUSSION LEVEL IMPACTS are what causes the lasting damage. The problem is head impacts much more than concussions. You can get concussions in almost any sport. But football is unique in the high frequency and severity of head impacts EVEN WHEN NO CONCUSSION OCCURS. And the further you are from the line of scrimmage, the lower your risk is.

Yes, concussions are bad. A friend of mine had his HS football career cut short because of one very serious concussion, and it took him over a year to fully recover. But over the long haul for the people who never have a concussion, the repeated blows to the head are what cause problems.

 

[Angie]

I understand your point but comparing playing a sport that millions have played and still play to putting a child in a car seat is not a good one. In fact there are dramatically different.

Many more millions ride in cars, and the number of times they ride in a car per year is much higher than the number of times they play football? I don't see your point.

Upthread people are talking about how many more teens are hurt in car accidents than they are in football. The number of exposures to driving/riding in a car dwarves playing football - yes, if you look at gross number of car crashes vs. football injuries in a year, of course the one number is bigger. But if you look at a granular level how many car accidents per exposure to a car there are vs. how many injuries there are vs. exposure to a football practice/game, football is worse.

 

[Gossamer]

Many more millions ride in cars, and the number of times they ride in a car per year is much higher than the number of times they play football? I don't see your point.

Upthread people are talking about how many more teens are hurt in car accidents than they are in football. The number of exposures to driving/riding in a car dwarves playing football - yes, if you look at gross number of car crashes vs. football injuries in a year, of course the one number is bigger. But if you look at a granular level how many car accidents per exposure to a car there are vs. how many injuries there are vs. exposure to a football practice/game, football is worse.

Please don't explain yourself Angie. Reasonable people understand that comparing football to riding in a car is asinine. They aren't the same.

For some reason, people want to be right about it and it has little to do with facts and more to do with ball-scratching, beer drinking, tough-guy syndrome. If the facts weren't true, we'd not have the situations we have in the NFL...and football pundits wouldn't be waxing poetic about "learning to play the game correctly". Apparently there's enough need to teach people how to do it right but that must not be based on any risks...wait...now I'm confused.

 

[IAStubborn]

Do you happen to remember where you saw the longitudinal data? I'm not doubting or disagreeing with you, I am just curious what kind of data they were looking at. For example, did they just look at the population of 75+ year old former players versus non-players, or did they look at the onset of symptoms? I wouldn't be surprised if both populations had similar rates of cognitive decline at old age. But if the former players started showing symptoms at 40 while the general population didn't show symptoms until 70, that would be a major difference. I certainly understand that the "onset of symptoms" data may not have been available since they weren't looking for anything like this 10+ years ago. We can collect this data now, but it might take 20 years to get it compiled and analyzed.

I'll poke around a little over the weekend and see if I can find references to a study like what you described.

It's been a while since I read it but I will look for it. They analyzed the overall medical records of people who were football players in the 40's and 50's and those that did not. It was a large study if I recall correctly. The one caveat was that during the early 40's they still used the old helmets and some have theorized (likely correctly) that while head fractures are more likely with these helmets concussions would be less because people would avoid head to head contac and thus concussions likely less. Hence their inclusion may have a counter effect on the helmet data. I am curious if they isolated the data or not on a rebuttall. I will look again. I have a doctor for a mother so she pulled all kinds of studies and consulted her neurologist friends as a concerned grandma in the know. She is ok with him playing now too.

 

[mustangcy]

Many more millions ride in cars, and the number of times they ride in a car per year is much higher than the number of times they play football? I don't see your point.

Upthread people are talking about how many more teens are hurt in car accidents than they are in football. The number of exposures to driving/riding in a car dwarves playing football - yes, if you look at gross number of car crashes vs. football injuries in a year, of course the one number is bigger. But if you look at a granular level how many car accidents per exposure to a car there are vs. how many injuries there are vs. exposure to a football practice/game, football is worse.

I was trying to say that while I agree with your point that we as a society do learn (see putting children in car seats as opposed 40 yrs ago) comparing the learning of car seats and attaching it to football, or the supposed understanding that football is too harmfull for kids to play is off base. Unless I misunderstood you.

 

[Tailg8er]

It's not over four years, though. I believe that the 20% of concussions in football is in one given year, over four years of ages. The driving was in one year, over one year of age. That's not misleading really - if I included 14 and 15 year olds driving, that wouldn't be apt, because they don't drive. That would skew the numbers.

I don't know if it's still this way, but I started driving at age 14 with a school/work permit. Even if you don't include 14/15, wouldn't it be applicable to include 16/17?


Also, the post below is what you originally replied to when you noted the 'chance of an 18 year old being in an accident', so I assumed you were referencing passengers as well as drivers.

No. And I won't let them ride a bicycle, ride in my car, or generally walk across the street.

 

[Angie]

I was trying to say that while I agree with your point that we as a society do learn (see putting children in car seats as opposed 40 yrs ago) comparing the learning of car seats and attaching it to football, or the supposed understanding that football is too harmfull for kids to play is off base. Unless I misunderstood you.

Football causes degenerative brain injury, even in high school. Every hit takes a toll on the brain. There are links upthread and easily googled that verify that. If other parents want their children whose brains are still developing to be put at very increased risk for both single traumatic brain injuries and for sustained injuries caused by persistent, low-impact hits, that's their choice - but it's absolutely a fact that football is often harmful. 1/3 of NFL players have brain trauma: LINK. IMO, it's absolutely the same thing - we didn't have MRIs 50 years ago to know that football was injuring people to this degree and regularity, but now we do. Same with car seats - we know better, now we can do better.

 

[CloneinWDSM]

I'm just going to keep my mouth shut on this topic.