Using data from a large online survey sponsored by the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research, researchers found that participants who had a history of playing organized tackle football were 61% more likely to report a Parkinson’s disease diagnosis or parkinsonism, an umbrella term for symptoms like tremors and rigidity that cause movement problems, compared with those who played other organized sports.
It’s not the helmets, it’s the hits to the head and the tackles to the ground. Those sudden jolts are what cause concussions.
Do rugby players suffer concussions as frequently as American football players? If they don’t, could the helmets be making the problem worse - encouraging players to hit with their heads more, like a false sense of security? Sorry if this is a stupid question, I don’t know anything about American football and not much more about rugby!
EDIT: it seems like rugby players are more prone to concussions than NFL players, but I might not be completely off the mark about helmets offering a false sense of protection:
“Rugby players are believed to play more aggressively when using scrum caps; however, studies have shown these make no difference for protecting against head injuries.”
Yes, merely having the helmets does increase the risk of concussion. Partly because a player feels natural need to protect their head so they’re willing to take risks, and partly because a helmet converts what would have been a really bad injury into just a concussion.
Ultimately, if they are serious about reducing concussions and other injuries, they’ll ban leading with the head (already done, I think) and hits to the head (already done for “defenseless” players, not sure what that means). Hopefully next is eliminating the three-point stance to further reduce head hits. Ideally they’d also find a way to eliminate hard tackles to the ground, but I can’t think of a way to do that without banning tackles entirely.
Reduce the weight of the helmet and you’ll reduce the amount of momentum involved in the hit, drastically reducing concussions. Science!
Reduce yes, drastically probably not. You’re still going to have rapid acceleration and deceleration causing concussions.
The person wearing the helmet is still 2-300 lbs, I don’t think a reduction in helmet weight would make the slightest difference.
Which a better helmet design protects from…if you read the article.
Helmets do not protect against concussions. Even if this fluff piece says so.
You have a soft squishy brain floating in a hard case. Your helmet would need to be comically large to properly soften the hits to the head in football.
You’re not understanding the fundamental issue - the helmets being used are causing more concussions than necessary due to their weight. No helmet will completely protect against 100% of all concussions, but the number of concussions in football is greatly worsened by heavy helmets adding mass to the equation.
If only there were an article about all of this…
I read the article. I don’t see what your talking about.
I even searched the article for “helmet”, “mass”, “weight” but didn’t see a single hit. What article are you talking about that details how lighter helmets would reduce CTE or concussions?
Start from this bit and read on. There are breaks in the page that may have made you think you’d gotten to the end.
“A helmet’s weight is at the core of Simpson’s research. Simple physics says the head moves when the body is struck, and the heavier the head, the more it travels. The brain is the passenger.”