New, compelling links between football and neurodegenerative diseases

TimzRFudz

Well-Known Member
The documentary with Alan Shearer brought this into the public eye a wee while back, which led to funding of this study. More to come on this, but this study provides strong links between having played professional football and the risks of specific diseases later in life. I suspect change will be on its way...
 
I reckon with more and more research in this area it's going to have a really profound effect on the rules of the game in future years.
 
I reckon with more and more research in this area it's going to have a really profound effect on the rules of the game in future years.

I think it will depend on how lawyered up people get. We know the damage boxing does to individuals and yet it's still a licensed sport. It might be that at the professional level it becomes absorbed as an inherent risk. What we don't have data on are the non-elite / amateurs / kids.... potentially a much much larger pool of affected individuals - that's where the rule changes might be seen.
 
If it hasn’t already i can see heading the ball phased out of kids football all together. Maybe introduced around the 16/17 year olds if not older.

Not saying I agree or disagree with that but can see it happening.
 
Is this due to repeatedly heading the ball?

It's retrospective mate, so they can't comment on causality at this point. It's saying there's an association between playing professional football and significantly increased risk of conditions such as Alzheimers.
 
If it hasn’t already i can see heading the ball phased out of kids football all together. Maybe introduced around the 16/17 year olds if not older.

Not saying I agree or disagree with that but can see it happening.

If that does happen then I'll put money on pushy parents teaching kids it in thier own time to gain an advantage.

Would the sport be any worse off for getting rid of heading entirely?
 
If it hasn’t already i can see heading the ball phased out of kids football all together. Maybe introduced around the 16/17 year olds if not older.

Not saying I agree or disagree with that but can see it happening.

The thing is there's no information yet on when the damage is done. We could potentially protect kids via rule changes or lighter balls but the next say 15+ years of playing full time as an adult twice a week might be when the real damage occurs.
 
If it hasn’t already i can see heading the ball phased out of kids football all together. Maybe introduced around the 16/17 year olds if not older.

Not saying I agree or disagree with that but can see it happening.

There is definitely a few kids leagues down south that have already banned it up to a certain age.
 
You simply cannot take the risk out of life.
How many office workers go on to suffer chronic back problems?

Whilst I agree with your general point, employers are compelled to ensure staff have appropriate desks and chairs and policies to mitigate against it. Or they get sued.

Football hasn't even started to look at the mitigation yet. But the FA and PFA are all over this already.
 
Whilst I agree with your general point, employers are compelled to ensure staff have appropriate desks and chairs and policies to mitigate against it. Or they get sued.

Football hasn't even started to look at the mitigation yet. But the FA and PFA are all over this already.

Lighter balls will almost certainly improve these figures mate , personally I think in some quarters they will push for an outright ban , and sadly the game will NEVER be the same .
 
Whilst I agree with your general point, employers are compelled to ensure staff have appropriate desks and chairs and policies to mitigate against it. Or they get sued.

Football hasn't even started to look at the mitigation yet. But the FA and PFA are all over this already.
Okay, maybe not the best example, however you simply cannot take the risk out of certain jobs.
Stats will prove that most soldiers get shot or blown up at work, or that more coppers suffer early death in life outside the armed services.

The truth is, some jobs are dangerous and carry risk.
If someone told me I could play centre forward for Rangers and head the ball throughout my career like Derek Johnstone but that it carried risk of impairment in later life, I would say fck it, give me the shirt and I will happily take the risk.

What are we going to tell our kids, don't become a cop or a soldier or a footballer because there is risk involved?
 
I always wonder what the risk factors are in a game like Rugby. Yes they don’t head the ball but watching some of the World Cup in recent weeks, some of the clatters these lads take is unreal, far heavier than anything you will ever see on a football park.
 
Lighter balls will almost certainly improve these figures mate , personally I think in some quarters they will push for an outright ban , and sadly the game will NEVER be the same .

I think it will be a slow-ish process. Scientific research is very like the legal profession where you painstakingly build an evidence base.

Right now the data is very compelling, but what it says is that there's an association, no cause. The next stage will be a prospective study. And from there it might be possible to really nail it down onto heading being the culprit.

Okay, maybe not the best example, however you simply cannot take the risk out of certain jobs.
Stats will prove that most soldiers get shot or blown up at work, or that more coppers suffer early death in life outside the armed services.

The truth is, some jobs are dangerous and carry risk.
If someone told me I could play centre forward for Rangers and head the ball throughout my career like Derek Johnstone but that it carried risk of impairment in later life, I would say fck it, give me the shirt and I will happily take the risk.

What are we going to tell our kids, don't become a cop or a soldier or a footballer because there is risk involved?

Cops or soldiers encounter hazards in their line of normal work mate. Whatever you or I may think about this, heading a ball isn't an obligate life or death option and therefore it would seem highly likely in the future, once the evidence is irrefutable, that something will be done to mitigate against it... be it lighter balls, headgear, incorporating accelerometers into kit to measure potential impact stress, etc.

And whilst I tend to agree with your view on the potential for offsetting a career like big DJ's vs having a five-fold greater chance of Alzheimer's disease in the future, the fact is most professional footballers win nothing in their careers, and probably don't earn that much either. Then when you factor in actually watching someone slowly die from the inside out, the way a lot of these diseases take people, the risks become even tougher to balance.

Ultimately, none of this emotional stuff will matter, I reckon. If the case is made cast iron then the governing bodies will implement change primarily on the basis of not getting sued out of existence.
 
I always wonder what the risk factors are in a game like Rugby. Yes they don’t head the ball but watching some of the World Cup in recent weeks, some of the clatters these lads take is unreal, far heavier than anything you will ever see on a football park.

A lot of the grounding for the work started from Willie Stewart's interests and involvement with rugby. In essence if it's an impact sport it's on the radar.
 
anyone who grew up in the 50,s or 60,s remember the leather ball ,when it was wet it was hard enough to kick it never mind using the head .sports science has developed over the years ,nobody knew how serious concussions were ,shake it off son ,get back in the game .lifestyle also plays a part ,booze ,smokes just not healthy .
 
A lot of the grounding for the work started from Willie Stewart's interests and involvement with rugby. In essence if it's an impact sport it's on the radar.
Thanks for clearing that up, I thought it was just football they were looking at.

I know the findings of studies in the NFL have been pretty frightening and that’s with them wearing helmets as well.
 
It would be very interesting to see the average number of brain impacts the average footballer has per game.

Assuming it follows the trend of the NFL, it’s reasonable to assume that the damage is done in the professional game.
 
Could be to do with socio economic backgrounds of people who get into football traditionally too. Might be genes passed on or people who have had a specific upbringing.
 
It is difficult to see what the solution could be.

My guess would be some sort of headgear (not necessarily a helmet) that is capable of absorbing blows to the head. Something like what the props and hookers wear in rugby.
 
I always wonder what the risk factors are in a game like Rugby. Yes they don’t head the ball but watching some of the World Cup in recent weeks, some of the clatters these lads take is unreal, far heavier than anything you will ever see on a football park.
But there have been significant rule changes in rugby to reduce the risk of head collisions. Football will not be able to avoid making some changes.
 
It is difficult to see what the solution could be.

My guess would be some sort of headgear (not necessarily a helmet) that is capable of absorbing blows to the head. Something like what the props and hookers wear in rugby.
This is data collated from decades ago. The ball these days is much lighter and doesn't absord water over the course of a game. We won't know if a lighter ball makes a difference for decades.

The brunt of the impact will be on the forehead where the headgear doesn't cover. The quick fix in Rugby is to cut the number of replacements. More guys need to complete the 80 so they'll have to be lighter to increase stamina. Boxing is an interesting one where head gear could counterintuitively be worse as prolonged dull blows could be worse than a single knock out blow.
 
I could be wrong in my understanding of the findings.

It said ex footballers were more likely to get Alzheimers, motor neurone and Parkinson's.
But less likely to have heart disease or cancer.

Is that just telling us that when we get older, if cancer or heart disease doesn't get us, then brain degeneration will?
 
Whilst I agree with your general point, employers are compelled to ensure staff have appropriate desks and chairs and policies to mitigate against it. Or they get sued.

Football hasn't even started to look at the mitigation yet. But the FA and PFA are all over this already.

If it gets to it, give players optional head gear to wear. A lighter version of what Cech wore.

Put the onus on the players to protect themselves. Let’s not ruin the game further.
 
I could be wrong in my understanding of the findings.

It said ex footballers were more likely to get Alzheimers, motor neurone and Parkinson's.
But less likely to have heart disease or cancer.

Is that just telling us that when we get older, if cancer or heart disease doesn't get us, then brain degeneration will?
Hah good point
 
To quote Johan Cryuff's comment about playing football with the ball in the air "Have you ever seen a cow fly". Basically the ball should be on the ground as often as possible, mind you that theory has obviously never reached Scotland.
 
To quote Johan Cryuff's comment about playing football with the ball in the air "Have you ever seen a cow fly". Basically the ball should be on the ground as often as possible, mind you that theory has obviously never reached Scotland.

There was a similar Brian Clough quote, but I can't remember it exactly.
Something like if God wanted football to be played in the air he'd have put grass on the clouds.
 
I could be wrong in my understanding of the findings.

It said ex footballers were more likely to get Alzheimers, motor neurone and Parkinson's.
But less likely to have heart disease or cancer.

Is that just telling us that when we get older, if cancer or heart disease doesn't get us, then brain degeneration will?
There may also, particularly with heart disease, be an element that footballers are typically fitter than the general population.
 
Lighter balls will almost certainly improve these figures mate ,
I'm not so sure - elbows/shoulders to head collisions, head to head collisions, head to ground collisions (rare, but they do happen) are all possible factors as well as heading the ball. Too soon, in my opinion, to say that there's a known definitive cause.
 
If it hasn’t already i can see heading the ball phased out of kids football all together. Maybe introduced around the 16/17 year olds if not older.

Not saying I agree or disagree with that but can see it happening.

younger kids shouldn't be playing the full pitch games anyway, 5 a sides on the small pitches is the way to teach technique and close control
 
I could be wrong in my understanding of the findings.

It said ex footballers were more likely to get Alzheimers, motor neurone and Parkinson's.
But less likely to have heart disease or cancer.

Is that just telling us that when we get older, if cancer or heart disease doesn't get us, then brain degeneration will?

No, because this was relative to a control cohort.

Up to the age of around 70 the outcomes were similar. Beyond that the ex footballers are less likely to die from cardiovascular disease or cancer, but relatively 3,4,5 times more likely to die from various neurodegenerative diseases.

Morbid thought, but I think I'd rather drop suddenly with an MI than be subject to a living hell for me and my family over a period of years....
 
This is data collated from decades ago. The ball these days is much lighter and doesn't absord water over the course of a game. We won't know if a lighter ball makes a difference for decades.

The brunt of the impact will be on the forehead where the headgear doesn't cover. The quick fix in Rugby is to cut the number of replacements. More guys need to complete the 80 so they'll have to be lighter to increase stamina. Boxing is an interesting one where head gear could counterintuitively be worse as prolonged dull blows could be worse than a single knock out blow.

Bizarrely as well in rugby - removing the body armour that some guys have been wearing over the past while (in fact, since it became professional, go figure...) might reduce injuries. There's evidence guys are hitting harder these days as they think they are protected.
 
Is this not all just guess work ?
There cannot be any statistical data from such a long time ago that would include head clashes or other head trauma, ie kicks .
Just blaming heading the ball seems like a bit of an easy diagnosis.
Has family history of the conditions been accounted for ?
 
Is this not all just guess work ?
There cannot be any statistical data from such a long time ago that would include head clashes or other head trauma, ie kicks .
Just blaming heading the ball seems like a bit of an easy diagnosis.
Has family history of the conditions been accounted for ?

With respect....Try watching the interview and reading the paper mate. Also try reading the thread.

No-one has blamed heading the ball.... or made any diagnosis... its a retrospective study. All the information is there.


Sigh.
 
Bizarrely as well in rugby - removing the body armour that some guys have been wearing over the past while (in fact, since it became professional, go figure...) might reduce injuries. There's evidence guys are hitting harder these days as they think they are protected.


correct in American football with all the pads and hard helmets, some think this contributes to the problem as they hit alot harder because of it
 
They won’t be happy till sport is finished, boxing, hockey and American football must be on a different level to football.
 
Thanks for clearing that up, I thought it was just football they were looking at.

I know the findings of studies in the NFL have been pretty frightening and that’s with them wearing helmets as well.
The actual gear they use for protection is what’s causing most of the heavy head blows in American football and ice hockey.
 
Back
Top