News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
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."