The claim that youth football is safer than cycling is being promoted again - this time by an NFL team doctor (totally unbiased I'm sure).
Pittsburge Steeleers doctor Joseph Maroon said "It's much more dangerous riding a bike... than playing youth football."
I'd like to see the data he's basing that on. According to the Huffington Post, he's basing it on the same study that others have to make these false claims. They have an expert who makes the same point I do below...it's not a comparison of rates.
The most likely reason that more 5-9-year-old boys go to the ED with brain injuries resulting from bike accidents is that far more boys ride bikes than play football.
These kind of claims have been made before. A Centreville High School coach tried to make the same claim in 2013, when I wrote
"Haddock said the highest rate of concussions in youth sports occurs in girls soccer, and the highest rate of concussions in the United States stems from bike accidents." He's talking about NUMBERS, not rates and not at the high school level. Either way, it's deceptive to try and cast football as less of a concussion risk than cycling. The numbers are higher because far more people participate in those sports.Concussion rates for football are the highest in all high school sports. I'm unaware of any data on concussion rates for cycling, but I'd be stunned if they're higher for cycling than for football. While there are twice as many bike-related concussions per year than in football, there are far fewer people playing football than biking (for starters, almost no women play).
And at the same time,
Speaking of failing to consider the denominator. Here's someone arguing that Mixed Martial Arts fighting is safer than cycling because more people die while cycling. He also fails to consider the benefits of cycling - everything looks bad when you only consider the costs [Thousands of people contract sexually transmitted diseases each year? Well, I guess it's cold showers for me from now on.] "Is it all so simple that we can just ignore the hard numbers behind these two activities and two data sets?" he asks. Apparantly, it is. By his logic it's safer to play Russian roulette than bike, because fewer people die doing it. [I don't have an opinion on MMA and whether it should be legal or not, but casting Citibike as dangerous or biking as more dangerous than fighting, without using all relevant data is bad form].
I read somewhere that the most dangerous consumer item in terms of number of injuries is the bed.
Now sleep on that!
Posted by: xmal | March 19, 2015 at 03:02 PM
Most injuries occur at home. That's why I stay out late at night.
Posted by: Jeffb | March 19, 2015 at 04:30 PM
That's where I plan on dying.
Posted by: Crickey7 | March 19, 2015 at 04:32 PM
I read that most injuries occur at home, so I moved.
Posted by: contrarian | March 19, 2015 at 10:48 PM
I read somewhere that the most dangerous consumer item in terms of number of injuries is the bed.
Now sleep on that!
And stairs are responsible for so many injuries that if they were a new product the CPSB would never let them be sold.
Posted by: contrarian | March 19, 2015 at 10:54 PM
As someone who received lasting injury to the amour propre area in bed, I now prefer the kitchen counters, but they are not without risk.
Football, it must be pointed out, produces cumulative, as well as acute, injury to the brain. The contribution of asymptomatic trauma to later impairment is what the NFL and its lackeys would rather people not think about. Bicycling's risks are more Nietzchean.
Posted by: Smedley Burkhart | March 20, 2015 at 08:30 AM
I have been injured cycling, running, skiing, playing soccer, and kayaking, but never playing football. So football might be safer than those activities, though I've never played it so can't say for sure.
Posted by: DE | March 20, 2015 at 08:40 AM
A quick Google on Dr. Joseph Maroon, reveals a gaudy web site for his practice with a picture of the great surgeon with a bicycle (The bolt-on aero bars set well above saddle height say it all; to wit, I bet he falls down a lot) and the fact that even the NFL feels his dismissive attitude toward chronic traumatic encephalopathy is mistaken<http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/03/18/nfl-says-maroon-doesnt-speak-for-league-on-cte/>.
Posted by: Smedley Burkhart | March 20, 2015 at 08:53 AM
Bugs Bunny had a comment on Dr. Maroon.
https://youtu.be/C_Kh7nLplWo
Posted by: 7 | March 20, 2015 at 09:07 AM
A professor from Washington State is claiming that head injuries from playing football can be reduced 85 percent by not wearing a helmet.
Posted by: JimT | March 20, 2015 at 09:45 AM
I don't know if that's true, but there could be a reduction. If you aren't wearing a helmet, you will play as if you're not wearing a helmet. Mostly works for rugby and soccer.
Posted by: DE | March 20, 2015 at 10:34 AM
Love this comment thread!
Posted by: freewheel | March 20, 2015 at 10:42 AM
Surfing the net can lead to multiple concussions if you slam your head into the keyboard everytime someone fails at statistics. So wear helmet!
Posted by: freewheel | March 20, 2015 at 10:45 AM
NFL team doctors are the same people who concluded that there was no serious consequence of repeated head injuries and routinely let player back on the field after a concussion. Why do we take these bozos seriously?
Posted by: SJE | March 20, 2015 at 02:56 PM
What a Maroon.
Posted by: Greenbelt | March 23, 2015 at 04:36 PM