purplerat wrote:

Teague wrote:

purplerat wrote:

Teague wrote:

Yes, yes of course. My posting history over the years has always been about giving no shits for people unlike yours. Oh and your bullshitting again. Either find the actual fucking facts or quit posting your bullshit please. Or do I need to school you AGAIN like I did in the Avery thread where you failed to back up your own mouth?

Why bother? Just like in the Avery thread you don't give a shit about the facts. I or somebody else can post them but you'll just ignore it and say "what evidence, there is no evidence." just like you did in that thread.

The reality is that right now data on CTE is limited and much of the focus has been on American football. Which is itself kind of ironic considering your claim that there is a lack of caring about American football players. If everybody else cares so much about their athletes then where's the dedicated research over there in regards to soccer or rugby?

What we do have better information on are the conclusions which are believed to be what causes CTE. And concussions, even if they don't lead to CTE directly, are very dangerous, especially for young people.

Concussion rates vary widely across youth sports, with the greatest injury risk in higher-contact games like rugby, hockey and football, a new research review finds.

The concussion rate was about 18 times higher than average for rugby, five times greater for hockey, and roughly double for American football, the study found.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-concussion-youth-sports-idUSKBN0TZ2RE20151216

W
T
F

You can't remember shit mate. In the avery thread YOU stated there was evidence he did it and when I asked for that evidence, you obfuscated like a mother fucker.

As for facts, once again, YOU made the claim about football (over here) and once again, failed to back up your claim with any evidence. Do it now then. Go and find the evidence to back up your claim.

Wrong on both accounts. In both, you made unsubstantiated claims. If you want to talk about your claim that there was no evidence in the Avery case - a thread which you started about a documentary you said you couldn't be bothered to watch then asserted there was no evidence - talk about it over there.

In this thread, you asserted rugby and soccer were safer than American football yet you demand I justify my skepticism towards your unsubstantiated claim. Nice try though.

Teague wrote:
Go and find a quote in this thread where "In this thread, you asserted rugby and soccer were safer than American football"

You can't because once again, you made it up in your head which is a theme with you.

Teague wrote:Interestingly, Rugby doesn't suffer the same issue but then they don't smack heads al lthe time. Ironic that the "safety" equipment here is actually not safe and this study shows that further studies are needed. If it's such a high number though, what does that mean for the national sport?

purplerat wrote:

Teague wrote:
Go and find a quote in this thread where "In this thread, you asserted rugby and soccer were safer than American football"

You can't because once again, you made it up in your head which is a theme with you.

Teague wrote:Interestingly, Rugby doesn't suffer the same issue but then they don't smack heads al lthe time. Ironic that the "safety" equipment here is actually not safe and this study shows that further studies are needed. If it's such a high number though, what does that mean for the national sport?

Teague wrote:

purplerat wrote:

Teague wrote:
Go and find a quote in this thread where "In this thread, you asserted rugby and soccer were safer than American football"

You can't because once again, you made it up in your head which is a theme with you.

Teague wrote:Interestingly, Rugby doesn't suffer the same issue but then they don't smack heads al lthe time. Ironic that the "safety" equipment here is actually not safe and this study shows that further studies are needed. If it's such a high number though, what does that mean for the national sport?

Sorry, but where does that say they're "safer"? I said... wtf! Why do I need to write it again it's right fucking there LOL - and you still can't read and I'M the one with the issue? GTFO and whilst you're at it - look up "assertions", "misrepresentation", "reading comprehension".

No wonder we're always arguing when you're not reading stuff correctly. We just found out from Proudfoot that rugby suffers more spinal injuries than anything else which would make CTE a US football thing. There's 5 test cases for UK football which is hardly compelling which is why I said earlier there's a need for more study. The conclusion so far being that with the protection it means more impacts to the head which over time lead to more cases of CTE.

purplerat wrote:

Teague wrote:

purplerat wrote:

Teague wrote:
Go and find a quote in this thread where "In this thread, you asserted rugby and soccer were safer than American football"

You can't because once again, you made it up in your head which is a theme with you.

Teague wrote:Interestingly, Rugby doesn't suffer the same issue but then they don't smack heads al lthe time. Ironic that the "safety" equipment here is actually not safe and this study shows that further studies are needed. If it's such a high number though, what does that mean for the national sport?

Sorry, but where does that say they're "safer"? I said... wtf! Why do I need to write it again it's right fucking there LOL - and you still can't read and I'M the one with the issue? GTFO and whilst you're at it - look up "assertions", "misrepresentation", "reading comprehension".

No wonder we're always arguing when you're not reading stuff correctly. We just found out from Proudfoot that rugby suffers more spinal injuries than anything else which would make CTE a US football thing. There's 5 test cases for UK football which is hardly compelling which is why I said earlier there's a need for more study. The conclusion so far being that with the protection it means more impacts to the head which over time lead to more cases of CTE.

What's your basis for saying it doesn't happen? It [CTE] hasn't been studied to any degree in rugby players. I guess you guys just don't care about your kinsman enough to bother looking into whether the 18x concussion rate might be causing CTE.

Interestingly, Rugby doesn't suffer the same issue