Sport and health
Over the past thirty years the issues associated with the long-term effects of an elite sporting career – particularly those of head injuries – have gradually assumed an increasing importance.
It is stating the bleedin’ obvious to record that life itself is potentially dangerous – any one of us could be “taken out” by a single-decker bus as we cross the road tomorrow morning to collect our daily newspaper.
By the same token, however, there are pastimes, hobbies and sports whose inherent physical risks are presumed to have been taken into account (if not for granted by those who willingly engage in them: let me here just reference sky-diving, ski jumping, climbing, motor racing, tobogganing and all other sports, games or contests which involve physical contact and/or “combat”.
But at what point does or should the giving of “willing informed consent” by a prospective participant cross the line from being an unremarkable matter of individual responsibility and becoming an issue of public health concern requiring the intervention of the presiding authorities?
Since the dawn of the 21st Century the various bodies, clubs and national associations involved in administering NFL football, both codes of rugby and also football have been forced to confront the fact that the link between the very nature of their games and long-term player concussion and dementia issues are not only scientifically/medically proven beyond any reasonable doubt but have also historically been ignored – or, worse, denied – for far too long.
Currently rugby union is considering both de-powering various aspects of forwards’ play and introducing ever-more stringent head injury assessment protocols in the elite game and potentially even banning contested scrums and/or certain types of tackling in the game as played at school or junior level.
Some might view these developments as perfectly sound and reasonable responses to the inherent dangers in the sport, being designed (as they are) to achieve an acceptable reduction in the number of the risk of serious head or other injuries.
Others might hold that a single instance of a broken neck and/or resulting paralysis occurring in school rugby involving young players who bodies are not yet fully grown and/or may be incapable of withstanding the enormous pressures and energies generated at scrum-time is one instance too many.
This week the eighty-one year old Manchester United legend Denis Law has announced that he is suffering from at least two sorts of dementia – he is simply the latest in an ever-lengthening line of great former soccer players who have “come out” in this respect. There is little doubt that before long the practice of “heading the ball” – and also how the game deals with dementia in former players – will become the subject of ever-greater concern and debate both within the Football Association and among those who organise the game at all levels.
At my most recent look, the number of former elite rugby union players around the world who are currently involved in preparing either personal or group legal actions against the authorities for failing to protect them adequately from the risk of concussion injuries exceeds 40.
And – the thought occurred to me today – where on earth does this leave the sports of boxing and UFC or mixed martial arts?
Mention has previously been made within the pages of this organ of the “open and accepted” historic connection between pugilism and head injuries causing progressive brain function deterioration. The phenomenon of “punch drunk” ex-pugs has been accepted by all those who follow boxing, both in the amateur and professional versions, as an occupational hazard since time immemorial.
This morning, as I glanced through the newspaper website sports stories, I noticed the number of upcoming bouts either confirmed or in “active negotiation” featuring these former greats of boxing:-
Manny Pacquiao (aged 42) is challenging for a world title this weekend and apparently hopes in due course to avenge his defeat by Floyd Mayweather (aged 44);
David Haye, 40, is coming out of retirement to make a one-off comeback this autumn and may extend his career further if he wins;
Amir Khan (aged 34) and Kell Brook (aged 35) – who ought to have fought years ago and have spent at least the last eight years at least “calling each other out” – both now semi-retired, are apparently in negotiation to fight towards the end of the year, presumably “just for the money”.
Today I just ask the question “From a health point of view for the participants, should any of these contests actually be happening?!”
Actually, never mind that: how can the sport of boxing still be justified, period?
