Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SerialStateLineXer t1_iznopi3 wrote

It's worth noting that "early diabetes and hypertension" was driven entirely by the 25-29 age group. In older age groups, former football players had lower rates of diabetes and hypertension than the general population, and even lower rates of diabetes than former football players in the 25-29 bracket. This is possibly just a fluke, or, as you mentioned, driven by selection bias.

The more striking difference is the rates of arthritis and early onset dementia, which was large and consistent across all age groups. 2% of former football players had dementia in their 50s, but only 0.2% of the general population did. Both of these are very plausibly attributable to physical trauma experienced during play.

So I don't think there's any real mystery here. The elevated rate of diabetes and hypertension in the 25-29 group is probably spurious, while physical trauma explains the rest.

7

Brynmaer t1_iznpit4 wrote

Yeah. That's a striking difference that is unlikely to be purely reporting or selection bias. It would be interesting to further differentiate by position to try and narrow down the possible variables. Like, do punters see similar numbers? Do corners? There is so much speciation in football by position when it comes to body size and play style that it could yield some results that may help the game adjust to mitigate some things.

2