Dementia Pugilistica & MMA
Matt Pitt over at Sherdog writes on the topic of Dementia Pugilistica in contact sports like MMA, boxing, and football, which is a continuation of the discussion we’ve had here at MMAPayout.com regarding the perceived safety of the sport:
It is true that there is compelling evidence that MMA is safer than boxing. But “safer” is not safe. MMA fighters are starting younger, are enticed by the money involved to fight longer and eventually MMA will have a cohort of neurologically impaired veterans of its own. With the overwhelming medical, scientific and epidemiologic evidence that a career worth of head blows leads to CTE in one out of five fighters, the moral imperative for some meaningful change is inarguable. The sport is too good not to be better.
Unfortunately, even if the need for greater safety is clear, what actually can be done to lessen the danger of CTE in combat sports is less certain. Football or rugby can adapt new equipment or rules to lessen the danger; fight sport has less clear options. In general, most of a fighter’s head blows — if not the most severe — will occur during training, out of reach of promoters and athletic commissions. Heavily padded gloves may paradoxically worsen the danger. Headgear appears to be of limited use, may even be harmful and, in any event, is unpopular with fighters and fans alike.
Further, it is difficult to stop what cannot be demonstrated to exist in real-time. Pre-autopsy testing for MTBI is effectively unavailable. The commonly used CAT scan — which does show bleeding — does not show MTBI. Blood tests for evidence of brain injury are unreliable, and lumbar puncture testing is impractical. The long delay between traumatic insult in a fight and onset of symptoms means that a fighter who shows no quantifiable evidence of injury during his career can still develop CTE at a relatively young age.
Payout Perspective:
MMA is not a positive influence on an athlete’s post-career quality of physical living – this much we can almost be certain. The physical strain that is placed on these individuals over countless years of sparring, rolling, and fighting is tremendous. However, it is in many ways no different than the strain that athletes in other sports endure; boxers, football players, hockey players, and rugby players all feel the effects of their playing days in post-career life. Some more than others.
It’s absolutely right to be concerned about the safety of athletic participants in our society – and to make sure that their well-being is not unfairly exploited – but I often wonder where the regulatory line should be drawn. It would seem to me that regulation has a duty to provide athletes with the best information possible, so that they can make an educated decision about their participation in sport. There is also a place for regulation in terms of overseeing and guiding sport activity, within reasonable limits, so as to ensure that the above exploitation does not occur.
Should the role of regulation extend much beyond that?
There are those that would claim these sports – MMA especially – are too dangerous and should be prohibited, but in response I must ask: dangerous in the eyes of whom and relative to what?