Football helmets should not be used.

Rebuttal Imagine if football didn't have helmets, like rugby. [6] Rugby is a sport with little head injuries, simply because bashing heads into each other risk cracking their head open. The fact that rugby players don't use helmets also prevents spearing, which prevents concussions. I’m going to start with the obvious. Rugby is extremely concerned with concussions. [1]* “improved conditioning and diets as well as tackling higher up on the body instead of on the legs mean the game is more physical with more high-speed collisions.”* “Concussion was the most common injury at Premiership clubs for a third year, accounting for 12.5 percent of incidents, according to the English rugby’s governing body. English clubs reported 86 during matches and eight in training in 2013-14, a 59 percent increase from the previous year.”* “Before the 2012 introduction of the temporary substitution for a head injury assessment, Rumbles said, 56 percent of players who were treated and cleared to play were later found to have concussion.”* “In May, a coroner’s inquest in Dublin found that amateur Kenny Nuzum died from repeated head blows while playing for Landsdowne. Nuzum, whose family donated his brain for research, died at 57 from CTE.”* “Last January, New Zealand’s Shontayne Hape retired at 33 after at least 20 concussions and blackouts in his career.” In fact, Rugby is not safer than the NFL. Fewer concussions are historically reported in Rugby because Rugby protocols for identifying and treating concussions were sub-standard prior to 2012. In a study titled “Comparison of Injuries in American Collegiate Football and Club Rugby: A Prospective Cohort Study” published in the American Journal of Sports Medicine concluded: [2] * Overall injury rates were substantially higher in collegiate rugby compared with football. Similarities between sports were observed in the most common injury types (sprains and concussions), locations (lower extremity and head), and mechanisms (direct player contact). Upper extremity injuries were more common in rugby (Wimpy_kid note: likely due to chest and shoulder pads in American football), and the rate of season-ending injuries was similar between sports. Rugby is beginning to use the NFL model for protocols and evaluation because it sees the legal precedent set by the NFL. No, my friend. Rugby players do not avoid head-to-head contact. Rugby's a very serious concussion problem, they are only starting to address. Doug King, a sports injury epidemiologist at the Auckland University of Technology in New Zealand, “…found that rugby players sustained an average 77 hits to the head per game, while American college football players only recorded 9 to 13 in earlier studies. While the gravitational weight, or G-force, of the direct impacts to the head roughly matched that seen in college football, the rotational acceleration when the head snaps back or sideways from body collisions was significantly higher among rugby players” [1, 3] Empirical evidence refutes your assertion that rugby players avoid head contact. Concussion injuries rates are similar, and would be exacerbated heavily if the rugby players had the additional benefit of American football body armor. Rebuttal: There is no helmet designed to effectively protect against CTE, and that is why it should be removed. A helmet is successful at preventing blunt-force trauma. However, what you're effectively saying that the head protection is fine doing only 50% of the job it should be. While it isn't originally designed to be, CTE wasn't known to the world at the time football helmets were implemented, and in reality, their purpose must change or they must be removed completely. I’m honestly surprised at this logic. A seatbelt doesn’t protect a driver from a side collision, therefore it should be removed. A motorcycle helmet doesn’t protect a rider from a concussion when he hits the ground, therefore it should be removed. A facemask doesn’t protect a player from an eye gouge, therefore it should be removed. Well if it’s not perfect, get rid of it, other risks be damned. Let’s look at exactly how much force we are dealing with. Sports Science used Ray Lewis to compare a football hit to an FBI battering ram. Ray Lewis generates over 1000 pounds of force against a door, leading with his shoulder. A very large FBI agent uses their standard battering ram and generates 800 pounds of force. Notice also, Lewis shattered the door from its frame. ; According to that logic, we should make the players vulnerable to forces exceeding a battering ram to the head because we cannot protect the inside of their brains from CTE. Bottom line: Either play with no protection, or protect everything. Rugby has a similar concussion problem to American football. Providing body protection while leaving the head exposed takes the worst of both worlds and combines them. [1]http://www.bloomberg.com... [2]http://ajs.sagepub.com... [3]http://ajs.sagepub.com...