There Be Monsters

March 31, 2014 by 1 Comment

“In like a lion, out like a lamb,” that’s what they say about March.

To the extent that expression applies to the weather this month and to this blog, I think 2014 may be the exception that proves the rule!  We may be going out like a lion in both areas.

The east coast of North America is ready for spring, but this month that opened up with winter is ending the same way.  If there was an outdoor lacrosse game in Buffalo, New York this weekend, the players were dealing with snow!

Mike_Fisher_throws_check_May_29_2006

More like a lion than a lamb: an NHL body check.

As for this blog, we opened the month with a post that had both sound and teeth, like the proverbial carnivore itself:  our first podcast was a discussion with Drs. Neil Craton and Oliver Leslie, the authors of the March 2014 CJSM lead editorial, Time to Re-Think the Zurich Guidelines: a Critique on the Consensus Statement on Concussion in Sport.  I continue to hear about this editorial, on social media, on the American Medical Society for Sports Medicine email ListServ, and most recently at a symposium on concussions held at Ohio State University (OSU).  It has stirred a tremendous amount of interest.  And so I thought it would be fitting to end the month where we started, with the subject of concussion in sport.

The featured speaker of the OSU symposium was Kevin Guskiewicz, who spoke about “Sports concussions: paranoia or legitimate concern?”  Both he and Dr. Jim Borchers, the Ohio State Team Physician, mentioned the editorial critique in their respective talks.

If you follow the literature on sport-related concussions, you most certainly will come across Dr. Guskiewicz’s name.  He has contributed mightily to the research on several dimensions of this injury.  And so it was a pleasure to hear him speak for an hour on the subject.

As the title of his talk would indicate, Dr. Guskiewicz took as his theme the fear surrounding sport-related concussion.  Dr. Guskiewicz did an admirable job underscoring the importance of both the injury (concussion) and the need to avoid throwing out the baby with the bathwater:  eliminating collision sports such as American football out of possibly misplaced concern over short- and long-term deleterious effects on the brain.  The high points of his talk focused on the various aspects of sport amenable to change which can minimize injury risk and maximize participation.

I especially enjoyed his approach because, in many respects, it is the work that he and a few others have done (amplified by the media) that has helped unleash the beast of “concussion fear.” Read more of this post

Filed under Concussion in Sport, Evidence-based Medicine in SEM, Injury Prevention, Public Health in Sports and Exercise Medicine, Safeguarding in Sport, Youth Sport

Avery Faigenbaum y Cinco Preguntas con Revista Clinica de Medicina Deportiva

December 10, 2013 by 2 Comments

You read that right.

Like the NBA teams that don a Spanish jersey for an evening, at CJSM we are getting our Spanish on.

Faigenbaum_diRoda (1)

Drs. Avery Faigenbaum and
Provincial Senator Cristina diRado
in Mar del Plata, Argentina

Our good friend and contributor to these blog pages and to the journal, Dr. Avery Faigenbaum, has agreed to sit with us for “5 Questions with CJSM.” We have been trying to catch up with him since his trip to Argentina this summer where he was lecturing on Exercise Deficit Disorder (EDD) and working on his own Spanish skills.  I’m know he’s a lot better in that area than I am.

Dr. Faigenbaum is a professor in the Dept. of Health and Exercise Science at The College of New Jersey.  He has written about EDD in youth (“Thinking Outside the Sandbox”) and about the benefits and safety of resistance training in youth.  He has lectured widely:  I’ve heard him speak in various settings in the United States, and he’s set to speak to the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2014 on EDD. Catch him if you can, you’re sure to learn a lot and be entertained as well: his energy is infectious.

And here’s just a taste of what you’re in for if you do get to see him:

________________________

Avery Faigenbaum: Five Questions with CJSM

1) CJSM: With the recent award of the 2020 Olympic games to Tokyo, can you comment on any evidence out there that such events stimulate activity in young fans/viewers?  Is there a ‘trickle down’ effect for youth athletics/exercise from events like the Olympics?

AF: Last summer James Bond and the “Queen” opened the Olympic Games in London by jumping out of a helicopter. This was followed shortly thereafter by stellar performances from world class athletes including sprinter Usain Bolt, swimmer Michael Phelps, boxer Nicola Adams, and 23 year old Rosannagh MacLennan who started jumping on the trampoline at the age of seven. But in stark contrast to these remarkable feats of athleticism, physical inactivity among the world’s population is now recognized as a pandemic. Read more of this post

Filed under Epidemiology, Exercise Medicine, General Interest, Public Health in Sports and Exercise Medicine Tagged with , , , , ,

Once More Unto the Breach

November 28, 2013 by 6 Comments

henry v

Shakespeare and sports medicine:
A perfect mix

I’ll bookend this post with two heavyweights of Western Civilization: Shakespeare and Paul of Tarsus (a.k.a. St. Paul).   This must be an important issue!

Once more unto the breach dear friends!  Like Shakespeare’s Harry, I’ll head into the fray and pick up the thread of a conversation that dominated this blog a week ago, when we were discussing a position statement on Mandatory Bicycle Helmet Legislation (MHL).  Take a chance to look back at the entire blog, there have been several posts and over a hundred comments on the issue.

You’ll find two different polls in that series of posts.  I tallied up the votes on November 20 (the ‘polls are still open,’ and so the numbers will keep adding up) and wanted to share them with you.

On the question of whether there should be mandatory bicycle helmet legislation, the respondents voted so: 245 no, 31 yes, 2 undecided.

The next poll asked the question:  if you are opposed to MHL, what single issue most informs your opinion.  The choices (and votes for) are:

73 voters thought that MHL put the focus on the wrong group for an intervention; bike safety begins with road and car driver safety.

48 thought that MHL sent an inappropriate message:  that MHL indicated biking is risky behavior, when it is inherently safe.

29 were concerned that MHL negatively affected bicycle ridership (decreased rates of biking).

9 thought that MHL was an unjustified restriction of their civil liberties.

And 9 thought that MHL weren’t helpful in reducing what they are purported to do:  reduce bicyle-related head trauma.

I put these vote results, from a decidedly non-scientific poll, in graphical form below.  The vast majority of poll respondents oppose MHL, and a plurality are concerned that the focus on bike safety needs to be placed not on personal protective equipment for bicyclists, but on making roads safer and car drivers’ more cognizant of their responsibility to share the road.

MHL reformattedreason for opposition

Read more of this post

Filed under Epidemiology, Injury Prevention, Polls, Public Health in Sports and Exercise Medicine

The November CJSM: A Discussion on the Mandatory Use of Bicycle Helmets

November 12, 2013 by 20 Comments

The November issue of CJSM has been out for a week, and I hope you’ve had a chance to look at our latest offering.  It is also our last offering for 2013 (CJSM is a bimonthly, publishing 6 times a year).  The next time the journal will hit your mailboxes and inboxes will be January 2014.

FIMS 2014

Quebec City, site of the XXXIII FIMS
World Congress of Sports Medicine
CJSM will be there: will you?

2014 promises to be a big year in sports and sports medicine.  The Winter Olympics take place in Sochi, Russia; the FIFA World Cup is in Brazil; and the Commonwealth Games are in Glasgow, Scotland.   On the sports medicine front, the Canadian Academy of Sports and Exercise Medicine (CASEM) hosts the FIMS 2014 World Congress of Sports Medicine in Quebec City, and earlier in the spring the AMSSM annual meeting takes place in the Big Easy.  And this brief listing, of course, merely scratches the surface of what is to come.

But before I get ahead of myself, best to hold on to the mantra, “Be Here Now,” and share with you a little of what’s in store when you delve into this month’s CJSM.

Headlining the November issue is CASEM’s position statement on the mandatory use of bicycle helmets.  This document is a revision of a previous statement made in 2002, and incorporates the medical evidence in support of such use that has accumulated over the last 10+ years.  There is an associated lead editorial by Murray Maitland, PhD that is definitely worth a read as well.

I was particularly interested in the CASEM offering at least in part because I am a regular bicycle commuter here in Columbus, Ohio who recently had his interest in such matters piqued after reading a provocative article in the NY Times:  “Is it OK to Kill Cyclists?”

That’s a rhetorical question mind you!

First having ensured the life insurance policy had been paid up, I then read through the CASEM statement, which packs a lot in two pages.  The statement surveys the field of what is known about the use of bicycle helmets and injury prevention, and then makes recommendations.  Some of the salient points I walked away with: 1) wearing a properly fitted helmet decreases head injuries by 63% to 88% in all ages of bicyclists; 2) introduction of legislation (i.e. not merely relying on education campaigns) is associated with a decreased injury rate and has not been shown to decrease ridership (importantly, as we seek to increase physical activity in our sedentary population); 3) youth populations are more likely to wear helmets where there is legislation that applies to riders of all ages as opposed to only 18 years and younger; 4) youth are more likely to wear helmets when cycling with an adult wearing a helmet (95%) than when cycling with an adult not wearing a helmet (41%).

The CASEM statement draws several conclusions from these data, but most importantly recommends “That all Provincial and Territorial governments should enact comprehensive legislation mandating that bicyclists of all ages wear helmets.”

I would concur with those recommendations, and I would love to hear your thoughts after reading the CASEM statement, either here in the comments section or on twitter @cjsmonline.  The CJSM executive editor, Chris Hughes, has written about this subject in a 2011 blog post, and notes that the associated poll of the readership taken at that time got more traffic than any other.  I’m hoping this month’s articles on the subject, and this blog post, encourages that same sort of commentary.

923380_10151585476514581_1263666389_n

My trusty steed has been known to fail me;
I’m happy to have a helmet on when riding it

My position on the matter (pro) is uncomplicated.  I think the data are clear and in favor of mandatory use of bicycle helmets:  mandatory legislation reduces serious injury; it encourages the most vulnerable (children) in the use of an injury prevention device; and it has not been shown to decrease ridership. Read more of this post

Filed under Epidemiology, General Interest, Injury Prevention, Public Health in Sports and Exercise Medicine, Safeguarding in Sport Tagged with , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →