4 ms·

interesting, I just thought they were cumulative. I didn't realize there is an increased risk if they are closer together.

• Traubenfuchs 3y ago
  > closer together Not necessarily: The increased and stacking vulnerability to brain damage after concussions might not go away ever. I don't think this has been researched.
  • chimeracoder 3y ago
    > Not necessarily: The increased and stacking vulnerability to brain damage after concussions might not go away ever. I don't think this has been researched. There are some permanent cumulative effects of concussions, though it's pretty well-accepted that repeated concussions in close succession (without sufficient time for recovery) is worse than concussions that are spaced out. Second impacts are much more likely to have serious consequences, including death, than initial impacts of similar magnitude[0]. You'll never get "definitive proof" of this because a double-blind study would be extremely unethical (let alone impractical), but there's enough understanding of the underlying science to make this conclusion relatively safely. In short: repeated head injury is bad regardless of how much time is allocated to recovery in between and has some permanent cumulative effects, but repeated head injury in short succession (for some definition of "short") is markedly worse. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-impact_syndrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-impact_syndrome
• aidenn0 3y ago
  Regardless of whether or not they are increased in risk when closer together, the concussion protocols the NFL has in place now treats them as if they are, and the medical community has long (as in many decades) suspected they are, a fact which the NFL feigned ignorance about.