Tobias-Reiper

Edit to make it a single post rather than a reply.

If you really think about it, there may be some meat to the ex-players arguments. I will explain why, using concussions as example, which seems to be the hot button issue in these lawsuits:

There is no doubt that football is a violent sport. If you look at the warning sticker on the helmets the players wear, it says:

WARNING: NO HELMET CAN PREVENT SERIOUS HEAD OR NECK INJURIES A PLAYER MAY RECEIVE WHILE PARTICIPATING IN FOOTBALL. Do not use this helmet to butt, ram or spear an opposing player. This is in violation of the football rules and such use can result in severe head or neck injuries, paralysis or death to you and possible injury to your opponent. Contact in football may result in CONCUSSION-BRAIN INJURY which no helmet can prevent. Symptoms include: loss of consciousness or memory, dizziness, headache, nausea or confusion. If you have symptoms, immediately stop playing and report them to your coach, trainer and parents. Do not return to a game or practice until all symptoms are gone and you have received medical clearance. Ignoring this warning may lead to another and more serious or fatal brain injury.

This label tells you what could happen to your brain and neck while playing the game. However, it tells you nothing of the effects that concussions can have on a player many years after they stopped playing the game.

Now, as a reasonable person, I'd think that playing such a violent sport for a long period of time is going to have an effect on my body later on in life. HOWEVER, I am not a doctor.

If I want to know what effects concussions could have later in life and the dangers of cumulative concussions, or at least be better educated on the subject, I'd go to the doctor and ask him/her.

If I go to the doctor and ask him/her specifically about concussions and effects later on in life well after my football playing days are over, and the doctor specifically tells me "no known issues later on in life, no known issues on incurring cumulative concussions later on in life" when the doctor knows based on scientific research there is indeed a possibility of severe or even mild issues later on in life, then any reasonable person will agree that doctor was negligent, and therefore, liable.

I don't have all the facts in front of me, obviously, but for what I gather, that is what the ex-players are arguing in regards to concussions they were told by NFL doctors regarding concussions.

You can draw a parallel with the tobacco industry. It wasn't that the product was harmful and no one knew about it, it was that the tobacco industry knew their product was harmful but told no one.

'Cause the simple man pays the thrills, the bills and the pills that kill