Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A kid playing organized pee wee football is unlikely to get a serious injury. The odds are almost zero in getting killed unlike riding a bike.
We are talking kids, not what adults freely choose to do. Kids are simply not able to hit each other that hard.
Riddle me this @pknopp. . .
WTF would I enroll kids in a pee-wee sport that I would not want them to gain interest in and participate in during middle, high-school, and college
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
Football is the only reason thousands every year even have college grades.
And insurance scams is why so many Russian drivers have mounted cameras?
Just another irrelevant point. I'm sure more people earned money for their degrees shooting at Iraqis and Afghanistian residents. Who cares? If My kid has to bank on a college scholarship via american football to gain entrance to a university. . .than I f'd up
My child is two and we play baseball, basketball, soccer, and toss the football around. I probably won't put him in youth football leagues, but other sports he will probably play.
--70% of all bicycle fatalities could of been prevented via a helmet
-- The link is Portland Bike Area commuters, and isn't relevant to kids/teens. A study of people who, with traffic every morning, ride a bike to and from work where they are crossing the most dangerous and most likely intersections for events with motor vehicles is different than kids usage
(now the above statistics don't take into account small injuries. . .i.e. you stub your toe, you don't go to the hospital/police/doctor).
The fact is that an accident is not a normal event of a bike rider, and a head impact does not happen frequently. It only happens very rarely. You wear a helmet, and you teach specific skills in navigating traffic (and encourage bike trails vs roads) and your chance of injury goes down a LOT. Bikes get you hurt when you get hit or hit a car.
American Football encourages head impacts (small/large) in every game, and thus is a higher lifetime risk based on what I know of neurology/brain. . .thats why I consider biking acceptable and football not.
So what - double the number of kids riding bikes injure themselves seriously enough to go to the ER.
Now - in the past I would have said, "But there are so many more kids riding bikes!" However, most kids I know who aren't involved in extracurricular activities aren't outside playing anymore - they're inside turning into little lard buckets sitting around watching TV and playing video games.
That's another ridiculous stereotype. By your own stat:
Types of sports and recreational activities:
Consider the following statistics:
Bicycling - In 2000, more than 373,000 children and adolescents ages 5 to 14 were treated in hospital emergency rooms for bicycle-related injuries. In addition, 173 children and adolescents ages 14 and under died in bicycle-related crashes in 1999.
Football - In 2000, more than 186,000 children and adolescents ages 5 to 14 were treated in hospital emergency rooms for football-related injuries. .
Now obviously, if there are more bicycling injuries with a lower PERCENTAGE of injuries, more kids are riding bikes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KathrynAragon
Really though, this is comparing apples to oranges. Adult bicyclists to children under 18 playing football?
It was the only stat that I could find that gave a percentage. No, it's not perfect, and I expected to hear something like the above from someone. However, you could take it a couple different ways:
1) Adults are more skilled on their bikes, therefore, one could presume more injuries in kids
OR
2) This is a survey of adults riding in traffic, which most kids don't, so perhaps the kid rate is lower.
Point is, I'm the one who searched through Google for a stat of any kind on this issue. Find a better one.
Even so, 22 percent injured vs 28 percent injured. Interesting...
That's another ridiculous stereotype. By your own stat:
Now obviously, if there are more bicycling injuries with a lower PERCENTAGE of injuries, more kids are riding bikes.
You don't have the critical piece of information - which is "How many kids are riding bikes vs how many kids are playing football."
Look, I don't doubt that football causes injuries. I'm not claiming that it's a completely safe sport. But neither is bicycling, and parents don't hesitate to buy a kid a bike (not that they should).
There are some risks worth taking. We choose our risks every day. We teach our children to weigh risk vs gain. The vast majority of kids playing football are never going to be seriously injured.
My husband played football in high school and college. He absolutely LOVED playing, in spite of his mother's worries. His son played football and loved it. They are both football fanatics. Though his son graduated several years ago, we still love going to those high school football games. They are such a positive experience for all involved - such clean, family fun. It's a terrific "communal" experience and builds such camaraderie.
As a family, we all really, really enjoy football in just about any form, from throwing the ball around in the backyard, to going to a professional game. It's greatly enriched our lives and the lives of our kids.
I totally respect any parent's rights to discourage their kids from playing contact sports. But it's not WRONG to encourage a kid's interest in those sports either.
I think people need to stay out of other families' business, generally speaking. (Of course I am not talking about not intervening if a child is actually being abused or neglected.)
You don't have the critical piece of information - which is "How many kids are riding bikes vs how many kids are playing football."
Look, I don't doubt that football causes injuries. I'm not claiming that it's a completely safe sport. But neither is bicycling, and parents don't hesitate to buy a kid a bike (not that they should).
There are some risks worth taking. We choose our risks every day. We teach our children to weigh risk vs gain. The vast majority of kids playing football are never going to be seriously injured.
My husband played football in high school and college. He absolutely LOVED playing, in spite of his mother's worries. His son played football and loved it. They are both football fanatics. Though his son graduated several years ago, we still love going to those high school football games. They are such a positive experience for all involved - such clean, family fun. It's a terrific "communal" experience and builds such camaraderie.
As a family, we all really, really enjoy football in just about any form, from throwing the ball around in the backyard, to going to a professional game. It's greatly enriched our lives and the lives of our kids.
I totally respect any parent's rights to discourage their kids from playing contact sports. But it's not WRONG to encourage a kid's interest in those sports either.
I think people need to stay out of other families' business, generally speaking. (Of course I am not talking about not intervening if a child is actually being abused or neglected.)
The thing is we know a lot more about concussions, CTE, and the long-term effects of sub-concussive hits now. There is a huge difference between allowing a child to play football 15 years ago and today. I suggest you take a look at this thread, there is a lot of useful data there.
The thing is we know a lot more about concussions, CTE, and the long-term effects of sub-concussive hits now. There is a huge difference between allowing a child to play football 15 years ago and today. I suggest you take a look at this thread, there is a lot of useful data there.
That is a good suggestion. Instead of trying to knock down what other people have said, take some time to educate yourself.
That is a good suggestion. Instead of trying to knock down what other people have said, take some time to educate yourself.
I know the risks associated with contact sports. My husband and I made an educated decision to allow his son to play contact sports.
This is a discussion board. And on this discussion board, this segment is called "Politics and Other Controversies." That means that we are going to discuss, debate and often disagree as we tackle today's issues and controversies.
So - I'll continue to put my two cents' worth into this discussion and you're free to do the same. If we disagree, so what?
My family considers the risk of contact sports worth the gain. Maybe yours doesn't. That's fine. I've qualified why it's worth it to our family. I don't consider it child abuse or endangerment to allow a teenager to take some risks.
It's very dangerous for teens to drive as well. Should we refuse to let our teens or our children ride in vehicles? After all, over 4000 children a year are killed in vehicle accidents.
There's an excellent thread on kids and football in the Parenting forum if you would like to read an intelligent discussion on the topic. If not, then carry on with the rant.
^. Why this is considered political, makes no sense.
Unless OP just wants to raise his post count on politics.
This is a parenting forum topic.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
