Does the woodpecker-inspired #Qcollar protect the brain & prevent #concussion?
Take 3 minutes to read this fully referenced thread presenting evidence that a jugular compression collar is unlikely to keep athletes safe
Please SHARE, help inform others!
bit.ly/QCollar
Take 3 minutes to read this fully referenced thread presenting evidence that a jugular compression collar is unlikely to keep athletes safe
Please SHARE, help inform others!
bit.ly/QCollar
Thread/2a
The #Qcollar is based on the idea that jugular compression increases blood in the brain to create a "bubble wrap" effect, which prevents the it from bouncing around inside the skull.
According to the company, this mechanism is found in Nature.
bit.ly/2KqTJvS
The #Qcollar is based on the idea that jugular compression increases blood in the brain to create a "bubble wrap" effect, which prevents the it from bouncing around inside the skull.
According to the company, this mechanism is found in Nature.
bit.ly/2KqTJvS
Thread/2b
From the company's promotional video, the device is justified based on reducing brain "slosh" by:
1) Replicating the animal adaptations (see 18:00 in video)
3) Replicating effects of "higher altitude" exposure (see 21:57, again at 36:00)
bit.ly/33sHyGk
From the company's promotional video, the device is justified based on reducing brain "slosh" by:
1) Replicating the animal adaptations (see 18:00 in video)
3) Replicating effects of "higher altitude" exposure (see 21:57, again at 36:00)
bit.ly/33sHyGk
Thread/2c
My favorite quote from the video is at 36:16
"As we go to higher altitudes, there is less oxygen in the air, so there is more CO2 in the oxygen we are breathing, so the brain senses it needs more oxygen, it naturally pulls more blood, so we have cerebral edema..."
My favorite quote from the video is at 36:16
"As we go to higher altitudes, there is less oxygen in the air, so there is more CO2 in the oxygen we are breathing, so the brain senses it needs more oxygen, it naturally pulls more blood, so we have cerebral edema..."
Thread/2d
This thread provides evidence that the very basis they present for the #Qcollar is inherently flawed. Their claims sound scientific, but are not accurate.
Links to the peer-review publications critically evaluating these flaws in greater detail are also provided.
This thread provides evidence that the very basis they present for the #Qcollar is inherently flawed. Their claims sound scientific, but are not accurate.
Links to the peer-review publications critically evaluating these flaws in greater detail are also provided.
Thread/3a
A patent application for the #Qcollar was first filed in 2010 by Dr. David Smith, focused on reducing brain "slosh"
patents.google.com/patent/US20110…
Later applications focused specifically on reducing "concussive" forces.
One of many examples:
patents.google.com/patent/US20160…
A patent application for the #Qcollar was first filed in 2010 by Dr. David Smith, focused on reducing brain "slosh"
patents.google.com/patent/US20110…
Later applications focused specifically on reducing "concussive" forces.
One of many examples:
patents.google.com/patent/US20160…
Thread/3b
However, with one exception (a brain tumor report) brain "slosh" does not appear in the scientific literature until 2012, and all articles on the topic have patent-holder Smith as an author.
A financial conflict of interest in "slosh" theory?
bit.ly/2YJgTq8
However, with one exception (a brain tumor report) brain "slosh" does not appear in the scientific literature until 2012, and all articles on the topic have patent-holder Smith as an author.
A financial conflict of interest in "slosh" theory?
bit.ly/2YJgTq8
Thread/4a
In 2012, two studies were published claiming that jugular compression reduced the severity of brain injury in rats that received a single damaging head impact.
Patent holder Smith was a coauthor on each.
bit.ly/2MbNSwq
bit.ly/2KpKg81
In 2012, two studies were published claiming that jugular compression reduced the severity of brain injury in rats that received a single damaging head impact.
Patent holder Smith was a coauthor on each.
bit.ly/2MbNSwq
bit.ly/2KpKg81
Thread/4b
This experiment was done using established methods, in which a 450 gram (~1 pound) weight was dropped onto the head of a rat from a height of 2 meters. This produces a 900 G (900 times the force of gravity) impact.
bit.ly/2YNPDG4
This experiment was done using established methods, in which a 450 gram (~1 pound) weight was dropped onto the head of a rat from a height of 2 meters. This produces a 900 G (900 times the force of gravity) impact.
bit.ly/2YNPDG4
Thread/4c
The 900G LINEAR impact used in the rat studies is NOT similar to sports-related concussions:
1) Head collisions in football players are 100-150G, rarely exceed 200G.
2) Human #TBI also involve ROTATIONAL acceleration.
bit.ly/2OK9GBk
bit.ly/2KIwtIK
The 900G LINEAR impact used in the rat studies is NOT similar to sports-related concussions:
1) Head collisions in football players are 100-150G, rarely exceed 200G.
2) Human #TBI also involve ROTATIONAL acceleration.
bit.ly/2OK9GBk
bit.ly/2KIwtIK
Thread/5a
In 2013, Dr. Smith authored a study claiming exposure to "higher altitudes" reduced the risk of #concussion in high school athletes.
His financial conflict-of-interest is not declared, even though he mentions jugular compression in the paper.
bit.ly/2MMAcHP
In 2013, Dr. Smith authored a study claiming exposure to "higher altitudes" reduced the risk of #concussion in high school athletes.
His financial conflict-of-interest is not declared, even though he mentions jugular compression in the paper.
bit.ly/2MMAcHP
Thread/5b
The study classified "higher altitude" as anything greater than the median altitude of the schools examined - 600 feet above sea level.
It hypothesized this elevation would cause physiological responses which would cause a "tighter fit" inside the skull to reduce #TBI
The study classified "higher altitude" as anything greater than the median altitude of the schools examined - 600 feet above sea level.
It hypothesized this elevation would cause physiological responses which would cause a "tighter fit" inside the skull to reduce #TBI
Thread/5c
Conclusion says, "Future research is warranted to test the
hypothesis that mitigating Slosh in the human cranium via
mild jugular vein compression will prevent or diminish severity of concussion."
In other words, "higher altitude" was used to justify #Qcollar
Conclusion says, "Future research is warranted to test the
hypothesis that mitigating Slosh in the human cranium via
mild jugular vein compression will prevent or diminish severity of concussion."
In other words, "higher altitude" was used to justify #Qcollar
Thread/5d
Decades of altitude research show 600ft elevation is not high enough to cause physiological changes in the brain. Thus, the link between altitude and concussion is implausible.
@zavorsky published a letter to the editor discussing this
bit.ly/2yP1Ds5
Decades of altitude research show 600ft elevation is not high enough to cause physiological changes in the brain. Thus, the link between altitude and concussion is implausible.
@zavorsky published a letter to the editor discussing this
bit.ly/2yP1Ds5
Thread/6a
In 2014, a similar paper claimed @NFL games at >644ft altitude had a ~30% lower risk of concussion during the 2012 and 2013 regular seasons.
This time, Smith's conflict of interest was declared.
bit.ly/2TlSgKa
In 2014, a similar paper claimed @NFL games at >644ft altitude had a ~30% lower risk of concussion during the 2012 and 2013 regular seasons.
This time, Smith's conflict of interest was declared.
bit.ly/2TlSgKa
Thread/6b
The paper makes incorrect statements about altitude physiology.
One example: "Another example would be the actual oxygen concentration of 20.9% at sea level changing to just 20.1% at 1000 ft of altitude."
WRONG: The O2% in the air remains constant at high altitude!
The paper makes incorrect statements about altitude physiology.
One example: "Another example would be the actual oxygen concentration of 20.9% at sea level changing to just 20.1% at 1000 ft of altitude."
WRONG: The O2% in the air remains constant at high altitude!
Thread/6c
The paper then links the supposed protective physiology of "higher altitude" to bighorn sheep and woodpeckers protecting themselves, and even mentions "self-altered jugular outflow."
Once again, altitude-concussion link used to justify jugular compression #Qcollar.
The paper then links the supposed protective physiology of "higher altitude" to bighorn sheep and woodpeckers protecting themselves, and even mentions "self-altered jugular outflow."
Once again, altitude-concussion link used to justify jugular compression #Qcollar.
Thread/6d
Again, @zavorsky published a letter to the editor, explaining that their physiological explanations did not make scientific sense.
"The authors show a lack of understanding of altitude physiology, while promoting statistical illiteracy"
bit.ly/2Kob7Bd
Again, @zavorsky published a letter to the editor, explaining that their physiological explanations did not make scientific sense.
"The authors show a lack of understanding of altitude physiology, while promoting statistical illiteracy"
bit.ly/2Kob7Bd
Thread/7a
@zavorsky and I published a paper in @japplphysiol explaining in even greater detail why the low altitudes used in the previous studies and jugular compression could not possibly cause "tighter fit" and reduce #concussion risk.
FREE READ!
bit.ly/2YQdVLr
@zavorsky and I published a paper in @japplphysiol explaining in even greater detail why the low altitudes used in the previous studies and jugular compression could not possibly cause "tighter fit" and reduce #concussion risk.
FREE READ!
bit.ly/2YQdVLr
Thread/7b
We compare the ~644 feet elevation (Smith 2013 and Myer 2014) to other altitudes, at which physiological changes actually do occur.
"Tighter fit" only possible >7,000 feet at a minimum!
Too many details to put in a tweet - read full paper if interested (link in 7A)
We compare the ~644 feet elevation (Smith 2013 and Myer 2014) to other altitudes, at which physiological changes actually do occur.
"Tighter fit" only possible >7,000 feet at a minimum!
Too many details to put in a tweet - read full paper if interested (link in 7A)
Thread/7c
We originally submitted the physiology content as part of another paper, which was published in @JAMANeuro
Review below. If the average neurologist may struggle w/some of the physiology data, how is the average parent to know the #Qcollar marketing is #pseudoscience?
We originally submitted the physiology content as part of another paper, which was published in @JAMANeuro
Review below. If the average neurologist may struggle w/some of the physiology data, how is the average parent to know the #Qcollar marketing is #pseudoscience?
Thread/7d
So, we just published a meta-analysis of data comparing concussion risk at higher altitudes.
>5,000,000 data points was not enough to find a significant epidemiologic association between altitude and concussion!
bit.ly/2ZLKdIL
bit.ly/2OPl2El
So, we just published a meta-analysis of data comparing concussion risk at higher altitudes.
>5,000,000 data points was not enough to find a significant epidemiologic association between altitude and concussion!
bit.ly/2ZLKdIL
bit.ly/2OPl2El
Thread/8a
Not surprisingly, the link between "higher altitude" and #concussion risk is not actually repeatable.
@zavorsky and I analyzed data from 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015 @NFL seasons and published our findings in @EpidemiologyLWW
bit.ly/2TgW9zW
Not surprisingly, the link between "higher altitude" and #concussion risk is not actually repeatable.
@zavorsky and I analyzed data from 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015 @NFL seasons and published our findings in @EpidemiologyLWW
bit.ly/2TgW9zW
Thread/8b
Since "higher altitude" could not plausibly influence concussion, any association must be coincidental and observable with any arbitrary division.
For fun, we showed that @NFL teams w/ animal logos had a ~30% lower risk of concussion than teams w/ non-animal logos!
Since "higher altitude" could not plausibly influence concussion, any association must be coincidental and observable with any arbitrary division.
For fun, we showed that @NFL teams w/ animal logos had a ~30% lower risk of concussion than teams w/ non-animal logos!
Thread/8c
It is important to recognize that the supposed link between "higher altitude" and concussion risk was heavily used to justify the #qcollar - jugular compression was claimed to simulate this. They also cited it in some subsequent other papers.
But that is now debunked!
It is important to recognize that the supposed link between "higher altitude" and concussion risk was heavily used to justify the #qcollar - jugular compression was claimed to simulate this. They also cited it in some subsequent other papers.
But that is now debunked!
Thread/9a
#Qcollar inventor Smith claims to have studied woodpeckers and that they likely protect themselves by occluding their jugular veins using their omohyoid muscle, and his product replicates that effect.
But, there seems to be no scientific evidence for this claim!
#Qcollar inventor Smith claims to have studied woodpeckers and that they likely protect themselves by occluding their jugular veins using their omohyoid muscle, and his product replicates that effect.
But, there seems to be no scientific evidence for this claim!
Thread/9b
I read EVERY reference about woodpeckers I could find (including getting full-texts of 300 year old papers! bit.ly/2Ma64Xb)
I contacted ornithologists that studied woodpeckers at
@CornellBirds.
Nowhere was there any description of woodpeckers doing this!
I read EVERY reference about woodpeckers I could find (including getting full-texts of 300 year old papers! bit.ly/2Ma64Xb)
I contacted ornithologists that studied woodpeckers at
@CornellBirds.
Nowhere was there any description of woodpeckers doing this!
Thread/9c
I published a @BJSM_BMJ paper with an engineer who studies woodpecker biomimicry.
We explain how woodpeckers actually do protect their brains - multiple adaptations! Replicating any one mechanism alone could not protect human brains.
bit.ly/2YXphx7
I published a @BJSM_BMJ paper with an engineer who studies woodpecker biomimicry.
We explain how woodpeckers actually do protect their brains - multiple adaptations! Replicating any one mechanism alone could not protect human brains.
bit.ly/2YXphx7
Thread/9d
We also explain a woodpecker impact is nothing like a sports concussion.
Woodpeckers repeatedly hit objects with their beak and brace their bodies to dissipate force.
Football players get hit directly, unexpectedly, have longer duration impacts, and rotational force.
We also explain a woodpecker impact is nothing like a sports concussion.
Woodpeckers repeatedly hit objects with their beak and brace their bodies to dissipate force.
Football players get hit directly, unexpectedly, have longer duration impacts, and rotational force.
Thread/9e
The #qcollar is also based on the assumption that woodpeckers don't get brain injuries. However, a @PLOSONE paper called that into question. It isn't clear if they get "injured," but there is evidence of impact-induced changes in their brains.
bit.ly/2YQVDhf
The #qcollar is also based on the assumption that woodpeckers don't get brain injuries. However, a @PLOSONE paper called that into question. It isn't clear if they get "injured," but there is evidence of impact-induced changes in their brains.
bit.ly/2YQVDhf
Thread/9f
I put that into the context of the #Qcollar in a paper in @lancetneurology, and concluded "woodpecker biomimicry might be a distraction to more effective strategies for preventing #TBI and chronic traumatic encephalopathy in human beings."
bit.ly/2RWux2c
I put that into the context of the #Qcollar in a paper in @lancetneurology, and concluded "woodpecker biomimicry might be a distraction to more effective strategies for preventing #TBI and chronic traumatic encephalopathy in human beings."
bit.ly/2RWux2c
Thread/10a
In September 2017, it was announced that @NFL player, Luke Kuechly, would be wearing an woodpecker-inspired "experimental collar" that could help him to prevent concussions - the #Qcollar
bit.ly/2KwBjs8 @ForTheWin
In September 2017, it was announced that @NFL player, Luke Kuechly, would be wearing an woodpecker-inspired "experimental collar" that could help him to prevent concussions - the #Qcollar
bit.ly/2KwBjs8 @ForTheWin
Thread/10b
According to one coach, "He hopes Kuechly wearing the collar will convince others to give it a try and ultimately lead to the device being passed by the FDA for sale in the U.S."
es.pn/2MQiGCh @espn
According to one coach, "He hopes Kuechly wearing the collar will convince others to give it a try and ultimately lead to the device being passed by the FDA for sale in the U.S."
es.pn/2MQiGCh @espn
Thread/10c
As the first #NFL player to wear the #Qcollar, Kuechly suffered a #concussion within the first few weeks using it.
Video shows this was not a direct head impact - if jugular compression reduced "slosh" it should have been effective here.
bit.ly/2KocEHv
As the first #NFL player to wear the #Qcollar, Kuechly suffered a #concussion within the first few weeks using it.
Video shows this was not a direct head impact - if jugular compression reduced "slosh" it should have been effective here.
bit.ly/2KocEHv
Thread/10d
He was clearly wearing the #Q_collar when it happened - it simply didn't work as originally claimed (as @zavorsky and I cautioned years earlier).
It seemed clear that he had did get a concussion on October 12:
bit.ly/31tOHnL
He was clearly wearing the #Q_collar when it happened - it simply didn't work as originally claimed (as @zavorsky and I cautioned years earlier).
It seemed clear that he had did get a concussion on October 12:
bit.ly/31tOHnL
Thread/10e
3 days later (Oct 15) claims that he didn't get a concussion and was "perfectly fine." Was this to pretend #Qcollar didn't fail?
wapo.st/2yQJ0Ec
Yet, he didn't resume practice until Oct 23 and wasn't announced as clear until Oct 27.
bit.ly/2TlfHmU
3 days later (Oct 15) claims that he didn't get a concussion and was "perfectly fine." Was this to pretend #Qcollar didn't fail?
wapo.st/2yQJ0Ec
Yet, he didn't resume practice until Oct 23 and wasn't announced as clear until Oct 27.
bit.ly/2TlfHmU
Thread/11a
A number of papers claim the collar works b/c it preserves white matter integrity in the brain, based on a special MRI technique known as DTI.
However, DTI "currently lacks the specificity necessary for meaningful clinical application."
bit.ly/2TjbyzH
A number of papers claim the collar works b/c it preserves white matter integrity in the brain, based on a special MRI technique known as DTI.
However, DTI "currently lacks the specificity necessary for meaningful clinical application."
bit.ly/2TjbyzH
Thread/11b
The #QCollar studies suggest changes in DTI values could indicate damage.
In one jugular compression study, avg medial diffusivity (MD) in non-collar control group INCREASED.
bit.ly/2yS6EAl
In another, avg MD in control DECREASED.
bit.ly/2YTdAvM
The #QCollar studies suggest changes in DTI values could indicate damage.
In one jugular compression study, avg medial diffusivity (MD) in non-collar control group INCREASED.
bit.ly/2yS6EAl
In another, avg MD in control DECREASED.
bit.ly/2YTdAvM
Thread/11c
They suggest stable DTI parameters, such as axial diffusivity (AD) as evidence that jugular compression may protect the brain. However, that is the group AVERAGE.
Of the 21 athletes using #QCollar, 11 decreased AD, 8 increased AD, only 2 showed no AD change!
They suggest stable DTI parameters, such as axial diffusivity (AD) as evidence that jugular compression may protect the brain. However, that is the group AVERAGE.
Of the 21 athletes using #QCollar, 11 decreased AD, 8 increased AD, only 2 showed no AD change!
Thread/11d
These studies involved adolescent athletes. DTI values are meant to change with growth during this time.
bit.ly/2YQLtsU
So, the #Qcollar keeping DTI parameters stable could also be interpreted as ABNORMAL brain development!
These studies involved adolescent athletes. DTI values are meant to change with growth during this time.
bit.ly/2YQLtsU
So, the #Qcollar keeping DTI parameters stable could also be interpreted as ABNORMAL brain development!
Thread/11e
Even if DTI parameters go up/down with or without collar, magnitude of change must be considered for clinical interpretation.
bit.ly/31rvpQ7
It is not clear that the #Qcollar elicits a sufficiently large change in DTI to suggest "brain protection."
Even if DTI parameters go up/down with or without collar, magnitude of change must be considered for clinical interpretation.
bit.ly/31rvpQ7
It is not clear that the #Qcollar elicits a sufficiently large change in DTI to suggest "brain protection."
Thread/11f
Though the papers attempt to use DTI to demonstrate #Q_collar protects the brain, this data is very nuanced and open to interpretation.
Given the misrepresentation of altitude physiology and woodpeckers used to justify jugular compression, I don't trust the MRI data.
Though the papers attempt to use DTI to demonstrate #Q_collar protects the brain, this data is very nuanced and open to interpretation.
Given the misrepresentation of altitude physiology and woodpeckers used to justify jugular compression, I don't trust the MRI data.
Thread/12a
It must be remembered that the two studies from Smith's group indicated "higher altitude" was associated with a reduced risk of #concussion (i.e. injury from a single large impact).
Authors suggested mimicking the effects of altitude could reduce CONCUSSION risk.
It must be remembered that the two studies from Smith's group indicated "higher altitude" was associated with a reduced risk of #concussion (i.e. injury from a single large impact).
Authors suggested mimicking the effects of altitude could reduce CONCUSSION risk.
Thread/12b
Indeed, in 2014 the group began conducting clinical trials (on children!) using the #QCollar.
The primary outcome measure was "concussion incidence."
clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02…
Indeed, in 2014 the group began conducting clinical trials (on children!) using the #QCollar.
The primary outcome measure was "concussion incidence."
clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02…
Thread/12c
In 2015, a clinical trial was registered listing the #Qcollar as an "Innovative Concussion Prevention Device."
By definition, this should prevent concussions (i.e., a single impact to the brain).
clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02…
In 2015, a clinical trial was registered listing the #Qcollar as an "Innovative Concussion Prevention Device."
By definition, this should prevent concussions (i.e., a single impact to the brain).
clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02…
Thread/12d
In 2017, another clinical trial emerged, entitled "Concussion Prevention in Soccer" and examined athletes ages 14-19 wearing the #Qcollar.
clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03…
In 2017, another clinical trial emerged, entitled "Concussion Prevention in Soccer" and examined athletes ages 14-19 wearing the #Qcollar.
clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03…
Thread/12e
Clearly, it appears that this device was rooted in preventing #concussions from happening, and this was actually being tested in clinical trials.
So, why has company changed its message to one of protecting from "repeated impacts" (in skiers and race-car drivers?)
Clearly, it appears that this device was rooted in preventing #concussions from happening, and this was actually being tested in clinical trials.
So, why has company changed its message to one of protecting from "repeated impacts" (in skiers and race-car drivers?)
Thread/12f
It is relatively easy to determine whether a device can prevent single concussive incidents - as the clinical trials show the #Qcollar originally intended to do.
My guess is that it didn't work for this purpose, and thus, the switch to "brain protection."
It is relatively easy to determine whether a device can prevent single concussive incidents - as the clinical trials show the #Qcollar originally intended to do.
My guess is that it didn't work for this purpose, and thus, the switch to "brain protection."
Thread/13a
Of course, I am not the only skeptic of the #Qcollar.
Accroding to @braindoc172, “In truth, it is my opinion that the way the product is being promoted is potentially misleading.”
bit.ly/2OLuPLn
Of course, I am not the only skeptic of the #Qcollar.
Accroding to @braindoc172, “In truth, it is my opinion that the way the product is being promoted is potentially misleading.”
bit.ly/2OLuPLn
Thread/13b
@McGillOSS independently evaluated this when it was marketed as Neuroshield, and had similar concerns over the scientific validity.
"NeuroShield has a questionable mechanism of action and too little evidence behind it."
bit.ly/2Kqb0VJ
@McGillOSS independently evaluated this when it was marketed as Neuroshield, and had similar concerns over the scientific validity.
"NeuroShield has a questionable mechanism of action and too little evidence behind it."
bit.ly/2Kqb0VJ
Thread/13c
@AndyFarke was the voice of much skepticism regardings Smith's theory about bighorn sheep and woodpeckers in a @NautilusMag article.
@AndyFarke was the voice of much skepticism regardings Smith's theory about bighorn sheep and woodpeckers in a @NautilusMag article.
@AndyFarke @NautilusMag Thread/13d
Dr. Smith has been quoted as welcoming scrutiny, as in his quote below from @NautilusMag
bit.ly/2YK8GC5
Despite our concerns, and those of others, the #Qcollar continues to move forward.
Dr. Smith has been quoted as welcoming scrutiny, as in his quote below from @NautilusMag
bit.ly/2YK8GC5
Despite our concerns, and those of others, the #Qcollar continues to move forward.
Thread/3c
Despite this, slosh theory was promoted as well-established in a 2014 @nytimes piece by an affiliated researcher who led the #Qcollar studies.
"For athletes in contact sports, brain slosh has long been seen as inherent and unavoidable."
nyti.ms/2ztWHt9
Despite this, slosh theory was promoted as well-established in a 2014 @nytimes piece by an affiliated researcher who led the #Qcollar studies.
"For athletes in contact sports, brain slosh has long been seen as inherent and unavoidable."
nyti.ms/2ztWHt9
@zavorsky Thread/5e
This 2013 altitude study is presented in @nytimes by the lead #Qcollar researcher as evidence "slosh mitigation" may create "tighter fit" (Bubble Wrap) to protect from distinct concussive events (no mention of repeated subconcussive impacts).
nyti.ms/2ztWHt9
This 2013 altitude study is presented in @nytimes by the lead #Qcollar researcher as evidence "slosh mitigation" may create "tighter fit" (Bubble Wrap) to protect from distinct concussive events (no mention of repeated subconcussive impacts).
nyti.ms/2ztWHt9
@lancetneurology Thread/9g
Woodpecker #pseudoscience claims in @nytimes op ed piece by #Qcollar researcher.
"We have observed that the woodpecker uses muscles to do this..." This is MISLEADING, since it sounds like they actually have evidence of this, yet none exists!
nyti.ms/2ztWHt9
Woodpecker #pseudoscience claims in @nytimes op ed piece by #Qcollar researcher.
"We have observed that the woodpecker uses muscles to do this..." This is MISLEADING, since it sounds like they actually have evidence of this, yet none exists!
nyti.ms/2ztWHt9
Thread/12f
2014 @nytimes piece #Qcollar researcher states slosh mitigation is targeted at distinct concussive events
"But to make progress against concussions, we have to give priority in future research to minimizing brain slosh during game play."
nyti.ms/2ztWHt9
2014 @nytimes piece #Qcollar researcher states slosh mitigation is targeted at distinct concussive events
"But to make progress against concussions, we have to give priority in future research to minimizing brain slosh during game play."
nyti.ms/2ztWHt9
Thread/12g
The @nytimes op ed author (lead #Qcollar researcher) clearly promotes recreating the supposed protective mechanisms of altitude and woodpeckers to defeat #CONCUSSIONS (distinct events from a single impact).
If true, why shift to repeated subconcussive impacts?
The @nytimes op ed author (lead #Qcollar researcher) clearly promotes recreating the supposed protective mechanisms of altitude and woodpeckers to defeat #CONCUSSIONS (distinct events from a single impact).
If true, why shift to repeated subconcussive impacts?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
