Close
today i learned (til)

Concussions can affect youth

January 10, 2020

From a young age, many children take up sports like football, boxing, and soccer. Playing such sports can potentially have a huge negative effect if a child or teenager experiences a concussion while playing their game. Depending on the person, the damage could have a lasting effect.

According to the Mayo Clinic, a concussion is a traumatic brain injury that affects your brain with certain effects being headaches, memory problems and balance problems (Mayo Clinic, 2019). A concussion itself could have a lasting impression on many different children and teenagers. Certain effects of a concussion that could be long term are light sensitivity, photophobia, vertigo, depression, and many more symptoms (“Long Term Effects”, 2018). Although these symptoms are pretty short term, you could potentially have long term effects when you are older, but it can have a significant impact when an individual is still young and their brain is still developing. In a study in Sweden between 1973 and 1985 that observed individuals who had head injuries of people under 25. In these studies, the researchers observed that these people were more likely to have mental health care and not able to graduate or attend college than a person who did not have this injury. Not only that, the individual also had a greater chance of dying prematurely (Reynolds, 2016). Therefore, it is important to know the potential risks of allowing ones’ children in playing such sports.

With the continuous increase of popularity of sports with young children and teenagers, the likelihood of having a concussion has increased. Approximately 1.6 – 3.8 million sports/recreation-related concussions occur each year within the United States (“What is a concussion”, 2019). With the amount of concussions that occur, there are a large number that occur within individuals who are younger than 20. The Blue Cross Blue Shield reported that there was a 71% increase in the number of concussions for individuals under the age of 20 from the years 2010 to 2015 (“The steep rise”). With the practice of such sports, these are slowly leading to concussions. In the United States, the competitive sports with the most reported concussions is football and it accounts for more than 60% of concussions (“What is a concussion”, 2019). Football is one of the major sports that causes the concussion in males as well and it is one of the major sports that causes concussions from 5 – 18 years. Football itself has caused the most concussion in high school sports and the incident rates of having a concussion was .60 per 1000. In female sports, the most amount of concussions occur in soccer (“Which Youth Sports”). With these specific sports causing concussions in the youth, it is our duty to educate and provide safer measures to help younger people to essentially play the sport in safe manner without any injuries or concussions occurring due to lack of precaution.

In order to prevent concussions, we as a community need to help those younger understand the risks at hand and allow them to understand the problems with doing such. Essentially have protective headgear when playing a sport that may have cause someone to hit their head is a big thing. Specifically, in soccer, it would be a wise thing to do play with a head gear could prevent some injuries according to specific ratings released by the Virginia Tech Helmet Lab (Staff, 2018). Having such protective measures will allow the youth to develop and prevent them from having certain effects as they grow older.

 

 

Clinic, M. (2019, March 16). Concussion. Retrieved from https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/concussion/symptoms-causes/syc-20355594

Reynolds, G. (2016, October 5). A Single Concussion May Have Lasting Impact. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/05/well/move/a-single-concussion-may-have-lasting-impact.html.

Long Term Effects of Post Concussion Syndrome. (0AD). Retrieved from https://www.theraspecs.com/blog/long-term-effects-post-concussion-syndrome/

staff, S. X. (2018, May 2). Could soccer headgear reduce concussion risk? First-ever ratings say yes. Retrieved from https://medicalxpress.com/news/2018-05-soccer-headgear-concussion-first-ever.html.

The steep rise in concussion diagnoses in the U.S. (0AD). Retrieved from https://www.bcbs.com/the-health-of-america/reports/the-steep-rise-concussion-diagnoses-the-us.

What is a Concussion? (2019). Retrieved from http://www.protectthebrain.org/Brain-Injury-Research/What-is-a-Concussion-.aspx

Which Youth Sports Cause the Most Concussions? (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.medstarsportsmedicine.org/research/which-youth-sports-cause-the-most-concussions/.

0Likes
Hamza Hamid
About Author

Hamza is a third year Computer Science major with threads in media and people. Hamza is involved with the Muslims Student Association at Georgia Tech. His passions include photography and videography.

You May Also Like

today i learned (til)
The Psychology of Fear and Why We Seek it Out
today i learned (til)
What a cat-astrophia! Diving into the GT Cat Community – Pro or Against Cats?
today i learned (til)
Too Hot to Handle
Field Notes, today i learned (til)
Navigating Transition in Higher Education – An Analysis of Transfer Students at Tech

Your journey starts here! Let’s talk!

ThemeRex © 2026. All rights reserved.
  Timothy Durham was convicted of rape when a test showed his DNA genotype matched the DNA recovered from the crime scene. Eye witnesses testified that Durham was in a different state at the time of the incident, but he wasn’t exonerated from his 3000 year sentence until follow up DNA analysis showed that the preliminary forensic analysis used in the trial was misinterpreted (Thomas et al.). DNA testing serves an invaluable part in our criminal justice system, but it comes with complications and bias that can lead to wrongful convictions and misinformed juries.  

Background:

Forensic genetics aims to identify the origin of a biological sample. It can be traced back to Karl Landsteiner who discovered human ABO blood groups. With blood groups, suspects could be eliminated based on their blood type. For example, if a suspect had type A blood and there was type B blood left at the scene by the perpetrator, the investigators could rule out the suspect. Unfortunately, the reverse didn’t work. If the suspect and perpetrator both had the same blood type, it can’t be concluded that the suspect was guilty. Blood identifiers evolved into 8 distinct categories which improved the ability to eliminate suspects, but could only conclude that (if the system matched) it might be the perpetrator or this person might be related to the perpetrator (Jobling and Gill). The field evolved in the 1980s with the discovery of Minisatellites, lines of repetitive DNA that don’t encode proteins. Minisatellite patterns in DNA create what we know today as the DNA fingerprint, and it has a much higher accuracy rate than previous methods (Augustyn et al.). Around the same time, a breakthrough for victims of sexual assault was discovered. In the case of assault, bodily fluids of both the victim and the assaulter can get mixed. A process called differential lysis was created which could selectively increase the concentration of sperm in a fluid sample thereby allowing for accurate DNA testing (Jobling and Gill). Forensics evolved to use single-locus probe testing after several years because of its ease of interpretation. It looked at specific minisatellites that had high variability between subjects. This was the first DNA-based method to be used in a criminal investigation. Two murder homicides from several years apart were connected using DNA evidence. The evidence was then used to exonerate an innocent man, and the guilty party was found when he tried to evade mandatory DNA testing for all men in the small town. His guilt was then reinforced when the DNA profiles matched, and he gave a confession (Jobling and Gill). Finding DNA at a crime scene doesn’t guarantee that you’ll find a murderer. There are issues with non-pure samples and limited samples that make DNA work difficult, and accreditation of facilities and new techniques and take time (Jobling and Gill).  

Subjectivity of DNA Interpretation:

In a 2009 publication, the National Academy of Science discusses the possibility for subjective influence in lab based forensics. The interpretation bias happens in complex cases where, for example, there could be a mixture of DNA. A study published in 2011 looked specifically at this issue. A gang rape happened in Georgia, and the mixture in DNA from the case was used to prosecute one suspect after another suspect took a plea bargain to testify against him. With DNA mixtures, there are three possible conclusions: suspect excluded, suspect cannot be excluded, and inconclusive. If the suspect is excluded, it means that there’s little to no possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. If the suspect cannot be excluded, it means that there’s a possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. In the trial, the DNA examiners who knew the context of the case concluded that the suspect being prosecuted could not be excluded. The 2011 study gave the DNA evidence from this case and the DNA profiles of the suspects to 17 forensic examiners. These examiners had no context of the case, and they all worked independently. Of the 17, only 1 came to the same conclusion (suspect cannot be excluded) as the examiners who knew the context of the case. Twelve of the 17 concluded that the suspect who was prosecuted and convicted had no relation to the DNA found in the sample. Not only does this show that subjectivity occurs due to the context of the case, but the 17 examiners came up with different findings based on their past experiences meaning that not all DNA analysis is objective. Some organizations like the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods say that quantitative statistical evidence should be presented with every categorical conclusion, but the US doesn’t require this (Dror and Hampikian).

False Positives:

There are two categories that cause wrongful identification in a DNA report: coincidental matches and false positives. Coincidental matches are DNA matches between two unrelated people. The probability of these matches is about 1 to 500,000 for white individuals and about 1 to 350,000 for black individuals. This small probability of coincidental matches makes people feel confident in DNA evidence. False positives, on the other hand, are matches between DNA and test DNA that result from issues in the forensics lab. There have been multiple cases of forensics labs accidentally switching victim and suspected rapist DNA which lead to convictions that were later overturned when the lab realized the error. There are also cases of misreading or misunderstanding a sample. In a case from 1993, a man was convicted of rape because someone interpreted a mixed sample of victim and perpetrator DNA as an individual sample. The conviction was again overturned. To prevent false convictions, retesting DNA is allowed, but it’s not an efficient solution. Many people are pushing for statistical information on the probability of false positives, so that the jurors can make accurate judgements based on DNA evidence (Thomas et al.).  

Conclusion:

DNA analysis is a useful tool for the criminal justice system, but subjectivity can be an issue in forensic testing. To combat wrongful convictions, there are organizations like The Innocence Project who use DNA testing to free the innocent, but reformed forensic testing standards should be put in place to prevent subjectivity and to ensure juries are correctly informed during trials. https://www.innocenceproject.org/    

Citation:

Augustyn , Adam, et al. “DNA Finerprinting.” Encyclopedia Britannica , 26 Apr. 2018, www.britannica.com/science/DNA-fingerprinting#ref153186. Dror, Itiel E., and Greg Hampikian. “Subjectivity and Bias in Forensic DNA Mixture Interpretation.” Science & Justice, vol. 51, no. 4, 2011, pp. 204–208., doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004. Jobling, Mark A., and Peter Gill. “Encoded Evidence: DNA in Forensic Analysis.” Nature Reviews: Genetics, vol. 5, no. 10, Oct. 2004, pp. 739–751., doi:10.1038/nrg1455. Thompson, William C, et al. “How the Probability of a False Positive Affects the Value of DNA Evidence.” Journal of Forensic Sciences, vol. 48, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 1–8., doi:10.1520/jfs2001171.