I love football and I love science, but there is a real problem with believing every scientific report that comes out, mainly because the jargon involved is beyond our understanding until it's "interpreted" for us.  We rely on people in the know to break it down for us.  As it turns out, as many here already suspect, it's a hit or miss situation.  Apparently, the CTE study from a few years back, might very well have been sensationalized to catch more attention than it deserved.  I didn't actually read the study and still haven't.  Biology and neurology just doesn't pique my interests.  But, if true, this proves that even highly publicized accepted scientific studies aren't necessarily reliable and it hasn't been, up til now, even questioned in the public eye.  I run in to this all the time when I read studies on climatology and see how ineffective the results actually are because the experiment was biased from the beginning.  I understand that CTE is kind of a new term, at least for me, but if the article is true in it's claim, we are a long way from proving this is in anyway related to football.  Although admittedly it makes sense from a logical argument, you still have to give a presentable set of data from an established set of parameters.  Well, it appears the parameters of this experiment were complete garbage.