No evidence to support that statement though Pedro.
Surgery has numerous risks. Surgery devascularises tissue and can slow healing. Introduces risks like infection. You get plenty of scar tissue with surgery.
The expanding indications of surgery are unsupported. Bony avulsions with huge displacement have some logic for needing it. Issue is…
No evidence to support that statement though Pedro.
Surgery has numerous risks. Surgery devascularises tissue and can slow healing. Introduces risks like infection. You get plenty of scar tissue with surgery.
The expanding indications of surgery are unsupported. Bony avulsions with huge displacement have some logic for needing it. Issue is that now indications are expanding to less displaced tears and musculotendinous injuries.
struggling with the idea that Arsenal, run by a global sports group, with the best minds on their best players, with limitless money, are making mistakes because surgeons like fees. Not to mention that club specialists all know each other and share expertise.
End of the day, you’re fighting against best in class talent working in the best league in the world. Think you should stand down on this one until you can prove they are wrong.
Sadly your stance shows a lack of understanding of how medicine works. Trends often follow dogma and fashions, rather than evidence, particularly in surgery, and it can sometimes take a decade or two for the truth to become obvious.
Also it's scientifically nonsensical - if something has not been proven then it hasn't been proven, you don't have to prove a negative to be able to justifiably state the case for something is unproven!!
Perhaps you should stand down until you've actually understood the argument - I am not saying they are definitely wrong, I am saying the case for the rising rate of hamstring surgery has not been proven and this is clearly the case, as the evidence cited by experts supporting this stance is low quality and flimsy. They may be right, however they may be wrong, what is clear, is that we don't know and their case is unproven.
If you don't have high quality evidence with a comparator then you simply don't know if your intervention is effective, and if history has taught us anything in surgery in particular, it is that trends in practice are not necessarily correct. Many new interventions don't work.
You don’t need to be an expert in sports medicine to understand that if Arsenal were actively damaging their star athletes with unnecessary surgery… we’d find out quicker than a decade.
No evidence to support that statement though Pedro.
Surgery has numerous risks. Surgery devascularises tissue and can slow healing. Introduces risks like infection. You get plenty of scar tissue with surgery.
The expanding indications of surgery are unsupported. Bony avulsions with huge displacement have some logic for needing it. Issue is that now indications are expanding to less displaced tears and musculotendinous injuries.
Time will tell.
My friend, I am not here to fight you on your expertise. But know I got this from someone at the elite level of sport.
I have expertise and I know multiple experts in this area.
struggling with the idea that Arsenal, run by a global sports group, with the best minds on their best players, with limitless money, are making mistakes because surgeons like fees. Not to mention that club specialists all know each other and share expertise.
End of the day, you’re fighting against best in class talent working in the best league in the world. Think you should stand down on this one until you can prove they are wrong.
Sadly your stance shows a lack of understanding of how medicine works. Trends often follow dogma and fashions, rather than evidence, particularly in surgery, and it can sometimes take a decade or two for the truth to become obvious.
Also it's scientifically nonsensical - if something has not been proven then it hasn't been proven, you don't have to prove a negative to be able to justifiably state the case for something is unproven!!
Perhaps you should stand down until you've actually understood the argument - I am not saying they are definitely wrong, I am saying the case for the rising rate of hamstring surgery has not been proven and this is clearly the case, as the evidence cited by experts supporting this stance is low quality and flimsy. They may be right, however they may be wrong, what is clear, is that we don't know and their case is unproven.
If you don't have high quality evidence with a comparator then you simply don't know if your intervention is effective, and if history has taught us anything in surgery in particular, it is that trends in practice are not necessarily correct. Many new interventions don't work.
You don’t need to be an expert in sports medicine to understand that if Arsenal were actively damaging their star athletes with unnecessary surgery… we’d find out quicker than a decade.