[siberian khatru]

Originally Posted by JohnnyV13

Rainman, you've CLOSE to the real issue here, but you're only hitting the edges of the target.

Part of the problem is, most people don't know much about study design. I know you do marketing analysis, so you get MOST of it, but do you have much of a background in hard science?

The key problem is this is nothing more than what doctors call a pilot study. Meaning, a small sample of cases to see if further research is warranted.

Not only is the sample size way too small for percentages to mean much, MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY CHANGES RAPIDLY.

So, they had to go back to 2009 to get even a handful of cases, and surgical techniques could have vastly improved over 16 years. Thus, the prognosis for a patient in 2009 could be vastly different than in 2022 (at the end of sample).

For example, if you asked about the prognosis of a pitcher with a rotator cuff injury in 1974, well....a sample of orthopedic literature would have said, "give up, he's toast." As we all know, Tommy Jobn went on to win more game AFTER Dr. Jobe repaired his rotator cuff than he won before his shoulder surgery on his way to the HOF.

16 years later, it was a vastly different world.

Now, I don't know if that's the case for patellar knee injuries. But crow doesn't either. However, the Chiefs' team doctor presumably knows the state of the art and Veach has better sources of information than any of us.

Just an FYI, Tommy John tore his elbow ligament, not his rotator cuff. And he’s not in the HOF.