When
Neurological Studies Face Struggles
E.J. Leavitt
Introduction:
Brain research
plays an essential role in the scientific and medical fields. The brain is
perhaps the most complex organ within the human body, and there is much that is
not well understood. For example, the biochemical, developmental, and
mechanical origins of conditions such as autism and Alzheimer’s disease present
information that is yet to be discovered. Research involving the brain has also
used up a significant amount of funding each year. The Alzheimer’s Association
spends about $480 million on Alzheimer’s research alone each year (Boomer 2016).
In the pursuit of these important neurological discoveries, however, there are
often tough public relation barriers to cross when breakthrough or fraudulent
studies are released.
When Findings Shake the Boat:
In
the fall of 2002, the people of Pittsburg, Pennsylvania lost a town hero of
theirs, Mike Webster, who reportedly died due to a heart attack. Just about a
decade and a half earlier, Webster played as a star center on the home NFL
team, the Steelers. Standing with his burly frame of 6’1” and 255 pounds, he
was known for his aggressiveness, skill, and strength in the sport. He was even
inducted into the Hall of Fame nine years after he finished his time with the Steelers
(Players 2016). However, even as he retired from football, his mind had already
been falling apart. In the decade preceding his death, he developed depression,
his behavior became increasingly erratic, he struggled to maintain his
concentration, and the weight of it all eventually collapsed his family life
(Litsky 2002).
After
Webster’s death, his body was taken to be examined by forensic neuropathologist
Dr. Bennet Omalu, M.D. In a history that has also been portrayed in the 2015
film Concussion, Dr. Omalu became
curious if the repeated concussions and head trauma sustained over a long
career in the NFL played any part in the gradual degradation of Webster’s
mental health. In collaboration with his colleagues at the University of
Pittsburg, he found amyloid plaques and some neurofibrillary tangles in
Webster’s neocortical regions, as well as damaged neurons in the frontal,
parietal, and temporal areas of the cerebral cortex. The brain damage, of which
the condition was named “chronic traumatic encephalopathy” (CTE) was evident
mostly at a microscopic level, and in the publication of the study the team
suggested that there are risks of long-term brain damage amongst players of the
NFL (Omalu et al. 2005).
As
a result of their publication, Omalu and his team quickly received repercussions
and oppositions. Omalu received phone calls that demanded that he retract his
study from the Neurosurgery journal,
and that his observations were somehow misinterpreted. Through his fax machine,
Omalu received a single-spaced, six paged letter from Elliot Pellman, who was
the chairman of the NFL’s “Mild Traumatic Brain Injury” committee at the time.
The leading group of NFL team doctors was coming after Dr. Bennet Omalu,
insisting that he was erroneous in his findings and that his publication should
be removed.
Dr.
Omalu, shocked, investigated into the claims. He found that Dr. Pellman was in
fact a rheumatologist, and that no one in the 14-member committee was a
neuropathologist. Also, Pellman was found to have published a paper in 1994
stating that concussions were merely an occupational hazard – part of the
profession in the NFL. With these discrepancies, Omalu responded to the
criticisms, and the NFL responded again by requesting an independent expert in
the field to review the samples of Webster’s brain tissue after the Neurosurgery journal declined to retract
the paper. This researcher, Dr. Peter Davies from the Albert Einstein College
of Medicine in New York whose career has been largely focused on Alzheimer’s
research confirmed Omalu’s findings in astonishment, and wrote his report for
the NFL that Omalu was right. Unfortunately, the NFL never released the report
to the public.
The
conflict between Dr. Omalu, his team, and the NFL escalated to the point that
Congress became involved. Experts across the field were invited into a
committee for the hearing – with the exception of Omalu. Dr. Omalu was never
welcomed into the committee, but pressure to further research and implement new
safety protocols for concussions was successfully placed on the NFL (Laskas
2015). NFL officials were unwilling to acknowledge the findings in the study
that Omalu produced, but after much scrutiny and testing, the condition that
Mike Webster was found to have post-mortem was confirmed.
The bitter
conflict that Dr. Bennet Omalu faced against the NFL achieved success in the
end in promoting the safety of football and other sports players. Since 2005,
several papers have been published about CTE and the post-career mental health
of NFL players, and the field of research in sports-related head and brain
injury has expanded. However, there is still much that remains to be done
improve player safety in the NFL. In a 2012 study of 85 people with histories
of mild traumatic brain injuries, 33 of the players were former football
players from the NFL, and they showed evidence of CTE (Pro 2016).
The increased
focus on brain injuries and football has also expanded to amateur athletics –
for instance, the NFL controversy may have indirectly encouraged increased
safety goals and participation in high school football. For the past couple of
decades, it has become a common practice in high school football to require a
symptom-free waiting period (SFWP) for players who sustain a concussion during
practice or in a game. The SFWP requires that after sustaining a concussion,
the affected player must not return to play (or practice) until he or she
exhibits no symptoms of a concussion for a set amount of time. In a study
performed from 2012 to 2014 measuring the percentage of SFWP use in
southeastern Wisconsin, a surprising 99.3% of athletes used an SFWP after
sustaining a mild traumatic brain injury. Between 1999 and 2004, only 60.3% of
athletes sustaining concussions used SFWPs, as found from a similar study (Pfaller
et al. 2016). Though it may not be a direct consequence of Dr. Omalu’s findings
about CTE, it is evident that substantial progress has been made with player
safety since the time of Omalu’s 2015 publication.
When a Fraudulent Study Emerges:
Although
hotly contested by doctors within the NFL, Dr. Omalu’s study was found to be
legitimate, and it has led to many good changes. However, what happens when a
scientist manages to publish a study with falsified results and fraudulent
conclusions? In 1998, such a study was published in the United Kingdom, and its
influence has sparked persistent negative consequences since that time. This
article, “Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and
pervasive developmental disorder in children”, was published in The Lancet by Andrew Wakefield, and was
retracted by the publisher in 2004. The study claimed that there was a
connection between autism spectrum disorder and the mumps-measles-rubella (MMR)
vaccine (Novella 2010).
Eyebrows
were raised within the medical and scientific communities after the release of
Wakefield’s study. First, the sample size that Wakefield used to collect his
data consisted of only 12 children. Also, upon closer observation of the
confidential medical forms and documents that were used in the study, a Sunday Times investigation found that
Wakefield manipulated data for the study to produce correlations that suggest
that the MMR vaccine causes autism. After its investigation, the Sunday Times presented figures regarding
the paper’s impact. Before, the rate of inoculation was about 92%, and after
the paper’s release, these rates fell below 80%. In addition to these rates, in
2008, researchers recorded 1,348 cases of measles. Just a decade before, only
56 cases of measles were confirmed (Deer 2009).
The
repercussions of Wakefield’s study led to more than an increased incidence of
measles within the U.K. In the U.S., a measles outbreak occurred in San Diego
in 2008 due to an intentionally unvaccinated child who contracted the disease while
in Switzerland (AOL 2001). In a study analyzing the incident, 839 individuals
were exposed, and 11 children who did not receive the MMR vaccine were infected
with the disease. As published in the journal Pediatrics, what prevented a larger outbreak was the high
vaccination rate within the affected community (Sugerman et al. 2010).
Fortunately – and thanks to the strong use of the MMR vaccine – many potential
measles infections were avoided. Unfortunately, the number of individuals are
getting measles in communities that at one time achieved herd immunity.
The
costs of the MMR vaccine study also incurs a high cost to the public. The 2008
outbreak mentioned previously led to costs totaling to about $177,000 – which amounts
to $10,376 a case. Another study looking at a 2007 mumps outbreak in Nova
Scotia estimated costs of nearly 2.5 million Canadian dollars, at CDN $3,511
per case (Janes 2010). The costs and increased incidence of mumps and measles
serves as a stark reminder that there is much to be done in the fields of public
health, vaccine awareness, and education to resolve the many problems caused by
Andrew Wakefield’s 1998 study.
Conclusion:
There
are essential pieces of information that are gained from research of the brain.
From learning more about the mechanisms of autism, Alzheimer’s disease,
concussions, and CTE, for instance, there is much to learn about the human
brain. It is important for the public to be well-educated regarding emerging
studies and breakthroughs (including those not directly related to the brain).
Also, effective prevention of fraudulent studies – including the detection and rapid
removal of questionable studies – may also assist in preventing severe economic
costs and medical incidents. If the public health and research communities can
learn from the stories of Dr. Omalu and Andrew Wakefield in preparation for
future events, many tragedies and costs may be avoided.
References:
AOL
Editors. The autism vaccine fraud: Dr. Wakefield’s costly lie to society. AOL. Retrieved October 28, 2016 from http://www.aol.com/article/2011/01/12/autism-vaccine-fraud-wakefield-cost-money-deaths/19793484/?gen=1
Boomer
Report. 2016. Alzheimer’s Association.
Retrieved October 28, 2016 from http://www.alz.org/boomers/
Deer,
Brian. 2009. MMR doctor Andrew Wakefield fixed data on autism. The Sunday Times. Retrieved October 26,
2016 from http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/public/news/article148992.ece
Janes,
Ashley. 2010. Economic burden of the Nova Scotia mumps outbreak. Dalhousie University. Retrieved October
28, 2016 from http://dalspace.library.dal.ca//handle/10222/13100
Laskas,
Jeanne Marie. 2015. The doctor the NFL tried to silence. The Wall Street Journal. Received October 28, 2016 from http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-doctor-the-nfl-tried-to-silence-1448399061
Novella,
Steven. 2010. The Lancet retracts Andrew Wakefield’s article. Science-Based Medicine. Retrieved October
28, 2016 from https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/lancet-retracts-wakefield-article/
Omalu,
B. I., DeKosky, S. T., Minster, R. L., Kamboh, M. I., Hamilton, R. L., and
Wecht, C. H. 2005. Chronic traumatic encephalopathy in a national football
league player. Neurosurgery 57: 183-134
Pfaller,
A. Y., Nelson, L. D., Apps, J. N., Walter, K. D., and McCrea, M. A. 2016.
Frequency and outcomes of a symptom-free waiting period after sport-related
concussion. The American Journal of
Sports Medicine 10:1-6.
Players.
2016. Mike Webster. National Football
League. Retrieved October 28, 2016 from
http://www.nfl.com/player/mikewebster/2528439/profile
Pro
Football. 2016. The N.F.L’s tragic C.T.E. roll call. The New York Times. Retrieved October 27, 2016 from http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/02/03/sports/football/nfl-brain-disease-cte-concussions.html
Sugerman,
D. E., Barskey, A. E., Delea, M. G., Ortega-Sanchez, I. R., Bi, D., Ralston, K.
J., Rota, P. A., Waters-Montijo, K., and LeBaron, C. W. 2010. Measles outbreak
in a highly vaccinated population, San Diego, 2008: role of the intentionally
undervaccinated. Pediatrics 125:
747-755
I like your take on the research aspect of neurological issues. I think that this is a major issue that has impeded the treatment and care of some neurological problems. Between unwanted findings and questionable research it makes it hard to make swift progress.
ReplyDeleteI like that you brought up this case study on Mike Webster. I don't remember where I heard this from, but apparently addictions to playing the sport can occur so this may explain some behaviors. We often neglect all the health issues we see though as a result of profit and it seen right here in the NFL as you mentioned. It's interesting though that the NFL used nonprofessionals to dismiss the research of a professional though. There are definitely fraudulent studies out there, but studies exhibiting type 1 error (they find significant results, but in actuality there was a mistake in sampling or something else) also are an issue with propagating false concepts (hopefully unintentionally). Wakefield actually was the only one of the researchers who had not rejected this study and kept claiming it was not fraudulent. He was also the surveyor of the parents and their stories were highly butchered when they were cross referenced (source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o65l1YAVaYc).
ReplyDeleteVery well written essay. I really appreciate the fact that you looked at both sides of the issue and brought them together. I also think it is incredible that a study such as the one performed by Andrew Wakefield was able to be published when the study itself was heavily biased. I think this good example of a bad study should be a stark reminder that we should consider any findings presented by researchers, regardless of publications. Not everything is correct.
ReplyDelete