On Jan 14, 1983,The Journalpublished two major articles1,2and two editorials3,4on the subject of boxing.The Journal's editor took the position that boxing should be banned in civilized countries based on moral, ethical, and medical grounds. The hullabaloo that followed was instantaneous, massive, and prolonged. It included major network television coverage, newspaper articles and editorials, magazine stories, letters of support, debate, and criticism toThe Journal, and numerous interviews with the various media for authors of all four publications inThe Journal. A Congressional hearing was spurred, and several state legislatures considered actions. With the exception of some closely tied to amateur boxing, virtually no one defended the "sport" as it is. The overwhelming majority of correspondents, witnesses, and authors stated that there was much wrong with boxing. Typical comments in articles, letters, and telephone calls included those decrying the situation: "Boxing is an exhibition of
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
George D. Lundberg (1984) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: