In the end, it all comes back to education: In the ideal world, a parent's decision about whether to allow a child to start
playing or continue
playing collision sports before high school
under current rules of
play (which are evolving in the direction of safety, fortunately, as seen, for instance, in USA Hockey's ban on body checking at the Pee Wee hockey level and below, and limits on full - contact practices instituted at every level of football, from Pop Warner, to high school, college, and the NFL), will be a conscious one; a decision in which the risks of participating in a particular sport - provided it is based on the most up - to - date information about those risks and a consideration of other risk factors that might come into
play for their child, such as pre-existing learning disabilities (e.g. ADHD), chronic health conditions (e.g., a history of history of multiple concussions or seizures, history of migraines), or a reckless and overly aggressive style of
play - are balanced against the benefits to the child of participating.
while far from conclusive, has raised alarm bells among some in the youth sports community and prompted at least one leading concussion expert, Dr. Robert Cantu, MomsTeam's concussion expert emeritus, to recently recommend that kids not
play such sports until middle or high school, at least
under current rules.
There appears to be a
current and very deliberate attempt to obfuscate what a VAT actually does (create a level field and back out taxes from exports, allowing recipient countries to impose their own taxes at consumption) and conflate it with protectionist measures such as straightforward tariffs or the proposed complex «border adjustability» tax, the latter explicitly prohibited
under WTO
rules precisely because it is not a level
playing field (imports are taxed and exports are subsidized).