State of the concussion debate: from sceptical to alarmist claims

Current discussions about concussion in sport are based on a crucial epistemological question: whether or not we should believe that repetitive mild Traumatic Brain Injury (mTBI) causes Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE). This epistemological question is essential to understanding the ethics at stake in treating these cases: indeed, certain moral obligations turn on whether or not we believe that mTBI causes CTE. After discussing the main schools of thought, namely the CTE-sceptic position (which does not admit a causal relation between mTBI and CTE) and the CTE-orthodox position (as defended by those who see a causal association between mTBI and CTE), this article examines the concussion debate in sport and asks if its current articulation helps to answer whether or not we should call for responsive, ethical action(s).