
‘On call for brain retrievals': the man who gets American football players examined for CTE after death
A former Harvard football player and professional wrestler turned neuroscientist, Nowinski helped establish the Unite Brain Bank at Boston University. It is the world's largest repository of brain samples dedicated to the study of CTE – or chronic traumatic encephalopathy, a progressive neurodegenerative disease linked to repetitive hits to the head and concussions. Some 1,600 brains have been examined there, with Nowinski helping to facilitate donations.
In his suicide note, 27-year-old Shane Tamura of Las Vegas asked for his brain to be studied for CTE, which can only be diagnosed posthumously. Tamura was a former high school football player, and he claimed the sport gave him the incurable brain injury.
Nowinski is following the case closely, preparing for the possibility that BU might acquire Tamura's brain. While he and the general public awaits the results of the New York medical examiners office's criminal autopsy (the office declined to provide a timeline), he spoke with the Guardian about how the Brain Bank procures former athletes' brains and what the NFL did to make the uproar around CTE go away.
What was your initial reaction to the news?
It was very troubling to learn about his suicide note. He clearly understood some aspects of the concussion and CTE discussion. But with what he did, he was not of sound mind, so you wonder if this was something that he latched on to as part of his psychosis.
How would you categorize Tamura's case? At least from a violence standpoint, it feels like it belongs on the same spectrum with Phillip Adams and Aaron Hernandez – both former NFL players who committed murder before killing themselves.
We've seen this enough over the years to know there are three categories: there's a chance that there's no pathological brain damage, that this has nothing to do with any history of playing football. There's a chance this has nothing to do with CTE, but he did take enough hits that he suffered concussions or subclinical traumatic brain injury that contributed to his symptoms, and that those symptoms contributed to his actions. And then there's the chance that he had CTE – and then that sort of splits into, did he have enough CTE where we might think it contributed to his actions or not?
You helped establish the Unite Brain Bank at Boston University, where the bulk of CTE research is conducted. What does the process of pursuing a brain for science look like?
We don't usually go into specifics, but what I can tell you is that my job is to track down cases that are of public interest – and this case certainly qualifies.
In a case like this where there's an ongoing investigation, the brain is basically under the jurisdiction of the medical examiner. It's their call whether or not it's studied and whether it's studied in-house or externally. But I also know the people involved with the New York City medical examiner's office have a tremendous reputation and tremendous capabilities internally, so there's no concern that [Tamura's] brain won't be studied.
What happens to the deceased after a criminal investigation has concluded? Like in the case of Hernandez, who died in penal custody?
There is a time when the investigation is over that, in theory, the brain tissue then becomes property of the family.
How does one go about convincing a family to make a donation to the Brain Bank, especially in tragic situations such as Tamura's or Hernandez's?
At this stage, after 1,600 brains, one thing our team all agrees upon is that there's no case so important [as] to upset a family. If they're not comfortable or on the fence, they're never pressured. We offer it as an opportunity if they want to.
What can the process of donating a brain look like for most families?
Most will call the 24-hour Boston University CTE center hotline. The person who responds to the call usually has a network of medical experts across the country who are essentially on call for brain retrievals. They coordinate when the brain retrieval will occur – could be at a hospital or a funeral home. The expert procures the brain and then either a courier is hired to fly it to Boston or it will be [preserved] for weeks to harden and then transferred to Boston.
BU says online that it's able to make extractions while also allowing for families to have open-casket funerals. How?
The person retrieving the brain goes through the back of the skull.
Ten years ago, football's CTE crisis was headline news and an inescapable controversy for the NFL. Why did the outrage recede?
I'll give you three insights: one is that when the NFL stopped denying the game caused CTE, it took some of the energy out. It stopped there being a clear bad guy in the story. Two is the sports industry has benefited from the fracturing of media. There just aren't that many full-time investigative journalists in sports anymore. Then point three is you can't get this issue on television anymore, and that's primarily because the NFL has now given a game to every media platform. It's not even a well-kept secret that anybody who carries game broadcasts is very concerned about [not calling attention to] CTE in the NFL. [Days after this interview, the NFL announced it had bought a 10% stake in ESPN.]
I can remember there being some urgency to establish a link between CTE and violence – but all the research at the time was inconclusive. Has anything changed?
I still wouldn't say there's been a definitive study. Frankly, it's very difficult to answer the question of CTE and violence through Brain Bank studies, because the data it produces comes from talking to families [after the subject dies]. It is true that a larger proportion of men with CTE than you would like had become violent with loved ones. But it's difficult to study the appearance and disappearance of the violence in part because a lot of people with CTE became violent midlife and then less so as dementia set in. So that will need to be studied longitudinally.
But if you ask me: am I aware of people [who played contact sports] who are considered the nicest guys in the world suddenly in their 50s and 60s becoming violent with their loved ones? I have a lot of those stories.
The NFL is quite proud of the rules changes they have enacted to make pro football safer – and to its credit the updates have taken a lot of hits out of the game. But what about the levels below, like college and high school? Can we point to a reduction in potential brain injuries?
Firstly, the NFL had to take the brain injury risk seriously because there's a [players] union. But that doesn't exist in college. We did an editorial recently to accompany a study that showed basically that 80% of the NFL's concussions are in games; in college, it's 30% [meaning the overwhelming majority happen during practice]. The editorial laid out how the NFL set the tone 10 years ago by virtually eliminating hits in practice.
The reality is I'm glad the NFL has started making some stronger changes – most recently, to kickoff procedures. No one was dying for that, but now we're all fine with it. But the sad part is the other levels aren't copying the NFL. Like, how is the NFL proving that it's safer, but college and high school football aren't even talking about it? In high school, apart from two states that have severe limits, everybody else has pretty loose limits, no monitoring and no penalties. I'm having that battle on a daily basis to warn athletes, especially the ones who are old enough to understand, that they're not being warned and their coaches are not properly educated on CTE.
So for all the good things that have happened, slowly progressing the discussion, we should not expect CTE to go down. We're still creating the same problem; we just feel better about it.
Personally, it always rankles me to hear announcers complain about roughness penalties that strike them as overzealous.
Then you realize safety is an afterthought to the business – that if the changes are too radical and fans turn off the TV, the hitting comes back. And I don't have a problem with that at the NFL level. Players get half the revenue, so they can have that discussion about how safe they want it to be. But we also have to educate the fans to allow it to be safer. The one place where that's actually happened is professional wrestling. Now that fans understand the risks, they want matches to be stopped when people have concussions.
Even now you see wrestling fans struggle to play back old matches because it's so obvious how dazed some of those guys were in the ring.
I had that discussion with a 25-year-old who works for a sports organization in the brain health space who was like, 'I watched some matches from your era. What the hell were you guys doing?' So, we could educate NFL fans too to enjoy a slightly safer game. But who wants to be reminded that many of the guys they're watching already have CTE?
Given that the NYC shooting happened during NFL training camps, I was surprised that players didn't have more to say about it.
Current NFL players don't talk about CTE because many of them don't understand it and others know they'll be punished if they do. I mean, let's be honest: Jerry Jones [owner of the Dallas Cowboys] is still on the record saying he doesn't believe that football causes CTE even though he's lost a teammate from Arkansas to it. So if you play for the Cowboys and start talking about CTE, I wouldn't be surprised if he cut you the next day.
Ten years ago there was a lot of talk about the need for a test to detect CTE in the living. Are we any closer to that?
Yes. We've learned tau Pet scans for Alzheimer's disease don't work. But we have identified targets we think might make it diagnosable from blood, and we are trying two more new tau Pet tracers that people are hopeful might work for CTE.
Interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
9 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
California city named world's most relaxing...but it's beaches are strewn with SEWAGE from nearby southern border
San Diego has been named the world's most relaxing city - but the tranquility of its golden beaches are under threat from sewage seeping in from the southern border. The California city was ranked first as the 'top city to unwind' based on metrics including spa access, air quality, sunshine hours, happiness and natural spaces. International eSIM provider Holafly gave the coastal metropolis a 'relaxation score' of 68.7 out of 100, followed by Singapore with 66.8 and Vienna, Austria with 63.5. This owed in large part to San Diego having 'the sunniest climate' among the cities listed, with an average of eight hours and nine minutes of bright sunlight per day. The picturesque city's balmy climate draws flocks of residents and tourists to South Mission and Central Beach each year - but the tides have turned in recent months. Analysis of the beaches on both sides of the southern border over the past two years have detected alarming levels of fecal matter in the water stretching 50 miles north of the US-Mexico coastal border, scientists have warned. One Coast Project and Permanent Forum of Binational Waters researchers have said fecal bacteria in the sea exceeded health standards almost every day of the year. The groups have collected water samples since 1999 along 65 miles of western coastline from Carlsbad, California, to Baja California in Mexico. Extremely high levels of enterococci bacteria, which can cause serious infections, were detected in Southern California beaches over the spring in particular. Researchers said they found an average of 15,000 units of the bacterium pre 100 milliliters of water, which is almost 100 times the legal limit in the US and Mexico. Enterococci comes from fecal contamination, and it can cause gnarly gastrointestinal, skin, urinary tract and even heart infections. The bacteria type has been found much more frequently in San Diego waters since 2020, after a sharp rise in the contamination on the Mexican side in 2018. Director of One Coast Project Rosario Sanchez told Fox News there are very different testing protocols on each side of the border. 'In the U.S. side, there's more standardized procedures in terms of how often testing is done, basically daily, but on the Mexico side it can be just once a month if that,' she said. Sanchez said that coastal water quality is way off meeting basic health standards for more than 325 days per year across the coastline. 'This has impacts on both sides on both sides of the border, we're not talking just water quality, but we're talking about health,' she said. The contamination in San Diego is also compounded by toxic sewage spills from the Tijuana River Valley on the south side of the border city. Californians living in the Imperial Beach area have complained about respiratory problems and other complications that they believe are linked to the waste in the river. According to the San Diego Coastkeeper, the 'failing sewage infrastructure in Mexico' and 'negligent operation of the South Bay Plant by the US government' are to blame for the pollution and smell. On the US side, crews have placed riprap - large rocks - in the river in an attempt to stop the foul smell of sewage from plaguing the valley. In Mexico, environment groups are working to replace a section of an ageing sewage pipeline with a newer one made of concrete. However, the only way to rebuild the pipeline with minimal pollution was to allow sewage waste to run through the river during the construction. The International Boundary and Water Commission, a federal government agency monitoring the waterways between Mexico and the US, announced on April 9 that the team in Mexico would be working around the clock to fix the pipeline. The US side of the IBWC said Mexico had informed them that the decision to dump five million gallons of wastewater a day into the river was a 'difficult decision,' but there were no other alternatives to fixing the sewage problem. The IBWC said that even though the sewage dump was 'bad news,' the decision was the best way to prevent wastewater from polluting the Tijuana River long-term.


BBC News
39 minutes ago
- BBC News
AI designs new superbug-killing antibiotics for gonorrhoea and MRSA
Artificial intelligence has invented two new potential antibiotics that could kill drug-resistant gonorrhoea and MRSA, researchers have drugs were designed atom-by-atom by the AI and killed the superbugs in laboratory and animal two compounds still need years of refinement and clinical trials before they could be the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) team behind it say AI could start a "second golden age" in antibiotic discovery. Antibiotics kill bacteria, but infections that resist treatment are now causing more than a million deaths a antibiotics has helped bacteria evolve to dodge the drugs' effects, and there has been a shortage of new antibiotics for have previously used AI to trawl through thousands of known chemicals in an attempt to identify ones with potential to become new antibiotics. Now, the MIT team have gone one step further by using generative AI to design antibiotics in the first place for the sexually transmitted infection gonorrhoea and for potentially-deadly MRSA (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus).Their study, published in the journal Cell, interrogated 36 million compounds including those that either do not exist or have not yet been trained the AI by giving it the chemical structure of known compounds alongside data on whether they slow the growth of different species of AI then learns how bacteria are affected by different molecular structures, built of atoms such as carbon, oxygen, hydrogen and approaches were then tried to design new antibiotics with AI. The first identified a promising starting point by searching through a library of millions of chemical fragments, eight to 19 atoms in size, and built from there. The second gave the AI free reign from the design process also weeded out anything that looked too similar to current antibiotics. It also tried to ensure they were inventing medicines rather than soap and to filter out anything predicted to be toxic to used AI to create antibiotics for gonorrhoea and MRSA, a type of bacteria that lives harmlessly on the skin but can cause a serious infection if it enters the manufactured, the leading designs were tested on bacteria in the lab and on infected mice, resulting in two new potential drugs. "We're excited because we show that generative AI can be used to design completely new antibiotics," Prof James Collins, from MIT, tells the BBC."AI can enable us to come up with molecules, cheaply and quickly and in this way, expand our arsenal, and really give us a leg up in the battle of our wits against the genes of superbugs."However, they are not ready for clinical trials and the drugs will require refinement – estimated to take another one to two year's work – before the long process of testing them in people could begin. Dr Andrew Edwards, from the Fleming Initiative and Imperial College London, said the work was "very significant" with "enormous potential" because it "demonstrates a novel approach to identifying new antibiotics".But he added: "While AI promises to dramatically improve drug discovery and development, we still need to do the hard yards when it comes to testing safety and efficacy."That can be a long and expensive process with no guarantee that the experimental medicines will be prescribed to patients at the are calling for AI drug discovery more broadly to improve. Prof Collins says "we need better models" that move beyond how well the drugs perform in the laboratory to ones that are a better predictor of their effectiveness in the is also an issue with how challenging the AI-designs are to manufacture. Of the top 80 gonorrhoea treatments designed in theory, only two were synthesised to create Chris Dowson, at the University of Warwick, said the study was "cool" and showed AI was a "significant step forward as a tool for antibiotic discovery to mitigate against the emergence of resistance".However, he explains, there is also an economic problem factoring into drug-resistant infections - "how do you make drugs that have no commercial value?"If a new antibiotic was invented, then ideally you would use it as little as possible to preserve its effectiveness, making it hard for anyone to turn a profit.


BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
US appeals court says Trump administration can cut billions in foreign aid
The federal government does not have to continue making foreign aid payments, a US appeals court has ruled in a major victory for President Donald ruling reverses a lower court judgment that said the Trump administration had to restore billions of dollars in foreign aid that had already been approved by Congress. On his first day back at the White House in January, Trump imposed a 90-day pause on all foreign assistance. International aid groups who relied heavily on government grants sued to challenge Trump's order. Among the funding cuts are nearly $4 billion (£2.95b) for global health programs through September. More than $6 billion for HIV and AIDS programs, which Congress had approved through 2028, can be axed, as well, under the out of the three judges on the appeals court panel agreed the plaintiffs in the case, the aid groups, did not have standing to bring the lawsuit, and so the funding cuts could international aid groups sued the administration in February. In March a district judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking the Trump administration's funding freeze, saying it was done unlawfully because the funds were allocated by Congress. Since he returned to office, Trump has slashed foreign aid, largely shuttering US Agency for International Development (USAID), the main foreign aid agency, because he found its spending "wasteful". More than 80% of all the agency's programmes were cancelled as of March, and on 1 July the remainder were taken over by the State Department as USAID officially closed its doors. Former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama condemned shutting down the agency and humanitarian organisations around the world have criticised Trump's funding cuts as both drastic and could cause more than 14 million additional deaths by 2030, according to a warning published by researchers in the highly esteemed Lancet medical journal earlier this year.