Dodgers Doc: No Noninjury Tommy John Surgery to Improve Performance
Stan Conte, vice president of medical services for the L.A. Dodgers, advised parents and coaches of young athletes to not consider Tommy John surgery on healthy arms for the sake of improving performance. He spoke at the SABR conference in Phoenix on March 13. Steve Mirsky reports
By Steve Mirsky
SUBSCRIBE TO 60-Second Health
On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
“There was a recent study that did a survey of parents and coaches asking them what they thought about Tommy John surgery.”
Dr. Stan Conte, vice president of medical services for the LA Dodgers, at the Society for American Baseball Research conference in Phoenix on March 13.
“And about 38 percent to 42 percent of the coaches and the parents thought it was okay to do a Tommy John surgery on their son that did not have an elbow problem in order to improve performance. This is dangerous stuff.”
Dangerous because that velocity does not increase on average after the surgery. The vast majority of pitchers do return to previous performance levels after a long rehab. But about 15 to 25 percent, depending on level of play, do not come back. And the shelf life of the surgery is limited. More major league pitchers are undergoing repeat Tommy John surgeries, with two being announced just this week.
“The parents come in and say, ‘Listen he’s throwing 78, he’s not going to get a scholarship until he’s throws 83, let’s do the surgery so he can throw 83.’ This sounds ridiculous, but it’s happening on a global scale. It's ridiculous.”
—Steve Mirsky
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism
Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.
When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.
Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber
