Here is not a study but a story that I find interesting. I find it interesting that when a professional athlete injures a ligament in the extremity (not even in the spine where the CNS is at risk), it is fully accepted that 1) it hurts 2) the player can not function 3) may require surgery. No one is questioning that the player may be faking or the treatment is unnecessary. Why when we treat injured patients hurt in car crashes with these same injuries in the spine, we get so much resistance from attorneys and insurance companies?? The other interesting fact about this story is how he hurt himself… taking off a shoe! He has done this thousands of times, like so many people have done this act with no injury before, he must be faking the injury. Of course what I wrote is false, but do you fight for your patients when insurance companies give a similar argument about crashes? I wonder why the team has not hired an “accident crash re-constructionist” to devise a report showing how not enough force could have been applied or there is no visible damage to the shoe to support this player is actually NOT hurt? Because this is the real world and we need to treat all our patients correctly and go off the history, findings, and clinical exam and research and get them the care they need.