I see this comment as a classic example of non sequitur
Each n jury has been unique. It is not a recurrence of a prior injury. What is the basis for assuming the past predicts the future. When none of the past injuries are related to each other why should they predict the possibility of a future injury?
This message has been modified
Originally posted on Oct 9, 2015 at 9:46:42am
Message modified by dratax on Oct 9, 2015 at 10:14:44am