When I joined the 1974 Los Angeles Dodgers, right-handed pitcher, Andy Messersmith, and I became friends.   While in the dugout or traveling, we talked baseball.   While eating, I noticed that Andy had difficulty bending his pitching elbow sufficiently to feed himself.  

     Andy said that not only could he not bend his pitching elbow sufficiently to easily feed himself, he could not brush his teeth, comb his hair, wash his face and so on.   I compared his pitching elbow’s flexion angle with his non-pitching elbow.   His flexion angles differed dramatically.   I suggested that we scientifically investigate this difference.   Andy agreed to visit me at Michigan State University after the season.  

     On January 15, 1975, Andy and I presented ourselves to Professor Bert M. Bez MD, the Chairman of the Division of Anesthesia in MSU's College of Osteopathic Medicine.   To prevent muscle action interference, Professor Bez bi-laterally anesthetized our brachial plexuses.   (At the brachial plexus, cervical nerves' five (C5), six (C6), seven (C7), eight (C8) and thoracic nerve one (T1) intertwine to form the arm’s radial, median, ulnar, musculocutaneous and axillary nerves.   The brachial plexus lies beneath the clavicle’s middle and the scapula’s coracoid process.)

     Using the Subclavian Perivascular Technique, Professor Bez bi-laterally administered 20cc of a 1% solution of Lidocaine (Xylocaine).   Lidocaine anesthetized the motor nerves that stimulate the elbow flexors and extensors.   Without muscle action, only skeletal structures could limit elbow flexion and extension.  

     An Olin Heath Center Radiographic technician placed our arms into the proper X-ray positions and forcefully fully extended and flexed our elbows.   Another technician captured Anterior/Posterior (A/P) and Medial/Lateral (M/L) views of our forcefully extended elbows and a Medial/Lateral (M/L) view of our forcefully flexed elbows.  

     I used the original X-rays to make the following observation and measurements.   However, because the technician could not completely extend or flex our pitching elbows, some elbow structures did not contact the X-ray plates.   Therefore, parallax error may cause some incorrect measurements.

     From the Anterior/Posterior view of the forcefully extended elbows, I:  
01.   measured the humeral mid-shaft width and cortex depth,
02.   evaluated the medial epicondyle,
03.   evaluated the trochlea/olecranon process articular surfaces,
04.   evaluated the olecranon fossa,
05.   evaluated the capitulum/radial head articular surfaces,
06.   evaluated the lateral epicondyle,
07.   measured and evaluated the radial head,
08.   measured the radial tuberosity,
09.   measured the radial mid-shaft width and cortex depth and
10.   measured the ulnar mid-shaft width and cortex depth.  

     Whereas the humeral mid-shaft of my non-pitching arm measured one-inch wide with the cortex one-quarter inch thick, the humeral mid-shaft of my pitching arm measured one and one-eighth inches wide with the cortex three-eighth inch thick.   Therefore, the humeral mid-shaft of my pitching arm is one-eighth inch wider and one-eighth inch thicker.

     Whereas the medial epicondyle of my non-pitching arm showed normal trabeculae and mineralization and a smooth, uninterrupted surface, the medial epicondyle of my pitching arm showed slightly abnormal trabeculae and considerably increased mineralization, especially proximally, but a smooth, uninterrupted surface.   Therefore, the medial epicondyle of my pitching arm has a slightly abnormal traveculae and considerably increased mineralization, especially proximally.

     The articular surfaces of my trochlea/olecranon process joint in my non-pitching and pitching arms appeared evenly-spaced, smooth and uninterrupted.

     The olecranon fossa of my non-pitching and pitching arms showed normal trabeculae and mineralization and no abnormalities.

     The articular surfaces of the capitulum/radial head joint in my non-pitching and pitching arms appeared even-spaced, smooth and uninterrupted.

     The lateral epicondyle of my non-pitching and pitching arms showed normal trabeculae and mineralization and a smooth, uninterrupted surface.

     The radial head of my non-pitching and pitching arms measured one inch wide with normal trabeculae and mineralization.

     The radial tuberosity of my non-pitching and pitching arms measured thirteen-sixteenths inch wide with normal trabeculae and mineralization and a smooth, uninterrupted surface.

     Whereas the radial mid-shaft of my non-pitching arm measured three-quarters inch wide with the cortex one-eighth inch thick, the radial mid-shaft of my pitching arm measured thirteen-sixteenth inch wide with the cortex one-eighth inch thick.   Therefore, the radial mid-shaft of my pitching arm was one-sixteenth of an inch wider.

     Whereas the ulnar mid-shaft of my non-pitching arm measured five-eighths inch wide with the cortex one-eighth inch thick, the ulnar mid-shaft of my pitching arm measured five-eighth inch wide with the cortex three-sixteenth inch thick.   Therefore, the ulnar mid-shaft of my pitching arm measure one-sixteenth inch thicker.

     Whereas the humeral mid-shaft of Andy’s non-pitching arm measured one inch wide with the cortex one-quarter inch thick, the humeral mid-shaft of Andy’s pitching arm measured one and one-quarter inch wide with the cortex seven-sixteenth inch thick.   Therefore, the humeral mid-shaft of Andy’s pitching arm measured one-quarter inch wider with its cortex three-sixteenth inch thicker.

     Whereas the medial epicondyle of Andy’s non-pitching arm showed normal trabeculae and mineralization and a smooth, uninterrupted surface, the medial epicondyle of Andy’s pitching arm showed abnormal trabeculae and a considerably increased mineralization in its proximal one-half, a smooth, uninterrupted surface and a wide fissure appeared in the medial epicondyle/trochlear union.   Therefore, the medial epicondyle of Andy’s pitching arm showed abnormal trabeculae, considerably increased mineralization in its proximal one-half and an abnormal fissure between the medial epicondyle and trochlea.

     The articular surfaces of the trochlea/olecranon process joint of Andy’s non-pitching and pitching arms appeared even-spaced, smooth and uninterrupted.   However, two loose pieces of cartilage lay near to the medial aspect of the articular surfaces of the trochlea/olecranon process joint in Andy’s pitching arm.

     Whereas the olecranon fossa of Andy’s non-pitching arm showed normal trabeculae and mineralization and no abnormalities, the olecranon fossa of Andy’s pitching arm showed abnormal trabeculae, increased mineralization and a large calcified cartilage fragment in the fossa’s center.   Therefore, the olecranon fossa of Andy’s pitching arm showed abnormal trabeculae, increased mineralization and a large calcified piece of cartilage or bone fragment in the center of the fossa.

     Whereas the articular surfaces of the capitulum/radial head joint of Andy’s non-pitching arm appeared even-spaced, smooth and uninterrupted, the articular surfaces of the capitulum/radial head joint of Andy’s pitching arm had uneven spacing and a deepened hollow in the radial head.   Therefore, the articular surfaces of the capitulum/radial head joint of Andy’s pitching arm had abnormal trabeculae and demineralization.

     Whereas the lateral epicondyle of Andy’s non-pitching arm showed normal trabeculae and mineralization with a smooth, uninterrupted surface, the lateral epicondyle of Andy’s pitching arm showed abnormal trabeculae and decreased mineralization around its edge with a smooth, uninterrupted surface.   Therefore, the lateral epicondyle of Andy’s pitching arm ahs abnormal trabeculae and decreased mineralization around its edge.

     Whereas the radial head of Andy’s non-pitching arm measured one and one-sixteenth inch wide with normal trabeculae and mineralization, the radial head of Andy’s pitching arm measured one and one-eighth inches wide with an enlarged, deformed shape, normal trabeculae and slightly increased mineralization.   Therefore, the radial head of Andy’s pitching arm has enlarged, deformed and increased its mineralization.

     The radial tuberosity of Andy’s non-pitching and pitching arms measured three-quarter inch wide with normal trabeculae and mineralization and a smooth, uninterrupted surface.

     Whereas the radial mid-shaft of Andy’s non-pitching arm measured eleven-sixteenth inch wide with the cortex three-sixteenth inch thick, the radial mid-shaft of Andy’s pitching arm measured three-quarter inch wide with the cortex one-quarter inch thick.   Therefore, the radial mid-shaft of Andy’s pitching arm is one-sixteenth inch thicker with the cortex one-sixteenth inch thicker.

     Whereas the ulnar mid-shaft of Andy’s non-pitching arm measured five-eighth inch wide with the cortex one-quarter inch thick, the ulnar mid-shaft of Andy’s pitching arm measured five-eighth inch wide with the cortex three-sixteenth inch thick.   Therefore, the cortex of the ulnar mid-shaft of Andy’s pitching arm is one-sixteenth inch thicker.

     I used the original X-rays to make the following observations and measurements.   However, because the technician could not completely extend or flex our pitching elbows, some elbow structures did not contact the X-ray plates.   Therefore, parallax error may cause incorrect measurements.

     From the Medial/Lateral views of our forcefully extended elbows views, I:  
01.   measured humeral olecranon fossa depth,
02.   evaluated the articular surface of the anterior humeral capitulum,
03.   measured the ulnar coranoid process and
04.   measured the maximum extension angles of our elbow.  

     During maximum elbow extension, the olecranon process contacts the olecranon fossa to limit the extension angle of the elbow.   To measure the maximum extension angle of the elbow, we placed dots on the anterior surface of the humeral mid-shaft, where the olecranon process touched the olecranon fossa and on the anterior surface of the ulnar mid-shaft on the medial/lateral X-rays of the extended elbows.   Then, we drew lines from the humeral mid-shaft dot to the olecranon process/fossa dot and on to the ulnar mid-shaft dot.   Lastly, we centered a compass on olecranon process/fossa dot such that it superimposed the humeral line and measured the ulnar angle.

     Whereas the olecranon process of my non-pitching arm penetrated one inch into its olecranon fossa, the olecranon process of my pitching arm penetrated eleven-sixteenth inch into its olecranon fossa.   Therefore, the olecranon process of my pitching arm penetrated into the olecranon fossa five-sixteenth inch less.<