That got your attention. I have no idea (yet) whether impingement will turn out to be bogus, but as of today, at least, hip impingement is a hypothesis, not a fact.

And I am at a loss regarding the utility of this hypothesis. What do you do with the information--prophylactic osteotomies?

I recently discovered that the "Double Crush Phenomenon", the process in which proximal yet subclinical compression of a nerve is said to place distal segments of that nerve at risk of damage from compression that would otherwise be noninjurious, was introduced into the medical literature as the "Double Crush Hypothesis". At no point was this hypothesis proven; nonetheless, simply by enduring for years, the concept lost its question mark.

The "shoulder impingement" hypothesis never had a question mark in the first place – surgeons are nothing if not confident – and 35 years later sub-acromial decompression is among the most popular operations in our field, even after it was said in the JBJS that the hypothesis did not withstand the test of time. Hmm...

I propose that the community of orthopedic surgeons adopt the convention whereby all podium speakers who wish to utter the phrase "hip impingement" (and not "hypothetical hip impingement" or "purported hip impingement") must make little quote marks with their fingers when they say the words.