RE: Why is Exercise Good for the Brain? An Evolutionary Neuroscience Perspective
Good to see some more serious content on steemit! We're in dire need of articles with greater substance, or I worry this thing is gonna implode.
If I may, I would suggest you simplify some of the language in your articles. Not that any word is abstruse per se, but some words (like "framework"), that have specific meaning in the science that is being explored, could be replaced to offer a more flowing reading experience that might appeal more to the general reader.
(And note that I'm guilty of being abstruse myself oftentimes!)
The framework also makes some proposals about the ideal exercise for a human: that moderate aerobic exercise (the kind you get from gathering and hunting) in congruence with cognitively demanding strategic and spatial tasks would be the ideal way to enhance brain function.
I like that you're being specific about this, because the generic word 'exercise', in the context of our current culture, might give the impression that what's required is something like crossfit! In actual fact, hunter-gatherers do very little prolonged intense exercise. When they hunt for instance, they prefer to injure their prey, then track it down, walking lazily, conserving as much energy (a valuable commodity) as possible, and then engage in short bursts of intense activity when they go in for the kill. That's quite the contrary of the modern man who wakes up in the early morning and goes for a 1-to-2-hour run that will eventually destroy his knees.
Another thing the hunter-gatherers might do is work in groups, or work intelligently to trap their prey. In other words, 'laziness' (or 'energy-conservancy') is always their goal!
Personally, I can’t for the life of me understand why anyone runs for a long time instead of playing more cognitively complex sports and games in the first place ;-)
True! I myself though dislike sports, but I could easily change your example to solitary activities like swimming or lifting weights, i.e. activities which confer some skill, or make you look better, instead of something as boring (and actually dangerous) as running.
Thanks for the advice! I'll be more careful about the language. Actually, the point of me doing these was to learn how to write in a more informal voice - to deliver both good content, but also an enjoyable experience even for those not super interested in the science. I think I've strayed from that recently, so I appreciate the nudge.
In exercise intervention research, it used to be all about aerobic exercise, but there was a ton of variation to the exercise intervention. In survey studies, the type of exercise was even more variable. Now research is extending outside of aerobic exercise to other activities like weight training. The results of all of these different types of studies are often conflicting, so I'm pleased that people are starting to build models that try to predict why some exercise studies will work really well and some won't work at all.
You make an especially good point about working in groups! Their framework might also include a social aspect, which is such a core aspect to being a human :-)
Oh you did fine. There's much harder stuff out there. See this for instance, I just read it: https://steemit.com/science/@lemouth/observation-of-new-phenomena-at-the-lhc-at-cern-flavor-anomalies-beauty-charm-and-penguins#@lemouth/re-alexanderalexis-re-lemouth-re-alexanderalexis-re-lemouth-observation-of-new-phenomena-at-the-lhc-at-cern-flavor-anomalies-beauty-charm-and-penguins-20170629t134202299z
Look at my comment to that post if you wanna have a chuckle maybe!
Yeah exercise science is in a lot of ways still in its infancy.
Just read this post: https://steemit.com/sports/@winstonalden/long-distance-running-versus-injury-how-i-ran-100-miles-in-june Goes to show running isn't ideal for us. I'd say it isn't even good, considering the much healthier alternatives. I don't think it's natural for humans to run long distances.