3 ms·
That is an incorrect analogy, because that claim would be about enhancing performance for peak performers. This study shows that there is no basis for the clai
by abtinf 9y ago
That is an incorrect analogy, because that claim would be about enhancing performance for peak performers.
This study shows that there is no basis for the claim that you can enhance performance of normal/healthy performers.
The researchers state the have insufficient evidence to determine the effect on low/unhealthy performers.
- djrogers 9y agoIt’s actually not a bad analogy - healthy young adults tend to be at their mental peak, certainly compared to when they are another 40-50 years down the road...
- Bartweiss 9y agoIt is a bad analogy, because the problem with studying marathon runners is that they've already used the fitness technique you want to study. They're runners because they walk and run a a lot. (And not necessarily because they're young! People run marathons in their 80s.) This study is about people who've never used Luminosity's techniques, but are in unrelated good (brain) health. There are a lot of known ways to mitigate or undo damage to the brain. Luminosity made a much bolder claim, that they could raise IQ in healthy, high-functioning adult brains. That's the Holy Grail of intelligence research, because no one has ever found a way to do it. It's like claiming a two mile walk each day will make literally anyone a much better runner. If you claim that, it's relevant that your offering is no good to marathoners.