4 ms·

This is an article written by a journalist. If we want to get to the bottom of things, we can open Google Scholar and search for related peer-reviewed publicati

This is an article written by a journalist. If we want to get to the bottom of things, we can open Google Scholar and search for related peer-reviewed publications, finding [1][2] in the process. What do we see in [1] and [2]? A very prominent downward trend ( https://i.imgur.com/avKUvTd.png https://i.imgur.com/avKUvTd.png ) on all but a single cognitive test, which is verbal knowledge. All the important cognitive abilities related to thinking and understanding seem to decline severely with age, by as much as 1.2~2.0 s.d. from the peak. This is 18~30 lost IQ points on a typical 15-s.d. scale. For some people, the naturally gifted (starting point of +2.5 s.d. from the mean) this decline may be merely sad and inconveniencing, but for most of us this reality poses significant challenges to our daily life and autonomy as we approach our late years. I really don't see how this point may be overstated or talked away. By the way, if we try to delve deeper in our research exercise we can find pretty specific biological mechanisms associated with the cognitive decline, such as cellular senescence, vascular degeneration and BBB breakdown, loss of mitochondrial function, loss of white matter integrity. In my opinion, as adult human being approaching middle age, this cognitive ability decline due to age cannot be ignored, or cheered away with the usual gung-ho or wished away with wishful thinking. Instead we should acknowledge the obvious process happening to our older relatives and beginning to happen to us, and push our representatives to fund more targeted research grants and biotech investments, to find some remedies. Some of the necessary research is already happening, if you know where to look [3], but it's really a tenth to hundredth of the effort we could muster, if we cared. If we believed. 1. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.167.6787&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.167... 2. http://www.iapsych.com/wj3ewok/LinkedDocuments/McArdle2002.pdf http://www.iapsych.com/wj3ewok/LinkedDocuments/McArdle2002.p... 3. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/acel.13296 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/acel.13296

peterbell_nyc 6y ago
I'm 51 ands my personal experience to date has been that I am way more effective in business now that I have ever previously been. I certainly put in less hours (now only ~40-45/wk as I have a 4.5 year old and various other commitments), but now I have made so many mistakes over the years that I generally focus on what really matters and am finding my impact is substantially greater than it was even though my effort is much lower.
lupire 6y ago
Anothe solution is to return to the millennia old practice of caring for elders.
r-zip 6y ago
I think it's important to note that the first graphic you posted doesn't include longitudinal data (i.e., doesn't correct for the Flynn effect). Compare to: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2683339/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2683339/.
- sinenomine 6y ago
  Thank you for posting this paper, it is more statistically/psychometrically sound than the one I posted. By testing each person across a significant path of their lifespan, and correcting for test-retest drift, it produces a more defendable result. Still, it does not make decline disappear into statistical insignificance, just lowers its magnitude to 0.8~1.0 s.d, which is still large, thus sparing the qualitative reasoning in my interpretation. It should also be noted, that the Flynn effect has ended somewhere in the 1990s-2000s, at least in Norway[2], so it is likely that long-term it ceases to be a disturbing factor for between-cohorts comparisons. Test-retest gains will still be an issue though (and there is a viewpoint that a large part of Flynn effect could be explained as a large-scale environmentally-driven test-retest effect acting on the population). I also like the review[1] of paper you posted, suggesting several measurable histological/neurological/physiological correlates of cognitive aging, aptly summarized on this graph: https://i.imgur.com/CpQ6Upc.png https://i.imgur.com/CpQ6Upc.png If you are interested in discussing these papers, or joining a community of like-minded people, feel free to ping me via the email in my profile. 1. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19231030/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19231030/ (sci-hubbable) 2. http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/Sundet2004.pdf http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/Sundet2004.pd...

peterbell_nyc 6y ago

I'm 51 ands my personal experience to date has been that I am way more effective in business now that I have ever previously been. I certainly put in less hours (now only ~40-45/wk as I have a 4.5 year old and various other commitments), but now I have made so many mistakes over the years that I generally focus on what really matters and am finding my impact is substantially greater than it was even though my effort is much lower.

lupire 6y ago

Anothe solution is to return to the millennia old practice of caring for elders.

r-zip 6y ago

I think it's important to note that the first graphic you posted doesn't include longitudinal data (i.e., doesn't correct for the Flynn effect). Compare to: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2683339/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2683339/.

sinenomine 6y ago
Thank you for posting this paper, it is more statistically/psychometrically sound than the one I posted. By testing each person across a significant path of their lifespan, and correcting for test-retest drift, it produces a more defendable result. Still, it does not make decline disappear into statistical insignificance, just lowers its magnitude to 0.8~1.0 s.d, which is still large, thus sparing the qualitative reasoning in my interpretation. It should also be noted, that the Flynn effect has ended somewhere in the 1990s-2000s, at least in Norway[2], so it is likely that long-term it ceases to be a disturbing factor for between-cohorts comparisons. Test-retest gains will still be an issue though (and there is a viewpoint that a large part of Flynn effect could be explained as a large-scale environmentally-driven test-retest effect acting on the population). I also like the review[1] of paper you posted, suggesting several measurable histological/neurological/physiological correlates of cognitive aging, aptly summarized on this graph: https://i.imgur.com/CpQ6Upc.png https://i.imgur.com/CpQ6Upc.png If you are interested in discussing these papers, or joining a community of like-minded people, feel free to ping me via the email in my profile. 1. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19231030/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19231030/ (sci-hubbable) 2. http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/Sundet2004.pdf http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/Sundet2004.pd...