One of the links he provides is to this review article: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0010945219303326?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedi

One of the links he provides is to this review article: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0010945219303326?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00109... It concludes with something not far off from what Huberman stated. Not saying it proves he’s right but makes it easy to give him the benefit of the doubt and try to track down the actual new research he is referencing. > One intriguing possibility is that the structure and function of aMCC could be altered with sufficient behavioral training. Indeed, as a flexible hub, the MCC may be better equipped than other brain regions to reshape its connectivity in response to learning. It has been proposed that protein receptors important for plasticity (such as CaMKII, NR2B, NMDA) are highly expressed in limbic circuits including aMCC (Wei et al., 1999; Palomero-Gallagher et al., 2008; Garcia-Cabezas et al., 2017; Burt et al., 2018; Palomero-Gallagher and Zilles, 2019). Interestingly, Garcia-Cabezas et al. (2017) recently showed that in adult monkeys, markers of synaptic plasticity are high in MCC (and other limbic regions) while markers of stability (as expressed by cellular factors that inhibit synaptic plasticity) are low. These findings suggest that training related improvement in behaviors requiring tenacity may be mediated through the aMCC. We have seen evidence that aMCC can be ‘trained up” in the domain of exercise (Colcombe et al., 2006).