3 ms·

A friendly reminder that correlation does not imply causation. There is no contradiction between this result being real, and meditation being absolutely worthle

by goonte 12y ago

A friendly reminder that correlation does not imply causation. There is no contradiction between this result being real, and meditation being absolutely worthless at preventing loss of grey matter. This is a small sample, and it's just as plausible that (I'm making this up) vegetarians are more likely to meditate, and a vegetarian diet correlates with more grey matter. If this is a significant result, the takeaway isn't that "I should meditate to keep my grey matter", but rather "I should be the kind of person that would have meditated in this study if I want to keep my grey matter".

hbgb 12y ago
I was very happy to see that the article addressed this immediately in the second paragraph: The researchers cautioned, however, that they cannot draw a direct, causal connection between meditation and preserving gray matter in the brain. Too many other factors may come into play, including lifestyle choices, personality traits, and genetic brain differences. Good reporting.
stolio 12y ago
Agreed, this is a highly correlative study. However even if meditating doesn't have a direct effect on the brain (it is in some forms just sitting there) it encourages the type of self-reflection that leads to healthier choices. The moments where you go "Oh, activity X is unhealthy and makes me unhappy so I should stop" cause a healthier more balanced lifestyle. So there is a completely non-woo mechanism for why meditation could be improving long term health. Also noteworthy is meditation is a practice that's thousands of years old and there are many different types of it and just because one of them is beneficial doesn't mean they all are.
porter 12y ago
What exactly would imply causation in a study like this? What should people look out for so they don't get fooled?
- ternaryoperator 12y ago
  It might well be that meditators react to situations less stressfully, so that it's actually stress that's the negative agent rather than meditation the positive one; and so any stress-reducing activities will have similar benefits. To show causation, it seems (I'm not a statistician) would require eliminating a lot of factors: diet, lifestyle, etc.

by goonte 12y ago

hbgb 12y ago

I was very happy to see that the article addressed this immediately in the second paragraph: The researchers cautioned, however, that they cannot draw a direct, causal connection between meditation and preserving gray matter in the brain. Too many other factors may come into play, including lifestyle choices, personality traits, and genetic brain differences. Good reporting.

stolio 12y ago

Agreed, this is a highly correlative study. However even if meditating doesn't have a direct effect on the brain (it is in some forms just sitting there) it encourages the type of self-reflection that leads to healthier choices. The moments where you go "Oh, activity X is unhealthy and makes me unhappy so I should stop" cause a healthier more balanced lifestyle. So there is a completely non-woo mechanism for why meditation could be improving long term health. Also noteworthy is meditation is a practice that's thousands of years old and there are many different types of it and just because one of them is beneficial doesn't mean they all are.

porter 12y ago

What exactly would imply causation in a study like this? What should people look out for so they don't get fooled?

ternaryoperator 12y ago
It might well be that meditators react to situations less stressfully, so that it's actually stress that's the negative agent rather than meditation the positive one; and so any stress-reducing activities will have similar benefits. To show causation, it seems (I'm not a statistician) would require eliminating a lot of factors: diet, lifestyle, etc.