lack of serious martial artists

[Gerry Seymour]

It was a joke mostly.
Your other point against it being the "best". Okay. Talking of jump rope: the form is uncomplicated and you can measure objective performance easily. The conditioning is better than jogging perhaps, and the knee impact is low. The lightness on one's feet and fact that it's cardio is a great boon to an old guy that complains of a tired body. If he could do 1 minute of jump rope with a good pace and 5 inches in heel vertical I would be surprised but that's great -- now he needs to progress to 5 minutes.

I didn't use anecdote for onion I used a study on rats I wasn't motivated to cite and anecdote of my own and other's experiences. Here's a meta-study:

Testosterone in Males as Enhanced by Onion (Allium Cepa L.) - PMC

Testosterone (17β-Hydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one) is the main sex hormone in males. Maintaining and enhancing testosterone level in men is an incessant target for many researchers. Examples of such research approaches is to utilize specific types of food ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

It used to be a micro cultural phase (amongst communities online) and still lives on in those that have tried it. Historical account is very good reason haha! Good enough that with anecdote it makes sense. Vinegar is good and it sticks around in health obsessed cultures for a reason. All fermented food is good for you. If you tried it with a bit of motivation instead of a really bad mood from taste or whatever you would see the benefits pretty quickly.

Just try it yourself. It's easy.

Why does everyone want a controlled study. It's food. You can just try it. Your claims of placebo are ridiculous since every person can experience "negative placebo" where you want something to fail so it doesn't work. Double edge sword.

Haha do you guys fear the onion and vinegar too? I think the truth is beginning to surface. One's will or lack thereof is quite informative, wouldn't you agree?

You may actually understate the advantage jump rope has over running for MA-related performance in this post. Perhaps running hills/stairs would come close, but I'd be hard to convince that jump rope isn't a better overall exercise than running. I never got very good at jump rope (I enjoyed running too much, back when my knees could take it), so my own experience may be tempered by never really getting to a point where I would plateau on that exercise.

 

[Diagen]

I never said they weren't "fine". I said they are incomplete. If you have evidence to contradict what we know of brain development (continues to mid-20's in most men), I'd love to see it.

Haha that their brain is still changing and convoluting until 25 doesn't make it incompetent at planning or "incomplete" for what amounts to a basic cognitive function. There is no "we" here because it's not established scientific fact, you're reading dumb articles and sensationalized scientists that give their incredibly assumptuous opinion about things.
Neuroscience is way past this 1980s or whenever research man you have no clue. These basic reductionist sweeping assertions have already been shaken off the field but you don't really check that kind of stuff so how would you know?
Neuroscience is more confused than ever at how things work while having a better map of it all too. It's too complicated for them. They find specific structures responsible for something and weep like God and his Angels have descended from the Heavens. Or like Lot's wife they fall in a pillar of salt. Because they're very very salty people after studying neuroscience.

 

[Diagen]

You may actually understate the advantage jump rope has over running for MA-related performance in this post. Perhaps running hills/stairs would come close, but I'd be hard to convince that jump rope isn't a better overall exercise than running. I never got very good at jump rope (I enjoyed running too much, back when my knees could take it), so my own experience may be tempered by never really getting to a point where I would plateau on that exercise.

It's big big big for keeping light on your feet. When you get better you swing the rope faster and can do 1 leg jumps so you can't really plateau at all. You can do the HIIT type stuff where you go fast then slow, fast then slow, like you're going up and then down a hill so to speak. You try the kneesovertoes guy stuff?
You can get weighted jump rope and/ or put on a weight vest as well if you're very very good at it. Putting in at least 10 minutes straight though is not easy.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Haha that their brain is still changing and convoluting until 25 doesn't make it incompetent at planning or "incomplete" for what amounts to a basic cognitive function. There is no "we" here because it's not established scientific fact, you're reading dumb articles and sensationalized scientists that give their incredibly assumptuous opinion about things.
Neuroscience is way past this 1980s or whenever research man you have no clue. These basic reductionist sweeping assertions have already been shaken off the field but you don't really check that kind of stuff so how would you know?
Neuroscience is more confused than ever at how things work while having a better map of it all too. It's too complicated for them. They find specific structures responsible for something and weep like God and his Angels have descended from the Heavens. Or like Lot's wife they fall in a pillar of salt. Because they're very very salty people after studying neuroscience.

It is, in fact, established scientific knowledge. The normal progression of brain development is pretty well documented, and this is the last center of the brain to develop. If you can point to research that contradicts this statement, I'd be very interested, because the last research I looked into only better defined, rather than refuting, prior findings.

 

[Diagen]

It is, in fact, established scientific knowledge. The normal progression of brain development is pretty well documented, and this is the last center of the brain to develop. If you can point to research that contradicts this statement, I'd be very interested, because the last research I looked into only better defined, rather than refuting, prior findings.

Cognition is more complicated than brain fold convolution, hence it is not scientific fact that teenagers have poor executive function.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Cognition is more complicated than brain fold convolution, hence it is not scientific fact that teenagers have poor executive function.

So, no research you're aware of that contradicts what past research showed?

 

[Yokozuna514]

My comment about them being incomplete is quite literal. The portion of the brain responsible for (among other things) reasoning through consequence is the last portion to develop. For most males it finishes developing in the mid 20's, and a bit earlier in most females.

Hahaha, I think the issue I have is using the words 'incomplete' and 'bad at figuring'. I don't feel it best describes what we are essentially agreeing upon. From what I've read today (which is thanks to you) is that the part of the brain that is responsible for 'evaluating' if something is a good idea, is not fully connected. There is less of the layer of myelin that connects this part of the brain to the rest of the brain. I suppose you can call this 'incomplete' as it will eventually grow to connect this part of the brain to the rest of the brain however I am still not fully satisfied that the word 'incomplete' properly serves the function of describing what is actually going on.

I am definitely not a neuroscientist nor am I the perfect wordsmith. One man's 'incomplete' could possibly describe this very well and that is fine with me. I am not even sure I could offer a better word or phrase in it's place except 'still in development' but that is just splitting hairs. Thanks for giving me a reason to read something to better understand this particular subject.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Hahaha, I think the issue I have is using the words 'incomplete' and 'bad at figuring'. I don't feel it best describes what we are essentially agreeing upon. From what I've read today (which is thanks to you) is that the part of the brain that is responsible for 'evaluating' if something is a good idea, is not fully connected. There is less of the layer of myelin that connects this part of the brain to the rest of the brain. I suppose you can call this 'incomplete' as it will eventually grow to connect this part of the brain to the rest of the brain however I am still not fully satisfied that the word 'incomplete' properly serves the function of describing what is actually going on.

I am definitely not a neuroscientist nor am I the perfect wordsmith. One man's 'incomplete' could possibly describe this very well and that is fine with me. I am not even sure I could offer a better word or phrase in it's place except 'still in development' but that is just splitting hairs. Thanks for giving me a reason to read something to better understand this particular subject.

And just to add to the info, myelin (among other things, it seems) helps insulate the neural pathways. This appears to reduce cross-talk, essentially improving "signal-to-noise" ratio, so triggers are more consistent. It also appears to increase the speed a signal travels (perhaps because of trigger responses being more consistent - I haven't looked into that part in a long time). Myelin sheathing is apparently a key component of "skill" as it develops in the brain.

 

[Diagen]

So, no research you're aware of that contradicts what past research showed?

There is nothing to contradict, like I said.
Here's a fundamental issue: One can research something a bit, come up with assertions about it because there's a commonly held belief about teenagers, and now it's fact. But it isn't.

Where is your study on teenager's ability to plan ahead and reason? You cannot find me a direct study of such can you?

 

[Diagen]

And just to add to the info, myelin (among other things, it seems) helps insulate the neural pathways. This appears to reduce cross-talk, essentially improving "signal-to-noise" ratio, so triggers are more consistent. It also appears to increase the speed a signal travels (perhaps because of trigger responses being more consistent - I haven't looked into that part in a long time). Myelin sheathing is apparently a key component of "skill" as it develops in the brain.

This suggests that focus is easier in adults. But, big life decisions are about wisdom and the big picture along with a sense of proportion. Hence how is it skill related?
If martial arts should or should not affect your entire being and perspective of people and the world might not be a question an adult asks, but one a teenager asks. Does the increase of myelin after development ends suggest it's a trait of rigidity and lack of adaptability? That one has stopped evolving and growing? How does more cross-talk and slower impulse travel affect perspective, adaptability, wisdom?
What goes into a plan, or reasoning? Should one even be planning something? What is relevant to any plan? Even the task of planning is up for question, so how can reduced cross-talk be good? Sometimes you want one specific thing done when planning, thinking, reasoning, but much of the time one wants the big picture and essential question.
Bottom line: There are many ways to get the same thing done.

How much does high IQ study and practice effect the brain? If you look at a brain of a student in Calculus III, going to math competitions and doing well in all high level classes, what kind of differences do you see compared to an average adult and teenager brain?

 

[J. Pickard]

I love the term @Tony Dismukes gave me for those of us who aren't professionals in MA: hobbyists. I think thinking of it as a hobby makes it easier to understand what happens. Most of us have a hobby other than MA. For some of us, we are REALLY serious about that hobby. For some of us, it's just something we like doing well enough to be worth the work it entails to keep doing it, and we get pretty good at it just by enjoying the process. Sometimes that hobby even turns out to be something we can make a career/business out of.

This is a really good perspective. I'll keep this in mind going forward. Thanks for the insight.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

There is nothing to contradict, like I said.
Here's a fundamental issue: One can research something a bit, come up with assertions about it because there's a commonly held belief about teenagers, and now it's fact. But it isn't.

Where is your study on teenager's ability to plan ahead and reason? You cannot find me a direct study of such can you?

This would be the first time you asked for such. I should have some time after work tomorrow to dig through journal references to find you something.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

This suggests that focus is easier in adults. But, big life decisions are about wisdom and the big picture along with a sense of proportion. Hence how is it skill related?
If martial arts should or should not affect your entire being and perspective of people and the world might not be a question an adult asks, but one a teenager asks. Does the increase of myelin after development ends suggest it's a trait of rigidity and lack of adaptability? That one has stopped evolving and growing? How does more cross-talk and slower impulse travel affect perspective, adaptability, wisdom?
What goes into a plan, or reasoning? Should one even be planning something? What is relevant to any plan? Even the task of planning is up for question, so how can reduced cross-talk be good? Sometimes you want one specific thing done when planning, thinking, reasoning, but much of the time one wants the big picture and essential question.
Bottom line: There are many ways to get the same thing done.

How much does high IQ study and practice effect the brain? If you look at a brain of a student in Calculus III, going to math competitions and doing well in all high level classes, what kind of differences do you see compared to an average adult and teenager brain?

This again sounds like you're trying to seem profound. You ask a set of rapid-fire questions, most of which are not really related to anything I've said. And the rest seems to be you just not understanding the purpose of myelin, nor the aside about skill development.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

There is nothing to contradict, like I said.
Here's a fundamental issue: One can research something a bit, come up with assertions about it because there's a commonly held belief about teenagers, and now it's fact. But it isn't.

Where is your study on teenager's ability to plan ahead and reason? You cannot find me a direct study of such can you?

It's common knowledge within the field, and most of the studies on it are old (as in 10-20 years old), specifically because the research had already been done, so all that would need to be done afterwards is repeat studies to confirm the originals. Which probably exist, but are tougher to find. What you are arguing against was essentially an established fact (backed by multiple studies I'd have to find again) in my undergrad and post-graduate studies in psychology, including, and in the internships and jobs I had related to applied developmental psychology.

Development of orbitofrontal function: Current themes and future directions

This is probably a bit old for you (2004), but if you're truly interested in it, this article references a lot of different studies from the chronological beginning of the studies on brain development. Which, again if you're truly interested in learning about it, is the place to start. Without understanding the historical context of research, and what's already been determined, a study of, say, 4 groups: Teenager with peers, Teenager without peers, Adult with peers and Adult without peers, playing a videogame involving running red lights while hooked up to an EEG probably won't have all that much meaning while going on about both the tangible results and the different brain activity that's observed. But shows exactly how teenage decision-making and risk-inclination is much more effected by their peers than adult decision-making and risk-inclination.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It's common knowledge within the field, and most of the studies on it are old (as in 10-20 years old), specifically because the research had already been done, so all that would need to be done afterwards is repeat studies to confirm the originals. Which probably exist, but are tougher to find. What you are arguing against was essentially an established fact (backed by multiple studies I'd have to find again) in my undergrad and post-graduate studies in psychology, including, and in the internships and jobs I had related to applied developmental psychology.

Development of orbitofrontal function: Current themes and future directions

This is probably a bit old for you (2004), but if you're truly interested in it, this article references a lot of different studies from the chronological beginning of the studies on brain development. Which, again if you're truly interested in learning about it, is the place to start. Without understanding the historical context of research, and what's already been determined, a study of, say, 4 groups: Teenager with peers, Teenager without peers, Adult with peers and Adult without peers, playing a videogame involving running red lights while hooked up to an EEG probably won't have all that much meaning while going on about both the tangible results and the different brain activity that's observed. But shows exactly how teenage decision-making and risk-inclination is much more effected by their peers than adult decision-making and risk-inclination.

Thanks for popping in with this. I don't keep my hands in this area as much as I used to, so digging up relevant studies would have taken me some real effort.

 

[Tez3]

lol why are you afraid of being made fun of in your own head or online for talking about conquering fear? Are you afraid of relating to it, does that make you vulnerable?

 

[Tez3]

Whether it sums up my attitude or not, I am trying to see other's point of view the entire conversation. If you want to approach something from a different angle I am game. Most people tend to be rigid in their point of view, hence why I would be somewhat confrontational. Most people are not confrontational or overly confrontational without much explanation and perspectives are not easily changed this way.

You admit that in this conversation you have made claims I have generally refuted or used to clarify my position, yes? And in the end it adds to the discussion even if the participants find it gives their mind an indian burn?

You aren't actually confrontational, you are in fact quite mundane and predictable.
You put me in mind of a young military person not long out of training who has been sent on a course and has back to their unit bursting with enthusiasm to explain to the old hands all about something they've not just been taught but actually experienced.
The rest of us, the old hands, smile indulgently as you teach your grandma to suck eggs because we don't want to discourage you. However if you go over the line into arrogance and rudeness you get slapped down and put in your place so basically our attitude depends on you.

In other words, no, you haven't given anyone anything to think about let alone give their mind an Indian burn, whatever that may be, caused a few yawns though.

 

[Diagen]

This again sounds like you're trying to seem profound. You ask a set of rapid-fire questions, most of which are not really related to anything I've said. And the rest seems to be you just not understanding the purpose of myelin, nor the aside about skill development.

I am talking about what you're talking about and trying to interpret the data, what's the issue?
You say nothing I say is relevant but it is. You:

"This appears to reduce cross-talk, essentially improving "signal-to-noise" ratio, so triggers are more consistent. It also appears to increase the speed a signal travels (perhaps because of trigger responses being more consistent - I haven't looked into that part in a long time). Myelin sheathing is apparently a key component of "skill" as it develops in the brain."

And my first line:

"This suggests that focus is easier in adults. But, big life decisions are about wisdom and the big picture along with a sense of proportion. Hence how is it skill related?"

You talk about signal to noise ratio but what is determined to be noise and what is determined to be signal? Adults can become so one-track that they lose all perspective, is this superior?
How am I being irrelevant? Are we having a discussion or sharing literature? There is discussion here about why teenagers quit early and I am trying to develop perspective.
Big life decisions are indeed about wisdom and the big picture, and how it connects to what one really wants and how one makes sense of things including the meaning of life. How is that irrelevant? It is part of the discussion because I've made it part of it. Of course teenagers want something meaningful.

How do you think inconsistency in signal responses or feedback affects thinking and perspective? Along with the increase cross-talk, the reduced myelin suggests what in terms of the way it shapes a person? The brain of a teenager experiences less consistent or irrelevant feedback on everything it does, there is constant cross-chatter and signals move exposed and slower. Perhaps they can be more self-aware of how others see their thoughts or use creative reasoning because of this? What do you think? Perhaps they are more associative in their reasoning and doing? Perhaps they are more individualistic due to the lack of consistent 'trigger' and sense of disassociation or non-linearity in their own thinking?

With this in mind, what do you think would attract and motivate them? It seems like a good place to start.

 

[Diagen]

It's common knowledge within the field, and most of the studies on it are old (as in 10-20 years old), specifically because the research had already been done, so all that would need to be done afterwards is repeat studies to confirm the originals. Which probably exist, but are tougher to find. What you are arguing against was essentially an established fact (backed by multiple studies I'd have to find again) in my undergrad and post-graduate studies in psychology, including, and in the internships and jobs I had related to applied developmental psychology.

Development of orbitofrontal function: Current themes and future directions

This is probably a bit old for you (2004), but if you're truly interested in it, this article references a lot of different studies from the chronological beginning of the studies on brain development. Which, again if you're truly interested in learning about it, is the place to start. Without understanding the historical context of research, and what's already been determined, a study of, say, 4 groups: Teenager with peers, Teenager without peers, Adult with peers and Adult without peers, playing a videogame involving running red lights while hooked up to an EEG probably won't have all that much meaning while going on about both the tangible results and the different brain activity that's observed. But shows exactly how teenage decision-making and risk-inclination is much more effected by their peers than adult decision-making and risk-inclination.

You can't assume that brain structure is responsible though, which none of you seem to register is the central point of my argument. Yes I understand and have agreed that the brains of teenagers are still developing but if external factors demanded a more adult brain they would adapt. If teenagers had to live on their own after they reached puberty you would see different brain structures and different social structures preparing them and adapting them to an adult life before they reach 12 or so, and teenagers would be less affected by peer pressure and more adult in every way.

You can't arbitrarily decide that circumstance has no part in the physiology of their brain. I don't care how many others do it, you can't do that if you want to have insight and true knowledge. In this sense you've bent to the pressure of "common knowledge" haha! Ironic.

 

[Diagen]

You aren't actually confrontational, you are in fact quite mundane and predictable.
You put me in mind of a young military person not long out of training who has been sent on a course and has back to their unit bursting with enthusiasm to explain to the old hands all about something they've not just been taught but actually experienced.
The rest of us, the old hands, smile indulgently as you teach your grandma to suck eggs because we don't want to discourage you. However if you go over the line into arrogance and rudeness you get slapped down and put in your place so basically our attitude depends on you.

In other words, no, you haven't given anyone anything to think about let alone give their mind an Indian burn, whatever that may be, caused a few yawns though.

Maybe you speak more than you mean so you think everyone else is the same.
More to the point: Nice of everyone to refuse engagement with anything I say hence no god damned discussion. Just have the damned conversation holy F