tag:blog.phds.org,2010:/2010/1/20/pe-for-grad-students/comments Mephisto Noh-Varr 2010-01-20T23:34:28Z Curt F. tag:blog.phds.org,2010-01-20:959:964 2010-01-20T23:34:27Z 2010-01-20T23:34:27Z <p>I think I agree Geoff. The "brain rule" that exercise is good does seem independent of the assumption that the brain is not evolving. The text of the Brain Rules book does seem to make that assumption, though. If I recall correctly, though, some of the other "brain rules" may rely on the assumption that brains aren't evolving.</p> <p>Either way, my linked-to post was meant as a general discussion of the conflicting views of whether or not the brain is evolving, and not meant to specifically address exercise in any particular way.</p> Geoff Davis tag:blog.phds.org,2010-01-20:959:963 2010-01-20T19:11:46Z 2010-01-20T19:11:46Z <p>That's pretty interesting. I'm no neuroscientist, but I don't think the idea that exercise leads to better cognitive performance requires an assumption of minimal brain evolution since pre-agrarian times. The pathways by which exercise is thought to exert its effects are quite low level: brain oxygenation, modulation of cortisol levels, etc. I imagine it would take a rather dramatic evolutionary jump to change the response of brain cells to oxygen levels (but again, I'm no biologist).</p> <p>The studies Medina cites in his Google talk (I've only read bits and pieces of his book) are pretty compelling.</p> Curt F. tag:blog.phds.org,2010-01-20:959:962 2010-01-20T18:42:17Z 2010-01-20T18:42:17Z <p>I second the recommendation of John Medina's talk at Google. I generally liked Brain Rules, too, although <a href='http://minglingken.wordpress.com/2009/04/21/brain-rules-vs-10000-year-explosion/'>I did have some reservations about some of his ideas</a>. I will have to check out the other book.</p> Victoria McGovern tag:blog.phds.org,2010-01-20:959:961 2010-01-20T17:55:21Z 2010-01-20T17:55:21Z <p>More kickball!</p>