Checks out, really.

  • Fredselfish@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Well guess I’m fucked. We have zero public transportation in my town surrounding my entire neighborhood is all highways. And only way to get anywhere is by driving

  • yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    20 hours ago

    IQ is not an objective measure of intelligence. Nothing can be because intelligence is colloquial and subjective. If I told you that I had an instrument that could objectively rank all humanity by beauty, smart people would see the problem immediately.

    IQ depends on their being one kind of underlying intelligence. No such thing as ‘book smarts’ or ‘street smarts’. Emotional intelligence is also fake. Just logical problem solving and spacial recognition.

    IQ is racist. IQ consistently shows that black Americans have lower IQ than other groups. White supremacists love this fact because they view it as scientific evidence that black people are inferior.

    “Race” is biologically incoherent, but “black American” is the most incoherent of all. Barack Obama is a famous black American. But his mama is a white lady named Durham and her people are British. In the Jim Crow era South, 1/16 black ancestry made you 100% legally black. That’s one great-grandparent. White and black Americans have been cross pollinating for 400years. Sometimes even consensually.

    “Black American” is not a coherent biological category. Therefore, when IQ tests mark differences between these groups, it can ONLY be measuring social difference because their is no biological explanation.

    IQ is not an objective measure of intelligence and any study based on it is faulty.

    • kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      18 hours ago

      IQ is a reasonably effective metric of certain kinds of intelligence. It doesn’t measure all intelligence and has some caveats, but it still highly correlates with certain abilities of one’s brain. IQ decreasing over time in the same subject is a cause for alarm.

      And you absolutely can objectively measure certain types of beauty. If you managed to rank all of humanity by facial symmetry, I’d think you were a bit weird, but I wouldn’t say that you were wrong.

    • Slashme@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      18 hours ago

      The original article wasn’t talking about IQ at all - Reader’s Digest was oversimplifying the research.

      Cognitive tests included prospective memory (baseline only: n = 171,585), visual-spatial memory (round 1: n = 483,832; round 2: n = 482,762), fluid intelligence (n = 165,492), and short-term numeric memory (n = 50,370).

  • bedwyr@piefed.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    24 hours ago

    I don’t think this is new information at all. It’s long been known that say rats put in a stimulating environment have more developed brains, more grey matter, and a higher intellect, than ones kept in a boring enclosure.

    What is in question, is how much of that drop in mental ability is from particulate matter and such, which is something it does do, and how much from just not thinking?

  • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    The study found similar results with participants who partook in several hours similarly sedentary activity, like television watching.

    Does it apply to motorcycles?

    • WhoIzDisIz@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      I think the issue is insufficient challenges for your brain to deal with on an intellectual level. If you don’t use it, you lose it kind of thing. Which sedentary activity you’re doing doesn’t itself really matter.

          • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            22 hours ago

            Well yeah, experiencing >1000 motorcycles and bicycles all blocked in and boiling in the Hanoi heat because of like 10 cars and a van will solidify ones unending loathing of cars, but usually things aren’t so bad and you get the fun of weaving and finding the ever-changing paths between bikes, pedestrians, cars, construction equipment, and potholes, whereas cars are just forced to go and stop when somethings in the way.

          • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 day ago

            Getting stuck in traffic in a car or cruising on a freeway is an exercise in patience, tracking which of the hundreds of bikes around you you have to pay close attention to while operating a motorbike is mentally exhausting.

            • WhoIzDisIz@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              Yes, but what to do in any given situation is not exactly a mental challenge. You don’t take an undefined amount of time to think through all the possibilities & outcomes - you have to make split second decisions that are mostly instinctual. This is far from being an intellectual process.

  • Slashme@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Oh, that famous Journal called Reader’s Digest.

    Here’s the original article: https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwx273

    Abstract:

    We investigated the cross-sectional and prospective associations between different sedentary behaviors and cognitive function in a large sample of adults with data stored in the UK Biobank. Baseline data were available for 502,643 participants (2006–2010, United Kingdom). Cognitive tests included prospective memory (baseline only: n = 171,585), visual-spatial memory (round 1: n = 483,832; round 2: n = 482,762), fluid intelligence (n = 165,492), and short-term numeric memory (n = 50,370). After a mean period of 5.3 years, participants (numbering from 12,091 to 114,373, depending on the test) also provided follow-up cognitive data. Sedentary behaviors (television viewing, driving, and nonoccupational computer-use time) were measured at baseline. At baseline, both television viewing and driving time were inversely associated with cognitive function across all outcomes (e.g., for each additional hour spent watching television, the total number of correct answers in the fluid intelligence test was 0.15 (99% confidence interval: 0.14, 0.16) lower. Computer-use time was positively associated with cognitive function across all outcomes. Both television viewing and driving time at baseline were positively associated with the odds of having cognitive decline at follow-up across most outcomes. Conversely, computer-use time at baseline was inversely associated with the odds of having cognitive decline at follow-up across most outcomes. This study supports health policies designed to reduce television viewing and driving in adults.