131–140 of 147 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, I guess you don't have kids yet. Lifestyles need to be sustainable. For many, machines in the gym downstairs is the only thing that fits (many don't have that).
Oh, yeah. Solution is to never have kids.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, you can even go as low as 20-30 seconds if your goal is not competitive powerlifting and more aesthetics, I wasted way too much time for inferior results before switching to short rest time
Alternate working either opposing or totally unconnected muscle groups and there's no reason to rest any in between sets, which has the added benefit of turning it into a pretty incredible cardio workout at the same time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This was how I felt about lifting weights. I know about all of it's amazing health benefits, but you've got 3-5 minutes rest between sets, with most programs having you do at least 9 sets total. That's not even counting the time added on if someone else asks to work in sets with you. Plus the need for a spotter when benching. Point is, I ended up getting into bouldering. If you want to send a bouldering problem, you…
> but you've got 3-5 minutes rest between sets No you don't. You don't have to. You can have 90 seconds between sets if you want. Just stay consistent, gym session after gym session. Who has time for a 5 minute rest between sets? If you're doing warm-up sets you'll be in the gym for hours!
His 2004 TED Talk[2] on neuroplasticity is IMHO well worth watching.
[1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Merzenich
[2]: https://www.ted.com/talks/michael_merzenich_on_the_elastic_b...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Alternate working either opposing or totally unconnected muscle groups and there's no reason to rest any in between sets, which has the added benefit of turning it into a pretty incredible cardio workout at the same time.
Not entirely true. Once you're at a reasonable strength level simply switching muscle groups will not provide adequate rest for your CNS to perform your sets optimally.
This http://borgefagerli.com/myo-reps-in-english/ works very well for me, great results and very short workouts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can combine approaches. I'm a "weekend warrior" with climbing, hiking etc., and my passion for those activities spurred me to train during the week on a schedule. I'd gym climb or work out at home with dumbbells, so that I could do harder objectives during the weekend. This can be a gateway drug, and cause you to change your whole lifestyle and move to a place with such activities in abundance.
Well, I guess you don't have kids yet. Lifestyles need to be sustainable. For many, machines in the gym downstairs is the only thing that fits (many don't have that).
This is interesting, and kind of odd. The article claims the failure of previous brain-training studies came from choosing the wrong techniques, but the evidence on dual n-back specifically has been conflicted for quite a while; this isn't the first study on it. What's interesting here is that a lot of the best results on dual n-back in the past have concluded that it's mostly promising to fight cognitive decline or…
My understanding of the literature is largely that n-back training doesn’t generalize effectively, mostly just improving ones ability to perform n-back exercises.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand. Isn't it just the same word you started off with? Actually, I probably misunderstand since it sounds like the whisper game but with public passings which obviously would make no sense.
Each word is pushing onto, and then popping off of a stack.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I think the head-to-head between techniques is what's novel about the paper. But what confused me is that they got a strong positive off dual n-back in the first place; other studies of that exact technique have regularly come up ambiguous-to-negative.
The studies on Dual-N-Back increasing IQ have been all over the place. Some positive some negative. With the larger more careful trials coming up negative. But IQ isn't working memory, attention, or executive function. And the findings on Dual-N-Back and working memory are less ambiguous and more positive. Also there have been some more interesting studies done on Dual-N-Back in terms of changing Type 1 dopamine rece…
Huh, I guess this is what I was missing. I had the impression that even on working memory in particular, dual-n-back had mostly failed on a practical level - it just created training effects that broke the validity of certain tests.
If that's not the case, I'm suddenly much more interested.