c-oreills

Study: https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2026/05/28/bjsports-2025-...

Regarding the first study: follow up from the same authors overturns their own results: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33666663/

> Conclusions and relevance: The findings of this study suggest that the association between CD and increased risk of neurodevelopmental disorders in the children was most likely explained by unmeasured familial confounding.

> human interactions are positive to participants pretty much if and only if those interactions are repeated

> One-off interactions are almost invariably toxic

I think these claims are too strong. I can believe that there's less incentive to treat people well when you don't expect to repeat interactions.

To give a mundane counter-example: last week I had a flight where I chatted on-and-off with the person next to me. I had zero expectations of repeat interactions with them following the flight, and it was still a friendly and courteous exchange, on both sides.

The study in question is https://www.neurology.org/doi/10.1212/WNL.0000000000214677

I thought of the same parallel when reading the post.

I've recently read Outlive for health advice. On its recommendation, I've taken up regularly walking with a loaded backpack of 20-30kg ("rucking").

The basis for this recommendation is that until recently, people would have been exposed to carrying weight in day to day life, but an increase in our daily convenience has reduced this more and more.

I can see that there would be benefits in doing the equivalent thing mentally as physically. "Rucking" for the mind.

Outlive also recommends mental exercises like learning an instrument or new language as potential ways to stave off neurodegeneration.