Thanks for the advice! I'll be more careful about the language. Actually, the point of me doing these was to learn how to write in a more informal voice - to deliver both good content, but also an enjoyable experience even for those not super interested in the science. I think I've strayed from that recently, so I appreciate the nudge.
In exercise intervention research, it used to be all about aerobic exercise, but there was a ton of variation to the exercise intervention. In survey studies, the type of exercise was even more variable. Now research is extending outside of aerobic exercise to other activities like weight training. The results of all of these different types of studies are often conflicting, so I'm pleased that people are starting to build models that try to predict why some exercise studies will work really well and some won't work at all.
You make an especially good point about working in groups! Their framework might also include a social aspect, which is such a core aspect to being a human :-)
Oh you did fine. There's much harder stuff out there. See this for instance, I just read it: https://steemit.com/science/@lemouth/observation-of-new-phenomena-at-the-lhc-at-cern-flavor-anomalies-beauty-charm-and-penguins#@lemouth/re-alexanderalexis-re-lemouth-re-alexanderalexis-re-lemouth-observation-of-new-phenomena-at-the-lhc-at-cern-flavor-anomalies-beauty-charm-and-penguins-20170629t134202299z
Look at my comment to that post if you wanna have a chuckle maybe!
Yeah exercise science is in a lot of ways still in its infancy.
Just read this post: https://steemit.com/sports/@winstonalden/long-distance-running-versus-injury-how-i-ran-100-miles-in-june Goes to show running isn't ideal for us. I'd say it isn't even good, considering the much healthier alternatives. I don't think it's natural for humans to run long distances.