I'm sorry, can you clarify your point? What is the problem with the idea that difficult tasks (both mental and physical) help to prevent atrophy in a certain part of the brain?
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/does-brain-training-work/
The tl;dr is that brain training makes you better at that one particular task. Whether that carries over to anything else is unknown. It is considered a useful technique only insofar as that it is easy to do, and we don't have a lot of other options to try anyway. But actual, measured benefits are difficult to find.
I am not against it as a concept. But much more research needs to be done to see if it has any actual value beyond the simple joy of doing such things.
Becoming smarter and preventing aging are two different goals.
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal....
> Based on this review, all three approaches to computerized training – classic cognitive training tasks, neuropsychological software, and video games – appear to hold promise for improving cognitive abilities in cognitively normal, community-dwelling older adults who have a higher risk of cognitive decline as they age.
The two best had an n of 12 and 8, respectively.
That's why they said 'appears'. It's suggestive, but the amount of available, good-quality data is surprisingly small.
My original conclusion wasn't that it didn't work, it was that the amount of actual research done was surprisingly small, and so that we didn't actually know what was being proclaimed as a done deal.
It turns out I was wrong, and that there has been more research than I thought.
That website just shows that brain-training programs like Lumosity* don't work very well. Thy are too simple and narrow in their focus.
After all, science is just a process mainly for avoiding lying to yourself about reality.
perfect. thank you!