I'd be quite curious to see this combined with [transcranial] photobiomodulation - a two-pronged approach to healthy mitochondria might pay healthy dividends.
For those hearing about PBM and feeling skeptical, I was as well, especially with all the claims of therapeutic "red light therapy" circling the internet. But do a quick search in pubmed and you will see that at this point there have been thousands of studies exploring the use of PBM (808-1064nm)
I quickly found these two which relate to sleep quality:
If anyone is interested in PBM I gave an overview presentation a few months ago to a lab studying noninvasive neurostimulation, I would be happy to send it your way.
Yes this is true, but we actually have a lot more data to back this on than exclusively fMRI analysis - for example the ADHD medication guanfacine works only because the alpha 2 receptors happen to be wired differently in the prefrontal cortex than it is in other areas of the brain (a2 is inhibitory for most brain regions, but in the PFC they're positioned to amplify connections between neurons) , so by stimulating alpha 2 we allow for a more “top down” control from the prefrontal cortex than we do without, which improves executive function.
So that is one extremely robust way to understand neurological conditions like ADHD or Parkinson’s
If this article resonates with you in even the smallest way, I urge you to read Neil Postman's "Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business".
I am currently re-reading this book and am amazed by the apparent accuracy of his analysis, which is that the mediums in which we communicate or express information (print vs. TV vs. TikTok) have a massively understated role in the quality and type of communication we participate in. That is, as print lends itself naturally to logical argument and less to emotional knee-jerk reactions, the type of conversations taken place in long-form print will by nature be more logical and intellectual. Compare this to TV or short term videos, which captivate us using more primal forms of distraction (bright lights with moving images, fast talking, "Gotcha" type rhetoric, cool dances, sexual/romantic behaviour, or background subway surfers), and it is obvious that the nature of what we see is inherently less based around logic and reason.
And as a consequence, if we are what we consume, it is only natural to surmise that the quality of the mind follows the quality (and qualia) of our media.
I think the prior probability in the bayesian sense is that the two entering cohorts are equally skilled (assuming students were randomly split into two sections as opposed to different sections being composed of different student bodies). If this were the case, the implication is that performance differences in standardized tests between cohorts are due to the professor (maybe one of the profs didn't cover the right material), so then normalization could be justified.
However if that prior is untrue for any reason whatsoever, the normalization would penalize higher performing cohorts (if it were a math course, maybe an engineering student dominated section vs an arts dominated cohort).
For those hearing about PBM and feeling skeptical, I was as well, especially with all the claims of therapeutic "red light therapy" circling the internet. But do a quick search in pubmed and you will see that at this point there have been thousands of studies exploring the use of PBM (808-1064nm)
I quickly found these two which relate to sleep quality:
https://pbmfoundation.org/brain-photobiomodulation-improves-...
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41125953/
If anyone is interested in PBM I gave an overview presentation a few months ago to a lab studying noninvasive neurostimulation, I would be happy to send it your way.