Jilka 🧘🏻‍♀️🕉️📈

Gender equality is a social justice matter, not a social protection!

[Орнитолог-любитель 🇧🇾 @BerlagaBuh]

Ух ты. Онлайнер разместил очень интересную статью, а вернее не статью, а настоящий гайд для тех, кто хочет ступить на тропу поиска предков
https://t.co/EPFybfKU8P

[Ihtesham Ali @ihtesham2005]

A Norwegian neuroscientist spent 20 years proving that the act of writing by hand changes the human brain in ways typing physically cannot, and almost nobody outside her field has read the paper.

Her name is Audrey van der Meer.

She runs a brain research lab in Trondheim, and the paper that closed the argument was published in 2024 in a journal called Frontiers in Psychology. The finding is brutal enough that it should have changed every classroom on Earth.

The experiment was simple. She recruited 36 university students and put each one in a cap with 256 sensors pressed against their scalp to record brain activity. Words flashed on a screen one at a time.

Sometimes the students wrote the word by hand on a touchscreen using a digital pen, and sometimes they typed the same word on a keyboard. Every neural response was recorded for the full five seconds the word stayed on screen.

Then her team looked at the part of the data most researchers had ignored for years, which is how different parts of the brain were communicating with each other during the task.

When the students wrote by hand, the brain lit up everywhere at once.

The regions responsible for memory, sensory integration, and the encoding of new information were all firing together in a coordinated pattern that spread across the entire cortex. The whole network was awake and connected.

When the same students typed the same word, that pattern collapsed almost completely.

Most of the brain went quiet, and the connections between regions that had been alive seconds earlier were nowhere to be found on the EEG.

Same word, same brain, same person, and two completely different neurological events.

The reason turned out to be something nobody had really paid attention to before her work. Writing by hand is not one motion but a sequence of thousands of tiny micro-movements coordinated with your eyes in real time, where each letter is a different shape that requires the brain to solve a slightly different spatial problem.

Your fingers, wrist, vision, and the parts of your brain that track position in space are all working together to produce one letter, then the next, then the next.

Typing throws all of that away. Every key on a keyboard requires the exact same finger motion regardless of which letter you are pressing, which means the brain has almost nothing to integrate and almost no problem to solve.

Van der Meer said it plainly in her interviews.

Pressing the same key with the same finger over and over does not stimulate the brain in any meaningful way, and she pointed out something that should scare every parent who handed their kid an iPad.

Children who learn to read and write on tablets often cannot tell letters like b and d apart, because they have never physically felt with their bodies what it takes to actually produce those letters on a page.

A decade before her, two researchers at Princeton ran the same fight using a completely different method and ended up at the same answer. Pam Mueller and Daniel Oppenheimer tested 327 students across three experiments, where half took notes on laptops with the internet disabled and half took notes by hand, before testing everyone on what they actually understood from the lectures they had watched.

The handwriting group won by a wide margin on every question that required real understanding rather than surface recall.

The reason was hiding in the transcripts of what the two groups had actually written down.

The laptop students typed almost word for word, capturing more total content but processing almost none of it as they went, while the handwriting students physically could not write fast enough to transcribe a lecture in real time, which forced them to listen carefully, decide what actually mattered, and put it in their own words on the page.

That single act of choosing what to keep was the learning itself, and the keyboard had quietly skipped the choosing and skipped the learning along with it.

Two studies. Two countries. Same answer.

Handwriting makes the brain work. Typing lets it coast.

Every note you have ever typed instead of written went into your brain through a thinner pipe. Every meeting, every book highlight, every idea you captured on your phone instead of on paper was processed at half depth.

You did not forget those things because your memory is bad. You forgot them because typing never woke the part of the brain that would have made them stick.

The fix is the thing your grandmother already knew.

Pick up a pen. Write the thing down. The slower road is the faster one.

[Seiya @hosomacho1]

1日30秒で、8時間の座りっぱなしを帳消しにする動作がある。

大げさではない。座りっぱなしで何が起きているかを先に説明する。

長時間座ると腸腰筋（股関節の奥にある深層筋）が縮んだまま固まる。すると骨盤が前に引っ張られ、連動して臀筋（お尻の筋肉）が正常に使えなくなる。臀筋が死ぬと腰椎（腰の骨）が代わりに負荷を引き受ける。腰が痛くなる。胸椎（背中の骨）が固まり、肩と首が代償を始める。

これは意志や姿勢の問題ではない。座るという行為が引き起こす、構造的な機能不全だ。

「ワールド・グレイテスト・ストレッチ」はこの連鎖を全部まとめて解除する。

股関節屈筋（脚を持ち上げる筋肉）・ハムストリングス（太もも裏）・胸椎・足首・肩。座りっぱなしで壊れる5カ所を、1つの動作で同時にリセットする。世界最高と呼ばれる理由はここにある。

正直、30秒のストレッチで何かが変わるとは思っていなかった。私自身、ストレッチ全般を「時間の割に効果が薄い」と軽視していた時期が長かった。

続けて2週間くらいで感覚が変わった。朝の腰の詰まりがない。肩が軽い。これだけで午前中の集中力が別物になる。

やり方はリプ欄へ。

[ALLATRA @allatra_org]

Microplastics are everywhere - in water, food and our bodies. Why banning plastic isn't enough and how science proposes to neutralize this threat.
Are you ready to completely remove plastic from your life right now or you think that's impossible?

[Tanya Narbut🇮🇱🇺🇦 @NarbutTanya]

Израиль снова побеждает рак.

Эта израильская технология позволяет уничтожать опухоли путем замораживания, без хирургического вмешательства или облучения.

Система ProSense от IceCure Medical использует криоабляцию. Крошечный зонд подает экстремально низкий уровень холода (жидкий азот) для точного замораживания и уничтожения раковых опухолей в молочной железе, почках, легких, печени и костях.

Процедура занимает несколько минут под местной анестезией, и многие пациенты отправляются домой в тот же день.
Уже одобренная FDA и используемая во всем мире, она предлагает минимально инвазивный вариант с более быстрым восстановлением и меньшим количеством побочных эффектов.

Это уже не научная фантастика. Это израильская инновация, дающая онкологическим больным более щадящий и точный путь к выздоровлению.

Горжусь этим каждый день. 🇮🇱

[Ihtesham Ali @ihtesham2005]

A Hungarian psychologist raised three daughters to prove that any child could become a chess grandmaster through early specialization. He succeeded. Two of them became grandmasters. One became the greatest female chess player who ever lived.

Then a sports scientist looked at the data and found something nobody wanted to hear.

His name is David Epstein. The book is called "Range."

The Polgar experiment is one of the most famous case studies in the history of deliberate practice. Laszlo Polgar wrote a book before his daughters were even born arguing that geniuses are made, not born. He homeschooled all three girls in chess from age four. By their teens, Susan, Sofia, and Judit were dominating tournaments against grown men. Judit became the youngest grandmaster in history at the time, breaking Bobby Fischer's record. The story became the gospel of early specialization. Pick a domain young, drill it hard, and you can manufacture excellence.

Epstein opens his book by telling that story honestly and then quietly demolishing the conclusion most people drew from it.

Chess works that way. Most things do not.

Here is the distinction that took him four years of research to articulate, and that almost nobody who quotes the 10,000 hour rule has ever read.

There are two kinds of environments in which humans develop expertise. Psychologists call them kind and wicked. A kind environment has clear rules, immediate feedback, and patterns that repeat reliably. Chess is the cleanest example. Every game ends with a winner and a loser. Every move is recorded. The board never changes shape. The pieces never invent new ways to move. A child who plays ten thousand games will see most of the patterns that exist in the game, and pattern recognition is exactly what chess mastery is built on.

A wicked environment is the opposite. Feedback is delayed or misleading. Rules shift. The patterns that worked yesterday may be exactly the wrong patterns to apply tomorrow. Most of the real world looks like this. Medicine is wicked. Investing is wicked. Building a company is wicked. Scientific research is wicked. Almost every job that involves a complex changing system with humans in it is wicked.

The Polgar sisters trained in the kindest environment any human can train in. Their success was real and the method was correct. The mistake was generalizing the method to fields where the underlying structure of the environment is completely different.

Epstein's research is what made the implication impossible to ignore.

He looked at the careers of elite athletes outside of chess and golf and found that the pattern was almost the inverse of what people assumed. The athletes who reached the very top of their sports were overwhelmingly people who had played multiple sports as children, specialized late, and often switched disciplines well into their teens. Roger Federer played squash, badminton, basketball, handball, tennis, table tennis, and soccer before tennis became his focus. The kids who specialized in tennis at age six and trained year-round for a decade mostly burned out, got injured, or topped out at lower levels of the sport.

The same pattern showed up everywhere he looked outside of kind environments. Inventors with the most patents had worked in multiple unrelated fields before their breakthrough work. Comic book creators with the longest careers had drawn for the most different genres before settling. Scientists who won Nobel Prizes were dramatically more likely than their peers to be serious amateur musicians, painters, sculptors, or writers.

The skill that mattered in wicked environments was not depth in one pattern. It was the ability to recognize when a pattern from one domain applied unexpectedly in another. That kind of thinking cannot be built by drilling a single subject. It can only be built by accumulating mental models from many subjects and learning to move between them.

The deeper finding is the one that should change how you think about your own career.

Specialists in wicked environments often get worse with experience, not better. Epstein cites studies of doctors, financial analysts, intelligence officers, and forecasters showing that years of experience in a narrow domain frequently produce more confident judgments without producing more accurate ones. The expert builds elaborate mental models that feel comprehensive and turn out to be increasingly disconnected from the actual structure of the problem. They stop noticing what does not fit their framework. They mistake fluency for understanding.

Generalists do better in wicked domains for a reason that sounds almost mystical until you understand the mechanism. They have less invested in any single mental model, so they abandon broken models faster. They are used to being a beginner, so they are not threatened by the discomfort of not knowing. They have seen enough different domains that they can usually find an analogy from one field that unlocks a problem in another. The technical name for this is analogical thinking, and the research on it is one of the most underrated bodies of work in cognitive science.

The single most useful sentence in the entire book is the one Epstein puts almost as a throwaway.

Match quality matters more than head start.

A person who tries six different fields in their twenties and finds the one that genuinely fits them will outperform a person who picked one field at fourteen and stuck to it on willpower alone. The lost years were not lost. They were the search process that produced the match. Every field they walked away from taught them something they later imported into the field they finally chose.

The reason this is so hard to accept is cultural, not empirical. We tell children to pick a path early. We reward the prodigy who knew at six. We treat the late bloomer as someone who failed to launch on time, when the data suggests they were running an entirely different and often more effective optimization process underneath.

The Polgar sisters were not wrong. The conclusion the world drew from them was.

If your environment is genuinely kind, specialize early and drill hard. If it is wicked, and almost every interesting human problem is, then the people who win are the ones who refused to specialize until they had seen enough to know what was actually worth specializing in.

You are not behind. You were running the right experiment all along.

[Независимый взгляд 💥 @zgldz]

🧪Китайская Ankon Technologies разработала новую систему капсульной эндоскопии с магнитным управлением и поддержкой ИИ. Теперь проверка всего ЖКТ, от желудка до прямой кишки, проводится без анестезии и шлангов. Капсула даже возьмёт биопсию, а потом выключится и выйдет. Цена $280

[Brett Boettcher @brettboettcher1]

Women have been lied to about strength training.

High reps and light weights don’t make you “toned”.

If you are a woman over 40, do these 7 exercises to get leaner, stronger and feel 10 years younger:

[ALLATRA @allatra_org]

A plastic bottle does not disappear without a trace. It transforms into micro and nanoplastics. Research shows how plastic particles become part of natural processes. What does this mean for our health and the future of ecosystems?

More information via the link.

[Kash @Alphakash14]

@shubhvanii 7-8 hour deep sleep????!? Natural optimal levels are 13-21% of your sleep to be deep.

[Jilka 🧘🏻‍♀️🕉️📈 @Jilka]

@shubhvanii Is 7-8 hours of deep sleep possible at all?

[Алена Акулова. Размышления психолога @psyalenaakulova]

Хороший ролик про психологию зависимости и практические рекомендации избавления

[Millie Marconi @MillieMarconnni]

A MIT PhD student told me he can predict exam questions before seeing the study guide.

Using NotebookLM.

I thought he was exaggerating.

Then he showed me the workflow.

He doesn’t wait for revision week.

He uploads past papers, lecture slides, textbook chapters, and old assignments into NotebookLM weeks in advance.

Then he runs 5 prompts.

By the time most students start studying, he already knows what the exam will probably look like.

Here’s the exact system:

[Enezator @Enezator]

A working mom left her child with her grandmother, showing a powerful example of what education really means 👩‍👧💛

[Massimo @Rainmaker1973]

Scientists have identified a reversal of the long-standing Flynn effect—the roughly 200-year trend of rising average intelligence (measured via IQ and cognitive tests) across generations.

For the first time in modern recorded history, Generation Z (born roughly 1997–2012) shows lower performance than previous generations in key cognitive domains, including attention, memory, literacy, numeracy, executive function, problem-solving, and general IQ—despite spending more years in formal education than ever before.

Neuroscientist and educator Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath, PhD, MEd, testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on January 15, 2026, highlighting this shift. In his written testimony, he stated that cognitive development in children across much of the developed world has stalled or reversed over the past two decades, with declines evident in international assessments (e.g., PISA, TIMSS) and other large-scale data starting around the mid-2000s and accelerating post-2010.

Horvath attributes the primary driver not to reduced schooling, but to the widespread integration of digital screens and educational technology (EdTech) in classrooms. He argues that human brains evolved for deep, focused learning through face-to-face interaction and sustained attention, not fragmented skimming or constant task-switching encouraged by devices.

Key points from his testimony include:

- Teens now spend over half their waking hours on screens, with significant portions in school involving computers or tablets—often leading to off-task behavior and shallower processing.

- Evidence from meta-analyses and national/international studies shows a consistent pattern: higher classroom screen exposure correlates with weaker outcomes in reading, math, science, and higher-order reasoning.

- Digital tools may aid narrow, repetitive skill practice in controlled settings, but in core academic contexts, they tend to reduce depth of understanding, retention, and critical thinking.

Horvath describes this as a "structural mismatch" between human cognition and how digital platforms are designed (to capture and fragment attention), warning that unchecked EdTech adoption risks long-term harm to workforce skills, innovation, and societal reasoning.

[Horvath, J. C. (2026). Written testimony before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. U.S. Senate]

[Allen Braden @allen_explains]

This 2-hour Stanford lecture breaks down how models like ChatGPT and Claude are actually built, clearer than what many people in top AI roles ever get exposed to.

Save this and set aside two hours today. It might end up being the most valuable thing you learn all week.

[Kevin Tanaka @ItsKevinTanaka]

Your body has a speed limit. Most people ignore it.

Behavioral expert Chase Hughes: move like you're underwater this week. Slower body = calmer mind. That's it. That's the whole trick.

@NCIUniversity

[Psyche Wizard @PsycheWizard]

- Buddha

[Jilka 🧘🏻‍♀️🕉️📈 @Jilka]

Совсем по-другому звучит. "Ласковый май" терпеть не могла😝 с их слащавыми голосками.

[Zafar @ZafaROCK_N_ROLL]

Kanye West перепел «Седую ночь» Юры Шатунова —
и это звучит неожиданно красиво.

Другой голос, другой язык, а сама песня ощущается так же сильно.

🔥 Просто по-другому подана — и заходит.