Separate names with a comma.
Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.
Discussion in 'Research, Studies, and Data' started by minglis, Aug 7, 2012.
I wonder if this has a effect on people who only ride during summer? If they don't have the full benefits of brain usage as was found in the regular riders, but attempt to ride at full capacity, they would seem to be more vulnerable.
Is this what contributes to us being "different". That hard to describe quality that we (riders) know we have, but find it difficult to put our proverbial finger on?
Ah crap.... now I'm in trouble.. seems this was already posted (well, some of the info was, not this exact article) here.... Sorry guys.
Wow, talk about myopic.
I'm not sure what you mean Lilley?
Put a cross link in the older thread...
I wonder what the brain looks like when you haven't been able to do a lot of riding, but you haven't stopped talking about riding? I hope I'm holding onto the benefits.
Lol I like this sentence: "Trial subjects were otherwise healthy people who had not ridden for 10 years or more."
If riding improves memory and reduces stress levels I'm going to be utterly fucked if I ever stop .
What do I mean?
Kawashima said. “A car is a comfortable machine which does not activate our brains. It only happens when going across a railway crossing or when a person jumps in front of us. By using motorcycles more in our life, we can have positive effects on our brains and minds”.
I would suggest Mr Kawashima learn how to drive and then actually do it.
All the article said was what we already know, that the brain designates more neuron connections for commonly performed activities than less commonly performed activities.
And that this is drivel. Motorcyclists just like to think they are different.
The article screamed of the worst type of tabloid style "journalism" right from the first sentence - and that was all that was needed for me to comfortably move on without reading the rest.
Do you ride a motorcycle Lilley?
Unless the driver is driving in a sporty manner, what input is there to engage multiple areas of the brain? There's not the same level of hazard perception and assessment. There's not the same level of planning a move. There's not the same level of kinesthetic perception. There's not the same level of involvement with the environment. There's not the same attention to balance. There's not the same attention to traction. There's not the same awareness of traffic and road conditions. There's not the same awareness of risk or threat.
...Sounds like another Lilleyism mate.
i'd say driving a car has the exact opposite effect
What is there to preclude driving in a sporty manner? I would suggest it involves all of those faculties with partial exception to balance and road condition.
I'm all for motorcycling but that piece was written so badly if it were a newspaper I'd burn it. I think others may have the same reaction if it were about a different pursuit. I'm all for motorcycling but I expect the pro-riding pieces to be written within the same precepts that we require of other journalistic articles. It's blatantly myopic by the end of the second line.
The context of the article was general every day, batshit boring driving, the daily commuting or errand running kind of driving. Non of those faculties are engaged. The windscreen is a tv. They're sitting on a couch. It's climate controlled. They have the radio or other distraction. It's shielded from the environment. They are disconnected from the outside world.
When a motorcyclist is commuting all those faculties are engaged. When a motorcyclist is riding in a spirited manner, all those faculties are engaged deeply and then some. When you hop on a bike it engages many more parts of the brain than a sitting in a car does.
Only when a car driver is driving in a spirited manner, or to use the silly example, getting a fright from crossing the train line, are any of those faculties engaged.
How hard is this to comprehend? :?
So a lack of eloquence and some righteous crusade about good writing is blinding you from the obvious? Why don't you go to the other related thread that Minglis linked to, and read the actual studies... maybe that will settle you down.
why do you think it's blinding me? I never disagreed with the research as such, just some of the conclusions and one eyed statements. Us riders being different is one. If they bothered to run any other adrenal pursuits beside motorcycling (even those pedally bikes) do you think they would be able to draw some interesting correlations?
Even if rock climbing lit up your brain up like a Xmas tree, there's little point comparing it to driving. I think cycling would have some overlaps, but on a path or off to one side of the road, i cant see how cycling engages all the parts of the brain a bike does.
Tappedouttalking, Android style.
My boss is late 60s, has always ridden, raced track bikes, competed in off-road events. He owns 5 bikes and still does pretty hectic off-road trips.
The old bastard doesn't miss a damn thing, pain in the arse sometimes because you know you can't get away with anything.
I am a cyclist mate. I spoke from that point of view. I believe in vehicular cycling rather than traffic separation and I STILL don't think a cyclists brain would light up as much as a moto riders.