Serious questions for people who work on this kind of research or who have done so in the past:
Why do we need this kind of research? Don’t we already have enough to tell us that exercising is good, and that exercising more is probably better?
Ostensibly they were trying to compare the recommended levels of activity with high intensity and medium intensity exercise to see which was better, but would anything really change based on this research? Wouldn’t whatever resources that went toward this research be better put to use by getting more people to exercise instead of studying what’s “best” or whatever this is trying to do?
I understand that doing and publishing research is key to some academic careers (which is questionable in its own right), is that what’s really driving all this? For reference, my view on the role of research in tenured/academic jobs is probably pretty close to the negative viewpoint in this article that was posted on HN a while back:
Why do we need this kind of research? Don’t we already have enough to tell us that exercising is good, and that exercising more is probably better?
Ostensibly they were trying to compare the recommended levels of activity with high intensity and medium intensity exercise to see which was better, but would anything really change based on this research? Wouldn’t whatever resources that went toward this research be better put to use by getting more people to exercise instead of studying what’s “best” or whatever this is trying to do?
I understand that doing and publishing research is key to some academic careers (which is questionable in its own right), is that what’s really driving all this? For reference, my view on the role of research in tenured/academic jobs is probably pretty close to the negative viewpoint in this article that was posted on HN a while back:
https://reyammer.io/blog/2020/10/03/the-good-the-bad-and-the...
What am I missing?