I Run, Therefore I Drink?

Here’s a question for your buddies at the next golf outing or bowling league night: Are we more active because we drink more or do we drink more because we’re more active? Recent research showed that there is a correlation between the two, but could not offer a solid reason.

Either way, another study claims the combination of moderate alcohol use and exercise will help our hearts more than just choosing one over the other.

Michael French, a health economics professor at the University of Miami, and his colleagues dug into data from the 2005 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, a yearly telephone survey of roughly 230,000 Americans, and found a surprisingly strong positive correlation between the levels of alcohol intake and exercise.  For both men and women, those who drank at least some alcohol exercised 7.2 minutes more per week than non-drinkers.

While that may not seem like much, the study showed that the more booze, the more minutes spent sweating. Light, moderate, and heavy drinkers worked out 5.7, 10.1 and 19.9 minutes more per week, respectively. Also, drinking resulted in a 10.1 percent increase in the probability of vigorous physical activity.

Now, that doesn’t mean that these folks were drinking while exercising, nor that it was necessarily good for them to engange in more than light drinking. Instead, French and his team, who have studied many facets of alcohol abuse and its triggers, are trying to make sense of this correlation that seems too strong to ignore. It seems counterintuitive to traditional views that if people engage in one unhealthy behavior, like excessive drinking, that they will most likely engage in other unhealthy behaviors, like physical inactivity.

French suggests that heavy alcohol use may be masked by the appearance of a healthy lifestyle and cautions physicians not to jump to conclusions.

“For example, taking into account only the patients’ levels of physical activity and perhaps diet would overlook potential alcohol use problems that could be detected and treated,” French writes. “Physically active individuals who engage in problematic drinking are often ‘‘healthy looking,’’ because alcohol use consequences are sometimes delayed.”

The study appears in the September/October issue of American Journal of Health Promotion.

Maybe we exercise more because we know how many calories those beers and mixers are adding to our waistlines. Even so, Danish researchers found that we’re still better off combining moderate alcohol consumption with exercise.

Morten Gronbaek, epidemiologist with Denmark’s National Institute of Public Health, and his team surveyed 12,000 people over a 20-year period to determine the cardiovascular effects of alcohol use and exercise. They divided the population into four groups: those who did not drink or exercise; those who had both moderate levels of alcohol use and exercise; and those who either just drank or just exercised at moderate levels.

The group with the highest risk of fatal ischaemic heart disease, a form of heart disease characterized by a reduced blood supply to the heart, were the non-drinking, non-exercisers. Choosing either moderate drinking or moderate exercise provided a 30 percent decrease in risk factors. However, drinking and exercising, (not necessarily at the same time), showed a 50 percent lower risk.

Their findings were detailed in the European Heart Journal.

“Being both physically active and drinking a moderate amount of alcohol is important for lowering the risk of both fatal IHD and death from all causes,” Gronbaek concluded.  Of course, the key is moderation, defined in the study as one drink per day for women and two per day for men. Also, Gronbaek warns that there is no heart benefit until a certain age.

“You wouldn’t advise everyone to drink,” he said. “You shouldn’t even think about doing it until age 45 or 50. There’s absolutely no proof of a preventative and protective effect before age 45.”

Sports Science Weekly Gym Bag - 9-28-09

Here's a new feature of Sports Are 80 Percent Mental: A weekly round-up of some of the best blog posts, articles and other interesting stuff that I've found on sports science and fitness research. If you find anything else, please just add it as a comment to this post! 

Aging Muscles: 'Hard To Build, Easy To Lose'
Have you ever noticed that people have thinner arms and legs as they get older? As we age it becomes harder to keep our muscles healthy. They get smaller, which decreases strength and increases the likelihood of falls and fractures. New research is showing how this happens — and what to do about it...

Back to Basics: Yes, Sergeant!
If Mark Roozen, a personal trainer in Colorado Springs, set his group conditioning classes to music, the playlist could start with “I’ve Been Working on the Railroad.” Mr. Roozen’s routines are as likely to incorporate logs, wheelbarrows and sandbags as circuit machines, Pilates equipment and other gym staples...
 
Often Overlooked but Key to Marathon Success: The Base
Doesn't sound glamorous, does it? Isn't snazzy sounding. Isn't flashy. But, man is it important. One of the biggest mistakes new marathoners make is overlooking the base mileage needed before beginning any kind of marathon training...

Real-Time Feedback System For Alpine Skiers Help Improve Performance
Researchers have developed an effective real-time performance management and feedback system for alpine ski racers that allow skiers to better understand their carved turning skills and improve their performance...

Caster Semenya - cover-ups, lies and confusion
For those who have not been following this astonishing story, Athletics South Africa boss Leonard Chuene admitted on the weekend that he lied about not having prior knowledge of the doubt around Caster Semenya, and has admitted that he authorized tests on Semenya in South Africa before the team left for the IAAF World Champs in Berlin...

Slushies: the new weapon for exercising in heat
Reading up on Australian sports research for an upcoming magazine story, I came across this little nugget about dealing with competition in hot conditions. The Aussies have been leaders in research on “pre-cooling” to lower body temperature before starting extended exercise in the heat. They introduced ice vests at the 1996 Olympics (which have since become widely used commercial products), and in 2004 brought big bathtubs full of ice-water to the Athens Olympic venues, actually immersing their endurance athletes shortly before their competitions...

Phys Ed: Can Vitamin D Improve Your Athletic Performance?
When scientists at the Australian Institute of Sport recently decided to check the Vitamin D status of some of that country’s elite female gymnasts, their findings were fairly alarming. Of the 18 gymnasts tested, 15 had levels that were “below current recommended guidelines for optimal bone health,” the study’s authors report. Six of these had Vitamin D levels that would qualify as medically deficient. Unlike other nutrients, Vitamin D can be obtained by exposure to ultraviolet radiation from sunlight, as well as through foods or supplements. Of course, female gymnasts are a unique and specialized bunch, not known for the quality or quantity of their diets, or for getting outside much...

What all youth baseball coaches should know
Read this.  It's the American Sports Medicine Institute's new "position statement" on youth baseball pitchers and injury prevention.  In July, ASMI's top researcher, Glenn Fleisig, shared findings from a study of youth pitchers for an article I wrote for the New York Times...

How To See A 130 MPH Tennis Serve

For most of us mere mortals, if an object was coming at us at 120-150 mph, we would be lucky to just get out of the way. Players in this week's U.S. Open tennis tournament not only see the ball coming at them with such speed, but plan where they want to place their return shot and swing their racquet in time to make contact. At 125 mph from 78 feet away, that gives them a little less than a half second to accomplish the task.

How do they do it? Well, they're better than you and I, for one. But science has some more specific answers to offer.

Swiss researchers have concluded that expert tennis players, like their own Roger Federer, have an advantage in certain visual perception skills, while UK scientists have shown how trained animals — and presumably humans — can rely on a superior internal model of motion to predict the path of a fast moving object.

For any sport that involves a moving object, athletes must learn the three levels of response for interceptive timing tasks. 

• First, there is a basic reaction, also known as optometric reaction (in other words, see it and get out of the way).

• Next, there is a perceptual reaction, meaning you actually can identify the object coming at you and can put it in some context (for example: That is a tennis ball coming at you and not a bird swooping out of the sky).

• Finally, there is a cognitive reaction, meaning you know what is coming at you and you have a plan of what to do with it (return the ball with top-spin down the right line).

This cognitive skill is usually sport-specific and learned over years of tactical training. Obviously, professional tennis players are at the expert cognitive stage and have a plan for most shots.

But, in order to reach that cognitive stage, they first need to have excellent optometric and perceptual skills.

Leila Overney and her team at the Brain Mind Institute of Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne (EPFL) studied whether expert tennis players have better visual perception abilities than other athletes and non-tennis players. Typically, motor skill research compares experts to non-experts and tries to deduce what the experts are doing differently to excel.

They carried out seven visual tests, covering a wide range of perceptual functions including motion and temporal processing, object detection and attention, each requiring the participants to push buttons based on their responses to the computer-based tasks and each related to a particular aspect of visual perception.

In this study, which was detailed in the journal PLOS One, Overney wanted to see if the perceptual skills of the tennis players were not only more advanced than non-tennis players but also other athletes of a similar fitness level, (in this case triathletes), to eliminate any benefits of just being in top physical shape.  To eliminate the cognitive knowledge difference between the groups, she used seven non-sport specific visual tests which measured different forms of perception including motion and temporal processing, object detection and attention. The participants watched the objects on computer screens and pushed buttons per the specific test instructions.

The tennis players showed significant advantages in the speed discrimination and motion detection tests, while they were no better in the other categories.

"Our results suggest that speed processing and temporal processing is often faster and more accurate in tennis players," Overney writes. They even scored better then their peers, the triathletes. "This is precisely why we added the group of triathletes as controls because they train as hard as tennis players but have lower visual processing demands in their sport."

Still, are the tennis players really just relying on their visual advantage when given that half second to react? Have their years of practice created an internal cognitive model that anticipates and predicts the path of an object?

Nadia Cerminara worked on that question. Cerminara, of the University of Bristol (UK), designed an experiment that taught household cats to reach with their paw at a moving target. If they successfully touched the target, they received a food reward.

After training the cats to be successful, she recorded their neuronal activity in their lateral cerebellum. Then, she measured the activity again but would block the vision of the cats for 200-300 milliseconds while performing the task. Despite the lapse in visual information, the neuron firing activity remained the same as before. Cerminara concluded that an internal model had been used to bridge the gap and provide a prediction of where the object was headed.

The study was published in the Journal of Physiology.

So, when faced with a blistering serve, science suggests that players like Federer not only rely on their superior perceptual skills, but also have created an even faster internal simulation of a ball's flight that can help position them for a winning return.

Of course, you may want to avoid the world's fastest server, Andy Roddick, especially when he's upset from a bad line call (see video). :-)

Running Addicts Need Their Fix

Just as there is the endorphin rush of a "runner's high," there can also be the valley of despair when something prevents avid runners from getting their daily fix of miles.

Now, researchers at Tufts University may have confirmed this addiction by showing that an intense running regimen in rats can release brain chemicals that mimic the same sense of euphoria as opiate use. They propose that moderate exercise could be a "substitute drug" for human heroin and morphine addicts.

Given all of the benefits of exercise, many people commit to an active running routine. Somewhere during a longer, more intense run when stored glycogen is depleted, the pituitary gland and the hypothalamus release endorphins that can provide that "second wind" that keeps a runner going.

This sense of being able to run all day is similar to the pain-relieving state that opiates provide, scientists have known. So a team led by Robin Kanarek, professor of psychology at Tufts University, wondered whether they could also produce similar withdrawal symptoms, which would indicate that intense running and opiate abuse have a similar biochemical effect.

Running rodents
The team divided 44 male rats and 40 female rats into four groups. One group was housed inside an exercise wheel, and another group had none. Each group was divided again, either allowing access to food for only one hour per day or for 24 hours per day. Though tests on humans would be needed to confirm this research, rodents are typically good analogues to illuminate how the human body works.
The rodents existed in these environments for several weeks. Finally, all groups were given Naloxone, a drug used to counteract an opiate overdose and produce immediate withdrawal symptoms.

The active rats displayed a significantly higher level of withdrawal symptoms than the inactive rats. Also, the active rats that were only allowed food for one hour per day exercised the most and showed the most intense reaction to Naloxone. This scenario mimics the actions of humans suffering from anorexia athletica, also known as hypergymnasia, that causes an obsession not only with weight but also with continuous exercise to lose weight.

"Exercise, like drugs of abuse, leads to the release of neurotransmitters such as endorphins and dopamine, which are involved with a sense of reward," Kanarek said. "As with food intake and other parts of life, moderation seems to be the key. Exercise, as long as it doesn't interfere with other aspects of one's life, is a good thing with respect to both physical and mental health."

The study appears in the August issue of Behavioral Neuroscience, published by the American Psychological Association.

Treatment ideas
Kanarek hopes to use these results to design treatment programs for heroin and morphine addicts that substitute the all-natural high of exercise in place of the drugs.  "These findings, in conjunction with results of studies demonstrating that intake of drugs of abuse and running activates the endogenous opioid and dopamine reward systems, suggest that it might be possible to substitute drug-taking behavior with naturally rewarding behavior," she writes.

She also wants to do further research on understanding the neurophysiology of extreme eating and exercise disorders. "The high comorbidity of drug abuse and eating disorders provides further evidence of a common neurobiological basis for these disorders," Kanarek concludes.

Usain Bolt Can Be Even Faster, Researchers Claim

Well, maybe Usain Bolt was right after all.  As discussed in our Physiology of Speed story, Bolt predicted he could run 100 meters in 9.54 seconds, lowering his own world record of 9.69 seconds.

Earlier this week, he almost got there running a 9.58 at the World Championships in Berlin.

Now, researchers from Tilburg University in the Netherlands say he could shave another 3/100ths of a second off and hit the tape at 9.51 seconds.

Using the "extreme value theory", Professor of Statistics John Einmahl and former student Sander Smeets have calculated the fastest possible times for men and women.  Between 1991 and 2008, they chronicled the best times for 762 male sprinters and 469 female sprinters.  They did not trust the data prior to 1991 as possibly being tainted by doping athletes (not that's its gotten much better since then.)

For females, their current world record, set by Florence Griffith-Joyner, of 10.49 seconds could be theoretically lowered to 10.33 seconds.

Extreme value theory is a branch of statistics that tries to predict extreme events such as 100-year floods or major stock market movements that deviate signficantly from the median.  With less statistical confidence (95% confidence), Einmahl estimates the men could get to 9.21 while the women could run a 9.88.

To make this statistical postulating a reality, Bolt needs to find the secret competitive edge that will shave these tenths and hundredths of seconds away. Scientists at the Research Institute of Wildlife Ecology in Austria claim sunflower oil may be the super fuel that is missing.

They found that mice fed a diet high in sunflower oil, which contains n-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids, were 6.3% faster in sprint races against mice fed a diet rich in linseed oil, which is high in n-3 fatty acids.

Their research was presented in June at the Society for Experimental Biology Annual Meeting.

"The results of the current study on mice suggest that moderate differences in dietary n-6/n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid intake can have a biologically meaningful effect on maximum running speed", says Dr Christopher Turbill, lead researcher. "The application of this research to the performance of elite athletes (specifically those in sports that involve short distance sprints, including cycling) is uncertain, but in my opinion certainly deserves some further attention" he said.

So, a little sunflower oil mixed into the pre-race Gatorade? It might work until world records start to fall and its added to the banned substance list.

The Physiology Of Speed

Usain Bolt, the triple Olympic gold medal sprinter from Jamaica, predicted last week that he could break his own world record of 9.69 seconds in the 100 meter sprint with a time as low as 9.54 seconds.  (8/15 update: he came very close running a 9.58 at the World Championships in Berlin.)

He claimed his coach told him its possible, so he believes him. His coach, Glen Mills, may have just finished reading some new research coming out of Duke University that showed sprinters and swimmers who are taller, heavier but more slender are the ones breaking world records.

At first glance, it may not make sense that bigger athletes would be faster. However, Jordan Charles, a recent engineering grad at Duke, plotted all of the world record holders in the 100 meter sprint and the 100 meter swim since 1900 against their height, weight and a measurement he called "slenderness."

World record sprinters have gained an average of 6.4 inches in height since 1900, while champion swimmers have shot up 4.5 inches, compared to the mere mortal average height gain of 1.9 inches.
During the same time, about 7/10 of a second have been shaved off of the 100-meter sprint while over 14 seconds have come off the 100-meter swim record.

What's going on
Charles applied the "constructal theory" he learned from his mentor Adrian Bejan, a mechanical engineering professor at Duke, that describes how objects move through their environment.

"Anything that moves, or anything that flows, must evolve so that it flows more and more easily," Bejan said. "Nature wants to find a smoother path, to flow more easily, to find a path with less resistance," he said. "The animal design never gets there, but it tries to be the least imperfect that it can be."

Their research is reported in the current online edition of the Journal of Experimental Biology.

For locomotion, a human needs to overcome two forces, gravity and friction. First, an athlete would need to lift his foot off the ground or keep his body at the water line without sinking. Second, air resistance for the sprinter and water resistance for the swimmer will limit speed.

So, the first step is actually weight lifting, which a bigger, stronger athlete will excel at. The second step is to move through the space with the least friction, which emphasizes the new slenderness factor.

By comparing height with a calculated "width" of the athlete, slenderness is a measurement of mass spread out over a long frame. The athlete that can build on more muscle mass over a aerodynamic frame will have the advantage.

The numbers
In swimming, legendary Hawaiian champion Duke Kahanamoku set the world record in 1912 with a time of 61.6 seconds with a calculated slenderness of 7.88. Some 96 years later, Eamon Sullivan lowered the world mark to 47.05 seconds at a slenderness factor of 8.29.

As the athletes’ slenderness factor has risen over the years, the winning times have dropped.  In 1929, Eddie Tolan's world-record 100 meter sprint of 10.4 seconds was achieved with a slenderness factor of 7.61. When Usain Bolt ran 9.69 seconds in the 2008 Olympics, his slenderness was also 8.29 while also being the tallest champion in history at 6-feet 5-inches.

“The trends revealed by our analysis suggest that speed records will continue to be dominated by heavier and taller athletes,” said Charles. “We believe that this is due to the constructal rules of animal locomotion and not the contemporary increase in the average size of humans.”

So, how fast did the original Olympians run? Charles used an anthropology finding for Greek and Roman body mass and plugged it into his formula.

“In antiquity, body weights were roughly 70 percent of what they are today,” Charles said. “Using our theory, a 100-meter dash that is won in 13 seconds would have taken about 14 seconds back then.”
Bolt puts his prediction to the test next month at the track and field world championships in Berlin. One of his main competitors is Asafa Powell, the previous world record holder, who is shorter and has a slenderness factor of 7.85. My money is on the Lightning Bolt.

Tiger's Brain Is Bigger Than Ours

As Tiger Woods heads to Sawgrass for The Players Championship this weekend, mortal golfers wonder what's inside his head that keeps him winning. Well, chances are his brain actually has more gray matter than the average weekend duffer.

Researchers at the University of Zurich have found that expert golfers have a higher volume of the gray-colored, closely packed neuron cell bodies that are known to be involved with muscle control. The good news is that, like Tiger, golfers who start young and commit to years of practice can also grow their brains while their handicaps shrink.

Executing a good golf swing consistently is one of the hardest sport skills to master. Coordinating all of the moving body parts with the right timing requires a brain that has learned from many trial and error repetitions.

In fact, past studies have shown that the number of hours spent practicing is directly related to a golfer's handicap (a calculated number that represents recent playing ability).

Magic number
K. Anders Ericsson, a Florida State professor and the "expert on experts," has spent more than 25 years studying what it takes to become elite in any field, including sports.

The magic number that keeps recurring in Ericsson's studies is 10,000 hours of deliberate practice. If someone is willing to dedicate this amount of structured time on any skill, he has the potential to rise to the top.

Some critics argue that practice is good, but we all start with different levels of innate abilities that put some at an early advantage (i.e. the boy who is six feet tall in fourth grade) While that may be true, Ericsson does not want the rest of us to use that as an excuse. "The traditional assumption is that people come into a professional domain, have similar experiences, and the only thing that's different is their innate abilities," he said in an interview with Fast Company. "There's little evidence to support this. With the exception of some sports, no characteristic of the brain or body constrains an individual from reaching an expert level."

So, what happens to the brain after all of that practice?

In the new study, a team led by neuropsychologist Lutz Jäncke compared the brain images of 40 men divided into four groups based on their experience as golfers. They recruited ten professional golfers (with handicaps of 0), ten advanced golfers (handicaps between 1 and 14), ten average golfers (handicaps between 15 and 36) and ten volunteers who had never played golf (not even mini-golf!).

Interviews revealed the "practice makes perfect" correlation between hours of practice and lower handicaps.

Brain scans (functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) showed that, indeed, there were structural differences, but not in the linear pattern they imagined. While significant differences existed in total volume of gray matter between the pros and the non-players, there was little difference between the pro and the advanced groups or between the average and non-players groups.

When the researchers combined the pros and the advanced golfers into one group called "expert," and the average and non-players into a second group called "novice," a clear dividing line emerged, showing that practice produces a noticeable step up in the brain's gray matter. This jump comes somewhere between 800-3,000 practice hours.

The results were detailed last month in the online journal PLoS ONE.

Step 1: Grow the brain
Another interesting twist is that the pros reported practicing five to eight times more than the advanced group, while the advanced group practiced only twice as much as the average group.

Yet the big jump in gray matter came after golfers achieved a skill level below a 15 handicap, moving from average to advanced. This is consistent with another study in 2008 that measured gray matter volume in students learning to juggle three balls. After learning to juggle for the first time, their gray matter increased. However, once that initial concept was learned, more advanced juggling tricks did not grow more brain cells.

It's been a long time since Tiger's handicap was 15, so clearly the additional years of practice were necessary to reach the top.  And, all of that gray has produced a lot of green.

Please visit my other sports science stories at LiveScience.com

Runners Pace Themselves Into The Zone

Most regular runners can tell you when they reach that perfect equilibrium of speed and comfort. The legs are loose, the heart is pumping and it feels like you could run at this pace forever.

Researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison now have an explanation for this state of running nirvana, and we can thank our ancestors and some evolutionary biology for it.

For years, it has been thought that humans have a constant metabolic energy rate. It was assumed that you would require the same total energy to run one mile, no matter if you ran it in 5 minutes or 10 minutes. Even though your energy burn rate would be higher at faster speeds, you would get there in half the time.

Turns out, however, that each person has an optimal running pace that uses the least amount of oxygen to cover a given distance. The findings, by Karen Steudel, a zoology professor at Wisconsin, and Cara Wall-Scheffler of Seattle Pacific University, are detailed in latest online edition of the Journal of Human Evolution.

Steudel's team tested both male and female runners at six different speeds on a treadmill while measuring their oxygen intake and carbon dioxide output. As expected, each runner had different levels of fitness and oxygen use but there were ideal speeds for each runner that required the least amount of energy

Overall, the optimal speeds for the group were about 8.3 mph (about a 7:13 minutes per mile) for males and 6.5 mph (9:08 min/mile) for females.

The most interesting finding: At slower speeds, about 4.5 mph (13 min/mile), the metabolic efficiency was at its lowest. Steudel explains that at this speed, halfway between a walk and a jog, the runner's gait can be awkward and unnatural.

"What that means is that there is an optimal speed that will get you there the cheapest," Steudel says.

So, why is a zoology professor studying running efficiency? Steudel's previous work has tried to build a theory of why our early ancestors evolved from moving on four limbs to two limbs, also known as bipedalism. She has found that human walking is a more efficient method of getting from point A to point B than on all fours. It might also have been an advantage for hunting.
This latest research could offer some more clues of how we moved on to running. Steudel explains, "This is a piece in the question of whether walking or running was more important in the evolution of the body form of the genus Homo."

Please visit my other sports science articles on LiveScience.

The Cognitive Benefits Of Being A Sports Fan

When was the last time you listened to a sporting event on the radio? If given a choice between watching the game on a big screen HD or turning on the AM radio, most of us would probably choose the visual sensation of television.

But, for a moment, think about the active attention you need in order to listen to a radio broadcast and interpret the play-by-play announcer's descriptions. As you hear the words, your "mind's eye" paints the picture of the action so you can imagine the scene and situations. Your knowledge of the game, either from playing it or watching it for years helps you understand the narrative, the terms and the game's "lingo".

Now, imagine that you are listening to a broadcast about a sport you know nothing about. Hearing Bob Uecker say, "With two out in the ninth, the bases are loaded and the Brewers' RBI leader has two strikes. The infield is in as the pitcher delivers. Its a hard grounder to third that he takes on the short hop and fires a bullet to first for the final out." If you have no baseball-specific knowledge, those sentences are meaningless.

However, for those of us that have grown up with baseball, that description makes perfect sense and our mind's eye helped us picture the scene. That last sentence about the "hard grounder" and the thrown "bullet" may have even triggered some unconscious physical movements by you as your brain interpreted those action phrases. That sensorimotor reaction is at the base of what is called "embodied cognition".

Sian Beilock, associate professor of psychology and leader of the Human Performance Lab at the University of Chicago, defined the term this way: "In contrast to traditional views of the mind as an abstract information processor, recent work suggests that our representations of objects and events are grounded in action. That is, our knowledge is embodied, in the sense that it consists of sensorimotor information about potential interactions that objects or events may allow."

She cites a more complete definition of the concept in Six Views of Embodied Cognition by Margaret Wilson. Another terrific overview of the concept is provided by science writer Drake Bennet of the Boston Globe in his article, "Don't Just Stand There, Think".

In a recent study, "Sports Experience Changes the Neural Processing of Action Language", Dr. Beilock's team continued their research into the link between our learned motor skills and our language comprehension about those motor skills. Since embodied cognition connects the body with our cognition, the sports domain provides a logical domain to study it.
Their initial look at this concept was in a 2006 study where the team designed an experiment to compare the knowledge representation skill of experienced hockey players and novices. Each group first read sentences describing both hockey-related action and common, "every-day" action, (i.e. "the referee saw the hockey helmet on the bench" vs. "the child saw the balloon in the air"). They were then shown pictures of the object mentioned in the sentences and were asked if the picture matched the action in the sentence they read.

Both groups, the athletes and the novices, responded equally in terms of accuracy and response time to the everyday sentences and pictures, but the athletes responded significantly faster to the hockey-specific sentences and pictures. The conclusion is that those with the sensorimotor experience of sport give them an advantage of processing time over those that have not had that same experience.

This may seem pretty obvious that people who have played hockey will respond faster to sentence/picture relationships about hockey than non-hockey players. But the 2006 study set the groundwork for Beilock's team to take the next step with the question, "is there any evidence that the athletes are using different parts of their brain when processing these match or no match decisions?" The link between our physical skill memory and our language comprehension would be at the base of the embodied cognition theory. 

So, in the latest research, the HPL team kept the same basic experimental design, but now wanted to watch the participants' brain activity using fMRI scanning. This time, there were three groups, hockey players, avid fans of hockey and novices who had no playing or viewing experience with hockey at all. First, all groups passively listened to sentences about hockey actions and also sentences about everyday actions while being monitored by fMRI.  Second, outside of the fMRI scanner, they again listened to hockey-related and everyday-related action sentences and then were shown pictures of hockey or every day action and asked if there was a match or mis-match between the sentence and the picture.

This comprehension test showed similar results as in 2006, but now the team could try to match the relative skill in comprehension to the neural activity shown in the fMRI scans when listening. Both the players and the fans showed increased activity in the left dorsal premotor cortex, a region thought to support the selection of well-learned action plans and procedures. 

You might be surprised that the fans' brains showed activity in the same regions as the athletes. We saw this effect in a previous post, "Does Practice Make Perfect", where those that practiced a new dance routine and those that only watched it showed similar brain area activity. On the other side, the total novices showed activity in the bilateral primary sensory-motor cortex, an area typically known for carrying out step by step instructions for new or novel tasks. 

When playing or watching, we are actually calling on additional neural networks in our brains to help our normal language comprehension abilities. In other words, the memories of learned actions are linked and assist other cognitive tasks. That sounds pretty much like the definition of embodied cognition and Dr. Beilock's research has helped that theory take another step forward. Beilock added, "Experience playing and watching sports has enduring effects on language understanding by changing the neural networks that support comprehension to incorporate areas active in performing sports skills."

So, take pride in your own brain the next time you hear, "Kobe dribbles the ball to the top of the key, crosses over, drives the lane, and finger rolls over Duncan for two." If you can picture that play in your mind, your left dorsal premotor cortex just kicked into gear!

Exercise Wins Again

It just seems too good to be true. Study after research study consistently promoting the endless benefits of exercise. Couch potatoes everywhere are waiting for the other shoe to drop, telling us that all of those scientists were wrong and we should remain as sedentary as possible.
Yet four additional studies released recently each give the same prescription for improving some aspect of your health: exercise.

They add to recent evidence that regular workouts can improve old brains, raise kids' academic performance and give a brain boost to everyone in between.

Better bones
One study illustrates the effect of exercise on preventing or limiting osteoporosis, which affects more than 200 million people worldwide. Researchers at the University of Missouri found that while both resistance training (lifting weights) and high impact exercise (running) both help build needed bone mineral density (BMD), running is the better choice.

"Exercise programs to increase bone strength should be designed using what is known about how bones respond to exercise," said Pam Hinton, associate professor and lead author. "Only the skeletal sites that experience increased stress from exercise will become stronger. High-impact, dynamic, multi-directional activities result in greater gains in bone strength."  The study was published in the February issue of the Journal of Strength Conditioning.

Less pain
In a related study, exercise seemed to be one of the few successful remedies for those that suffer from low-back pain. In the February issue of the Spine Journal, University of Washington physicians summarized 20 different clinical trials that promoted different solutions to alleviating pain.

"Strong and consistent evidence finds many popular prevention methods to fail while exercise has a significant impact, both in terms of preventing symptoms and reducing back pain-related work loss," said Dr. Stanley J. Bigos, professor emeritus of orthopaedic surgery and environmental health. "Passive interventions such as lumbar belts and shoe inserts do not appear to work."

Better eye health
Also, vigorous exercise has now been linked with significantly reduced onset of cataracts and age-related macular degeneration. In the study, detailed in Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, researchers reviewed the eye health of 41,000 runners over seven years and found that both men and women had significantly lower rates of these two diseases than the general public.

Men who logged more than 5.7 miles per day had a 35 percent lower risk than those that ran less than 1.4 miles per day. While the correlation is strong, the reason is not clear.

"We know some of the physiological benefits of exercise, and we know about the physiological background of these diseases, so we need to better understand where there's an overlap," said Paul Williams, an epidemiologist in the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Life Sciences Division.

Cancer prevention
Each year in the U.S., more 100,000 people are diagnosed with colon cancer. To see what effect exercise has on lowering this rate, researchers at Washington University and Harvard University combined to review 52 studies over the last 25 years which linked exercise and the incidence of cancer. Overall, they found that those that exercised the most (5-6 hours of brisk walking per week) were 24 percent less likely to develop the disease than those that exercised the least (less than 30 minutes per week).

"The beneficial effect of exercise holds across all sorts of activities," said lead study author Kathleen Y. Wolin, Sc.D. of Washington University. "And it holds for both men and women. There is an ever-growing body of evidence that the behavior choices we make affect our cancer risk. Physical activity is at the top of the list of ways that you can reduce your risk of colon cancer."

So, are there any studies out there that link exercise with a negative outcome?

In a recent study published in the journal Obesity, Dolores Albarracín, professor of psychology at the University of Illinois, did find that people who are shown posters with messages like "join a gym" or "take a walk" actually ate more after viewing these messages than those that saw messages like "make friends."

"Viewers of the exercise messages ate significantly more (than their peers, who viewed other types of messages)," Albarracín said. "They ate one-third more when exposed to the exercise ads."



Please visit my other sports science articles at LiveScience.com

Soccer Robots Getting Smarter At RoboCup

Anyone who has ever bravely volunteered to coach a youth soccer team is familiar with the blank stares that ensue when trying to explain the offsides rule. The logic that combines moving players, the position of the ball and the timing of a pass is always a challenge for 10-year-old brains to grasp (let alone 40-year-old brains.) Imagine trying to teach this rule to an inanimate, soccer-playing robot, along with all of the other rules, movements and strategies of the game.

Now researchers have developed an automated method of robot training by observing and copying human behavior.

Why are scientists teaching robots to play soccer? The short-term motivation is to win the annual RoboCup competition, the "World Cup" of robotic development. International teams build real robots that go head to head with no human control during the game. This year's competition is in Graz, Austria in June.

Here's the final match from the 2008 RoboCup:



The long-term goal is to develop the underlying technologies to build more practical robots, including an offshoot called RoboCup Rescue that develops disaster search and rescue robotics.

In a study released in the March 2009 online edition of Expert Systems with Applications, titled "Programming Robosoccer agents by modeling human behavior", a team from Carlos III University of Madrid used a technique known as machine-learning to teach a software agent several low-level basic reactions to visual stimuli. "The objective of this research is to program a player, currently a virtual one, by observing the actions of a person playing in the simulated RoboCup league," said Ricardo Aler, lead author of the study.

In addition to actual robots, RoboCup also has a simulation software league that is more like a video game. In the study, human players were presented with simple game situations and were given a limited set of actions they could take. Their responses were recorded and used to program a "clone" agent with many if-then scenarios based on the human's behavior. By automating this learning process, the agent can build its own knowledge collection by observing many different game scenarios.

The team has seen early success at learning rudimentary actions like moving towards the ball and choosing when to shoot, but the goal is to advance to higher-level cognition, including the dreaded offsides rule. Implanting the physical robots with this knowledge set will give them a richer set of actions to choose from when they are exposed to visual stimuli from the playing field.

Previous attempts at machine learning relied on the robot/software to learn rules and reactions entirely on their own, similar to neural networks. Aler's team hopes to jump start the process by seeding the knowledge base with human players’ choices. While current video soccer games like FIFA 2009 already use a detailed simulation engine, transferring this to the physical world of robots is the key to future research.

RoboCup organizers are not shy about their ultimate tournament in the year 2050. According to their website, "By mid-21st century, a team of fully autonomous humanoid robot soccer players shall win the soccer game, comply with the official rules of the FIFA, against the winner of the most recent World Cup."

That's right; they plan on the robots beating the current, human World Cup champions. "It's like what happened with the Deep Blue computer when it managed to beat Kasparov at chess in 1997," says Aler.

Maybe they can also build a robot linesman who can always get the offsides call correct!

The Mechanics Of Steroids

A $252 million contract to play baseball causes "an enormous amount of pressure ... to perform at a high level every day," according to Alex Rodriguez. The New York Yankees' third baseman provided a few more details last week about the anabolic steroids he used from 2001 to 2003 after he had signed a record-setting deal with his former team, the Texas Rangers.

Here is what most of us know about anabolic steroids: they make muscles grow faster, there are harmful side effects to our health, most sports leagues have banned them, and they are illegal without a prescription.

But how do they actually work? Does an athlete just pop a few pills and then wait for the Popeye-spinach effect? Let's dig a little deeper into the science of steroids.

Legal uses
Anabolic steroids, or anabolic-androgenic steroids (AAS), are the synthetic (made in a lab) derivatives of the naturally produced hormone testosterone. They promote the growth of muscle (anabolic effect) and the typical male characteristics of puberty (androgenic effect).

When legally prescribed, they are an option for patients who produce abnormally low levels of testosterone or who suffer from body-wasting diseases such as cancer or AIDS. When used by athletes, the goal is to speed up the body's natural muscle-building process.

When we lift weights heavier than what we're used to, we create tiny micro-tears in muscle fibers. The body's natural repair process repairs the tear and then overcompensates by adding bigger cells to build a stronger fiber — this is called muscular hypertrophy. Over time, this repeated process of teardown and re-build will result in muscle growth.

Natural testosterone is the body's main ingredient for this process, but anabolic steroids can serve as a supplement.

Once ingested, an AAS travels through the blood stream to the muscle tissue. It is drawn into the muscle cell's receiving dock, called an androgen receptor. Once delivered to the muscle cell, the steroid can interact with the cell's DNA and stimulate the protein synthesis process that promotes cell growth.

Different variants and amounts of AAS can cause different reactions producing either massive body-building physiques or more toned athletic muscles (i.e. Barry Bonds vs. A-Rod). Athletes experiment with different combinations (called stacking) or regimens (pyramiding) in an attempt to fine-tune the final result.  A-Rod's stack was reportedly straight testosterone and Primobolan.

Beyond bulk
While the focus in the media is on the bulked-up home run hitters, anabolic steroids can also benefit pitchers and others who need a faster turnaround from sore, overused muscles. Intense exercise also releases cortisol, known as the stress hormone, which breaks down muscle tissue, producing sore muscles.

AAS can block cortisol from binding to the muscle cell's receptor sites, which diminishes the breakdown process. Less muscle breakdown means less muscle fatigue which would allow a pitcher to recover more quickly from a nine-inning outing.

Besides all of the known negative side effects of using steroids just for ergogenic reasons, there is also the uncertainty of what exactly you are taking. Last month, federal Drug Enforcement Administration agents arrested the owners of an Alabama-based online pharmacy on charges that they filled hundreds of illegal prescriptions for anabolic steroids for clients across the country.

The worst news for the customers of this pharmacy was delivered by U.S. Attorney Deborah Rhodes: "Each of the pharmacy owners and pharmacists named in the indictment are charged with prescribing and selling veterinary steroids, approved for cattle and livestock only, to humans." 

Please visit my other sports science articles at LiveScience.com

Tiger, LeBron, Beckham - Neuromarketing In Action

Its not you, its me. That's what the CEOs at three large companies told their superstar athlete spokesmen in the last few months. First, the Buick division of GM ended its $3 million per year relationship with golfer Tiger Woods one year early. Next, the NBA's LeBron James lost his connection with Microsoft less than two years after the mega-marketing deal was announced at the 2007 All-Star game. Finally, Pepsi stopped serving uber soccer marketing star David Beckham.

All three companies issued very polite press releases blaming the struggling economy and wished their sports stars future success. Why did these three deals not work? Was the economy an easy scapegoat or were these endorsements doomed from the beginning?

For years, researchers have tried to develop models to explain consumer behavior and our emotional reactions to celebrity endorsers. Matching the right spokesperson to the right product is the key. The three leading theories for endorsement marketing, Source Credibility, Source Attractiveness and Product Match-up, guide companies in making the right choice.

Credibility combines expertise with trustworthiness. The more an athlete is perceived to know about the product, the more credibility points he earns with the audience (i.e. Tiger and golf clubs).  Attractiveness ties together likeability and familiarity of the athlete. The more a consumer wants to "be like Mike", the more effective the message. Like credibility, a logical marriage of athlete to product makes for an effective match-up. A relationship that seems forced probably won't make sense to us.

Using these models, the Tiger/Buick, LeBron/Microsoft and Beckham/Pepsi match-ups seem illogical in our minds. It may be that our mirror neurons were not firing as the advertisers expected. Located in the prefrontal cortex, these neurons can be activated by observing someone else making an action. When you watch Beckham kick a soccer ball, the same neurons light up as if you were actually kicking the ball. This reaction is the basis of imitation learning theories.

Marketers are now trying to make use of this brain function by observing consumers' brain activity using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). In his recent book, Buyology, (2008, Broadway Books), Martin Lindstrom begins to apply this neuroscience to why we buy things. According to Lindstrom, Abercrombie and Fitch use this idea in their stores - the "large blow-up posters of half-naked models" make your "mirror neurons fire-up."

That might be a stretch, but Roger Dooley, consultant and author of the blog, Neuromarketing, does see a connection when using athlete endorsers. "This research suggests a basis in neuroscience for the “believe in your product” advice,” he commented. “While the individual hearing the sales pitch may be listening to the words, her brain’s mirror neurons are firing at the same time in reaction to the salesperson’s emotions, demeanor, etc. If there’s a disconnect between the words that are cognitively processed and the emotions that are mirrored, the pitch will probably be less effective. Neuromarketers should take note, too - while ads normally employ professional actors who have the ability to accurately simulate the desired emotions and state of mind, pitches that use celebrity athlete endorsers... may suffer if the viewer finds the emotions don’t match the words."

We can watch Tiger hit a golf ball with his Nike clubs and our brain can imagine (or fantasize) about swinging those same clubs. But, watching Tiger drive a Buick or imagining LeBron working on an Excel spreadsheet breaks the mirror and the connection with our hero. Of course, seeing Beckham dressed as a cowboy, surfer and gladiator while drinking a Pepsi destroyed much of his athletic credibility.

Companies will continue to invest in athletes and their persuasive powers over the masses. Forbes magazine recently named the ten most influential American athletes, as named by respondents to a survey by E-Poll Market Research.  Woods tied with Lance Armstrong for the top spot, with 36% describing them as influential. Twenty-five percent said James was influential. As long as the products they pitch match their athletic profile, our neurons will open our wallets.

Please visit my other articles on Livescience.com

Take Your Brain To The Gym

The moment of truth has arrived, again. The holidays have passed, the bowl games are over and you have renewed your annual New Year's resolution to get back into shape... for real. Don't worry, you are not alone. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), 63 percent of Americans have a Body Mass Index (BMI) in excess of 25 (defined as overweight), while a quarter are greater than 30 (obese).

Its not just kids that benefit from exercise. As we get older, those extra pounds start to affect other areas of our health, contributing to the onset of diabetes, hypertension and high cholesterol.

Several new studies in the last month have now built stronger links between our levels of physical activity and the health of our most important body part, the brain. Conditions such as dementia, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and even mild age-related memory loss can be delayed by regular physical activity.

Shrinking brain

According to John Ratey, clinical associate professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and author of "Spark: the revolutionary new science of exercise and the brain" (2008, Little, Brown), "Age happens. Getting older is unavoidable, but falling apart is not."

Starting at age 40, we lose about 5 percent of our brain volume per decade, but then at age 70 other conditions may start to accelerate the deterioration. As we age, our cells are less able to cope with stress from waste products such as free radicals.

In the brain, as this stress claims more neuron cells, the web of interconnections between neurons weakens. As we each have more than one hundred billion neurons with each having oodles of connections to other neurons, this gradual net loss is not as dramatic, at first. However, as we age, if this neurodegenerative process accelerates, then our general focus and memory loss as well as more serious conditions like Alzheimer's may appear.

What the aging brain needs is a pumped-up blood flow. Exercise-induced neurotrophins such as brain-derived neurotropic factor (BDNF), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), as well as the neurotransmitter dopamine are needed to grow and fertilize new and existing neurons and their synapse connections. Ratay calls BDNF "Miracle-Gro for the brain."

Make new brain cells

Researchers at the National Cheng Kung University Medical College in Taiwan recently tested the effects of BDNF in the brains of mice of different ages. Half were trained to run a maze for 1 hour a day for exercise, while the control group did not exercise.

As expected, the researchers first found that neurogenesis, the creation of new neuron cells in the brain, dropped of dramatically in the middle-aged mice compared with younger mice. They also were able to conclude that exercise significantly slows down the loss of new nerve cells in the middle-aged mice.

Production of neural stem cells improved by approximately 200 percent compared to the middle-aged mice that did not exercise.

Increase blood flow

OK, that was mice. What about humans?  University of North Carolina brain researchers recently found that older adult humans who regularly exercised had increased blood flow in their brains. They compared long-time exercisers with sedentary adults using 3D MRI brain-scanning techniques.

"The active adults had more small blood vessels and improved cerebral blood flow," said the study's senior author, J. Keith Smith, associate professor of radiology at UNC School of Medicine. "These findings further point out the importance of regular exercise to healthy aging."

The research builds on a host of other studies, summarized in an August review, that show a balanced diet and regular exercise can protect the brain and ward off mental disorders.

Helps manage glucose

Finally, in a report released last month, Scott A. Small, associate professor of neurology at Columbia University Medical Center, found that levels of blood sugar (glucose) have a direct effect on blood flow in the brain.

By testing 240 elderly volunteers, and using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), Small and his colleagues found a correlation between elevated blood glucose levels and decreased cerebral blood flow, in the dentate gyrus, an area in the brain's hippocampus that has a direct effect on our memories. This corresponds with Smith's findings by showing that exercise may help manage glucose levels, which will improve blood flow to the brain.

Small's previous imaging studies have shown that physical exercise causes an improvement in dentate gyrus function.

"By improving glucose metabolism, physical exercise also reduces blood glucose" Small said. "We have a behavioral recommendation — physical exercise."

Please visit my other articles on Livescience.com

Kids Who Exercise Can Get Better Grades

The end of 2008 brings some discouraging news about our kids' brains and brawn. Recent results from an international math and science test show United States students are performing near the middle of the pack compared to other countries, while their levels of obesity continue to climb.

Historically, these two trends were studied independently with plans of action developed for each. However, several researchers and a new book have been making the case for linking these two problems by showing the effects of aerobic exercise not only on a student's fitness level but also on their test scores.

Last month, the latest (2007) TIMSS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study) scores were released. They compare fourth grade students from 36 countries and eighth grade students from 48 countries. They were tested on subjects that were common to all of the countries, including algebra, geometry, chemistry and physics. Overall, 425,000 students participated in the test, which is administered every four years.

In math, American fourth graders came in at 11th place of the 36 countries while eighth graders scored ninth out of 48. Hong Kong and Taiwan ranked first for fourth grade and eighth grade, respectively.  In science, Singapore topped the list for both fourth grade and eighth grade, with U.S. science students taking eighth place and 11th place.

While the American math scores have improved slightly, the science scores have dropped. In 2003, U.S. fourth graders were in sixth place in the world and eighth graders were in ninth place.

Only 6 percent of U.S. eighth-grade students reached the TIMSS "advanced" level in math, compared to 45 percent of students in Chinese Taipei, 40 percent in Korea, 40 percent in Singapore, 31 percent in Hong Kong, 26 percent in Japan and 10 percent in Hungary.

Regarding student fitness, the most recent figures from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report that the percentage of overweight or obese 6- to 11-year-olds has tripled since 1980, with more than 125 million children at unhealthy levels.

Leaping backward

Ironically, one of the solutions proposed for raising test scores, No Child Left Behind, encourages schools to focus more of the school day on the core academic subjects while reducing class time in peripheral subjects, like art, music, and physical education.  In fact, only 6 percent of American high schools offer a daily gym class. Yet a 2002 Virginia Tech study showed no relationship between reduced class time in those subjects and higher overall standardized tests.

In his latest book, "Spark: The Revolutionary New Science of Exercise and the Brain" (2008, Little, Brown), John Ratey, a Harvard clinical associate professor of psychiatry, argues for more physical fitness for students as a cure for not only their obesity but also their academic performance.

"I cannot underestimate how important regular exercise is in improving the function and performance of the brain." Ratey writes. "Exercise stimulates our gray matter to produce Miracle-Gro for the brain." That "Miracle-Gro" is a brain chemical called brain-derived neurotropic factor, or BDNF. When we exercise, our working muscles send chemicals into our bloodstream, including a protein known as IGF-1.

Once in the brain, IGF-1 orders the production of more BDNF. The additional BDNF helps new neurons and their connections grow. In addition, levels of other neurotransmitters are increased after a strenuous exercise session.

"Dopamine, serotonin, norepinephrine — all of these are elevated after exercise," says Ratey. "So having a workout will help focus, calming down, and impulsivity — it’s like taking a little bit of Prozac and a little bit of Ritalin."

Evidence mounts

Research showing a link between fitness and academics is growing. The California Department of Education (CDE) looked for a correlation between fitness scores and test scores. They found that kids who were deemed fit (by a standard test of aerobic capacity, BMI, abdominal strength, trunk strength, upper body strength and overall flexibility) scored twice as well on academic tests as those that were unfit.  In the second year of the study, socio-economic status was taken into account, to possibly eliminate that variable as an explanation. As expected, those in the upper-income brackets scored better overall on the academic tests, but within the lower-income set of students, the same results were observed — kids who were more fit performed better academically.

Charles Hillman, associate professor of kinesiology at the University of Illinois, was able to duplicate these findings with 259 third and fifth-grade Illinois students. His team also noticed that two of the tests, BMI and aerobic capacity, were significantly more influential to higher academic scores than the other four fitness factors. Digging deeper, he isolated two groups of 20 students, one fit and the other unfit. They were given cognitive tests of attention, working memory and processing speed while their brain's electrical activity was being measured by an electroencephalogram (EEG) test.

The fit kids’ brains showed more activity in the prefrontal cortex, known for its executive function and control over other brain processes.

So, just send the kids on a fast jog and they will ace all of their tests?  Not quite.

“The exercise itself doesn’t make you smarter, but it puts the brain of the learners in the optimal position for them to learn,” Ratey said. “There’s no way to say for sure that improves learning capacity for kids, but it certainly seems to correlate to that."

Please visit my other articles on Livescience.com

Related Stories:
Athletic Gene ACTN3 = "All Children Test Newborn To 3"?
Sideline Raging Soccer Moms (and Dads!)
Does Practice Make Perfect?

How Should Cheating Be Defined In Sports?

When Milwaukee Brewers pitcher Chris Capuano reports for spring training in April, he will be anxious to demonstrate the effects of a performance-enhancing off-season. His brain will benefit from a sharper focus while his throwing arm will boast an extra boost that has been missing since 2006. Stimulants? Steroids? Scandal? No need to panic, he just had LASIK surgery for his eyes and "Tommy John" surgery for his injured elbow. Of course, had he chosen amphetamines to improve his focus or steroids to increase his strength, he would have been banned and berated. 

Society Decides

There is confusion over the means and methods athletes have available to enhance their performance. Certainly, corrective eye surgery to raise your vision level to 20/20 seems fair, but many athletes go into the procedure hoping to come out with enhanced 20/15 or 20/10 eyesight. Replacing a damaged elbow ligament with a tendon doesn't seem like cheating, but what if its done on a healthy elbow hoping for a few more miles per hour on a fastball that has faded over the years?

Earlier this month, a commentary in the journal Nature recommended a fresh look at cognitive-enhancing drugs and where to draw the line in the sand between natural performance and enhanced performance. The authors, an esteemed group of neuroscientists and ethicists, argued that "enhanced" is only defined by the rules set by society.

Certainly, abuse of prescription drugs, such as Ritalin and Adderall, is illegal because of the potential, harmful side effects. Still, reports of the rising use of these drugs by college students and professionals show the demand for options beyond nutrition, exercise and sleep.

These drugs are just the first generation of possible brain boosting supplements, which is why the Nature commentators are calling for an organized, stigma-free approach to evaluating the risks, benefits and ethics of future products.

Even in Major League Baseball, there is mounting evidence that cognitive-enhancing drugs may be on the rise. Since MLB banned amphetamines in 2006, there has been a dramatic rise in the number of therapeutic use exemptions issued to players for attention-deficit disorder diagnoses, for which drugs like Ritalin and Adderall can be legitimately prescribed. In 2006, 28 players applied for the exemption, while a year later there were 103. There is suspicion that many of these ADD diagnoses are just excuses to get the pills.

Legal Jolt

So, what if there was a cognitive-enhancing, sports supplement that increased alertness, concentration, reaction time and focus while also decreasing the perception of muscle fatigue? Even more encouraging, this supplement is sold in millions of outlets and is socially accepted worldwide. It comes in three sizes, tall, grande or venti – coffee. More specifically, caffeine has been the subject of many recent studies of its effectiveness, both cognitively and physiologically.

Earlier this year, Dr. Carrie Ruxton completed a literature survey to summarize 41 double-blind, placebo-controlled trials published over the past 15 years to establish what range of caffeine consumption would maximize benefits and minimize risk for cognitive function, mood, physical performance and hydration. The studies were divided into two categories, those that looked at the cognitive effects and those that looked at physical performance effects.

The results concluded that there was a significant improvement in cognitive functions like attention, reaction time and mental processing as well as physical benefits described as increased "time to exhaustion" and decreased "perception of fatigue" in cycling and running tests.

Given these results, how exactly does caffeine perform these wonderful tricks? Dr. Ruxton explains from the study, "Caffeine is believed to impact on mood and performance by inhibiting the binding of both adenosine and benzodiazepine receptor ligands to brain membranes. As these neurotransmitters are known to slow down brain activity, a blockade of their receptors lessens this effect."

Bottom line, the chemicals in your brain that would cause you to feel tired are blocked, giving you a feeling of ongoing alertness. This pharmacological process is very similar to that of the ADD drugs.

If caffeine is such a clear cut performance enhancing supplement, why did the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) first add caffeine to its banned substance list, only to remove it in 2004? At the time that it was placed on the banned list, the threshold for a positive caffeine test was set to a post-exercise urinary caffeine concentration of about 3-4 cups of strong coffee.

However, more recent research has shown that caffeine has ergogenic effects at levels as low as the equivalent of 1-2 cups of coffee. So, it was hard for WADA to know where to draw the line between athletes just having a few morning cups of coffee/tea and those that were intentionally consuming caffeine to increase their performance level.

So, if Chris Capuano has a double espresso before pitching, his brain, eyes and arm should enhance his performance in the game.  Is that an unfair advantage? Science will continue to offer new and improved methods for raising an athlete's game above the competition. Players, league officials and fans will have to decide where to draw the line.

Please visit my other articles on Livescience.com

Why Pro Athletes Attract Trouble

From the "athletes behaving badly" department (in the past month, anyway):
•    NHL bad boy (Sean Avery) was suspended for six games for a crude remark.
•    Six NFL players were suspended for allegedly violating the league's drug policy.
•    Another NFL player (Adam "Pacman" Jones) returned to his team's roster after being suspended, again, for an off-field altercation.
•    Oh, and NFL receiver (Plaxico Burress) accidentally shot himself in a nightclub with a gun he was not licensed to carry. 

Despite the 24/7 media coverage of each of these incidents, sports fans have become accustomed to and somewhat complacent with hearing about athletes and their deviant acts.
In fact, new statistics reveal that bad behavior is clearly evident among high school athletes, particularly in high-contact sports.

It starts young
Besides the highly publicized stories, there are thousands more across the nation involving amateur athletes taking risks both on and off the field. From performance-enhancing supplements to referee/official abuse to fights, guns and recorded crimes, the image of sports as a positive influence on athletes may need a second look.

Granted, in a population of any size there will be a few bad apples. However, these actions have become so prevalent that academic researchers have created a branch of study called "deviance in sports" attached to the sports sociology tree. 

They are asking questions and challenging some assumptions about cause and effect. Is there a connection between sports participation and deviance? Does the intense competition and battle on the field shape a player's off-the-field lifestyle? Since success in sports brings attention and prestige to athletes, does the risk of losing that status cause a need to take risks to maintain their "top dog" positions?

In their new book, "Deviance and Social Control in Sport," researchers Michael Atkinson and Kevin Young emphasize the confusing environment surrounding athletes. They describe two types of deviance: wanted and unwanted.

Owners, players and fans may know that certain behaviors are literally against the rules but are at the same time appreciated as a sign of doing whatever it takes to win.  Performance-enhancing drugs are not allowed in most sports, but athletes assume they will improve their performance, which helps their team win and keeps fans happy. Fights in hockey will be, according to the rule book, penalized, but this deviance is assumed to be wanted by fans and teammates as a sign of loyalty.

However, related bad behavior can quickly turn on a player to being socially unwanted. 

Abuse of drugs that don't contribute to a win, (marijuana, cocaine, alcohol), will transform that same player into a villain with shock and outrage being reported in the media. In the Sean Avery example, a hockey player fighting to defend his teammates on the ice can then be suspended from the team and criticized by those same teammates for an off-color remark.

Real statistics
Most athletes who make it to the professional level have been involved in sports since youth. Sports sociologists and psychologists often look at the early development years of athletes to get a glimpse of patterns, social norms and influences that contribute to later behaviors.

In a recent American Sociological Review article, Derek Kreager, assistant professor of sociology at Penn State University, challenged the long-held belief that youth sports participation is exclusively beneficial to their moral character development. 

With the focus on teaching teamwork, fair play, and self esteem, sports are often cited as the antidote to delinquency. But Kreager notes that other studies have looked at the culture that surrounds high school and college athletes and identified patterns of clichés, privileges and attitudes of superiority. For some athletes, these patterns are used to justify deviant behavior.

In fact, his most recent research attempted to find a cause-and-effect link between deviant behavior and specific sports. Specifically, he asked if high-contact, physical sports like football and wrestling created athletes who were more prone to violent behavior off the field.

Using data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, more than 6,000 male students from across 120 schools were included. The data set included a wide collection of socioeconomic information, including school activities, risk behaviors and at-home influences. Kreager's study analyzed the effects of three team sports (football, basketball, and baseball) and two individual sports (wrestling and tennis) on the likelihood of violent off-field behavior, specifically, fighting.

To isolate the effect of each sport, the study included control groups of non-athletes and those that had a history of physical violence prior to playing sports. 

For team sports, football players were 40 percent more likely to be in a confrontation than non-athletes. In individual sports, wrestlers were in fights 45 percent more often, while tennis players were 35 percent less likely to be in an altercation. Basketball and baseball players showed no significant bias either way.

"Sports such as football, basketball, and baseball provide players with a certain status in society," Kreager said. "But football and wrestling are associated with violent behavior because both sports involve some physical domination of the opponent, which is rewarded by the fans, coaches and other players. Players are encouraged to be violent outside the sport because they are rewarded for being violent inside it."

Please visit my other articles on Livescience.com

Better Golf Ball Design Helps You Play Better Golf

When it comes to improving your golf game, you can spend thousands of dollars buying the latest titanium-induced, Tiger-promoted golf clubs; taking private lessons from the local "I used to be on the Tour" pro; or trying every slice-correcting, swing-speed-estimating, GPS-distance-guessing gadget. But, in the end, it’s about getting that little white sphere to go where you intended it to go. Don't worry, there are many very smart people trying to help you by designing the ultimate golf ball. Of course, they are also after a slice of this billion dollar industry, as any technological advancement that can grab a few more market share points is worth the investment.

In fact, the golf ball wars can get nasty. Earlier this month, Callaway Golf won a court order permanently halting sales of the industry's leading ball, Titleist's Pro V1, arguing patent infringements involving its solid core technology which Callaway acquired when it bought Spaulding/Top Flite in 2003. Titleist disagrees with the decision and will appeal, but in the meantime has altered its manufacturing process so that the patents in question are not used.

The challenge for golf ball manufacturers is to design a better performing ball within the constraints set by United States Golf Association. The USGA enforces limits on the size, weight and initial performance characteristics in an attempt to keep the playing field somewhat level. Every "sanctioned" golf ball must weigh less than 1.62 ounces with a diameter smaller than 1.68 inches. It also must have a similar initial velocity when hit with a metal striker, and rebound at the same angle and speed when hit against a metal block. So, what is left to tinker with? Manufacturers have focused on the internal materials in the ball and its cover design.

Today's balls have 2, 3 or 4 layers of different internal polymer materials to be able to respond differently when hit with a driver versus, say, a wedge. When hit with a driver at much higher swing speed, the energy transfer goes all the way to the core by compressing ball, reducing backspin. During a slower swing with a club that has more angle loft, the energy stays closer to the surface of the ball and allows the grooves of the club to grab onto the ball's cover producing more spin. When driving the ball off of the tee, the preference is more distance and less loft, so a lower backspin is required. For closer shots, more backspin and control are needed.

The Science of Dimples

Which brings us to the cover of the ball and all of the design possibilities. Two forces affect the flight and distance of flying spheres, gravity and aerodynamics. Eventually, gravity wins once the momentum of the ball is slowed by the aerodynamic drag. Since all golf clubs have some angular loft to their clubface, the struck ball will have backspin. As explained by the Magnus Force effect, the air pressure will be lower on the top of the ball since that side is moving slower relative to the air around it. This creates lift as the ball will go in the direction of the lower air pressure. Counteracting this lift is the friction or drag the ball experiences while flying through the air.

Think about a boat moving through water. At the front of the boat, the water moves smoothly around the sides of the boat, but eventually separates from the boat on the back side. This leaves behind a turbulent wake where the water is agitated and creates a lower pressure area. The larger the wake, the more drag is created. A ball in flight has the same properties.

The secret then is how to reduce this wake behind the ball. Enter the infamous golf ball dimples. Dimples on a golf ball create a thin turbulent boundary layer of air molecules that sticks to the ball's contour longer than on a smooth ball. This allows the flowing air to follow the ball's surface farther around the back of the ball, which decreases the size of the wake. In fact, research has shown that a dimpled ball travels about twice as far as a smooth ball.

See video of simulated air flow around a golf ball

So, the design competition comes down to perfecting the dimple, since not all dimples are created equal! The number, size and shape can have a dramatic impact on performance. Typically, today's balls have 300-500 spherically shaped dimples, each with a depth of about .010 inch. However, varying just the depth by .001 inch can have dramatic effects on the ball's flight.

Regarding shape, these traditional round dimple patterns cover up to 86 percent of the surface of the golf ball. To create better coverage, Callaway Golf's HX ball uses hexagon shaped dimples that can create a denser lattice of dimples leaving fewer flat spots. Creating just the right design has traditionally been a trial-and-error process of creating a prototype then testing in a wind tunnel. This time-consuming process does not allow for the extreme fine-tuning of the variables.

Simulation Solution

At the 61st Meeting of the American Physical Society's Division of Fluid Dynamics this week in San Antonio, a team of researchers from Arizona State University and the University of Maryland is reporting new findings that may soon give golf ball manufacturers a more efficient method of testing their designs. Their research takes a different approach, using mathematical equations that model the physics of a golf ball in flight. ASU's Clinton Smith, a Ph.D. student and his advisor Kyle Squires collaborated with Nikolaos Beratlis and Elias Balaras at the University of Maryland and Masaya Tsunoda of Sumitomo Rubber Industries, Ltd. The team has been developing highly efficient algorithms and software to solve these equations on parallel supercomputers, which can reduce the simulation time from years to hours.

Now that the model and process is in place, the next step is to begin the quest for the ultimate dimple. In the meantime, when someone asks you, "What's your handicap?" you can confidently tell them, "Well, my golf ball's design does not optimize its drag coefficient which results in a lower loft and spin rate from its poor aerodynamics."

Please visit my other articles on Livescience.com


Related Articles on Sports Are 80 Percent Mental:
Putt With Your Brain - Part 2 

Putt With Your Brain - Part 1 

Does Practice Make Perfect? 

Play Better Golf By Playing Bigger Holes

Getting The Call Right With Technology

The loneliest men in sports have not been making any friends lately. 

Both umpires and referees have been making news, despite their often repeated goal, stated by World Series rookie umpire Tom Hallion said last month after Game 3: “As an umpire, you never want to be involved in the outcome of the game.” He added: “We like to get every play right. We’re human beings, and sometimes we get them wrong.” 

Hallion and his five partners at October's Fall Classic did not quite reach their goal. In Game 3, Hallion called Carl Crawford safe at first on a close play, but replays showed he was out. In Game 4, it was the Phillies who benefited after veteran umpire, Tim Welke, called Jimmy Rollins safe at third during a rundown, despite an obvious tag on his backside.


The men in stripes are not doing any better. Veteran NFL referee, Ed Hoculi (aka "Guns"), blew a call in Week 2's Broncos/Chargers game.  Broncos' quarterback Jay Cutler let the ball slip out of his hand and the Chargers recovered.  However, Hoculi ruled the play an incomplete pass. The video replay booth called it a fumble, but since Hoculi had blown his whistle, the call could not be reversed. 

Not to be outdone by their American counterparts, two English soccer officials have set a new standard for head-scratching calls.

In a Sept. 22 game between Watford and Reading, referee Stuart Atwell and one of his linesmen, Nigel Bannister, combined to become the ultimate sales pitch for any type of goal-line replay technology. After a scramble in front of goal, the ball bounced across the end line, two yards wide of the nearest goalpost. As both teams headed up the field and Watford prepared for a goal kick, Bannister signaled to Atwell that he saw the ball cross the line between the goalposts and that Reading should be awarded a goal. To the astonishment of all 22 players on the field and the 14,761 fans, Atwell overruled his own eyes and gave the goal to Reading. The replay made it painfully obvious how wrong the call was: 

So, assuming officials want some kind of automated technical assistance, what is available?

First, pure video instant replay gives officials a second, slower chance to see the play again and possibly adjust their live call. All four major sports leagues in the United States use replay at some level. 

In addition to judging if a shot was taken before the buzzer, the NBA added replay this season to differentiate 2-point versus 3-point baskets. MLB commissioner Bud Selig has put a stop to the spread of replay beyond the home run/foul ball call for now, but public pressure may change that. The NHL’s use of replay focuses mainly on different goal scoring scenarios. The NFL is the most advanced user of replay to judge multiple situations.

Second, an emerging selection of decision-support tools can make the actual call for the officials using location-based technology. In tennis, the Hawk-Eye system is being used at such high-profile events as Wimbledon and the U.S. Open. 

A system of six high-speed cameras records a ball's movement, which is useful when it bounces near one of the court lines. It feeds the cameras' input to a central computer that analyzes the data from all angles and then creates a motion graphic that simulates the ball's location when it bounces on the court, either on the line or next to the line, with a judgment of "in" or "out."

A player can challenge a line umpire's original call, but Hawk-Eye's ruling is then final. The interesting illusion that tennis fans have accepted is watching this 3D simulation as if it is based on a single camera’s footage of the ball. Actually, the sequence shown to viewers is Hawk-Eye's best estimate as to what actually happened based on the data it received from the cameras. There have been more than 550 challenges at the U.S. Open since 2006 when Hawk-Eye was installed. Thirty percent of those challenges resulted in a call being reversed.

In soccer, Adidas and Cairos Technologies have partnered to create an "intelligent" ball that includes a microchip that transmits its location on the field to a computer. 

The system also places a thin, underground electrical wire that surrounds each goal. If the ball's location is sensed to be completely inside the boundary of the goal, a signal is sent to a watch worn by the referee indicating that a goal has been scored. 

This technology would have saved Atwell and Bannister from their embarrassment. However, after extensive testing at several FIFA tournaments, Sepp Blatter, president of FIFA, announced in March that instead of technology, two additional human referee assistants would be used to judge whether a goal was scored. "Let it be as it is and let's leave it (soccer) with errors," Blatter said. "The television companies will have the right to say he (the referee) was right or wrong, but still the referee makes the decision — a man, not a machine." Interestingly, the English Premier League was also testing the use of Hawk-Eye as an alternative to Adidas' smart ball.

Even if the umps and refs don't want to use the technology, sports television producers still want to empower the fans.

In baseball, ESPN's "K-zone" and Fox Sports' "Fox Trax" show a virtual representation of pitches and the strike zone to let us judge the accuracy of the home-plate umpire's calls. Think that last called strike was a bit outside?  Watch the computer generated replay that is accurate to within one-half inch. 

Then, go ahead and yell at the ump. If only they could come up with a way to transmit our voices directly into the stadium.

Please visit my other articles on Livescience.com

Hockey Hits Are Hurting More

One painful lesson every National Hockey League rookie learns is to keep your head up when skating through the neutral zone. If you don't, you will not see the 4700 joules of kinetic energy skating at you with bad intentions.

During an October 25th game, Brandon Sutter, rookie center for the Carolina Hurricanes, never saw Doug Weight, veteran center of the New York Islanders, sizing him up for a hit that resulted in a concussion and an overnight stay in the hospital.  Hockey purists will say that it was a "clean hit" and Weight was not penalized.

Six days before that incident, the Phoenix Coyotes' Kurt Sauer smashed Andrei Kostitsyn of the Montreal Canadiens into the sideboards. Kostitsyn had to be stretchered off of the ice and missed two weeks of games with his concussion. Sauer skated away unhurt and unpenalized. See video here.

Big hits have always been part of hockey, but the price paid in injuries is on the rise. According to data released last month at the National Academy of Neuropsychology's Sports Concussion Symposium in New York, 759 NHL players have been diagnosed with a concussion since 1997. For the ten seasons studied, that works out to about 76 players per season and 31 concussions per 1,000 hockey games. During the 2006-07 season, that resulted in 760 games missed by those injured players, an increase of 41% from 2005-06. Researchers have found two reasons for the jump in severity, the physics of motion and the ever-expanding hockey player.

In his book, The Physics of Hockey, Alain Haché, professor of physics at Canada's University of Moncton, aligns the concepts of energy, momentum and the force of impact to explain the power of mid-ice and board collisions.

As a player skates from a stop to full speed, his mass accelerates at an increasing velocity. The work his muscles contribute is transferred into kinetic energy which can and will be transferred or dissipated when the player stops, either through heat from the friction of his skates on the ice, or through a transfer of energy to whatever he collides with, either the boards or another player.

The formula for kinetic energy, K = (1/2)mass x velocity², represents the greater impact that a skater's speed (velocity) has on the energy produced. It is this speed that makes hockey a more dangerous sport than other contact sports, like football, where average player sizes are larger but they are moving at slower speeds (an average of 23 mph for hockey players in full stride compared to about 16 mph for an average running back in the open field).

So, when two players collide, where does all of that kinetic energy go? First, let's look at two billiard balls, with the exact same mass, shape and rigid structure. When two balls collide on the table, we can ignore the mass variable and just look at velocity. If the ball in motion hits another ball that is stationary, then the ball at rest will receive more kinetic energy from the moving ball so that the total energy is conserved. This will send the stationary ball rolling across the table while the first ball almost comes to a stop as it has transferred almost all of its stored energy.

Unfortunately, when human bodies collide, they don't just bounce off of each other. This "inelastic" collision results in the transfer of kinetic energy being absorbed by bones, tissues and organs. The player with the least stored energy will suffer the most damage from the hit, especially if that player has less "body cushion" to absorb the impact.

To calculate your own real world energy loss scenario, visit the Exploratorium's "Science of Hockey" calculator. For both Sutter and Kostitsyn, they received checks from players who outweighed them by 20 pounds and were skating faster.

The average mass and acceleration variables are also growing as today's NHL players are getting bigger and faster. In a study released in September, Art Quinney and colleagues at the University of Alberta tracked the physiological changes of a single NHL team over 26 years, representing 703 players. Not surprisingly, they found that defensemen are now taller and heavier with higher aerobic capacity while forwards were younger and faster. Goaltenders were actually smaller with less body mass but had better flexibility. However, the increase in physical size and fitness did not correspond with team success on the ice. But the checks sure hurt a lot more now. 

Please visit my other articles on Livescience.com