>This is a very complicated cause/effect to figure out, even for top-class physical therapists.
Have you ever wondered what kind of experiment is needed to be run in order to verify causation?
I see people say "correlation does not equal causation." And they never wonder, well what exactly is causation and how can science attempt to verify it at all? One person even told me that causation is impossible to verify. He's right on a technical level. If you want to be very pedantic science cannot prove anything to be true. But pedantry aside experimental methods to "prove" causation are very real and used extensively in the medical industry. All the medicine you put in your body (including the covid vaccine) is verified to be effective from a causative standpoint.
That being said the experiment to test for whether or not hand/grip and strength causatively effects life span is quite trivial in terms of planning out what has to be done. The study could take a while but we've done other studies that have lasted longer and are far more complicated.
Simply select a random group of people and put half of them on a daily plan to increase grip strength. If the half that was put on a daily plan generally lives longer than the other half of people who weren't put on a plan you have verified causation. The key to proving causation is to have the experimenters hand controlling the causative factor rather than observing it.
This technique can (and often is) used to produce raw science directly from clinical practice. The term for this is called "clinical trials"
Not necessarily. It's possible that the group that works on increasing their grip strength will also become healthier overall in other ways. The grip strength exercises might motivate them to do other things that are good for them, body their mood, etc.
I am describing the technical way of verifying causation. This is how it's done in formal science. I'm not making this stuff up.
>The grip strength exercises might motivate them to do other things that are good for them, body their mood, etc.
Grip strength is still the causative factor here. It "causes" people to be motivated which in turn causes people to live longer. It literally supports the articles main point.
People are saying that correlation does not equal causation and that training for grip strength will not increase your lifespan.
However if the scenario you describe above is true. Then training for grip strength DOES increase your lifespan. Causation verified. The article is then completely correct. Think about it.
I get where you're coming from though. Being born has a causative association with having a longer life span than not being born. The connection is technically causative but you want to find a more direct source that is lower on the chain of causation.
Have you ever wondered what kind of experiment is needed to be run in order to verify causation?
I see people say "correlation does not equal causation." And they never wonder, well what exactly is causation and how can science attempt to verify it at all? One person even told me that causation is impossible to verify. He's right on a technical level. If you want to be very pedantic science cannot prove anything to be true. But pedantry aside experimental methods to "prove" causation are very real and used extensively in the medical industry. All the medicine you put in your body (including the covid vaccine) is verified to be effective from a causative standpoint.
That being said the experiment to test for whether or not hand/grip and strength causatively effects life span is quite trivial in terms of planning out what has to be done. The study could take a while but we've done other studies that have lasted longer and are far more complicated.
Simply select a random group of people and put half of them on a daily plan to increase grip strength. If the half that was put on a daily plan generally lives longer than the other half of people who weren't put on a plan you have verified causation. The key to proving causation is to have the experimenters hand controlling the causative factor rather than observing it.
This technique can (and often is) used to produce raw science directly from clinical practice. The term for this is called "clinical trials"