New Psychology Today Post: Healthy Body and a Sound Mind? Does Physical Fitness Improve Cognition?

The Roman poet Juvenile popularised the motto “a sound mind in a healthy body”).  But is this really the case?  What is the relationship between physical health and mental power, and why does it matter for schools?

I've just published the latest contribution to my Psychology Today column: Healthy Body and a Sound Mind?  Does Physical Fitness Improve Cognition? 

Please check it out, leave a comment and share!

 

Aims - what's the point of PE and sports coaching?

‘Cheshire Puss,’ she began, rather timidly … ‘Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?’  ‘That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,’ said the Cat.  ‘I don’t much care where,’ said Alice.  ‘Then it doesn’t matter which way you go,’ said the Cat.  ‘So long as I get somewhere,’ Alice added as an explanation.  ‘Oh, you’re sure to do that,’ said the Cat, ‘if you only walk long enough.’ (Lewis Carroll, 1865, ‘Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland’)

To help understand the importance of aims within sport teaching, consider two encounters.  In the first, the teacher/coach uses her knowledge, skills and understanding to prepare young children for elite competition.  She draws on state-of-the-art scientific knowledge to ensure that her young players develop extraordinary physical and mental skills, and uses her excellent communication and motivational skills to keep the players training and their parents quiet.  By the nature of such training, lots of these players are injured or burnt out, and whilst the teacher/coach is upset for the children, she consoles herself that the situation is probably necessary if she is to achieve her ultimate goal: medals.

On the second encounter another teacher/coach uses her scientific knowledge to help the young people in her charge to have sporting experiences that are enjoyable.  For her, sport should be ‘fun’, whilst she knows that fun for six, sixteen and sixty years olds will take quite different forms.  This teacher plans her sessions with the intention of maximising enjoyment for all, and considers a session a good one if everyone leaves with a smile of their face.

These teachers/coaches are clearly involved in sport pedagogy, but who have markedly different conceptions of the role and value of sport in people’s lives.  The first teacher seems to think of the aims of sport mainly in social terms; for her, the purpose of sport is as a vehicle to win medals and glory, whether for the club or for the country.  The second teacher understands the point of sport in terms of personal satisfaction or enjoyment.  Casual observations in schools and sports clubs reveals that there are many teachers and coaches who assume the latter position, and who feel they have achieve their goal if everyone is ‘busy, happy and good’.  And, it is also not difficult to find evidence of the former approach, too, whether in the form of the brutal training of Chinese infant gymnastics or in the ‘survival of the fittest’ mindset of youth squads in many professional football clubs in the United Kingdom.

So, we can see two teachers with very different conceptions of the aims of sport, and these aims result in completely different ways of thinking of sport. 

Much like a rudder directs a boat, aims direct the uses to which a teacher’s/coach’s skills, knowledge and understanding are put.

As we have seen, aims can be framed in terms of social or individual outcomes.  This is not to suggest that there are only a small number possible aims!  On the contrary, the list of aims is probably endless  For example, an international review of the stated aims of educational systems from around the world came up with the following composite list (Tabberer, 1997):

• Excellence
•  Individual development
•  Social development
• Personal qualities
•  Equal opportunity
•  National economy
•  Preparation for work
•  Basic skills
•  Foundation for further education
•  Knowledge/skills/understanding
•  Citizenship/community/democracy
•  Cultural heritage/literacy
•  Creativity
•  Environment
•  Health/physical/leisure
•  Lifelong education
•   Parental participation

It would not be difficult to show how each of these can be translated into an aim for sport pedagogy (with a little imagination!).

It is worth noting that the list above was gleaned from curriculum documents.  Philosophically speaking, therefore, they represent what are called explicit aims.  These are aims that are stated for all to hear or published for all to read.  The moment a government or agency publishes the aims of a strategy or scheme they make them explicit, and consequently, open to discussion, criticism and rejection.

If aims are not made explicit they remain implicit, or hidden.  There is nothing sinister about this: implicit aims are not hidden to conceal.  Often, they are just too obvious to discuss.  Take as an example the question of mind-body dualism.  For many people (probably most people) the superiority of the mind over the body is simply taken for granted, and so any educational aims related to the development of the body will be inevitably be affected by this assumption.

One of the most valuable jobs that philosophy can offer is to help make implicit aims and assumptions explicit.  This is important because it is impossible to discuss, criticise and reject ideas until they are out in the open.  Lots of bad ideas grow and thrive only in the dark!

It is worthwhile examining both explicit and implicit aims because both will influence the way people act.  The explicit aims might reflect things like policies and formal guidance, and these are obviously relevant to teachers and coaches.  However, implicit aims are likely to reflect unquestioned assumptions and practices.  Our implicit aims will probably be more powerful precisely because we never question them.

So what?  Why does this talk of matter?

You may have already met Julie Myerson’s memoir ‘Not a Games Person’.  It is a frank account of a young woman who gradually changes from a general distain for sport and exercise to someone who hates them, largely due to her experiences at school.  At one point Myerson describes a lesson that might be familiar to many of us.

“This is me.  Six years old and standing in a sack in the middle of a field somewhere in the middle of England a long time ago.

 I don’t know why I’m here or what I’m doing – I don’t have any idea what the purpose is of standing in this field.  All I know is that they want me to jump – hold the sack as tight as I can and jump jump jump to the finishing line.

 I’m surrounded by people but all alone.  There’s a horrible feeling in my tummy and an itch on my leg, like a fly crawling over it.  I shiver and wait for the whistle to blow.”
(Julie Myerson, 2005, ‘Not a Games Person’)

We have no way of knowing the aims of Myerson’s teacher, but we can guess.  Perhaps the teacher felt that it was important for her pupils to get out of the classroom, to ‘burn off excess energy’.  Or maybe the motivation was competition (it was a sack race, after all).  Or perhaps her planning was inspired by the aim to make her children fitter and healthier.  Or was this lesson just an easy way to fill some time before the real business of school starts again?

Some of the teacher’s aims might be reasonable; others might seem weak or illegitimate.  In other words, different aims are of different value, and such value is only judged by making the aims explicit and by critically discussing them.

Strangers on a train You are on a train occasionally chatting to a charming person sitting opposite. Your new-found friend has just been reading an article in the newspaper that reports research findings that many children around the world have no regular sport or physical education lessons whilst at school. “Oh well”, your companion says innocently, “thank heavens it is only sport they are missing out”. You smile to yourself, and educate the stranger.



What do you say?

Bodies and Minds: even more on philosophy and sport

Philosophers are nothing if not an argumentative bunch, and many different arguments have been offered against Dualism.  One school of philosophy that is particularly relevant in this regard is phenomenology.  This approach is unusual because as opposed to almost every other school of philosophy, it is mainly concerned with describing, rather than the explaining, the things we experience.  Hubert Dreyfus captures the spirit of the phenomenological stance when he wrote:

“In explaining our actions we must always sooner or later fall back on our everyday practices and simply say 'this is what we do' or 'that's what it is to be a human being'.  Thus, in the last analysis, all intelligibility and all intelligent behaviour must be traced back to our sense of what we are.” (cited in Wrathall, 2000, p. 94)

According to Dreyfus, the biggest problem with dualism is that its account of action just does not relate to what it is really like to move.

So, phenomenologists reject the Cartesian splitting of the mind and body in favour of an integrated view that emphasises the notion of embodiment, or the central importance of human experience as lived through a body.  In other words, while dualism generally regarded the mind as the driver and degraded the body to a mere machine or vehicle, phenomenology countered that the body was the bridge to the world:  “Our senses are the portals that lead from inner to outer space.  Robbed of them, we become an island unto ourselves, lacking the ability to interact with the world” (Hunter and Csikszentmihalyi, 2000, p. 8).

At the heart of phenomenology is the view that to be in the world is to have a body or be a body.  It is only through being a body that I am what and who I am.  And it is only though my body that I can experience and learn about the things that make up my world.

This might seem a rather abstract idea, but some writers have suggested that a lot of what goes on when people actually play sport does not seem to fit the dualist idea of a mind working a mechanical body, no matter how fit and efficient.  The psychologist Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi, who we have just met above, suggested that there were certain experiences that were common to many sports players in which thought and action seem inseparable.  He used the word ‘flow’ to refer to experiences in which a person feels on top of the world, in total command of the situation and feeling that his/her limits are being pushed to the limits.  He quotes the words of an elite skater:

“Everything else goes away. It almost happens in slow motion, even though you're doing things at the correct time with the music and everything.  Nothing else matters; it is just such an eerie, eerie feeling. The audience fades away, except for the brief moment when they were clapping so loudly - actually that was just a part of us. It was all a part of our experience; it never took us out of our focus”. (Jackson and Csikszentmihalyi, 1999, p. 73)

Numerous sports players have spoken about these types of experiences: of ‘being in the zone’; of ‘going with the flow’; and of ‘playing out of my mind’.  Together, they point to an experience in which the body and the mind are inseparable.

“Basketball is a complex dance. To excel, you need to act with a clear mind and be totally focused on what everyone on the floor is doing. Some athletes describe this quality of mind as a "cocoon of concentration." But that implies shutting out the world when what you really need to do is become more acutely aware of what's happening right now, this very moment.” (Great basketball coach Phil Jackson; 1995, p. 116)

So, what do you think?

Is this just an illusion or a trick of the mind?

Or is it just the consequence of highly trained athletes just thinking that they are not thinking?

Where Am I? a little more about philosophy and sport

Imagine that you are approached by scientists  to go on a secret mission to disarm a nuclear devise.  The mission is very risky to your brain, but not your body.  So the clever/ mad scientists have figured out a way of sending your body on the mission whilst leaving your brain behind in the laboratory.  You are a heroic sort of person, and agree to go on the mission.  Your brain is surgically removed from your body and placed in a vat, although the brain and body are still linked together via implants, transmitters and antennae.  Before you go to disarm the bomb your body sits down and stares at your brain in the vat.

Where are you?

Are you the brain in the vat?

Or the body in the chair?

Or wherever you think you are?

This story is the start of a thought experiment (an imaginative devise to test philosophical ideas) from Daniel Dennett (1978).  The full story becomes more complex as various twists and turns are introduced.  The whole time, Dennett is trying to work out where he really is.

Try reading the full account, either in his book ‘Brainstorms’, or on one of the many websites that reproduces it (such as: http://www.newbanner.com/SecHumSCM/WhereAmI.html).

Dennett’s experiment offers a particularly vivid example of one of the most persistent questions in philosophy: what does it mean to be human?  Are we primarily minds or bodies?  Where are we?

Why does this matter to those involved with sport pedagogy?  According to Margaret Talbot (2001, p. 40) it “is the only educational experience where the focus is on the body, physical activity and physical development”.  In other words, we who work in sport pedagogy need to think about our own understandings of the body because the body is the focus of our professional interest.  More importantly, as we will see shortly, we need to reflect on our assumptions about bodies because they will heavily influence the ways we approach the teaching and care of them.


So, where are you?

This is your brain in the gym: physical education and cognitive outcomes

Sit mens sana in corpore sano

It is to be prayed that the mind be sound in a sound body.

Ask for a brave soul that lacks the fear of death,

which places the length of life last among nature’s blessings,

which is able to bear whatever kind of sufferings,

does not know anger, lusts for nothing and believes

the hardships and savage labours of Hercules better than

the satisfactions, feasts, and feather bed of an Eastern king.

I will reveal what you are able to give yourself;

For certain, the one footpath of a tranquil life lies through virtue.

The Roman poet Juvenile (in his Satires 10.356-64) famously popularised the claim that a ‘‘healthy body leads to a healthy mind” around the end of the 1st Century AD. In doing so, he started the long tradition of associating development of the mind and development of the body.

Juvenile’s statement stands in stark contrast to many influential schools of thought over the last two thousand years. Generally speaking, the body has not been taken seriously in Western thought, and has been taken up only to be dismissed in comparison with the mind or the soul. Certain forms of Christianity taught that the body was depraved and the source of sin (Brown, 1988). While some classical writers, such as Plato and Aristotle, asserted a view to the effect that the development of the mind needs to be balanced by the development of the body (Hills, 1998), Western philosophy has tended to present the body as of only marginal significance to human beings, concerned primarily with moving and sustaining the mind. Philosophers from René Descartes to Immanuel Kant to the present day have characterised the human being as a mental subject in a physical, material body (Brevik, 2008): the mind is central; the body is merely functional. Gilbert Ryle (1949) famously depicted this view as ‘the ghost in the machine’, although a more graphical metaphor might be ‘the mind in the meat’. So, the importance of the body lies in its ability to move the mind from place to place. It needs to be fit and healthy because these are the conditions necessary for effective mobility.

Two main lines of attack have been launched during the last half Century against this viewpoint. The first originated from the continental school of philosophy called phenomenology. Thinkers like Martin Heidegger and Maurice Merleau-Ponty raised objections to the traditional view by highlighting the role of the body in the human being interactions with the world. Heidegger (1963) challenged the mind-body / subject-object distinction of thinkers like Descartes by defining the human being as Dasein (being-in-the-world). As we make our way in the world, he argued, we do so neither as a subject mind, or as an objective body, but as a coherence of being-in-the-world. This approach was taken up and substantially extended by Merleau-Ponty (1962) who presented the body as an active agent in the world. For him it is the body-being-in-the-world that captures the human condition. The second source of criticism of the Cartesian human comes from modern cognitive science. Hubert Dreyfus (Dreyfus and Dreyfus, 1986) has spent decades critiquing the ‘Information Processing’ of learning that is still influential, in which the mind runs a series of motor programs, rather like a computer runs its programs, and the body simply follows the commands (Bailey and Pickard, in press). Recent work by thinkers like Andy Clark (1997) have taken Dreyfus’ ideas much further, both in terms of the radical nature of the hypotheses and by actually translating the theory into the practice of artificial intelligence.

Yet, despite the criticisms of the philosophers and the scientists, the Western mindset continues to place the body as a poor second to the mind. This is the context in which the Western model of education, which has increasingly come to dominate all corners of the world, has always been concerned first and foremost with the mind and its products (such as reason, thinking and knowledge). It seems reasonable, therefore, to suggest that the marginal position of the subject most closely concerned with matters of the body - physical education – reflects the marginal role of the body in wider discourse (Hardman and Marshall, 2000).

So, this is not merely an academic issue: school systems are profoundly affected by the beliefs and values about the relative importance of the mind and body; similarly, parents and students absorb these beliefs and values, which influence the ways they approach schooling, prioritise certain sorts of activities over others, and withdraw completely from those educational experiences judged to be of little value. Physical Education has its place, they seem to argued, but it should not interfere with the real business of schooling, which many believe to be academic achievement and examination results (Lau et al., 2004; Lindner, 2002).

This post outlines some of the research into the relationship between physical activity and cognitive development. If the phenomenologists are correct, there ought to be some sort of relationship between the development of the body and the development of the mind. If the traditional perspective is right (Ghost in the Machine; Mind in the Meat), there should be little or no relationship.

Physical Education and Cognitive Development

Studies of cognitive outcomes of Physical Education have mainly focused on the development of learning skills and academic performance associated with participation. Numerous authors have argued for transfer effects of Physical Education to other areas of the school curriculum, such as literacy and numeracy (Pirie, 1995), whilst others have suggested that physical activity stimulates the development of generic cognitive or learning skills (Barr and Lewin, 1994).

Empirical research into the cognitive outcomes of involvement in Physical Education, or more generally, physical activity, tend to fall into three categories:

1) studies of associations between Physical Education / physical activity and academic performance, such as in assessments;

2) studies of associations between physical activity and cognitive functioning;

3) studies of associations between Physical Education / physical activity and the improvement of other areas of the curriculum and basic skills, such as literacy, numeracy and thinking skills.

The classic study of the relationship between Physical Education and general school performance was carried out in France between 1951 and 1961 (Hervet, 1952). Researchers reduced ‘academic’ curriculum time by 26 per cent, replacing it with Physical Education, yet academic results did not worsen and there were fewer discipline problems, greater attentiveness and less absenteeism. Similarly, the Hindmarsh Project in Australia assessed the effects of a 14-week daily physical activity programme on a range of measures, including academic performance (Dwyer et al., 1983). Despite the loss of 45 to 60 minutes of classroom teaching time each day, there were no signs of an adverse effect on numeracy and literacy.

More recent studies have found small improvements for some children in academic performance when time for Physical Education is increased in their school day (Sallis et al., 1999; Shephard, 1996). A review of three large-scale studies found that academic performance is maintained and occasionally enhanced by an increase in a student’s levels of Physical Education, despite a reduction in the time for the study of academic material (Shephard, 1997). It has also been found that Physical Education and physical activity levels are higher in relatively high-performing than low-performing schools (Lindner, 2002). These findings should, however, be taken with some caution, as other studies found no relationship, or a trivial one, between participation in Physical Education and educational achievement (Melnick et al., 1988, 1992; Tremblay et al., 2000).

It might be the case that any improvement in academic performance following physical activity reflects changes in cognitive functioning, such as increases to blood flow in the brain, increased levels of arousal and stimulated brain development (Ratey and Hagerman, 2009). Cognitive function may also benefit indirectly from increased energy generation, as well as a break from sedentary, classroom-based work (Lindner, 1999). Whilst such changes have been associated with physical activity (Etnier et al., 1997), the subsequent link with school performance is equivocal, and further studies are required.

Some well-designed studies have found a positive relationship between increased physical activity and concentration (Caterino and Polak, 1999; Raviv and Low, 1990), and whilst most studies have tested the effects of short-term interventions, it has been suggested that effects are more likely to be sustained if physical activity is introduced over a long period of time (Etnier et al., 1997).

With regard to the third area of research, Physical Education / physical activity’s contributions to other areas of the curriculum, few robust studies have been undertaken to date. Much of the literature is taken with non-empirical papers that either extrapolate from parallels between movement and intellectual development in early childhood or promote movement-based practices as appealing alternatives to passive learning of concepts (Gildenhuys and Orsmond, 1996). Whilst it is plausible that physical activity helps generate empowering and relaxing contexts for learning (Daley, 1988), there is no satisfactory evidence to support the claim. For example, Keinänen et al. (2000) reviewed the small number of empirical studies of strategies using dance instruction to improve reading and non-verbal reasoning, but were unable to draw strong conclusions, because, despite generally positive findings, none ruled out alternative explanations for the effects. Likewise, Dismore and Bailey’s (2005) study of outdoor learning among Primary-aged students found improvements in a range of other curriculum areas, but the research was unable to discount confounding variables.

Some of the most enthusiastic support for the claim that there is a relationship between Physical Education / physical activity and cognitive benefits comes from small-scale studies, based on self-administered and self-evaluated designs (BBC News, 2001). Such studies ought not to be disregarded, but neither should they be used as the basis of bold assertions that increasing certain activities improves school performance. Of course, a causal relationship will always be difficult to establish, since to do so would require either withholding treatment from a group of children or somehow accounting for the wide range of confounding variables (Hills, 1998). Nevertheless, some studies have utilised large-scale, controlled experimental designs (Caterino and Polak, 1999; Raviv, 1990; Sallis et al., 1999; Shephard, 1996), and these might act as examples of workable approaches for future research.

One major omission from the existing literature is that which offers a coherent analytical framework for explaining possible effects associated with Physical Education / physical activity. Few studies have sought to explore the precise mechanisms that might cause cognitive benefits, or the ways in which different types of activity and different ways they are presented might initiate those mechanisms. These would seem to be good candidates for future research. The difficulty, as always, is that quality research is expensive and time-consuming. However, if policy makers and practitioners are going to really understand the relationship between Physical Education and cognition, such studies are vital.

Conclusions and cautions

Based on the available research evidence it seems safe to conclude that increased levels of Physical Education do not interfere with pupils’ achievement in other subjects (although the time available for these subjects is consequently reduced), and in some groups of students outcomes may be associated with improved academic performance. More clear positive evidence relates to relationships between physical activity and cognitive functioning, especially when sustained over a long period of time.

These findings warrant cautious optimism. However, there is a danger. Physical Education has a long and ignoble history of aligning itself to various instrumental bandwagons – social inclusion, crime reduction, weight management, sports performance and so on. Positive outcomes in each of these areas should be acknowledged and celebrated, but they should NOT become justifications for the subject. Physical Education should stop requiring more of itself than other subjects. The justification for the subject is its intrinsic merit, not its contribution to other areas. Physical Education offers students distinctively valuable experiences, and these experiences are all the more worthwhile because they are the only formal opportunity for young people to learn in, through and about their bodies. As philosophers like Dreyfus and Merleau-Ponty have made clear, we are our bodies and our bodies are us. To conceive of an education system that negates this understand is perverse, and will not serve the needs and interests of learners.

References

Bailey, R., Armour, K., Kirk, D., Jess, M., Pickup, I., & Sandford, R. (2009) The educational benefits claimed for physical education and school sport: an academic review. Research Paper in Education, 24, 1, pp. 1-27.

Bailey, R.P. and Pickard, A. (in press) Body Learning: Examining The Processes of Skill Learning in Dance. Sport, Education and Society.

Barr, S. and Lewin, P. (1994) Learning movement: integrating kinesthetic sense with cognitive skills, Journal of Aesthetic Education, 28 (1), 83–94.

Brevik, G. (2008) Bodily Movement: the fundamental dimension. Sport, Ethic and Philosophy, 2, pp. 337-352.

Brown, P. (1988) The body and society: men, women, and sexual renunciation in early Christianity. New York: Columbia.

Clark, A. (1997) Being There: Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Daley, D. (1988) Language development through physical education, British Journal of Physical Education, May, 123–132.

Dismore, H. and Bailey, R. (2005) ‘If only’: outdoor and adventurous activities and generalised academic development, Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 5 (1), 56–68.

Dreyfus, H. and Dreyfus, S. (1986) Mind Over Machine. New York: Free Press.

Etnier, J., Salazar, W., Landers, D., Petruzzello, S., Han, M. and Nowell, P. (1997) The influence of physical fitness and exercise upon cognitive functioning: a meta-analysis, Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 19, 249–277.

Gildenhuys, C. and Orsmond, C. (1996) Movement and second language acquisition: the potential and method, Sport, Education and Society, 1 (1), 103–115.

Hardman, K. and Marshall, J.J. (2000) Worldwide Survey of the State and Status of School Physical Education Final Report, Manchester: University of Manchester.

Heidegger, M. (1963) Being and Time (trans. J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson). San Francisco, CA: Harper.

Hervet R. (1952) Vanves, son Experience, ses Perspectives, Revue Institut Sports, 24, 4–6.

Hills A. (1998) Scholastic and intellectual development and sport. In K.-M. Chan and L. Micheli (Eds) Sports and Children (Champaign, IL, Human Kinetics).

Keinänen, M., Hetland, L. and Winner, E. (2000) Teaching cognitive skills through dance: evidence for near but not far transfer, Journal of Aesthetic Education, 34 (3/4), 295–306.

Lau, P., Yu, C., Lee, A., So, R. and Sung, R. (2004) The relationship among physical fitness, physical education, conduct and academic performance of Chinese primary school children, International Journal of Physical Education, 12, 17–26.

Lindner, K. (2002) The physical activity participation – academic performance relationship revisited, Pediatric Exercise Science, 14, 155–169.

Melnick, M., Vanfossen, B. and Sabo, D. (1988) Developmental effects of athletic participation among high school girls, Sociology of Sport Journal, 5, 22–36.

Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962) Phenomenology of Perception (trans. C. Smith). New York: Humanities Press.

Pirie, B. (1995) Meaning through movement: kinesthetic English, English Journal, December, 46–51.

Ratey, J.J. and Hagerman, E. (2009) Spark: the revolutionary new science of exercise and the brain. London: Quercus.

Ryle, G. (1949) The Concept of Mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Sallis, J., McKenzie, J., Kolody, B., Lewis, M., Marshall, S. and Rosengard, P. (1999) Effects of health-related physical education on academic achievement: Project SPARK. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 70,127–134.

Shephard, R. (1996) Habitual physical activity and academic performance, Nutrition Review, 54 (4), S32–S36.

Shephard, R. (1997) Curricular physical activity and academic performance, Pediatric Exercise Science, 9, 113–126.

Taras, H. (2005) Physical activity and student performance in school, Journal of School Health, 75 (6), 214–218.

Tremblay, M., Inman, J. and Willms, J. (2000). The relationship between physical activity, self-esteem, and academic achievement in 12-year-old children, Pediatric Exercise Science, 12, 312–324.

This post is based on a chapter of a book written for UNESCO, and supported by the International Council for Sport Science and Physical Education.

For more information on this and related topics, go to my website: www.richardbailey.net