I'm not sure what you expect to accomplish by using obscure and invented health industry terminology absent from medical science and citing this kind of evidence with a three hour long podcast that I'm simply not going to entertain.

Regardless, you have constructed a new straw man argument. My point was far less complicated, which is that expensive and complex technological devices as sport accessories distract from the natural incentive of improving fitness and are unnecessary and functionally duplicated with an inexpensive stopwatch. The natural incentive for improved health is traded for the incentive for being entertained by absurdly detailed metrics without advantage to the fundamental goal of improving fitness.

Unnecessary reliance on accessories will synthetically make it more difficult to do the same activity if the accessories are removed, for whatever the reason they happen to not be available, stolen, lost, broken, whatever. Exercise is its own reward, and there is little reason to replace that incentive with the need to be entertained by detailed metrics of past events.

> Your statements are bizarre and arrogant. It feels like debating with an edgy teenager.

More ad hominem attacks.

Please do not be concerned about the opinions of others. Please follow you heart and do what makes you happy. I strongly insist that you do.