I'm into ham radio which, as a hobby, skews to an older demographic. Does just having a stimulating hobby actually slow decline? Most of the fun of ham radio is learning - it never stops, there's always something else to discover. I'd guess that it's the learning, searching, and connections you make that provide the benefits. Unless being in nature is a requirement, but then you have plenty of retirees that go RVing - do they experience the same benefits? I doubt that's as intellectually stimulating as birding or radio. Maybe.

▲

rustyhancock an hour ago | parent [-]

Yes of course, anything the requires skills you don't otherwise use. In particular continuous learning is very helpful.

The challenge however is, is it that those who engage in such hobbies have decline slowed. Or are they able to engage in those hobbies due to not declining.

It's not possible to answer clearly without some randomisation and control which is basically impossible.

Still, it's reasonable inference that hobbies and work maintain cognitive capabilities.

▲

saimiam an hour ago | parent [-]

Maybe by comparing the comparative cognitive of twins, one of whom has a hobby and the other doesn’t?

	▲	rustyhancock 39 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		It'll definitely be a nice data point. It seems also just enough to say supporting people to have a hobby if they're at risk of dementia and don't have one is important to meeting their social and health needs. I might be being too cynical. I wonder if there is some funding arguments, I.e. if it's for their health and insurer may fund it. If it's for their social/cultural and general wellbeing it might be out of their remit somewhat.