We’re all time-poor, so multi-tasking is seen as a necessity of modern living. We answer work emails while watching TV, make shopping lists in meetings and listen to podcasts when doing the dishes. We attempt to split our attention countless times a day when juggling both mundane and important tasks.

But doing two things at the same time isn’t always as productive or safe as focusing on one thing at a time.

The dilemma with multi-tasking is that when tasks become complex or energy-demanding, like driving a car while talking on the phone, our performance often drops on one or both.

Here’s why – and how our ability to multi-task changes as we age.

Doing more things, but less effectively

The issue with multi-tasking at a brain level, is that two tasks performed at the same time often compete for common neural pathways – like two intersecting streams of traffic on a road.

In particular, the brain’s planning centres in the frontal cortex (and connections to parieto-cerebellar system, among others) are needed for both motor and cognitive tasks. The more tasks rely on the same sensory system, like vision, the greater the interference.

This is why multi-tasking, such as talking on the phone, while driving can be risky. It takes longer to react to critical events, such as a car braking suddenly, and you have a higher risk of missing critical signals, such as a red light.

The more involved the phone conversation, the higher the accident risk, even when talking “hands-free”.

Generally, the more skilled you are on a primary motor task, the better able you are to juggle another task at the same time. Skilled surgeons, for example, can multitask more effectively than residents, which is reassuring in a busy operating suite.

Highly automated skills and efficient brain processes mean greater flexibility when multi-tasking.

Adults are better at multi-tasking than kids

Both brain capacity and experience endow adults with a greater capacity for multi-tasking compared with children.

You may have noticed that when you start thinking about a problem, you walk more slowly, and sometimes to a standstill if deep in thought. The ability to walk and think at the same time gets better over childhood and adolescence, as do other types of multi-tasking.

When children do these two things at once, their walking speed and smoothness both wane, particularly when also doing a memory task (like recalling a sequence of numbers), verbal fluency task (like naming animals) or a fine-motor task (like buttoning up a shirt). Alternately, outside the lab, the cognitive task might fall by wayside as the motor goal takes precedence.

Brain maturation has a lot to do with these age differences. A larger prefrontal cortex helps share cognitive resources between tasks, thereby reducing the costs. This means better capacity to maintain performance at or near single-task levels.

The white matter tract that connects our two hemispheres (the corpus callosum) also takes a long time to fully mature, placing limits on how well children can walk around and do manual tasks (like texting on a phone) together.

For a child or adult with motor skill difficulties, or developmental coordination disorder, multi-tastking errors are more common. Simply standing still while solving a visual task (like judging which of two lines is longer) is hard. When walking, it takes much longer to complete a path if it also involves cognitive effort along the way. So you can imagine how difficult walking to school could be.

What about as we approach older age?

Older adults are more prone to multi-tasking errors. When walking, for example, adding another task generally means older adults walk much slower and with less fluid movement than younger adults.

These age differences are even more pronounced when obstacles must be avoided or the path is winding or uneven.

Older adults tend to enlist more of their prefrontal cortex when walking and, especially, when multi-tasking. This creates more interference when the same brain networks are also enlisted to perform a cognitive task.

These age differences in performance of multi-tasking might be more “compensatory” than anything else, allowing older adults more time and safety when negotiating events around them.

Older people can practise and improve

Testing multi-tasking capabilities can tell clinicians about an older patient’s risk of future falls better than an assessment of walking alone, even for healthy people living in the community.

Testing can be as simple as asking someone to walk a path while either mentally subtracting by sevens, carrying a cup and saucer, or balancing a ball on a tray.

Patients can then practise and improve these abilities by, for example, pedalling an exercise bike or walking on a treadmill while composing a poem, making a shopping list, or playing a word game.

The goal is for patients to be able to divide their attention more efficiently across two tasks and to ignore distractions, improving speed and balance.

There are times when we do think better when moving

Let’s not forget that a good walk can help unclutter our mind and promote creative thought. And, some research shows walking can improve our ability to search and respond to visual events in the environment.

But often, it’s better to focus on one thing at a time

We often overlook the emotional and energy costs of multi-tasking when time-pressured. In many areas of life – home, work and school – we think it will save us time and energy. But the reality can be different.

Multi-tasking can sometimes sap our reserves and create stress, raising our cortisol levels, especially when we’re time-pressured. If such performance is sustained over long periods, it can leave you feeling fatigued or just plain empty.

Deep thinking is energy demanding by itself and so caution is sometimes warranted when acting at the same time – such as being immersed in deep thought while crossing a busy road, descending steep stairs, using power tools, or climbing a ladder.

So, pick a good time to ask someone a vexed question – perhaps not while they’re cutting vegetables with a sharp knife. Sometimes, it’s better to focus on one thing at a time.

Peter Wilson, Professor of Developmental Psychology, Australian Catholic University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Medicare, Australia’s universal health insurance scheme, guarantees all Australians access to a wide range of health and hospital services at low or no cost.

Although access to the scheme is universal across Australia (regardless of geographic location or socioeconomic status), one analysis suggests women often spend more out-of-pocket on health services than men.

Other research has found men and women spend similar amounts on health care overall, or even that men spend a little more. However, it’s clear women spend a greater proportion of their overall expenditure on health care than men. They’re also more likely to skip or delay medical care due to the cost.

So why do women often spend more of their money on health care, and how can we address this gap?

Women have more chronic diseases, and access more services

Women are more likely to have a chronic health condition compared to men. They’re also more likely to report having multiple chronic conditions.

While men generally die earlier, women are more likely to spend more of their life living with disease. There are also some conditions which affect women more than men, such as autoimmune conditions (for example, multiple sclerosis and rheumatoid arthritis).

Further, medical treatments can sometimes be less effective for women due to a focus on men in medical research.

These disparities are likely significant in understanding why women access health services more than men.

For example, 88% of women saw a GP in 2021–22 compared to 79% of men.

As the number of GPs offering bulk billing continues to decline, women are likely to need to pay more out-of-pocket, because they see a GP more often.

In 2020–21, 4.3% of women said they had delayed seeing a GP due to cost at least once in the previous 12 months, compared to 2.7% of men.

Data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics has also shown women are more likely to delay or avoid seeing a mental health professional due to cost.

Women are also more likely to need prescription medications, owing at least partly to their increased rates of chronic conditions. This adds further out-of-pocket costs. In 2020–21, 62% of women received a prescription, compared to 37% of men.

In the same period, 6.1% of women delayed getting, or did not get prescribed medication because of the cost, compared to 4.9% of men.

Reproductive health conditions

While women are disproportionately affected by chronic health conditions throughout their lifespan, much of the disparity in health-care needs is concentrated between the first period and menopause.

Almost half of women aged over 18 report having experienced chronic pelvic pain in the previous five years. This can be caused by conditions such as endometriosis, dysmenorrhoea (period pain), vulvodynia (vulva pain), and bladder pain.

One in seven women will have a diagnosis of endometriosis by age 49.

Meanwhile, a quarter of all women aged 45–64 report symptoms related to menopause that are significant enough to disrupt their daily life.

All of these conditions can significantly reduce quality of life and increase the need to seek health care, sometimes including surgical treatment.

Of course, conditions like endometriosis don’t just affect women. They also impact trans men, intersex people, and those who are gender diverse.

Diagnosis can be costly

Women often have to wait longer to get a diagnosis for chronic conditions. One preprint study found women wait an average of 134 days (around 4.5 months) longer than men for a diagnosis of a long-term chronic disease.

Delays in diagnosis often result in needing to see more doctors, again increasing the costs.

Despite affecting about as many people as diabetes, it takes an average of between six-and-a-half to eight years to diagnose endometriosis in Australia. This can be attributed to a number of factors including society’s normalisation of women’s pain, poor knowledge about endometriosis among some health professionals, and the lack of affordable, non-invasive methods to accurately diagnose the condition.

There have been recent improvements, with the introduction of Medicare rebates for longer GP consultations of up to 60 minutes. While this is not only for women, this extra time will be valuable in diagnosing and managing complex conditions.

But gender inequality issues still exist in the Medicare Benefits Schedule. For example, both pelvic and breast ultrasound rebates are less than a scan for the scrotum, and no rebate exists for the MRI investigation of a woman’s pelvic pain.

Management can be expensive too

Many chronic conditions, such as endometriosis, which has a wide range of symptoms but no cure, can be very hard to manage. People with endometriosis often use allied health and complementary medicine to help with symptoms.

On average, women are more likely than men to use both complementary therapies and allied health.

While women with chronic conditions can access a chronic disease management plan, which provides Medicare-subsidised visits to a range of allied health services (for example, physiotherapist, psychologist, dietitian), this plan only subsidises five sessions per calendar year. And the reimbursement is usually around 50% or less, so there are still significant out-of-pocket costs.

In the case of chronic pelvic pain, the cost of accessing allied or complementary health services has been found to average A$480.32 across a two-month period (across both those who have a chronic disease management plan and those who don’t).

More spending, less saving

Womens’ health-care needs can also perpetuate financial strain beyond direct health-care costs. For example, women with endometriosis and chronic pelvic pain are often caught in a cycle of needing time off from work to attend medical appointments.

Our preliminary research has shown these repeated requests, combined with the common dismissal of symptoms associated with pelvic pain, means women sometimes face discrimination at work. This can lead to lack of career progression, underemployment, and premature retirement.

Similarly, with 160,000 women entering menopause each year in Australia (and this number expected to increase with population growth), the financial impacts are substantial.

As many as one in four women may either shift to part-time work, take time out of the workforce, or retire early due to menopause, therefore earning less and paying less into their super.

How can we close this gap?

Even though women are more prone to chronic conditions, until relatively recently, much of medical research has been done on men. We’re only now beginning to realise important differences in how men and women experience certain conditions (such as chronic pain).

Investing in women’s health research will be important to improve treatments so women are less burdened by chronic conditions.

In the 2024–25 federal budget, the government committed $160 million towards a women’s health package to tackle gender bias in the health system (including cost disparities), upskill medical professionals, and improve sexual and reproductive care.

While this reform is welcome, continued, long-term investment into women’s health is crucial.

Mike Armour, Associate Professor at NICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University; Amelia Mardon, Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Reproductive Health, Western Sydney University; Danielle Howe, PhD Candidate, NICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University; Hannah Adler, PhD Candidate, Health Communication and Health Sociology, Griffith University, and Michelle O’Shea, Senior Lecturer, School of Business, Western Sydney University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

It’s that time of year when many people are getting started on their resolutions for the year ahead. Doing more physical activity is a popular and worthwhile goal.

If you’re hoping to be more active in 2024, perhaps you’ve invested in an activity tracker, or you’re considering buying one.

But what are the benefits of activity trackers? And will a basic tracker do the trick, or do you need a fancy one with lots of features? Let’s take a look.

Why use an activity tracker?

One of the most powerful predictors for being active is whether or not you are monitoring how active you are.

Most people have a vague idea of how active they are, but this is inaccurate a lot of the time. Once people consciously start to keep track of how much activity they do, they often realise it’s less than what they thought, and this motivates them to be more active.

You can self-monitor without an activity tracker (just by writing down what you do), but this method is hard to keep up in the long run and it’s also a lot less accurate compared to devices that track your every move 24/7.

By tracking steps or “activity minutes” you can ascertain whether or not you are meeting the physical activity guidelines (150 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity per week).

It also allows you to track how you’re progressing with any personal activity goals, and view your progress over time. All this would be difficult without an activity tracker.

Research has shown the most popular brands of activity trackers are generally reliable when it comes to tracking basic measures such as steps and activity minutes.

But wait, there’s more

Many activity trackers on the market nowadays track a range of other measures which their manufacturers promote as important in monitoring health and fitness. But is this really the case? Let’s look at some of these.

Resting heart rate

This is your heart rate at rest, which is normally somewhere between 60 and 100 beats per minute. Your resting heart rate will gradually go down as you become fitter, especially if you’re doing a lot of high-intensity exercise. Your risk of dying of any cause (all-cause mortality) is much lower when you have a low resting heart rate.

So, it is useful to keep an eye on your resting heart rate. Activity trackers are pretty good at tracking it, but you can also easily measure your heart rate by monitoring your pulse and using a stopwatch.

Heart rate during exercise

Activity trackers will also measure your heart rate when you’re active. To improve fitness efficiently, professional athletes focus on having their heart rate in certain “zones” when they’re exercising – so knowing their heart rate during exercise is important.

But if you just want to be more active and healthier, without a specific training goal in mind, you can exercise at a level that feels good to you and not worry about your heart rate during activity. The most important thing is that you’re being active.

Also, a dedicated heart rate monitor with a strap around your chest will do a much better job at measuring your actual heart rate compared to an activity tracker worn around your wrist.

Maximal heart rate

This is the hardest your heart could beat when you’re active, not something you could sustain very long. Your maximal heart rate is not influenced by how much exercise you do, or your fitness level.

Most activity trackers don’t measure it accurately anyway, so you might as well forget about this one.

VO₂max

Your muscles need oxygen to work. The more oxygen your body can process, the harder you can work, and therefore the fitter you are.

VO₂max is the volume (V) of oxygen (O₂) we could breathe maximally (max) over a one minute interval, expressed as millilitres of oxygen per kilogram of body weight per minute (ml/kg/min). Inactive women and men would have a VO₂max lower than 30 and 40 ml/kg/min, respectively. A reasonably good VO₂max would be mid thirties and higher for women and mid forties and higher for men.

VO₂max is another measure of fitness that correlates well with all-cause mortality: the higher it is, the lower your risk of dying.

For athletes, VO₂max is usually measured in a lab on a treadmill while wearing a mask that measures oxygen consumption. Activity trackers instead look at your running speed (using a GPS chip) and your heart rate and compare these measures to values from other people.

If you can run fast with a low heart rate your tracker will assume you are relatively fit, resulting in a higher VO₂max. These estimates are not very accurate as they are based on lots of assumptions. However, the error of the measurement is reasonably consistent. This means if your VO₂max is gradually increasing, you are likely to be getting fitter.

So what’s the take-home message? Focus on how many steps you take every day or the number of activity minutes you achieve. Even a basic activity tracker will measure these factors relatively accurately. There is no real need to track other measures and pay more for an activity tracker that records them, unless you are getting really serious about exercise.

Corneel Vandelanotte, Professorial Research Fellow: Physical Activity and Health, CQUniversity Australia

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.