碳基生物生存指南

如果走进一个凶案犯罪现场搜证，你会从何找起？墙上喷溅的血迹、尸体上的咬痕、指尖的头发、凶器上的指纹、和散落各处的DNA。尽管我们不是法医法证专业，但这些证据，似乎都值得收集，也应该要被用于定罪，对吧？Hmmm 对，但也不对：血迹喷溅分析在过去半个世纪里都极为粗糙，这个领域的奠基人甚至都没有考虑到重力和阻力的影响；咬痕也极不可靠，完全无法用来准确区分任何人；毛发分析也不靠谱，检验员连人发和狗发可能都分不清；而即使是指纹和 DNA，也一样会导致误判，有些是人为原因，而有些，就是科学的局限。从小被刑侦案吸引的我们，对案发现场和法证实验室都不会陌生，这可能我们第一次看到白大褂，显微镜，看到科学最直观也可以说是最酷的应用。但法证的发展，其实在相当层面，和科学其实是背道而驰的。可是，如果证据都不可靠，那我们，还能相信法庭里的什么呢？特别感谢 黑猫侦探社 咪仔一起来聊天！我正沉浸收听 🔍 爱泼斯坦深度调查案 ... 停不下来！【时间轴】07:04 咬痕、毛发、血迹、DNA、指纹，这些证据的靠谱程度，如何排序？11:37 指纹是如果长成现在的样子，它们真的是独一无二的吗？17:11 探案现场，我们如何比对指纹24:29 远在美国的嫌疑犯，指纹为何会出现在了西班牙32:37 咬痕证据：毫无科学可言的法证37:47 毛发分析：一样毫无科学可言41:20 血液喷溅分析：有科学，但不多45:33 鞋印、轮胎、笔迹、弹道分析：靠谱，但局限48:43 法证科学，到底出了什么问题？52:15 DNA：最靠谱的证据，却因为太精确依旧会导致错判57:29 案件实例中 DNA 的滥用65:00 专家的经验和直觉，真的靠谱吗？67:17 如果证据都不可靠，那我们，还能相信法庭里的什么呢？📃 本期播客提到的文献素材传送门：美国司法部关于 Brandon Mayfield 案件的回顾报告： https://oig.justice.gov/sites/default/files/legacy/special/s0601/final.pdf我们的指纹，是怎么长出来的： https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36764291/指纹辨认，12年准确率几乎保持稳定： https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4507210/指纹相似概率几何？ https://archive.org/details/fingerprints00galt/page/n19/mode/2up，https://biometrics.cse.msu.edu/Publications/Fingerprint/PankantiPrabhakarJain_FpIndividuality_PAMI02.pdf ， https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4291566指纹专家时隔7个月后的结论可重复率研究： https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0032800利用马德里爆炸案验证指纹专家指纹辨认前后一致性的研究： https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16325362/指纹专家会拿到关于指纹拥有者的信息： https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0379073818306558咬痕研究的问题： https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S135503060171859X?via%3Dihub ， https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19040674/ ， https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/228091.pdf因为咬痕被定罪的知名案例： https://www.exonerationregistry.org/cases/10283 ， https://exonerationregistry.org/cases/10883毛发分析调查： https://www.nacdl.org/newsrelease/NewsRelease-04-20-2015 ， https://www.blumenthal.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/following-fbi-ad ， https://exonerationregistry.org/cases/11115麦克唐纳血液喷溅分析历史回顾： https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/1747NCJRS.pdf ， https://features.propublica.org/blood-spatter-analysis/herbert-macdonell-forensic-evidence-judges-and-courts/血液喷溅可靠性研究： https://www.nature.com/articles/srep11461 ， https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/247180.pdf2009 年美国国家科学院对法医学发展的回顾： https://www.nationalacademies.org/projects/STLP-Q-06-03-A接触 DNA 和微量 DNA 研究发现： https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28363122/ ， https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1344622314001576 ， https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28608145/接触 DNA 和微量 DNA 实例： https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/when-dna-implicates-the-innocent/ ， http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7966641.stm多人 DNA 分辨实验： https://www.fsigenetics.com/article/S1872-4973(18)30248-5/fulltext本期音乐：片尾曲 heavy 沉重 by 乐小红书账号：梦妮爱读文献 （ID：4196506308）在小宇宙查看该单集文稿

今年学术很火，但可惜不是以好的方式火。抄袭、造假、洗稿，为什么学术好像突然变成了一个“流氓圈“？当你看到无数标题党想马上按下结论，拉下院长，觉得中国学术已经无可救药的时候，我想邀请你停下来，听听中、欧，文、理科学者怎么说，听听学术造假吹哨人怎么说，听听专门研究学术造假的学者怎么说，甚至，来听听论文工厂的运营怎么说。事实上，学术造假这件事，涉及到的不只是一两位学者，还有一整个产业链、以及整个学术评价和晋升体系。而就连学术造假纠察这件事儿也没那么容易，很多看似应该随机的小数点，在学术里，它真的就不随机。讽刺很容易，理解却需要时间。而只有真正理解这件事的复杂性，也许，我们才能开始讨论，该如何解决。【时间轴】00:00 调查记者梦妮深入论文工厂👀08:45 如何系统性研究学术造假产业链16:35 学术造假对咱普通人有什么影响呢20:29 谁该为学术造假负责21:12 从理解做学问，是怎样一种职业开始24:28 中国学术圈现状30:39 欧洲学术圈现状（德国）33:19 这套学术评价体系，适合什么样的人41:20 多少博士，能最终成为教授42:38 所以，到底是谁在造假？48:36 造假调查：斯坦福真实&嘉宾分享60:24爆火全网的“随机数生成器”指控，其实有很大风险67:57 耿同学，冤枉了学者？？69:38 对学术造假吹哨人，是否需要约束72:21 学术体系，该如何改进74:49 方案一：更多钱，抽奖式经费申请？80:39 方案二：更少钱，让领域更纯粹？87:10 所以，为什么学术的象牙塔里，丑闻层出不穷？87:45 一些小心翼翼地时事评论96:31 最后一个问题 💌📃 本期播客提到的文献素材传送门：假论文，已经成为一项产业： https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2420092122被撤回的论文由少数编辑负责审稿：“The 45 PLOS ONE editors whom we were able to flag due to the anomalous rate at which they accepted retracted or PubPeer commented publications or had their submissions handled by other flagged editors comprise only 0.25% of all editors. These individuals edited 1.3% of all articles published in PLOS ONE by 2024 but 30.2% of retracted articles. More than half of these editors (25 of 45) also authored articles retracted by PLOS ONE.”论文撤回比例集中于特定子学科 ：“Consistent with most scientists’ expectations concerning egregious errors or scientific fraud, for CRISPR-Cas9, we find that the rate of retractions is only about 0.1%. The rate of retractions increases from tRNA (peak of ∼1% for tRNA and cancer) to circular RNAs (peak of ∼2.5%), miRNAs (peak of ∼4% for miRNA and cancer), and lncRNAs (peak of ∼4%). We also find higher rates of retractions for subfields focused on cancer than on development.Retraction rates can be highly variable across publishers for articles in these subfields. Indeed, for studies concerning “lncRNAs” and “miRNAs and cancer” published in certain journals, the retraction rate exceeds 10%, while for some other journals the rate is close to zero, far below expectation.”假论文数量增长，远高于真论文：”We also find that the number of retracted articles has been increasing exponentially over the last 30 y (Fig. 5B). Remarkably, and testifying to the enormous impact of postpublication review efforts, we find the number of articles with PubPeer comments has also been increasing exponentially. To provide perspective, we note that the number of retracted articles and PubPeer-commented articles has been doubling every 3.3 y and every 3.6 y, respectively, while the total number of publications has been doubling every 15.0 y. ”英国皇家学会2010报告《科学世纪：确保我们未来的繁荣》，涉及到博士就业流向： https://royalsociety.org/-/media/policy/publications/2010/4294970126.pdf0.45%的博士生，最后会成为博士：图1.6学者中的男女比例失衡：“Despite progress in the past decade, ensuring a diverse scientific workforce remains a challenge. Women are still under-represented in the latter stages of scientific careers, particularly in the physical sciences. While 35% of all researchers in science- related disciplines are women, the proportion falls to 30% for lecturers, 21 % for senior lecturers and just 11 % for professors.”Marc 斯坦福学术造假事件调查报告： https://boardoftrustees.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj31576/files/media/file/scientific-panel-final-report.pdf ：“Dr. Tessier-Lavigne did not have actual knowledge of any manipulation of research data, did not have a material role in the preparation of the data and/or figures that have been publicly challenged, and was not in a position where a reasonable scientist would be expected to have detected any such misconduct.”； “The Scientific Panel has concluded that Dr. Tessier-Lavigne did not have actual knowledge of the manipulation of research data that occurred in his lab and was not reckless in failing to identify such manipulation prior to publication.”因为人的参与，随机数就并不随机： https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12589620/ ：“Previously, the phenomenon of end digit (ED) preference has been described for several measurement types in social sciences, public health, and epidemiology”， https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279544736_It_Seems_Factual_But_Is_It_Effects_of_Using_Sharp_versus_Round_Numbers_in_Advertising_Claims：“ An experiment is described that examines whether consumers make the false assumption that claims using sharp numbers are less likely to be estimates (i.e., are more factual) than those using round numbers and, if so, whether this makes sharp-number claims more believable.”抽签式科研基金发放： https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-026-02082-7 ：“If reviewers can’t reliably tell the difference between top grant proposals, why should they pretend they can? A new wave of funders is turning to lotteries to break the tie.”科普/记者频道 Christophe - I tried to buy a scientific paper： https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEwiOykoXXc本期音乐：片尾曲 Battles and Wasteland by Neo Retros封面设计特别感谢：wow lab小红书账号：梦妮爱读文献 （ID：4196506308）在小宇宙查看该单集文稿

如果回到千年以前，这日子估计不好过，没人懂病毒，没人懂细胞，所有的医学科学都围绕着几乎无法被推翻的传统和宗教。但，在这所有的混乱和落后中，护肤，却好像一直没变。从流程来说：清洁，保湿，去角质，甚至功能性的护理；从成分上来说：酒石刷酸，大麦爽肤，还有蜂蜜藏红花... 好像这么多年下来，也都是从自然中取样。护肤这件事儿反馈及时、迭代快，经验医学就格外好用，以至于把理论研究抛在了千年以后的现在。但，在我们理解病毒，理解细胞之后，好多事儿也变了。从机制原理，我们更能知道什么物质好，它如何起效，以及是否能改进和编辑这些天然成分，来更好地为我们所用。护肤史，也是医学史，也是科学史。本期节目，由 碳基生物生存指南 的梦妮 和 美业Ken大瓜 的Ken共创，一起聊聊这千年以来护肤的过去，现在，和未来。特别感谢娇兰对本期节目的支持 ✨御廷兰花系列20周年，万代兰御龄精华以再生科技结合兰花本身的非凡生命力，打造全方位抗老护肤体验。面霜质地舒适，成分天然，能显著改善12种衰老指标。以皮肤为蓝本，开启下一个抗衰时代 🌸【时间轴】01:41 在不了解细胞的千年以前，我们就护肤了？08:11 透明质酸…是从牛眼睛里来的！12:38 透明质酸在眼睛里干嘛？18:12 大分子皮肤真的可以吸收吗？23:02 娇兰万代兰御龄精华✨27:00 肉毒杆菌是真的毒，极为可怕的毒32:25 一个生化武器，如何怎么走向皮肤？35:48 肉毒杆菌 vs 肉毒肽生物机制对比38:57 肉毒肽如何进入皮肤？41:22 胶原蛋白到底是什么？47:02 我们如何吸收胶原蛋白，它有什么作用？52:51 皮肤，新科技的试验台57:56 5-10 年后，护肤科学的未来期待本期音乐：Pixabay（免版权音乐库）vicatestudio-beautiful-christmas-short-3-512320，finley-chill-sunset-chill-nature-529994在小宇宙查看该单集文稿

如果顶尖医学专家告诉你，针对你的癌症，所有已验证的疗法都已用尽，你会怎么做？如果给你无限的资源，你会从哪里入手，为自己博一线生机？这个问题，曾经摆在 Sid Sijbrandij 面前。他很普通，不是博士不是医生更不是学者，在生物医学面前，他只拥有基本的常识；但他，也不普通，乘着网络信息技术的爆发，他是一位白手起家的亿万富翁，拥有几乎无限的资源和财富。在大部分情况下，这两者组合在一起都不会有什么好结果：过度自信，用做互联网的方式解构生物，被学界诟病嘲讽。但，他却成功召集了自身癌症领域的顶尖医生，免疫学家，病理学家，生物信息分析师，让大家都愿意一起试一试，在标准治疗以外，是不是还有路可走，该怎么走。结果，还真被他走通了。癌症复发至今已有一年多，他身体内，没有疾病证据。细看这个故事，他这一路很不容易，靠极强的学习能力拉齐了与专家沟通的知识差距，在无人领域试着在旧系统里找新出路。但更重要的是，他做对了很多事，从深度全方位不计目的地检测，到以个体为导向的单人临床实验。而不能更巧的是，就在这期播客上线的7个小时前，莫德纳宣布自己完成了个性化新抗原疗法的黑色素瘤三期临床，结果喜人。这位亿万富翁两年前的经历，此刻，似乎正在更多人身上被验证。看到新闻的时候我想到一句话：“未来常常是缓慢地，然后突然地到来。”也许，我们现在就处在一切即将被改写、这样一个激动的，慌乱的，又最让人屏息以待的时刻。【时间轴】03:41  Sid 患病前的人生，美国梦的成功范本06:50 Sid 所患的骨肉瘤，为什么这么难治，现在能怎么治？12:32 癌症复发，标准治疗已无药可医20:09 Sid 的选择：不放弃，但也不盲目24:28 最大化检测 - 单细胞测序，是什么？34:27 靶向 PET，靶向治疗的试验场38:25 类器官构建，用体外分身试新药39:41 一切的转折点47:06 取样，怎么会这么难 - 你的组织，不是你的组织54:25 如何让医生，信任你？64:47 单人临床实验，怎么过伦理监管？69:27 单人临床实验的中国体系72:19 vs 美国体系，中美对比，哪个好？80:42 为了活，毫无保留的全方位投入，你愿意吗？87:08 个性化医疗的未来长什么样？91:51 现在该做些什么，让我们离未来更近一些？📃 本期播客提到的文献素材传送门：莫德纳个性户新抗原疗法原理及新闻稿： https://www.modernatx.com/media-center/all-media/blogs/individual.neoantigen-therapies ， https://news.modernatx.com/merck-and-moderna-announce-phase-3-interpath-001-trial-of-intismeran-plus-keytruda-met-endpoints-of-rfs-and-dmfs-in-melanomaSid 所有治疗及检测数据： https://osteosarc.com/#newsSid 新闻报道（诊疗全记录）： https://centuryofbio.com/p/sidSid 个人网站： https://sytse.com/cancer/Future of Cancer Care Today（未来癌症治疗）免费咨询及资料分享： https://sijbrandijfoundation.org/fcct#resources美国学者呼吁FDA对新药研发的审批监管应更灵活： https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1089/genedge.7.1.070Even one（哪怕只有一位）在投企业名录： https://evenone.ventures拓展资料：Sid Sijbrandij 的故事在叙述中有极大简述，包括在标准治疗阶段，Sid 就尝试过单人用药，以及 Sid 有广泛地使用 mRNA 疫苗技术，Sid 的完整诊疗过程可参见上述文献。另外，本期叙述还参考了 Sid 在多个播客接受的访谈，包括与 OpenAI （https://academy.openai.com/public/blogs/sid-sijbrandij-chatgpt-cancer-research） ，Outperform Cancer with MB Gilliam， Changelog，Infinita City。感兴趣的话，我最推荐 Sid 在 OpenAI 的演讲～03:02 处的混剪内容均取自 Claude AI for Science 发布会： https://www.anthropic.com/events/the-briefing-ai-for-science-virtual-event本期音乐：Pixabay（免版权音乐库）alanajordan-sprinkles-and-twinkles-263938，mickeyscat-moment-of-peace-mickeyscat-554494封面设计特别感谢：wow lab小红书账号：梦妮爱读文献 （ID：4196506308）在小宇宙查看该单集文稿

我们好像总是很累。身体提不上劲，心理也没有动力，感觉活着本身，就已经很累了。这样低精力也总是跟没有目标、没有动力、倦怠、畏难绑在一起，好像谁都不想被贴上这个标签。但高精力就一定好吗？他们似乎从来感觉不到累，但会不会当真的垮下来的时候，才发现其实一直在透支。所以，精力到底是什么，为什么日常生活就让人如此疲惫？精力真的是天生的吗？低精力的人，真的可以获得世俗意义上的成功吗？如果想要提升精力，除了人人都知道的睡好吃好运动好，还有其他解法吗？本期节目就想在这个话题上，对疲惫和精力，做一次更底层的拆解。希望能帮你在信息繁杂的方法论之外，真正了解精力，了解疲惫。从原理和数据入手，我们也终于可以回答：那些看起来精力充沛的“高精力人群”和似乎总容易疲惫的“低精力人群”，到底有没有优劣之分。【时间轴】05:03 计算每日卡路里消耗时，你会忽视什么09:37 为啥我喝水都胖、哪怕吃了很多也懒得动 - 也许是因为你对能量的敏感性不够17:20 心理疲惫从何而来 - 人与人间的动机响应敏感性差异19:30 衡量疲惫时的主观感受和客观指标，到底哪个更可靠？22:42 该如何正确看待智能设备的数据焦虑23:49 关于疲惫的客观指标：运动表现，静息心率，心率变异性28:20 主观疲惫的不同分类测量31:36 恢复和休息本身，就是进步的一部分38:28 做自己感兴趣的事情还能拿到钱，怎么反而越做越没劲44:34 钱，怎么会没用呢..？48:11 你的动力来源 - 基本心理需求：胜任感，归属感，自主性49:35 为什么有些事儿你超有动力做，几乎让人上瘾？54:32 胜任感，归属感，自主性如何帮我们在生活中找回动力58:07 我们该谈钱，但不能只谈钱59:58 高精力 vs 低精力，到底谁好谁坏呢？62:07 低精力人群，也可以获得世俗意义上的成功；而高精力人群，也有需要注意的风险点本期节目特别感谢 Eight Sleep 赞助播出。 Eight Sleep 智能温控床套搭配 AI 睡眠系统，为你动态调温，优化睡眠质量，帮助你在理解疲惫之外，能更好地从疲惫中恢复过来。🎁 碳基生物生存指南的听众可领取1000元的专属优惠券～ 听友们在天猫/京东/Eight Sleep小程序商城，联系客服，报出【碳基生物生存指南】暗号，就可以领取～天猫优惠券点击这里领取 👈京东优惠券点击这里领取 👈📃 本期播客提到的文献素材传送门：第一部分 身体和心理的精力输出，比你想得要复杂得多NEAT 在每日能量消耗的占比： https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/ajpendo.00562.2003 ：“EAT is therefore the most variable component of energy expenditure, both within and between subjects, ranging from ∼15% of total daily energy expenditure in very sedentary individuals to 50% or more of total daily energy expenditure in highly active individuals”活动不足人群比例： https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10351178/ ：“From 2010 to 2018, the age-adjusted prevalence of insufficient PA in China increased from 17.9% (95% confidence interval 16.3% to 19.5%) in 2010 to 22.3% (20.9% to 23.8%) in 2018 (P for trend < 0.001).”， https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK279077/ ：“For the majority of subjects in industrialized countries, exercise is believed to be negligible.不同人每天1000大卡的能量摄入实验： https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9880251/NEAT 激活者与 NEAT 保存者： https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196(15)00123-8/fulltext：“NEAT activators are those animals with a copious and robust NEAT signal, and NEAT conservers have a blunted response to NEAT signals and expend lower levels of energy, resulting in obesity.”NEAT 遗传水平，测量的是体力活动水平，不是直接测量NEAT敏感度。但这两者方向上是一致的： https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/ajpendo.00562.2003 ：“On the basis of twin and family studies, the heritability for physical activity level is estimated to be between 29 and 62%.”影响 NEAT 敏感性的非基因因素： https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196(15)00123-8/fulltext ：“The genetic regulation of NEAT is possibly influenced by multiple neuromediators located in the hypothalamus, including orexin, neuromedin U, ghrelin, and the agouti gene–related protein. This, plus the conditioning of the environment to different levels of physical activity and the behavioral factors that we learned from our main educators, will determine an individual to be a NEAT activator or a NEAT conserver, predisposing us to spend more time either sitting or moving. ”所有人格特质的可遗传性元分析： https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25961374/生理 vs 心理，疲劳 vs 精力互相独立却也互相影响： https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21641846.2019.1573790 ：”Trait physical and mental fatigue were moderately correlated (r = .59, p < .001; table in online appendix). A similar association was found for physical and mental energy (r = .50, p < .001). Mental energy and fatigue were also associated (r =−.30, p < .001), as was physical energy and fatigue (r =−.32, p < .001). Interestingly, physical energy was not associated with mental fatigue (r =−.07, p = .67), but there was a small but signicant correlation between physical fatigue and mental energy (r =−.23, p < .001).“睡眠客观数据与主观感受并不匹配： https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27889439/ ：“Thirty-eight sleep, demographic and clinical correlates of sleep quality were considered. Together, these multivariable models explained only 11-17% of the variance in predicting subjective sleep quality.“ , “Overall, the commonly obtained measures of polysomnographically-defined sleep contributed little to subjective ratings of prior-night sleep quality.” 以及反例： https://academic.oup.com/sleep/article-abstract/26/2/117/2709164 ：“ Sleepiness ratings suggest that subjects were largely unaware of these increasing cognitive deficits, which may explain why the impact of chronic sleep restriction on waking cognitive functions is often assumed to be benign.”主观疲惫水平会影响运动表现，但不是通过客观指标： https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/japplphysiol.91324.2008 ：“This negative effect was not mediated by cardiorespiratory and musculoenergetic factors as physiological responses to intense exercise remained largely unaffected.”第二部分 疲惫，能被准确测量和预判吗职业运动员客观测量指标： https://www.thieme-connect.com/products/ejournals/html/10.1055/a-2433-3930HRV 高还是低好？该如何关注？（7 天均值测量） https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11204851/：“A high HRV relative to baseline represents a healthy, flexible autonomic system and improved adaptability and recovery in response to a changing environment or stressor, such as travel or exercise.”，“valuating rolling 7-day averages of an individual’s HRV compared to daily values may provide a more meaningful context on HRV changes and overtraining compared to daily measurements or population norms.”长期训练导致静息心率降低的具体机制： https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24825544/ ：“Endurance athletes exhibit sinus bradycardia, that is a slow resting heart rate, associated with a higher incidence of sinus node (pacemaker) disease and electronic pacemaker implantation.”运动表现的客观变化是过度训练： https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9460078/ ：“Functional overreaching is defined as a short-term decrease in performance (usually up to 2 weeks) followed by a supercompensation effect (adaptive improvement in performance). In cases where the performance decrement is of a slightly longer duration (usually up to 3-4 weeks) and not followed by supercompensation, the term nonfunctional overreaching is used. Finally, if reduced performance capacity lasts for more than 3 to 4 weeks and is followed by neither supercompensation nor improved athletic performance, the athlete is likely experiencing an overtraining syndrome (OTS).”运动员倦怠程度评估： https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28682196/ ， 在线问卷： https://psytests.org/sport/abqen.html通用的倦怠程度评估问卷： https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/job.4030020205 ， 在线问卷： https://www.mindgarden.com/117-maslach-burnout-inventory-mbi第三部分 自我决定理论奖励，会削弱自主性： https://selfdeterminationtheory.org/SDT/documents/1983_RyanMimsKoestner.pdf：“Rewards in general appear to have a controlling significance to some extent and thus in general run the risk of undermining intrinsic motivation.“移除奖励后动力减弱（MRI 研究）： https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1013305107 ：“The strong incentive value of monetary reward pushed down the intrinsic value of task success. As a result, when the monetary reward was no longer promised, the intrinsic task value was underestimated, resulting in decreased motivation relative to the control group.”关于奖励削弱动力的系统性综述： https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0033-2909.125.6.627 ：“As predicted, engagement-contingent, completion-contingent, and performance-contingent rewards significantly undermined free-choice intrinsic motivation (d = –0.40, –0.36, and –0.28, respectively), as did all rewards, all tangible rewards, and all expected rewards.”自我决定论 - 胜任感，链接感，自主性决定动力： https://selfdeterminationtheory.org/SDT/documents/2000_RyanDeci_SDT.pdf胜任感，链接感，自主性能预测玩家是否持续玩游戏： https://selfdeterminationtheory.org/SDT/documents/2006_RyanRigbyPrzybylski_MandE.pdf ：“Results show that SDT’s theorized needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness independently predict enjoyment and future game play.“需求密度假说 - 最容易沉迷于电子游戏的孩子，是在日常生活中得不到胜任感，链接感，自主性满足的孩子： https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S074756321830092X ：“As expected, we found strong support for the need-density hypothesis in terms of need satisfaction.”生活幸福感直接影响线粒体效能： https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38889126/ ：“By combining longitudinal antemortem assessments of psychosocial factors with postmortem brain (dorsolateral prefrontal cortex) proteomics in older adults, we find that higher well-being is linked to greater abundance of the mitochondrial OxPhos machinery, whereas higher negative mood is linked to lower OxPhos protein content. Combined, positive and negative psychosocial factors explained 18 to 25% of the variance in the abundance of OxPhos complex I, the primary biochemical entry point that energizes brain mitochondria.”第四部分 低精力人 vs 高精力人？同一个人一天内疲劳感的变化大于人与人之间的区别： https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9124457/ ：“The majority of the variance for relaxation, satisfaction, insecurity, anxiousness, irritation, feeling down, fatigue, dizziness, intention, and self-efficacy is explained by the within subjects and within days variance (42.9% to 65.8%).”外向型 vs 内向型领导优劣势对比： https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2011-15936-006 ：“Extraversion predicts leadership emergence and effectiveness, but do groups perform more effectively under extraverted leadership? Drawing on dominance complementarity theory, we propose that although extraverted leadership enhances group performance when employees are passive, this effect reverses when employees are proactive, because extraverted leaders are less receptive to proactivity.”尽责性最能预测职业成功： https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352250X25000673 ：“Conscientiousness is the strongest predictor across performance outcomes.” https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0092656619300753 ：“A general conclusion from this literature is that conscientiousness is the strongest predictor of job performance among FFM traits for most jobs.”拓展资料现在越来越多的研究指出，疲劳和精力的驱动来源并不一致，背后的生理机制也不尽相同。研究者Loy等人（2013、2018）发现，主观精力感与多巴胺水平相关，而主观疲惫感则与血清素升高、组胺下降和炎症细胞因子升高相关，是两条独立的神经化学通路。在身体层面，客观疲惫的核心机制是肌肉代谢产物的积累（糖原耗竭、乳酸、无机磷酸盐），而客观身体精力的生物学基础更接近线粒体的ATP产能效率。这意味着：不管是身体还是心理层面，你都可以在很累的同时，仍然很有精力，两者不是一根轴上的两端，而是可以独立变化的两个维度。这一点在Boolani & Manierre（2019）的研究数据里得到了验证。本期播客没有详细探讨这个区分，如果你感兴趣，可以参考以下研究：Loy, Bryan D., Patrick J. O'Connor, and Rodney K. Dishman. "The