You could create several cohort with different co-controlled fixes for each: more calories, more protein, more fiber, more nutrients.
Then evaluate the percentage of successfully treated patients in each cohort.
It's of course a difficult study, since someone with a bad diet will lack practically everything, so more things will work than not. I'd also be curious to see how you would design a real food diet high in micronutrients without accidentally adding a bunch of fiber in the process
Imo DS/Algs to an extent are a good prerequisite.
Once you know them in one language that knowledge is portable enough to get you up-to-speed in $lang.
Then, and no earlier will I start worrying about doing real things in my programs and the "idiosyncracies"
Most of these wouldn't qualify as "puzzles", would they?
I find it nice to learn new languages via data structure puzzles, because to me the data structures of a language feel like the grammar and once I have that down everything else falls into place
Additionally I am bothered by the insistence of these outlets to forego connecting the brain and the mind, as well as hormones and feelings.
Like cortisol and dopamine or whatever are just chemical representations of feelings, are they not?
And large areas of the brain are just a physical representation of the mind, right?
It's like they pretend the brain is just some other organ, like our liver or kneecap, and not the irreducable self.
Also no review or planning anywhere in that process.
I'm semi-confident that if a Junior were to talk to another Junior before starting about things to look out for, and then the code was reviewed by say a third Junior, they would not have this bug.
Call me naive, but I don't think Juniors are as oblivious as they are made out to be