So here are some studies connecting internet addiction to physical brain damage
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/articl ... ne.0057831
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/articl ... ne.0020708
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/articl ... ne.0030253
Now, I guess one possibility is that these people become addicted because of the damage, rather than the damage causing addiction?
Here's a summary of the studies, and a couple more,
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/me ... -the-brain
I'm also wondering, would a study comparing people who work on a computer 8+ hours a day to people who work away from computers be more objective? (People coming to psychologists because they have mental health issues are already more likely to have mental health issues).
Anyhow, I'm wondering what other people think about this. This is a big issue for me, as I spend a lot of time on the computer, and I also use computer tools for teaching.
There's also this,
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/me ... se-concern
which to me is somewhat more convincing. From what I've read, and my own experience, videogames and youtube have a strong negative affect on kids (I see it all the time, where they become moody after using these). But then I wonder, is the problem the content, or the medium; is the iPad bad, or is it simply running around shooting people and picking up coins that causes these problems.
Most of these articles mention that the problem is due to 'over stimulation'. I'm honestly not sure what that means. Do rollercoasters also cause over-stimulation? Are there any examples of non-screen activities which overstimulate children (or adults) and could be potentially unhealthy?
Internet addiction.
- Mr. PC
- Posts: 617
- https://cutt.ly/meble-kuchenne-wroclaw
- Joined: Sun 25 Jan 2009 05:16
- Location: Canada
Re: Internet addiction.
Brain damage?
That seems unlikely to me.
I have not read any of the links, but maybe what they measured is an adaptation of the brain,
similar to different brain development in response to different brain activities?
That seems unlikely to me.
I have not read any of the links, but maybe what they measured is an adaptation of the brain,
similar to different brain development in response to different brain activities?
Re: Internet addiction.
Sure, for example:Mr. PC wrote:Are there any examples of non-screen activities which overstimulate children (or adults) and could be potentially unhealthy?
Reading Manga, Anime and all those novels, comics...etc. <---NOTE: THESE ARE NOT ELECTRONICS.
Teens go thorough reading phases that appear like the sky would fall if they did not read through the night (lights on after bed time), on the bus, during lunch, at recess, between gulps of assigned work in school under their textbooks. They get ultra moody if you take their novels and books and comics away. They also like to mimic their superheros and characters dressing up and going to comic cons (conventions).
If you sent them through an MRI I am sure you will detect brain changes different to non-readers.
Re: Internet addiction.
RRM. Could you elaborate? How significantly do our brains adapt/develop in response to different activities?
If you could read the links, that would be fantastic. I don't know why I have such a phobia of screens (I spend most of my time in front of a screen). If I could either be certain about this, or know it's total B.S., I could stop worrying and it would take a load off my shoulders.
I don't see reading or manga being overstimulating though; maybe they're addictive. I'm still not sure what's meant by overstimulating. Some videogames for sure are really fast-paced, with a constant barrage of graphics and sounds, but other games not so much. Is PacMan, for example, overstimulating?
If you could read the links, that would be fantastic. I don't know why I have such a phobia of screens (I spend most of my time in front of a screen). If I could either be certain about this, or know it's total B.S., I could stop worrying and it would take a load off my shoulders.
I don't see reading or manga being overstimulating though; maybe they're addictive. I'm still not sure what's meant by overstimulating. Some videogames for sure are really fast-paced, with a constant barrage of graphics and sounds, but other games not so much. Is PacMan, for example, overstimulating?
Re: Internet addiction.
From link number 4:
You can see that as 'damage to the shrinked area', but you can also see this as a shift in activity.
Playing games, you will also not spend much time on reflecting which of your actions are socially acceptable.
So, the resulting atrophy in those areas are a logic consequence.
Atrophy, yes.
Damage, no.
Probably, there is a substantial increase in areas involved in fast responding.
Detrimental?
Yes, in the sense that you are not training the areas that may make you a better person.
Brain damage?
I don't think so, in as much that you cannot say that a person who stopped physical exercise has muscle damage.
Muscle atrophy? Yes, definitely, but not muscle damage.
He may be training his musical skills instead.
Someone who is raised multilingual, will have brain expansion in the areas involved in leanrning languages,
and someone raised by musicians will have better evolved areas involved in musical skills.
There have been numerous studies about brain development being very much dependent on brain input.
Exercise and exposure brings about a shift in brain development.
That is absolutely normal.
It also explains why we get better in something that we focus on.
When you spend a lot of time playing games, you get better in playing games, and not in playing with your little sister.
This will be reflected in your brains.
Do i think that screen addiction has a phsyical impact on your brain?
Absolutely.
But in my view it is not as much brain damage, as it is brain adaptation.
You become a better game player. Not a socially skilled person, and you may not be functioning optimally in 'normal' (non-game) life.
Though the latter can also be said about many geniuses.
Shrinkage of specific areas usually comes with expansion of other areas.Multiple studies have shown atrophy (shrinkage or loss of tissue volume) in gray matter areas
You can see that as 'damage to the shrinked area', but you can also see this as a shift in activity.
This makes sense; when you play a fastgame, there is not much planning, organizing etc involved. And you train yourself to react immediately to impulses. In a game, impulse control may be contraproductive.Areas affected included the important frontal lobe, which governs executive functions, such as planning, prioritizing, organizing, and impulse control (“getting stuff done”). Volume loss was also seen in the striatum, which is involved in reward pathways and the suppression of socially unacceptable impulses.
Playing games, you will also not spend much time on reflecting which of your actions are socially acceptable.
Empathy and compassion are definitely not trained when playing games.A finding of particular concern was damage to an area known is the insula, which is involved in our capacity to develop empathy and compassion for others and our ability to integrate physical signals with emotion.
So, the resulting atrophy in those areas are a logic consequence.
Atrophy, yes.
Damage, no.
Probably, there is a substantial increase in areas involved in fast responding.
Detrimental?
Yes, in the sense that you are not training the areas that may make you a better person.
Brain damage?
I don't think so, in as much that you cannot say that a person who stopped physical exercise has muscle damage.
Muscle atrophy? Yes, definitely, but not muscle damage.
He may be training his musical skills instead.
Very much so.How significantly do our brains adapt/develop in response to different activities?
Someone who is raised multilingual, will have brain expansion in the areas involved in leanrning languages,
and someone raised by musicians will have better evolved areas involved in musical skills.
There have been numerous studies about brain development being very much dependent on brain input.
Exercise and exposure brings about a shift in brain development.
That is absolutely normal.
It also explains why we get better in something that we focus on.
When you spend a lot of time playing games, you get better in playing games, and not in playing with your little sister.
This will be reflected in your brains.
Do i think that screen addiction has a phsyical impact on your brain?
Absolutely.
But in my view it is not as much brain damage, as it is brain adaptation.
You become a better game player. Not a socially skilled person, and you may not be functioning optimally in 'normal' (non-game) life.
Though the latter can also be said about many geniuses.
Re: Internet addiction.
Ok, so rather than focusing on the harm from games, I should be focusing on developing the skills which games don't (empathy, inhibition).
"Someone who is raised multilingual, will have brain expansion in the areas involved in learning languages,
and someone raised by musicians will have better evolved areas involved in musical skills."
But learning music has been shown to increase linguistic ability. There's a lot of synergy in mental skills, so to me it would make sense, building one part will generally help other parts. But will these expansions come at a cost somewhere else in the brain? Does every development mean something else has to atrophy to make room? If that were the case, everyone would be more or less equally intelligent. I really don't know much about the brains, I know humans are smart because we have more surface area due to more folds in the brain. Does the brain's shape change creating new folds?
It's possible to have internet addiction, but for example in my case, spend time
-writing music
-listening to music
-reading books and manuals
-reading and writing on forums such as this
-planning lessons
-learning languages
-making art
I guess most of the subjects with internet addiction are doing activities that are more likely to lead to atrophy.
"Seventeen IAD subjects and sixteen healthy controls without IAD participated in this study. Whole brain voxel-wise analysis of fractional anisotropy (FA) was performed by tract-based spatial statistics (TBSS) to localize abnormal white matter regions between groups. TBSS demonstrated that IAD had significantly lower FA than controls throughout the brain, including the orbito-frontal white matter, corpus callosum, cingulum, inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus, and corona radiation, internal and external capsules, while exhibiting no areas of higher FA. Volume-of-interest (VOI) analysis was used to detect changes of diffusivity indices in the regions showing FA abnormalities. In most VOIs, FA reductions were caused by an increase in radial diffusivity while no changes in axial diffusivity. Correlation analysis was performed to assess the relationship between FA and behavioral measures within the IAD group. Significantly negative correlations were found between FA values in the left genu of the corpus callosum and the Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders, and between FA values in the left external capsule and the Young's Internet addiction scale."
Does this fit with what you sad? They're simply losing FA and white matter because they're not using it?
Can I ask; what is your policy concerning screens / TV / video-games for your daughter?
I'm also reading this,
"Internist Kogan, on the other hand, believes the physical damages of increased technology use could be severe. She says that prolonged use can overstimulate the nervous system and increase production of cortisol, the so-called stress hormone.
“It’s the fight-or-flight response,” explains Kogan. “When you’re using these technologies, your cortisol will be pumping through the roof. And you don’t want higher levels of cortisol,” which increases your risk of experiencing anxiety, depression, insomnia, high blood pressure and diabetes." ~Svetlana Kogan, M.D.
~http://www.forbes.com/2010/06/29/techno ... -time.html
I think if you're overproducing cortisol it's a lot worse than simple atrophy from not using certain skills.
"Someone who is raised multilingual, will have brain expansion in the areas involved in learning languages,
and someone raised by musicians will have better evolved areas involved in musical skills."
But learning music has been shown to increase linguistic ability. There's a lot of synergy in mental skills, so to me it would make sense, building one part will generally help other parts. But will these expansions come at a cost somewhere else in the brain? Does every development mean something else has to atrophy to make room? If that were the case, everyone would be more or less equally intelligent. I really don't know much about the brains, I know humans are smart because we have more surface area due to more folds in the brain. Does the brain's shape change creating new folds?
It's possible to have internet addiction, but for example in my case, spend time
-writing music
-listening to music
-reading books and manuals
-reading and writing on forums such as this
-planning lessons
-learning languages
-making art
I guess most of the subjects with internet addiction are doing activities that are more likely to lead to atrophy.
"Seventeen IAD subjects and sixteen healthy controls without IAD participated in this study. Whole brain voxel-wise analysis of fractional anisotropy (FA) was performed by tract-based spatial statistics (TBSS) to localize abnormal white matter regions between groups. TBSS demonstrated that IAD had significantly lower FA than controls throughout the brain, including the orbito-frontal white matter, corpus callosum, cingulum, inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus, and corona radiation, internal and external capsules, while exhibiting no areas of higher FA. Volume-of-interest (VOI) analysis was used to detect changes of diffusivity indices in the regions showing FA abnormalities. In most VOIs, FA reductions were caused by an increase in radial diffusivity while no changes in axial diffusivity. Correlation analysis was performed to assess the relationship between FA and behavioral measures within the IAD group. Significantly negative correlations were found between FA values in the left genu of the corpus callosum and the Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders, and between FA values in the left external capsule and the Young's Internet addiction scale."
Does this fit with what you sad? They're simply losing FA and white matter because they're not using it?
Can I ask; what is your policy concerning screens / TV / video-games for your daughter?
I'm also reading this,
"Internist Kogan, on the other hand, believes the physical damages of increased technology use could be severe. She says that prolonged use can overstimulate the nervous system and increase production of cortisol, the so-called stress hormone.
“It’s the fight-or-flight response,” explains Kogan. “When you’re using these technologies, your cortisol will be pumping through the roof. And you don’t want higher levels of cortisol,” which increases your risk of experiencing anxiety, depression, insomnia, high blood pressure and diabetes." ~Svetlana Kogan, M.D.
~http://www.forbes.com/2010/06/29/techno ... -time.html
I think if you're overproducing cortisol it's a lot worse than simple atrophy from not using certain skills.
Re: Internet addiction.
Sure, but your time is limited, and thus your training hours.Mr. PC wrote:There's a lot of synergy in mental skills
Studying music only will not increase your actual language skills.
You gotta do both to get synergy.
Not like that.Does every development mean something else has to atrophy to make room?
But focussing on certain skills, you will neglect others.
Some areas will be overstimulated (stimulating expansion), whereas other areas will be understimulated (leading to shrinkage)
Sure, but during those hours you are not training your social skills.It's possible to have internet addiction, but for example in my case, spend time
-writing music
-listening to music
-reading books and manuals
-reading and writing on forums such as this
-planning lessons
-learning languages
-making art
If that would be about all you do all day, it would lead to shrinkage of the 'social area'.
Yes; use it or lose it.They're simply losing FA and white matter because they're not using it?
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/th ... or-lose-it
They (and me) go to bed at 20.00Can I ask; what is your policy concerning screens / TV / video-games for your daughter?
They are allowed to watch tablet after 18.00
In those 2 hours we also eat, drink, play etc
Sure. That is stress.I think if you're overproducing cortisol it's a lot worse than simple atrophy from not using certain skills.
Re: Internet addiction.
I will take a stab at the article(, assuming you quoted from Link #3 of the first post).[color=#008000]Mr. PC[/color] wrote: I guess most of the subjects with internet addiction are doing activities that are more likely to lead to atrophy.
"Seventeen IAD subjects and sixteen healthy controls without IAD participated in this study. Whole brain voxel-wise analysis of fractional anisotropy (FA) was performed by tract-based spatial statistics (TBSS) to localize abnormal white matter regions between groups. TBSS demonstrated that IAD had significantly lower FA than controls throughout the brain, including the orbito-frontal white matter, corpus callosum, cingulum, inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus, and corona radiation, internal and external capsules, while exhibiting no areas of higher FA. Volume-of-interest (VOI) analysis was used to detect changes of diffusivity indices in the regions showing FA abnormalities. In most VOIs, FA reductions were caused by an increase in radial diffusivity while no changes in axial diffusivity. Correlation analysis was performed to assess the relationship between FA and behavioral measures within the IAD group. Significantly negative correlations were found between FA values in the left genu of the corpus callosum and the Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders, and between FA values in the left external capsule and the Young's Internet addiction scale."
...They're simply losing FA and white matter because they're not using it?
Answering your questions quickly:
I cannot say they are losing or gaining FA, because their study did not measure that.
I cannot say they are losing or gaining white matter, because their study did not measure that.
I cannot say that it is atrophy, because their study did not measure that.
---- Fractional anisotropy is not a part of your brain, it is a measurement_name_thing, so don't worry about "losing" FA, so to speak.
{hmm, FA can be found in liquids, including water, I guess liquids has brains too with FA. lol, joking }Wikipedia wrote: "Fractional anisotropy (FA) is a scalar value between zero and one that describes the degree of anisotropy of a diffusion process. ... Note that the FA of most liquids, including water, is 0 unless the diffusion process is being constrained by structures such as network of fibers." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional_anisotropy
So if there is a network of fibers blocking the diffusion of water or most liquids, then the value is not going to be 0.
If I am thinking correctly, then the white matter blocking the water diffusion in the brain is what the researchers are measuring.
With white matter like a network of fibers in a pool of water, than there is less diffusion of water so the number will be closer to 1.
However, the question is are white matter lost? or are white matter simply rearranged to allow more diffusion of water?
For example, maybe neurons huddle together to make a stronger tighter neural connection, then there is more space for water diffusion.
Let's pretend white matter are curlers. Like during a game, curling team members huddle around to sweep in front of the rock, and as the curlers move closer to their goals, half of the ice rink becomes freed, and then there is more ice space for figure skaters(water) to prance around. No curling team members were lost.
But when the rock is not there, the curling team members stand and spread out around the ice rink and play, taking up room for figure skaters to practice their space-hogging quadruple jumps, so less figure skaters are diffusing onto the ice rink to play.
To say that there are more figure skaters diffusing onto the ice rink, and FA closer to 0 is a problem because we are losing curlers is not correct, they never measured if curlers got off the rink.