And, once again, health/longevity research where the arrow of causality is very unclear.
Does a stimulating mental environment stave off dementia, or is this a matter of the ability/desire to do something a measure of current capability? If you enjoy reading that effectively says it's something reasonably easy for you and thus is a measure of your mind.
As noted by others, the conclusions of the original article do not exactly match the Guardian or HN title. From the original: "cognitive enrichment was related to lower risk of [Alzheimer's Disease]".
I frequently see videos from around the world or hear directly from the teachers I know, that the children currently in schools are averse to and perform badly in reading and writing skills and even basic reasoning skills. It's extremely alarming - in some places, 8th graders are performing at 2nd grade levels! Their attention span is also reported to be very short.
To be honest, I'm a bit skeptical and am waiting for study results on this. The reports are that unbelievable. Of course, this isn't uniform among that population. But the incidence is a bit too frequent for my comfort. I don't remember any other generation complaining so much about the children like the current one. If I were asked to guess the culprits, I would pick social media and AI slop. But again, I'm waiting for a rigorous scientific confirmation.
But if it's true, I am scared to think about the emotional and neurological mess these kids are going to find themselves in.
Why is the title so misleading? That isn't at all what the study measured. Just read the article
1) looked at a group of 80-year-olds for 8 years
2) checked their economic status throughout life using reading and leisure time (# of library and museum visits as a proxy)
3) Found that higher scores in lifetime enrichment were associated with a 38% lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease and a 36% lower risk of MCI.
They did everything possible so you wouldn't draw the idiotic conclusion and yet you still clickbait. Shameful! A rise in shark attacks doesn't increase ice cream sales.
Reading and writing Absolutely CANNOT lower dementia risk and you are a liar if you claim otherwise. If you want to lower your dementia risk be born with a higher SES.
Given that dementia can result from various pathological processes, I wonder what it is about dementia that leads you to conclude that these forms of cognitive stimulation cannot possibly reduce one’s risk. I agree that the title is misleading, though, in large part because it assumes causation, whereas association is about all one can say. At least both absolute and relative risk were mentioned in the write up; that’s rare to see.
The original paper is behind a firewall of course, so I cannot access it. Possibly they controlled for other measures of SES? I don’t know.
And, once again, health/longevity research where the arrow of causality is very unclear.
Does a stimulating mental environment stave off dementia, or is this a matter of the ability/desire to do something a measure of current capability? If you enjoy reading that effectively says it's something reasonably easy for you and thus is a measure of your mind.
As noted by others, the conclusions of the original article do not exactly match the Guardian or HN title. From the original: "cognitive enrichment was related to lower risk of [Alzheimer's Disease]".
The study in question is https://www.neurology.org/doi/10.1212/WNL.0000000000214677
not only is reading and writing healthy, it is fun!
I frequently see videos from around the world or hear directly from the teachers I know, that the children currently in schools are averse to and perform badly in reading and writing skills and even basic reasoning skills. It's extremely alarming - in some places, 8th graders are performing at 2nd grade levels! Their attention span is also reported to be very short.
To be honest, I'm a bit skeptical and am waiting for study results on this. The reports are that unbelievable. Of course, this isn't uniform among that population. But the incidence is a bit too frequent for my comfort. I don't remember any other generation complaining so much about the children like the current one. If I were asked to guess the culprits, I would pick social media and AI slop. But again, I'm waiting for a rigorous scientific confirmation.
But if it's true, I am scared to think about the emotional and neurological mess these kids are going to find themselves in.
> We constructed a composite measure reflecting lifetime cognitive enrichment...
and for $39.00 we will tell you about it.
No thanks.
Why is the title so misleading? That isn't at all what the study measured. Just read the article 1) looked at a group of 80-year-olds for 8 years 2) checked their economic status throughout life using reading and leisure time (# of library and museum visits as a proxy) 3) Found that higher scores in lifetime enrichment were associated with a 38% lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease and a 36% lower risk of MCI.
They did everything possible so you wouldn't draw the idiotic conclusion and yet you still clickbait. Shameful! A rise in shark attacks doesn't increase ice cream sales. Reading and writing Absolutely CANNOT lower dementia risk and you are a liar if you claim otherwise. If you want to lower your dementia risk be born with a higher SES.
Given that dementia can result from various pathological processes, I wonder what it is about dementia that leads you to conclude that these forms of cognitive stimulation cannot possibly reduce one’s risk. I agree that the title is misleading, though, in large part because it assumes causation, whereas association is about all one can say. At least both absolute and relative risk were mentioned in the write up; that’s rare to see.
The original paper is behind a firewall of course, so I cannot access it. Possibly they controlled for other measures of SES? I don’t know.
I think the title of this post should be changed to match the “Lifetime cognitive enrichment” from the original publication.
[dead]