Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Brain Scans Show the Impact of Neglect On a Child's Brain Size

Posted by samzenpus on from the cloth-mom-vs-wire-mom dept.

An anonymous reader writes "A shocking comparison of brain scans from two three-year-old children reveals new evidence of the remarkable impact a mother's love has on a child's brain development. The chilling images reveal that the left brain, which belongs to a normal 3-year-old, is significantly larger and contains fewer spots and dark 'fuzzy' areas than the right brain, which belongs to that of a 3-year-old who has suffered extreme neglect. Neurologists say that the latest images provide more evidence that the way children are treated in their early years is important not only for the child's emotional development, but also in determining the size of their brains. Experts say that the sizeable difference in the two brains is primarily caused by the difference in the way each child was treated by their mothers."

4 of 206 comments (clear)

  1. Any other variables..? by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Were both children same sex, race....other variables with genetic implications?

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    1. Re:Any other variables..? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly. How big a role has NUTRITION played in the two images? It would stand to reason that a 'severely neglected' child would also eat lower quality food.
      So let's skip the "lovey dovey" story for a moment and make sure we're not drawing the wrong conclusions here.

    2. Re:Any other variables..? by Kielistic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Which was exactly what the AC said. The neglected child would also probably not get the recommended nutrition. The issue was not that parents perform a necessary service. The issue was that nutrition was probably a larger contributor to poor development than how the infant was "treated by their mothers".

      It is misleading to say that "this study shows that children need momma's love more than anything else in the world" when it most likely boils down to "nutrition starved brain develops poorly". Probably get more attention from the former though- even Slashdot picked it up despite being hardly relevant and having no scientific merit.

  2. Re:Sample size? by Eil · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not sure why anybody thought this was news, I remember reading about it in my Pschology 101 textbook. Nearly any mammal (not just humans) deprived of external stimulus when young will end up with a less developed brain than their otherwise normal peers.

    This doesn't apply only to babies and toddlers either. There was a study awhile back trying to figure out why certain groups of inner-city teens don't learn in school. As in, they were taught the same material, given the same homework, spent the same amount of time in class. The study controlled for things like truants and habitual trouble-makers. It turned out that all of them were dealing with at least major parental crisis. For example, their parents were severe alcoholics, beat them, sexually abused them, or died recently. When stuff like that happens, the kids' brains switched into survival mode and were then completely incapable of the kind of in-depth learning that normal kids enjoy. Remove the crisis, and the kid can learn at a normal capacity again. (Depending on the extent/length of the trauma.)