Slashdot Mirror
Can Computerized Brain Training Prevent Dementia? (newyorker.com)
"Researchers believe they have found a link between speed-of-processing training and a reduction in cognitive decline among the elderly," reports the New Yorker. An anonymous Slashdot reader quotes an article about how this new long-term study actually contradicts much of the previous science. In October of 2014 a group of more than seventy academics published what they called a consensus statement, asserting that playing brain games had been shown to improve little more than the ability to play brain games... no brain game, nor any drug, dietary supplement, or lifestyle intervention, had ever been shown in a large, randomized trial to prevent dementia...until today, when surprising new results were announced at the Alzheimer's Association annual meeting, in Toronto.
Nearly 3,000 participants with an average age of 73.6 participated in the study, with some receiving "speed of processing" training -- and some later receiving four hours of additional training. "The researchers calculated those who completed at least some of these booster sessions were 48% less likely to be diagnosed with dementia after ten years than their peers in the control group." Signatories of the 2014 consensus statement panning brain games are now calling these new results "remarkable" and "spectacular".
Nearly 3,000 participants with an average age of 73.6 participated in the study, with some receiving "speed of processing" training -- and some later receiving four hours of additional training. "The researchers calculated those who completed at least some of these booster sessions were 48% less likely to be diagnosed with dementia after ten years than their peers in the control group." Signatories of the 2014 consensus statement panning brain games are now calling these new results "remarkable" and "spectacular".
It's one study. Wait for independent duplication before calling it remarkable. It could still be proven to be as much of a hoax as vaccines causing autism, global warming, or evolution. Exercise caution in believing a single study.
There was no real time measurement to prove or disprove that this works. They favorably calculated the possibility that in ten years some people would do better with their computerized brain training. This seems like a sham to me. I want to see results that verify, not predict, improvement.
I know this is slashdot, but the computers here are just a delivery system not the content.
Dust off all those Martin Gardner puzzles in print or PDF, plus various other puzzles and you've got the same thing whether it is on a monitor, tablet or paper.
errr what was I saying ?
Since Alzheimer apparently already sets in at the age of three, the answer would be "no".
I worked in a related field, and my gut feeling says no. How much arithmetic can you teach someone in a few hours of training? How much of a foreign language? Almost nothing, and it will be forgotten in a matter of months. So it's very unlikely that a few hours of training is enough to dramatically reduce dementia or whatever mental health problem.
Why haven't these researchers come forward in 2014, when the 70 academics released a statement about the futility of "brain games," I wonder. Even after "only" 8 years, they could have issued some preliminary results.
I watched this horrible disease reduce two of the most powerful men in my life (direct relatives) to living corpses that could not even remember their own names. Truly, I hope no one ever has to face the horror of this disease either in themselves or someone they know.
What is even more saddening is the amount of ignorance that surrounds this disease. I had a friend whom, upon finding out that I had relatives who had Alzheimer's, say he was glad that he had no family history of the illness, because he would never have to worry about this terrible affliction. It was quite a shock to him when I advised him that people with no family history of Alzheimer's make up a good portion of new Alzheimer's diagnosis every year. He flat out refused to believe me, going as far to assert that he KNEW that ONLY people with a family history of the disease capable of getting it. I was astounded at the ignorance.
Society in in general still has a lot to learn about this disorder and the risks that everyone faces.
"Of course, Edwards’s findings may not stand up to peer review" This study has not even been through peer review and therefore is not complete. This leaves me to wonder why the results have been published so early, smells fishy to me.
Even better, implants that will deliver ads straight to the patient's brain coupled with a re-defintion of dementia will lead to 100% reliable results.
Now if you'll excuse me I have to start my zombie walk, mumbling: "I will buy the latest Taylor Swift album, I will buy ..."
You'll be demented. Demented you will be. Dementia is your fate. You will become an Alzhy zombielike shambler, doomed to stumble and mumble all over the place. The good news is that you will discover every day with renewed joy and blessed forgetfulness the experience of crapping in diapers. Demented!
Computerized brain training one of the sources of dementia. Proof? It causes otherwise normal people to hand over money for an app of magic beans rather than simply going to the library and reading some science books...for free.
those who completed at least some of these booster sessions were 48% less likely to be diagnosed with dementia
The other 52% simply forgot about the booster sessions.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Psychology has spent pretty much its entire life trying to prove manifest destiny, i.e. that some people are inherently better than others.
First it was class, but that isn't enough, but clearly society is/was class-based so better class must mean better person, right?
Then it was race, but that isn't enough, but clearly society is/was race-based so better race must mean better person, right?
Now it's IQ, which coincidentally is affected by class and race, but clearly society is/was IQ-based so better IQ must mean better person, right?
It doesn't matter that we're the same thick-as-pigshit humans that we've always been, making the same mistakes over and over through the millennia - our ability to solve specific, simple problems like how to match shapes confirms a better ability to build the infrastructure to create Pokemon Go, thus people with high IQ are better able to contribute to society. As people of high class. As people who are white or Asian or Ashkenazi Jew.
And by "better able to contribute to society", I mean better able to build a specific type of fairly shit society - like a society built by marathon runners would be really good at fostering those who are built to run marathons, and appear to advance the state of the art in all problems that are helped by running marathons, but still fail hard at all remaining issues.
captcha: dogging. Eh not tonight luv.
Crosswords! My great grandma was an avid crossworder, and she was sharp as a tack until her death at 95! Anecdotal to be sure.
It's just as likely (if not more likely) that cognitive decline reduces training. What were these people thinking? Oh,..., wait,...
Oh, I'm sorry sir, I thought you were referring to me, Mr. Wensleydale.
You would have to have dementia to believe that playing a computer game will prevent it. If you get Alzheimers there is no treatment and the prognosis is a slow, confusing decline into helplessness. If they are truly suggesting their game helps people, they aren't even doctors and are only helping themselves. I call bullshit.
I think this anonymous coward is trying to be ironic here, since Germany doesn't have a 2nd amendment to repeal. It's hard to tell on slashdot sometimes, since anonymous trolls post the most absurd things with complete sincerity.
Murder rate in Germany is 0.86 murders per 10,000, while in America it is 5 per 10,000; so whatever Germany is doing in the way of gun control: it seems to be working.
(http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Murder-rate )
One that you aren't already proficient in, well enough to travel abroad and chat with the natives with no assistance.
But that's like diet and exercise - everyone knows it, fewer people actually do it.
This statement would've made sense, if all or most of the violent crimes involved an actual firearm. But that's not true — even in the "gun crazy" America, less than 10% of criminal violence involves guns... Fail...
The gun was bought on the dark web. We need to regulate the internet. Now.
There's a long list of activities that have been shown to slow or mask cognitive decline in the elderly, e.g. reading, being bilingual, learning a second/foreign language, and physical exercise but most of all, social engagement. There have been a number of studies that have shown remarkable improvements in not only cognitive function but also quality of life in retirement homes where they've enacted programmes where small children visit. The residents talk to the children, read them stories, and various other activities. Also beats crappy day-care where the carers barely have enough time to feed and change the children in their care, let alone engage with them socially and play with them.
I suspect that belief that computerized brain training can prevent dementia is probably a symptom of early dementia.
Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.