Magpie :) @m4gp13bl33d5 - Tumblr Blog

Hiii I'm Tony/Magpie <3 (he/xe/phey)

this blog is mainly bunch of friends, Dan and Phil and some other random stuff (eg. bbc ghosts)

I am autistic and have adhd, please remember this when interacting with me

my messages are open to anyone 18 or under (because I'm only 16) but you're welcome on my blog whoever you are (no dni because I'll just block you if I don't like you)

@/mothboystarman on everything else :P

#tony says

bepsily

i feel the most normal about these two ever .

what-even-is-thiss

Nobody does a proper Greek chorus anymore. Everybody just has the chorus actors speak one at a time.

I know that choral chanting is difficult to do but come on why can’t we have a hive mind once in a while

livelaughlok1

i’m starting a rumour:

comingupwithjoshdun

Next time someone asks you if Dan and Phil are dating you can just respond with “yes they’ve been together since 2009” instead of sending an essay back to them

lestatbf

fetish opera as jenny holzer truisms

rottingtrouble-child

I saw this video about a doctor who performed an MRI on a 5 year old and discovered she essentially had “brain damage” from excessive iPad use, as the white matter in her brain couldn’t form properly due to an understimulated environment.

Hmm it’s almost like there’s supposed to be adult figures responsible for monitoring her screen time and making sure she develops properly… certainly this isn’t the result of neglect at the hands of her parents…

dragon-in-a-fez

I'm gonna cut off the whole long-ass pointless thread I saw talking about the finer points of taking iPads from babies because here's the thing:

"a doctor did an MRI and found that a kid had brain damage from iPad use" is a lie. that's not how MRIs work. that's not how brain damage works. if you're arguing about whose responsibility it was to prevent this from happening, you are starting from a premise that is not just unproven, it's impossible. you might as well be talking about whose responsibility it was to make sure the moon didn't get made out of pudding.

plushypretzel

This study found a link between higher rates of screen-based media use and "lower microstructural integrity of brain white matter tracts supporting language and emergent literacy skills in prekindergarten children". This study demonstrates real developmental harm associated with overuse of screens at a young age but OP was exaggerating the findings and admits their understanding of this paper came from a fear-mongering type reel/short video.

I have not read and assessed the quality of the study itself. I'm not a doctor and have only a small amount of familiarity with neuroscience through my linguistics postgrad. I'd be interested to hear a more qualified take on this study.

The take-away for most people should be: limit your child's screen time or it may seriously impact their early childhood development, including physical brain development. Read all uncited information on the internet with a grain of salt.

dragon-in-a-fez

kids & tech was my PhD area so I can give you a qualified take.

as with basically every study on the topic of "screens and kid brains", this one:

doesn't differentiate between types of screen-based activities

is correlational, not experimental, and doesn't control for obvious confounding variables

which makes it basically useless.

take, for example, the existence of tablet apps that are specifically meant for children and parents to use to read together. if "reading with parents" is the actual underlying variable impacting white matter growth, then the medium (screen vs paper) might not matter at all!

if "screen time" is a meaningful construct then so is "paper time", and it would be reasonable to collapse doing crossword puzzles, completing tax forms, writing personal letters, reading novels, and ordering from restaurant menus into one metric and try to measure its impact on brain development. but we don't do that because it's obviously stupid.