On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Darryl or Natalia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >If there are data which support the claims that too much TV or computer >screen exposure opens us up to serious health problems, content aside, >the acceptance and reduction of their effects could take not only >decades, but erode lyfestyles and modern educational customs. Who >would baby-sit? > >What impact might such albeit reluctant acceptance have on the economy? >Could it be likened to the age old fear that, should just 5% of diamond >bearing married women liquidate their symbols of matrimony, the market >would collapse? > >Vision-saving screens might reduce some aspect of retinal demise, but >certainly won't address the ill effects of flashing cutaways, nor >replace the reduced levels of melatonin we need to defend against >disease. (For other possible effects, please check the web site >provided at the end of the excerpt.)
There is nothing in the article (or at least the part you posted) about physical damage to vision, and with the wide variety of new screen technologies now becoming available, even if such an effect existed it wouldn't be likely to exist across all the technologies. >As a consumer of both TV and computer/internet services, I find this >issue especially challenging. Yet now, I'll think twice about falling >asleep with the TV on. I recognize symptoms mentioned in this article >which I am certain are directly related to high-screen exposure. >Computer/internet services are most important in my life; invaluable >globally to information sharing. The problems listed are all related to the indolence and passivity inherent in one-way television. I would suggest that not very much of this - some of the physical issues, as is observed in vid-kids - carries over to computering. Interaction via computer is mentally envigourating rather than numbing & dumbing in front of the boob tube. The physical issues are best addressed by getting up and going outside for a walk. Even better is climbing hills. You're in a great location for that, you should be able to hike up a different 500m hill every weekend. -Pete >Has anyone explored this dependence/addiction as possibly being greatly >mitigated in future? Economically, socially, recreationally, >strategically, medically, or otherwise? > >Natalia >*********************************************************************** >STUDY FINDS LONG TV WATCHING ASSOCIATED WITH MANY ILLS > > >FERGUS SHEPPARD, SCOTSMAN - A new report claims that Britain's love >affair with television is causing far more damage - both physically >and psychologically - than previously thought. The findings have been >compiled by Dr Aric Sigman, a psychologist who has previously written >about the effects of television on the viewer. His report, analyzing >35 different scientific studies carried out into television and its >effect on the viewer, has identified 15 negative effects he claims can >be blamed on watching television. > >Among the most disturbing findings are the links he claims to have >found between long hours of television viewing and cancer, autism and >Alzheimer's. . . > >His report, published in the respected Biologist magazine, claims the >problem with television lies in the length of time we spend in front >of the set. For most people, watching television now takes up more >time than any other single activity except work and sleep. . . > >Dr Sigman claims the battery of ill effects takes its toll on both >body and mind. He claims the effect on the brain is not stimulating, >but almost narcotic, numbing the areas of the brain stimulated by, for >example, reading. > >The influence of modern editing techniques - for example the rapid >"jump cuts" - also plays its part. Attention spans fracture while at >the same time, according to Dr Sigman, the brain is programmed to >reward itself with the neurotransmitter dopamine for being able to >cope with an onslaught of novelty on screen. > >The litany of bodily ills Dr Sigman links to television makes for >equally bleak reading. He associates it not only with obesity, but >Alzheimer's, diabetes and even the breakdown of cells capable of >healing wounds. Dr Sigman claims a significant body of research now >points to television as a key factor in reducing levels of the hormone >melatonin, the substance that regulates the body's internal clock and >also governs the speed at which puberty develops. > >http://news.scotsman.com/scitech.cfm?id=265852007 _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
