Neuroscientist Dismisses Dementia Claims as "Junk Science"

Andy Chalk

One Flag, One Fleet, One Cat
Nov 12, 2002
45,698
1
0
Neuroscientist Dismisses Dementia Claims as "Junk Science"


Cardiff University neuroscientist Dr. Dean Burnett says the claim that videogames cause dementia is "junk science" that reaches "overblown conclusions based on little or no evidence."

Videogames. They'll turn your brain to mush, almost literally in the estimation of Susan Greenfield, a scientist, Baroness and former director of the Royal Institution of Great Britain who said last week [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/113660-British-Neuroscientist-Says-Games-Cause-Dementia] that videogames cause such "high arousal" in the minds of children that they can disable connections within the brain, possibly permanently, resulting in dementia. Scary stuff! Except, well, it's not, really.

"The temporary or permanent deactivation of nerve connections in the brain is implied to be a negative consequence of excessive computer game playing, as opposed to a perfectly normal and actually quite essential occurrence in a typical, healthy brain," Burnett wrote in a guest article for The Telegraph [http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tomchiversscience/100111114/guest-post-baroness-greenfield-junk-neuroscience-and-the-danger-of-video-games/]. "The constant deactivating of parts of the brain is vital to our functioning as normal cognitive beings. There can be times when too much of the brain is active at once, and these are seldom good things, as anyone who's had a seizure or violent hallucination will probably attest."

He acknowledged that some of Greenfield's statements are essentially accurate but takes her to task for phrasing them in such a way as to leave average readers equal parts confused and concerned. "The phrase 'high arousal, which in turn activates the brain system's underlying addiction and reward, resulting in the attraction of yet more ... activity' is more commonly known as 'fun' or 'enjoyment'," he continued. "This same effect can be seen in football fans or pretty much anyone who has a persistent hobby."

That's the crux of his argument : every activity done to excess, be it football, fishing or playing videogames, will have an impact on the wiring of the brain. And while some games are certainly inappropriate for kids, that's a far cry from suggesting that they actually do long-term damage.

"Baroness Greenfield clearly has her reasons for disliking computer games and other electronic entertainments, and I'm sure they're noble ones," he concluded. "But this does not justify the use of junk science, or the public airing of overblown conclusions based on little or no evidence."

Burnett's response was pared down considerably for The Telegraph; the whole, unedited thing, which he described as "more verbose and piss-taking," can be read at Science Digestible [http://sciencedigestive.blogspot.com/2011/10/dont-read-this-itll-destroy-your-brain.html].



Permalink
 

Zhukov

The Laughing Arsehole
Dec 29, 2009
13,769
5
43
Wait... so I didn't need to throw all my games in the bin for the sake of my mental health?

...

Well, crap.
 

Al_

New member
Aug 15, 2008
62
0
0
Greenfield's a crank. She was pretty much run out of the Royal Institution when they eventualy relaised what a mistake they'd made and before she could completely bring it to its knees financially.
 

Seventh Actuality

New member
Apr 23, 2010
551
0
0
Baroness Greenfield is full of shit. If the "baroness" part didn't give it away, she comes out with this bollocks on a semi-regular basis and not once has it been with a more scientific justification than this. IIRC her usual MO is to attack new media in general, I think targetting computer games specifically is new. Considering the free publicity it's gotten her, we can probably expect to hear her talking out of her arse again in the near future.
 

Furioso

New member
Jun 16, 2009
7,981
0
0
You know your a bad neuroscientist when you don't even understand how brains work, or fun for that matter
 

Zaleznikel

New member
Sep 3, 2008
96
0
0
I'm a student of Neuroscience, and when I was reading the original Greenfield article, I was amused at her ridiculous conclusions.

Though I am reminded of a study done where participants were given one of two made-up "studies" to read on the same topic. One used neuroscience to explain the "evidence" in it, and the other used psychology. Guess which one convinced people more?

So yeah, Greenfield's stuff could potentially be more dangerous to the industry than your typical Keith Ablow bull, but I bet most people have already made up their minds about videogames anyway.
 

Sonicron

Do the buttwalk!
Mar 11, 2009
5,133
0
0
DracoSuave said:
I love you scientific peer review.
Amen to that. Anti-media hacks like Greenfield apparently still haven't realized that the very thing they're trying to discredit has made it impossible for them to spout their unsubstantiated bullshit without immediate scrutiny from folks working in the same branch. The irony is so delicious, it's almost too much to bear.
 

Lizardon

Robot in Disguise
Mar 22, 2010
1,055
0
0
I really like this Dr. Dean Burnett, for taking "The Baroness" down a peg and for actually knowing what he's talking about.

And I don't understand how her article was published without someone looking over it and realising it was bullshit.
 

Traun

New member
Jan 31, 2009
659
0
0
Lizardon said:
I really like this Dr. Dean Burnett, for taking "The Baroness" down a peg and for actually knowing what he's talking about.

And I don't understand how her article was published without someone looking over it and realising it was bullshit.
Because they want publicity, not science. A headline like that sells copies.
 

Albino Boo

New member
Jun 14, 2010
4,667
0
0
Oh look some guy from a minor university that isn't even the top 200 ( http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2011/10/06/cardiff-university-fails-to-make-top-200-of-world-s-best-universities-91466-29553277/ )has criticized one of the leading neuroscientist in the world. Dr Dean Burnett isn't even head of his department http://medicine.cf.ac.uk/en/person/dr-dean-burnett/. So it boils down to Baroness Greenfield Professor of Synaptic Pharmacology at Lincoln College Oxford versus Dr Dean Burnett course tutor at Cardiff University. I think I know who has greater credibility and as clue they don't live in Wales
 

Formica Archonis

Anonymous Source
Nov 13, 2009
2,312
0
0
Traun said:
Because they want publicity, not science. A headline like that sells copies.
It also gets you lucrative speaking gigs at collections of like-minded people. We've got an anti-wifi/cell tower nut in Canada who seems to make her entire living on showing up whenever a school gets wifi or a cell tower goes up. She's got enough clout that her arguments saw the Canadian Green party (via Twitter) resolving to ban the sun. (They tried to say they'd ban wifi in public - stupid to begin with - but their phrasing on the ban also includes natural sources of electromagnetic radiation.)
 

Femaref

New member
May 4, 2008
186
0
0
albino boo said:
Oh look some guy from a minor university that isn't even the top 200 ( http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2011/10/06/cardiff-university-fails-to-make-top-200-of-world-s-best-universities-91466-29553277/ )has criticized one of the leading neuroscientist in the world. Dr Dean Burnett isn't even head of his department http://medicine.cf.ac.uk/en/person/dr-dean-burnett/. So it boils down to Baroness Greenfield Professor of Synaptic Pharmacology at Lincoln College Oxford versus Dr Dean Burnett course tutor at Cardiff University. I think I know who has greater credibility and as clue they don't live in Wales
It is called scientific peer review. Baroness Greenfield could just respond to it and they'd debate it. However, I guess she'd either remain silent or resort to ad hominem attacks like you did, both not helping the credibility of her article and conclusions.
 

Suave Charlie

Pleasant Bastard
Sep 23, 2009
215
0
0
albino boo said:
Oh look some guy from a minor university that isn't even the top 200 ( http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2011/10/06/cardiff-university-fails-to-make-top-200-of-world-s-best-universities-91466-29553277/ )has criticized one of the leading neuroscientist in the world. Dr Dean Burnett isn't even head of his department http://medicine.cf.ac.uk/en/person/dr-dean-burnett/. So it boils down to Baroness Greenfield Professor of Synaptic Pharmacology at Lincoln College Oxford versus Dr Dean Burnett course tutor at Cardiff University. I think I know who has greater credibility and as clue they don't live in Wales
Ah the ol' appeal to authority gambit, well personally I'd side with Ben Goldacre, a man who makes a living discrediting quacks and fauds. Oh what's this? He's written about her in detail and how much she's talking out of her arse:
http://www.badscience.net/2009/05/professor-baroness-susan-greenfield-cbe/
http://bengoldacre.posterous.com/a-clarification-why-people-have-been-concerne

And really, if you're going to bring up what positions they have, why side with the one that was kicked out of the Royal Institution?
 

DracoSuave

New member
Jan 26, 2009
1,685
0
0
albino boo said:
Oh look some guy from a minor university that isn't even the top 200 ( http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2011/10/06/cardiff-university-fails-to-make-top-200-of-world-s-best-universities-91466-29553277/ )has criticized one of the leading neuroscientist in the world. Dr Dean Burnett isn't even head of his department http://medicine.cf.ac.uk/en/person/dr-dean-burnett/. So it boils down to Baroness Greenfield Professor of Synaptic Pharmacology at Lincoln College Oxford versus Dr Dean Burnett course tutor at Cardiff University. I think I know who has greater credibility and as clue they don't live in Wales
Job title < Peer review when dealing with science.

Let x be a subject or theory, where S(x) is the amount of science done on, and p(x) is the amount of work published in peer review journals, and e is the empirical data collected.

S(x) = (ep)(x). If p(x) = 0, then this becomes:
S(x) = 0e(x) = 0 for all values of x.

The Baroness has not published anything for peer review on the subject, so her 'findings' do not have scientific authority.

If anything, her credentials damn her, not support her; they're more than good enough to remove barriers to publication.
 

McMullen

New member
Mar 9, 2010
1,334
0
0
albino boo said:
Oh look some guy from a minor university that isn't even the top 200 ( http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2011/10/06/cardiff-university-fails-to-make-top-200-of-world-s-best-universities-91466-29553277/ )has criticized one of the leading neuroscientist in the world. Dr Dean Burnett isn't even head of his department http://medicine.cf.ac.uk/en/person/dr-dean-burnett/. So it boils down to Baroness Greenfield Professor of Synaptic Pharmacology at Lincoln College Oxford versus Dr Dean Burnett course tutor at Cardiff University. I think I know who has greater credibility and as clue they don't live in Wales
The great thing about science is that if Lord Kelvin or Newton are incorrect, all you need is good evidence to demonstrate it, or to at least show that their reasoning is unsound. You don't need to be their equal in order to question them. If this baroness is full of shit (which is as obvious from her choice of language as a scam email is from its poor grammar), she can be called out on it by a lab assistant in a community college.
 

Jodah

New member
Aug 2, 2008
2,280
0
0
Furioso said:
You know your a bad neuroscientist when you don't even understand how brains work, or fun for that matter
Fun is the devil's work. Everyone should be working 24/7. If you ever smile you are possessed and should be beaten with sticks.
 

GonzoGamer

New member
Apr 9, 2008
7,063
0
0
According to this Baroness, dolls would cause dementia too. And I don't mean those creepy ones either, just playing with dolls in general.