SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaFh71YwZ4Y dept.
Submitted via IRC for Bytram
The development of neural circuits in youth, at a particularly important time in their lives, can be heavily influenced by external factors -- specifically the frequent and regular use of cannabis. A new study [...] reports that alterations in cognitive control -- an ensemble of processes by which the mind governs, regulates and guides behaviors, impulses, and decision-making based on goals are directly affected.
[...] The findings are based on functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data acquired from 28 adolescents and young adults (aged 14-23 years) with significant cannabis use and 32 age and sex-matched non-using healthy controls. Participants were scanned during their performance of a Simon Spatial Incompatibility Task, a cognitive control task that requires resolving cognitive conflict to respond accurately.
Compared to their healthy counterparts, the adolescents and young adults with significant cannabis use showed reduced activation in the frontostriatal circuits that support cognitive control and conflict resolution.
The authors also examined the degree to which fluctuations in activity in relation to conflict resolution is synchronized across the different regions comprised in this frontostriatal circuit (that is, to what extent are regions functionally connected with each other). Although circuit connectivity did not differ between cannabis-using and non-using youth, the research team found an association between how early individuals began regularly using cannabis and the extent to which frontostriatal regions were disrupted, suggesting that earlier chronic use may have a larger impact on circuit development than use of later onset.
Deficient Functioning of Frontostriatal Circuits During the Resolution of Cognitive Conflict in Cannabis-Using Youth (DOI: 10.1016/j.jaac.2018.09.436)
(Score: 2) by Rich on Saturday June 22 2019, @04:06AM (4 children)
My memorable brain mush experience was when I went to the US for the first time after finishing school. At that time, in Germany, we only had about three state-sponsored programs, and I was exposed to dozens of channes of cable TV for the first time. Back then, MTV was still good, with actual music videos, and I was completely captivated by it for about four hours in one stretch one day. When I left the screen after that exposure, I felt like my IQ just had dropped by 25 points or so.
I've ever since been wary of media overconsumption (*). When I later interacted with everyday stoners, I've always thought they were at about the level I felt I was at after that TV trip. (Without any scientific furthering) my impression is that the damage done by cannabinoids might not be from chemical harm from its contents, but by removing the perception of the consumers from physical life around them for prolonged times. I've never noted significant adverse effects in cannabis consumers who where stoned only intermittently, they were up to quite challenging tasks in software engineering where I worked.
(*) Strangely enough, for reasons I can't recall, I once (iirc before the MTV experience) binge-watched 16 recorded hours of Magnum PI over the course of two days , which didn't cause such an effect. So it probably is relevant how much overstimulation there is, and enough of John Hillerman's portrayal of a distinguished English housekeeper (vs fast cut car chases) helped in that respect.
(Score: 2) by ElizabethGreene on Sunday June 23 2019, @06:32PM
I suspect that we'll eventually discover that the cognitive impact of television and digital media largely stems from rapidly switching from one view to another and/or one topic to another.
In Television and movies it's the quick cuts between scenes that do it. Watching SpongeBob with my kids the scene cuts come blisteringly fast, 4 seconds is a long scene. In social media and the web it's jumping from one page or engagement to the next. On Instagram or Facebook getting ten seconds of engagement is a lifetime.
Offloading medium and long term memory to search engines can be a good thing. To use that effectively we need to step back and figure out how to leverage that without driving our attention spans and ability to hold onto a thought to zero.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday June 26 2019, @07:22AM (2 children)
But, he wasn't really a "distinguished English housekeeper," he was Robin Masters [wikipedia.org] messing with everyone's heads -- Especially Magnum.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by Rich on Wednesday June 26 2019, @03:32PM (1 child)
And the next thing you claim is that Deckard was a replicant, huh?
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday June 26 2019, @03:45PM
Not even close. Deckard was a reprogrammed pastry chef! Geez Louise!
As for "Higgins," just look at all the clues and it's obvious. But it took a PI with the Thomas' skills to figure it out. Now you know. :)
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr