Computer Use Could Help Predict Early-Stage Alzheimer's (thestack.com) 55
An anonymous reader cites an article on The Stack: Infrequent use of a computer in later life could be an early sign of reduced cognitive ability, according to research from Oregon Health and Science University. A study, which involved 27 'cognitively-healthy' adults aged 65 or older, used MRI scans to measure the volume of the hippocampus -- a small area of the brain with a key role in memory function used to pick up early biomarkers of dementia and Alzheimer's. Data was also collected on computer use among participants via mouse movement detection software. Results showed an additional hour of computer use each day was linked to a 0.025% larger hippocampal volume(PDF), thus indicating that lower computer usage could help predict cognitive decline.
Conundrum (Score:4, Funny)
I'm running Windows, so my computer has all the signs of Alzheimer's disease..... what does that say about me?
correlation vs causation (Score:5, Insightful)
So does cognitive decline cause low computer use or does high computer use prevent cognitive decline?
In otherwords, should doctors be saying "go surf some ***n" to prevent dementia. Watch out for visual symptoms though.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: correlation vs causation (Score:3)
You're correct, but still the mainstream takeaway for the general public is "keep using computer to stave off dementia." I must admit that the results from the study seem so weak to me that there's not much takeaway at all. When I hit that age I can look at declining computer use as a (probably temporary) result of games sucking that month and I'm realizing the value of going for walks instead.
I'm not blaming the researchers for reporting it, but I just don't think there's much meat there.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought increased computer use would be a sign in geeks since we would just keep reading the same /. article over and over thinking it was new.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or it could just be that there are too many idiots whose brains have ossified to the point that it's not even worth arguing with [newyorker.com] - and this applies to a much larger age group than just old folks having "senior's moments."
That is probably a good pre-indicator of future dementia.
Re: (Score:2)
While you have my sympathy for your mother's condition if it is Alzheimer's, it is a common thing in mothers to ask the same question over and over because they don't trust their 'little children' (aged 40 and above) to take proper care of themselves. Furthermore, there is less and less of interest for older people on the computer and internet. Games? Either dedicate your life to the game or GTFO, you aren't good enough. Movies on Netflix? Perhaps, but might as well turn on the TV. Surfing news sites? Look
Re: (Score:2)
There are a huge number of factors here that don't seem to have been filtered and which are therefore muddying the findings.
One simple example: the factor most strongly associated with Alzheimer's is age. To quote the Alzheimer's Society: "Age is the greatest risk factor for Alzheimer's. The disease mainly affects people over 65. Above this age, a person's risk of developing Alzheimer's disease doubles approximately every five years. One in six people over 80 have dementia." Other forms of dementia, such as
Re: (Score:2)
In otherwords, should doctors be saying "go surf some ***n" to prevent dementia.
I'm trying to figure out what four letter word elderly people would be surfing for that fits your pattern. Bran? Pain? Lawn (preceeded by "How to get kids off my ")? CSPAN nope that's 5 letters.
Study (Score:1, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why should we care? (Score:1)
Nature vs Nuture. (Score:2)
Yeah right (Score:2)
My wife has early stage Alzheimer's... (Score:2, Informative)
so when I retire (Score:2)
when I'm retired and reading books on my kindle or whatever ereader a lot, does that count as computer use ?
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's less about computer use specifically and more about keeping the brain busy. My grandfather was instructed to keep his brain busy in his later years so it's pretty much "use it or lose it"
Re: (Score:2)
I agree totally, but I'm just laughing at this article that assumes everyone must use a computer all the time. when in the mood I've spent long multi-day holidays reading and bicycling and not touching the keyboard even though I'm in IT and hack (not crack) at home on on various code projects for fun.
That rings a bell... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
hmmm (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not the case every time, it has just proven historically to be the way to bet.
It would be great if the information gathering arm of the internet could be used to diagnose our ills, advise our decisions, and improve our lives. One day it might happen... someone will first need to create an algorithm that does all those things and
What? (Score:2)
thus indicating that lower computer usage could be help predict cognitive decline.
Does it say anything about not being able to write cromulent English?
Anyway. Why is the link being made in this direction? It seems to me - not knowing anything about the study, I will admit - that using a computer seems more likely to cause a larger hippocampus than the other way around.
The research results showed that an additional hour of computer use each day was linked to a 0.025% larger hippocampal volume. The scientists thus concluded that lower computer usage could be used to predict cognitive decline.
Right, so why did they "thus conclude"? It does say:
A causative relationship has not been ruled out
By which from context I assume they mean the internet use causing the larger hippocampus (though of course a smaller hippocampus could also cause less frequent computer us
Re: (Score:2)
P-value of 0.01 (Score:4, Informative)
Remember, if you run an experiment like this one a hundred times, you'll get this result once on average by pure statistical chance. The other 99 don't get published. There were a couple other things they measured (education and MMSE) that could have been interesting enough to publish, too, so knock the odds down to 1/33. Or, since they tried a couple different methods to normalize the data, odds are up to 1/20 that this study would have produced numbers this significant on a single variable by pure chance.
Re: (Score:1)
You can't attempt to reproduce a result that doesn't get published.
Elderly using computers (Score:3)
The problem is many elderly people 65+ don't use computers to begin with. My dad is 83, and really hadn't ever even touched a computer or related technology until recently. He just never wanted to learn, and didn't want it in his life. My 79 year old mom did learn somewhat and did all the e-mail correspondence with me. Well she recently passed. I flew out to be with my dad and when I initially got there I walked past my mom's iPad on the table. I mentally figured I'd be going home with the iPad because I thought there was no way he'd want to learn it. I was wrong. Not only did he want to learn how to use it to do e-mail and do some easy searches (I installed the Google app for ease of use/explanation), but he wanted to get a smart phone too. I was stunned, but I went with him to get an iPhone.
It's been rough going since he's gotten it, but he has friends who have smart phones and can help. He can usually figure out how to e-mail me or text me with it, and he's called me with it several times, so positive steps in the right direction. I guess since his computer use has increased nearly infinitely (from nothing to something) that bodes well for staving off Alzheimers. My point was lack of computer use among the elderly may just mean they're resistant to technology, not that they are developing Alzheimers.
Re: (Score:2)
Guess I have 5 months left. Then, throw me under the bus?
One ***FORTIETH*** of a percent (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
From what I can tell, a lot of people have zero brains, so one gram is huuuuge improvement.
Depends on the type of usage (Score:2)
Is it researching on Google or doing online puzzles? Or is it posting cat pics on Facebook/Instagram?
Re: (Score:2)
Reductio ad absurdem (Score:2)
Prediction (Score:2)
Or maybe....
Decreased computer use (or any other moderately intellectual endeavour) is a symptom of decreased cognitive function.
Meaning this is the opposite of prediction.
I observe this, but in a different way (Score:2)
Because I do IT services in a place with a lot of retirees, all of the people I work with are ongoing computer users. But when I find someone who has to use the password reset link every time they log onto a site they don't go to every day, I count that as Stage 1. Stage 2 is when they are writing their passwords down (as I instruct them! Geezer IT rules are not the same as workplace rules.) but are no longer organized enough to associate the right password with the right site.
Does Computer Porn Count? (Score:1)
Results showed an additional hour of computer use each day was linked to a 0.025% larger hippocampal volume
Cuz if it does, then I have over a 1% bigger hippocampal volume.
waiting for God (Score:1)
An earlier indicator is loosing stacks on the share market.
Inability to use the computer was one of the big signs of dementia for Dad.
Luckily when he couldn't use the computer, he couldn't trade anymore.
It's sad seeing a once top engineer unable to do anything,
now he's just waiting for God.
Mine is bigger (Score:2)
an additional hour of computer use each day was linked to a 0.025% larger hippocampal volume
My hippocampus is 0.6% larger.
What? No. That's a ridiculous conclusion to draw. (Score:2)
Just because two different things are correlated to the same variable, that doesn't mean you can use one to predict the other. It *might* be so, or the two things might affect hippocampus size independently, without any causal link from one to the other.
This is like saying that people who like ice cream tend to gain weight, and people with cancer tend to lose weight, so we can predict whether you like ice cream based on whether you have cancer or not.
I'm 65 (Score:2)
...and now I just need more hours in the day, so I can make my hippocampus grow more.
(It is a causal relation, right? :-)