I was honored to have been interviewed by Mark Harbinger, Founder and Executive Director of the Hug Morenz Foundation for Media Literacy. If you'd like to learn more about their mission, check out https://www.hugmorenzfoundation.org/
Mark, from the Foundation: Marc, it’s always great to talk with you. I think we can agree, anyone named ‘Marc’ is probably pretty cool and should be heard from. But, seriously, you’re a doctor and neurosurgeon, correct?
Marc Arginteanu, MD: Hi Mark. Thanks for taking the time to interview me. I am indeed a neurosurgeon. Although I’ve stepped away from clinical practice, I’ve served as the Chairman of Neurosurgery at Englewood Hospital, in New Jersey. I’ve also served as the president of the New Jersey Neurosurgical Society. I’m currently an Associate Clinical Professor of Neurosurgery at Mount Sinai in New York City.
Since stepping away from clinical medical practice, I’ve taught neuropsychology at Florida International University, in Miami. I’ve also been advising and investing in medical related startup companies. My passion, though, is in writing. My non-fiction book, The Mind Unlocked, briefly achieved bestseller status on Amazon. My fiction novels have won several awards. Anyone interested in learning more is welcome to check out my Amazon Author page (https://amzn.to/3ZvKhLU) or my Goodreads Author Page (https://bit.ly/4bjOpoy)
Mark, from the Foundation: “Great. To the questions, proper: Some people think we should be putting kids in front of screens at the earliest ages possible; while, others believe that all this screen-time is interfering with the natural development of children and—for example—should be removed from schools, entirely. Is there objective, empirical evidence that screen-time—in and of itself, regardless of the content—has negative effects on the brain?
Dr. Marc A: Yes, there is. Here’s a taste: A 2019 study, performed by neuroscientists in Ohio asked the question "Is screen-based media use associated with differences in the structural integrity of brain white matter tracts that support language and literacy skills in preschool-aged children?"
In other words, does too much screen time damage the brains of preschoolers? The doctors studied 47 prekindergarten children with specialized MRI studies called diffusion tensor imaging scans. The imaging revealed anatomical derangements in the brains of young children who were exposed to screen use greater than that recommended by the AAP guidelines. Certain brain white matter tracts were disorganized and the lining of the cells (myelination) were malformed. The scientists psychologically examined (cognitive assessments) the children who were exposed to excessive screen time. Those children exhibited worse language and literacy skills.
The current generation of kids is growing up with smartphones, tablets and other internet-enabled electronic devices. They have never known a world without sophisticated electronic devices or the internet, which may be why half of all adolescents report some level of addiction to digital devices. Many parents worry about the effect that screen time has on the developing brains of adolescents.
An extensive government sponsored study has been developed to determine whether screen time is bad for kids’ brains. Researchers from the National Institutes of Health have embarked upon the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study. Envisaged as a 10-year study, the largest ever of teenage brains, neuroscientists will subject kids to regular physical exams, cognitive tests and MRI scans at medical centers across the nation. The children and their parents also fill out detailed, confidential questionnaires about their habits and lifestyles.
Thus far, MRI scans have revealed significant differences in the brains of some children who reported using smartphones, tablets, and video games more than seven hours a day. In addition to demonstrable anatomical differences, children who engaged in more than two hours a day of screen time achieved lower scores on thinking and language tests.
In 2021, Scientists from Colorado reported their findings regarding a group of more than eleven thousand nine and ten year old children. They discovered that more screen time is significantly associated with worse mental health (depression and anxiety), increased behavioral problems, decreased academic performance, and poorer sleep.
That’s pretty damning stuff!
Kudos to The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), for creating guidelines regarding children's screen time:
- Avoid screen time for children younger than 18 months, with the exception of video chatting.
- From 18 to 24 months, introduce digital media by watching quality programming like PBS Kids, or Sesame Workshop with children.
- For ages 2 to 5 years, limit screen time to 1 hour per day and watch quality programming with kids.
In my opinion, this work should be extended. I would welcome recommendations for older children too.
Mark, from the Foundation: “Obviously, the older the child the stronger the case for giving them practice with the online world—whereas the younger they are, the more being taken out of the real world, as it were, is disruptive.
This is why I’d like to zoom in on middle-school kids (ages 10-13). That’s where it seems the muddiest. Is there anything about the brains of pre-teens that make them especially vulnerable to changes from a new, different (from the real world, I mean) environment—say, with life in entirely digital, online communities?
Dr. Marc A: I do believe the middle schoolers have their own unique space in brain development. That’s the age where hormones are really ramping up. Sex hormones (such as testosterone and estrogen) are able to make their way into the neuronal (brain cell) nucleus and alter the production of mRNA and thus brain proteins. The science backs it up, too:
A 2023 study of middle school age children laid out some scary findings. Scientists recruited more than one-hundred and fifty children (aged twelve years) from rural North Carolina public schools. The children were surveyed regarding their social media usage (Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat): some of the kids rarely checked social media (one time or less per day) other kids were glued to their screens (checking social media more than twenty times a day). The researchers performed functional MRIs (an imaging study which can evaluate brain anatomy and activity) on the children every year for three consecutive years. The researchers also asked the children a bunch of psychological questions.
Based on the answers to questions, the scientists concluded: kids who check social media too often become hypersensitive to feedback from peers. In other words, the children may enter a pathological psychological state: they swing from joy to dread, craving positive electronic reinforcement and fearing any disapproval mirrored in their screens.
Based on the fMRI, the scientist demonstrated: Habitual social media checkers had significantly different brain activity than those who didn’t give a fig about Snapchat (and other social media). The differences observed were widespread and included the Amygdala (part of the limbic system, which guides emotions), Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (a part of the brain associated with executive functions such as focusing attention and decision making), Insula (part of the brain responsible for sensory processing, self-awareness, and emotional guidance of social behavior) and Ventral striatum (part of the reward system of the brain).
Mark, from the Foundation: A lot of Media Literacy practitioners— and educators in general—like to try and let the kids inhabit as much of their educational experience as possible. You know, learn by doing: what we used to call ‘experiential learning’. And, so, they see online activities (like with Ed Tech products) as an extension of that. Making things even weirder, what they do online becomes their “lived experience”, even though perhaps very little (or none) of it was lived/experienced in the real world.
So I’m often concerned that somehow the virtual world has been given equal footing that it maybe doesn’t deserve?
There’s been a lot of recent press about virtual reality goggles. Or, for another example, I know my own kids, in their teen years, spent a fair amount of time watching other kids play video games online—as I’m sure you’re aware, there are entire Youtube channels devoted to influences who merely stream their own commentary while they play video games. Kids argue that this is like us watching football—but, really it’s like watching Fantasy Football.
So, I have to ask: is there really some brain science reason for my visceral reaction to this (“But but but, dammit, it isn’t real!”). Or, am I just another old man yelling at the cloud?
Dr. Marc A: There is a BIG difference. You and I are both SciFi buffs. The SciFi epoch is dawning. Humans have been evolving in a codependent way with our environment for as long as we’ve been, well, human.
Human evolution is still going on, but takes a long, long time. One example is lactose intolerance. Lactose INtolerance is the normal phenotype. Mammal babies (including us) wean from breast milk for many reasons. One of which being so they don’t compete with younger siblings for nutrition. Evolution solved the problem by causing weaned children to lose the ability to properly digest lactose.
Then humans started on a side gig called animal husbandry. In those early days, we were always on the brink of starvation. Some people killed the whole herd of sheep when times got tough. Others drank the sheep’s milk. Those who were lactose tolerant (a mutation) were able to properly digest the milk and utilize the calories. Those with the laudable mutation were less likely to starve to death. As a bonus, they kept some sheep around for the next year. The mutants were more likely to survive and pass the mutated gene (lactose tolerance) on to the next generation. Voilà, evolution.
Technological evolution is happening in the blink of an eye. Our brains can’t evolve quickly enough. If our brain’s don’t keep up with our tech, we’re surely going to suffer psychological and physiological consequences, heretofore unseen and undreamed of.
Mark, from the Foundation: Another timing issue that comes to mind: as a former educator who is now an attorney, I often think about these issues in the realm of the “mature minor” doctrine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mature_minor_doctrine). This is one area where our two fields intersect, Marc.
In your practice, did you have to deal with the medical decisions of families about their children?
Dr. Marc A: I didn’t really deal with kids in my medical career. What I can say, though, is the teen brain is unique.
The brain of an adolescent is no different in size or shape than that of an adult. On a standard CAT scan or MRI the brain of a father and his teenage daughter would be indistinguishable. But, in terms of development, their brains are worlds apart.
Researchers have demonstrated that most adolescents activate different brain regions during decision making when compared to adults. Relatively increased activity in the ventral striatum (a deep part of the brain that is considered a primary component of the reward system) and insula (a part of the brain active during psychological conflicts) is seen in the teenage brain. In most adult brains, on the other hand, the activity of the prefrontal cortex (the area responsible for executive function and rational decision making) predominated.
The anatomy of the teenagers’ brains is not fully mature. Certain cells of the brain (also called neurons or gray matter) send their signals via axons (a part of a neuron that is like the television cable that brings signals from one area to another). The axons (also called white matter) can leak signals unless they are insulated by a fatty substance called myelin. Although the peripheral nerves, traveling through the body, are completely myelinated from a young age (allowing excellent physical coordination and strength), the axons of the brain do not become completely myelinated until the human brain fully matures at about twenty five years of age. The last part of the brain to become myelinated is the frontal lobe (responsible for executive functions). Because the wiring is not mature, the teen brain is more easily rewired (neuroplasticity) or disrupted.
Mark, from the Foundation: I really want to thank you for this. I knew from the very first time we met and spoke on these issues that your perspective was an important one for folks to hear.
Let’s try to button this up: What would your number one recommendation be for parents and educators of elementary and middle-school age children with regard to screens, social media, and [let’s not forget] the algorithms?”
Dr. Marc A: Empowerment is the key.
When kids are tiny, a parent’s job is to provide unmitigated protection.
But as children grow, the parent’s job changes. Sure, we still have to watch out for them. But we also need to provide them tools to handle life’s vicissitudes.
The family dinner table should be heaped high with nutritious discussions, where youthful thoughts are explored and lofty ideas are aired. What did you see online today? Oh, really. Wow. That’s interesting. What did you think about it? Oh, really. Why? It doesn’t so much matter their opinions as long as they’re able to defend them based on reason. If they’re missing some facts, pass them around by the scoopful, like mashed potatoes.
Mark, from the Foundation: I love that metaphor. Thanks again, Marc!
Hi Marc! I would love to have you on my podcast. Let’s talk about books and brains.
@MarcArginteanu Thanks for the facts about screen time effects on growing brains. My time in the classroom with 12-14- year-old students was in the years just before personal devices were part of getting dressed and ready for school. And even without them, it was plain to see the chemical reactions from neurons firing, hormones dripping, and family rules mixing it up among the pliable brains herded together to "learn" stuff. It was dynamic and fun till then, but I'm not equipped to deal with it now. I am sometimes not even able to get the remote for the garage door to obey me.