Screens: When more is harmful

Jean Rystrom, my friend and fellow member of the Healthy Kids Watch Less TV coalition, once again has shared some of the 2007 research that bears on our interest in the consequences of excessive screen time for kids. Jean is Kaiser-Permanente Northwest's regional practice director for pediatrics.

Here is what she has written us:

This is the last of my series of brief impressions from important medical studies in 2007 pertaining to screen time. Consider all of the usual caveats: I'm not a researcher, and I "might" be biased.

The first message simply updated the status quo: By age 12 months, the average baby is watching about 1 hour per day, despite the American Academy of Pediatrics recommendation of no screen time before age 2.

The second message showed significant delay in language acquisition associated with screen time in very young children, and sustained exposure was associated with problems in aggression (by far the strongest), sleep, self control, attention and cooperation.

The third message looked at the rapidly growing information about attention issues, where there is still much controversy. But it appears that there is some sort of connection, perhaps a tendency to become accustomed to rapid pacing from entertainment media, which leads to boredom with the real world.

Now, finally, the news on obesity, hypertension, and one article that ties together the issues with media, sleep and learning.

Obesity:

* Family eats together, more likely to serve fruits or veg

* Television on, less likely to serve fruits or veg

* Having dinner together does not overcome the adverse effects of having the television on during mealtime in terms of fruits and veg

Fitzpatrick et al, Journal of the American Dietetic Association, April 2007

Hypertension:

Looking at children who are obese, researchers found that both severity of obesity and daily TV time were significant independent predictors of the presence of hypertension.

* As is well supported elsewhere, TV time was positively correlated with the severity of obesity.

* Children watching 2-4 hours per day had 2.5 times the odds of hypertension compared to those watching less (adjusted for BMI, race, and site, but not SES), and 3.3 times the odds for over 4 hours per day of watching.

* The odds of having hypertension increased by 26 percent for each hour of TV watched per day.

Pardee, et al, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, December 2007

Sleep, memory and learning:

Very small German study in which 13 year old boys were given sleep studies and memory tests on 3 separate days: a) after 1 hour of "mild violence" video game, b) after a PG movie, and c) no screen time.

* Significant changes in sleep patterns were found the night after the video game and the movie, with greater changes for the computer game than the movie (hypothesis: the movie was pretty ho-hum for these boys, who are generally unrestricted in their viewing)

* The sleep pattern changes seen may be related to the learning "consolidation process" which takes place during sleep

* Verbal memory performance was much lower after the video game and also after the movie (but not quite statistically significant for the movie)

* The effect of media on sleep patterns could explain some of the negative association between school performance and screen time

Dworak et al, Pediatrics, November 2007

Parents surrendering, then losing kids to "screens"

My friend and fellow media activist Jean Rystrom of Kaiser Permanente is a great source of information about trends in excessive, damaging "screen-time" use among children.

In the last two days, she has sent me and others two telling e-mails. The first is a link to a Wall Street Journal column, "Teenage Zombies," which echoes many concerns I've heard recently from parents. The primary one is that kids are becoming addicted to video games and are isolating themselves from their families and others.

The second lays out the alarming exposure of very young children to screen images, despite the medical community's warnings about the dangers posed, particularly to those under two. Parents, it seems, are turning over responsibility for their children's well-being to television programmers and TV hucksters.

Here's her report, which I have edited slightly:

I'm sending you a four-part series (one a week) of my brief impressions from important medical studies in 2007 pertaining to screen time (you'll be happy to know that I'm leaving out articles which pertain primarily to content as opposed to time). Consider all of the usual caveats: I'm not a researcher, and I "might" be biased.

This first message is simply an update, particularly about younger children. The issue continues to grow in importance and urgency as more opportunities to watch are developed and marketed, and aimed at younger and younger kids. Clearly we continue to have a lot of work to do: raising awareness is still a priority. Most parents are not aware that the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends no screen time at all before age 2 (which has more to do with brain development than obesity, although that too is an ever more serious problem).

* 20 percent of children under age 3 have a TV in their bedroom

* 43 percent of children age 3 and 4 have a TV in their bedroom

* Most common reason cited by parents (54 percent): "it frees up other televisions in the house for other family members to watch their own shows"

* 27 percent of 5 and 6 year olds use a computer on a typical day

- Vandewater et al, Pediatrics, May 2007

* By 3 months of age, about 40 percent of children regularly watched television, DVDs, or videos

* The median age for introduction was 9 months

* Average 1 hour per day by age 12 months

* Parent reasons: education, entertainment, and babysitting

- Zimmerman et al, Archive of Pediatric Adolescent Med, May 2007

Jean and I are part of a coalition making a major push in the next two years to ensure that the dangers of early childhood exposure to screens are widely known and addressed in Oregon. Jean represents Kaiser Permanente (see its excellent website on screen time and its impact on kids); I represent Media Think. Other members include the State Health Department, Multnomah County Library, the County Health Department, WIC (Women, Infants and Children), Community Health Partners and the Oregon PTA.

We'll keep you informed of our progress.

High-placed TV-B-Gone; new get-a-grip device

If all went according to plan yesterday, State Sen. Vicki Walker put a TV-B-Gone in the hands of Oregon's State Superintendent for Public Instruction Susan Castillo—all in the name of getting Oregon's schools to get serious about media literacy.

The pocket TV remote was a gift from me to Castillo via Walker. I passed the little zapper on to Walker, who chairs the Senate's education committee, during a discussion we had about getting more media literacy into the schools.

And I have State Sen. Ginny Burdick to thank for arranging for my meeting with Walker at Hillsdale's Baker and Spice. Earlier this year I chided Burdick for failing to tend to her constituents' e-mails, particularly repeated messages from me. All is forgiven.

Also, my friend Jean Rystrom, who heads Kaiser Permanente's laudable TV Turnoff efforts, has alerted me to another useful get-a-grip-on-screens device. This one, called TV Allowance, electronically parcels out how much time your kids (or you, or your spouse) have with the TV. When the allotted time is up, the screen goes blank. It can also ride herd on computers and video games.

No wrestling over the remote; no video tantrums.

Like the TV-B-Gone, TV Allowance prompts critical thinking and discussions about screens and how we use them in our lives.