Dr Aric Sigman, an associate fellow of the British Psychological Society, thinks so. In fact, he says there are fifteen different health risks for children associated with too much television and is urging the government to set guidelines for "recommended daily allowances" of television time. After reviewing 35 academic studies on the subject, he has come up with the following guidelines for appropriate television watching for children:
- children under three years old should watch NO television at all
- ages 3 to 7 should watch television no more than 30 minutes to an hour each day
- seven to 12-year-olds get an hour
- 12 to 15-year olds should only watch for one-and-a-half hours
- 16 and over can watch for two hours
As for the health risks he says children face from too much television, they range from obesity to heart disease to disrupted sleep and lowered immunity. Short attention spans, risk of developing ADHD and even the early onset of puberty is being blamed on television.
His point, and it may be a good one, is that when parents talk about moderation and setting limits on television viewing, they need to know what is considered "excessive." By defining it, parents will known when to shut it off.
According to Dr. Sigman's recommendations, Ellie is probably watching a little more than she should. Is your child exceeding Dr. Sigman's recommended daily allowance of television?
1. Absolutely. And Sigman's work has problems. Lots of problems. Obvious are connections between short attention spans and excessive TV viewing -- because of the short-timed cycles of programs and advertisements. Less obvious is childhood obesity, but that certainly follows a logic because TV viewing is usually sedentary. Lowered immunity? Early onset of puberty? These are mere statistical associations. Early onset of puberty -- especially menarche in girls -- can be associated with childhood obesity, whether that obesity is a result of excessive TV viewing, over-eating, or genetic tendency toward obesity. Lowered immunity could be from a range of trickle-down causes resulting from excessive TV viewing, or it could be a mere statistical anomaly. Thing is, Sigman doesn't know, yet he states the associated health risk as if it is proven.
Sigman's work is like the list of side effects you see with drug advertisements. One of the side effects of, say, a cholesterol-fighting statin is cold or flu. Cold or flu? How can a statin cause cold or flu, you ask? Well, it can't. But a certain number of people, a statistically significant number of people, in the test group caught a cold or influenza during the trial. So when they publish the results of the trial they have to include them as a possible side effects.
When Gutenberg invented movable type and brought printing to the masses -- well, a lot more of the masses than previously could have had something printed or had accessible to them printed materials -- for a century thereafter 25 percent of the people thought he was a genius; the other 75 percent thought he should have been put to death as destroyer of contemporary society.
TV is still relatively new. Always-on, multi-channel, broad-scope-programming TV is still brand new anyway you cut it. It's part of the human condition that some people always take new technology as the Devil's work. In his time, experts lined up to tell the people how Gutenberg's press would ruin society and that men weren't meant to read lots of things all the time. It was unhealthy, it skewed the work ethic, it was bad for the eyesight and the constitution. They cited associative evidence, too.
This is sensationalism at its worst. In order to well develop, children should participate in a variety of activities, including, low-key, relaxing entertainment that can be if parent's wish watching their favorite, age-appropriate TV programs. TV is here to stay, folks. Sigman is not.
Posted at 4:20PM on Apr 25th 2007 by san