One of the problems with democracy is that we, the populace, are subject to either falling sway to fashionable nostrums or to having our knowledge about matters manipulated. We can’t all be experts in everything – no, not even us here – and so we have to rely upon those who are. Which leaves us open to being misled by those who claim to be such experts. Some of whom, how many being a matter of interesting conjecture, will be non-experts just in it for themselves.
Quite who, well, we can point a few fingers. We here think that at least one campaigner on economic issues is just a retired accountant looking for some personal aggrandisement. After writing pieces telling people how to dodge the tax system he realised that gig’s too difficult, so switched to insisting that no one be allowed to do that, something that pays better. On a more general basis this idea that we must recycle everything is just wrong but it provides a nice living for the campaigners. Quite who benefits from shouting about limiting screen time for children we’re not sure. There must be more than the one living from doing it, obviously, otherwise there wouldn’t be the people doing the shouting.
It’s wrong though all the same:[perfectpullquote align=”full” bordertop=”false” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””] The impact of screen time on teenagers’ mental health is so tiny that even wearing glasses has a bigger effect, researchers have concluded. In recent years concerns have been raised that too much technology is damaging youngsters both physically and mentally. But a study of 300,000 adolescents from Britain and the US found that, at most, only 0.4 per cent of the difference in well-being between youngsters was due to screen time, meaning 99 per cent was because of other factors. In fact, technology only slightly surpasses the negative effect of regularly eating potatoes and is less impactful on welfare than wearing glasses or being left-handed, the research shows. [/perfectpullquote]
Teenage screen time, about as dangerous as potatoes. That should put the issue to bed but then we’re talking about emotions here, aren’t we, things not subject to fact nor reason. Which is that problem with democracy even if it is still the best system of a bad lot.