Now recommended no TV at all for under 3's

[Furball]

Just seen on BBC news it is now recommended no TV at all for under 3's but can't find any info about it on their website.

BarbielovesKen, could you clarify, when you are talking about neral pathways being made are you talking about neuroplasticity?

If you are then what this article is stating is patently not true.

It's been a while since I did any neuro physio but I distinctly remember that patients recovery after stroke or head injury is due to the brain being able to forge new neural connections. If this happens in an 82 year old its sure as hell not stopping when a child reaches 3. Any neuro bods out there please come forward and assist me!!

I would agree that a child watching telly is not going to be stimulating as many neural connections as say a child making a den, or drawing a picture, but as a previous poster has said they will probably be stimulating their visual and language areas of the brain (unless of course bits & bobs is on...then everthing will go into standby mode).

I really can't see how rationed tv time can be so very harmful.

Aloha, your children's day sounds idyllic. And lol at evil and corrupting peter pan. My dd pretends to be the little mermaid in the bath every night - shock horror!!

We are *constantly makeing new connections. All though out life. Every time we learn something, even as minor as aname!

Its not the educated middle classes who need telling to restrict it - so its like preaching to the converted
Its those who could really benefit from running around- picking up a book or some pens or enjoying some imaginative play who watch unrestricted tv

LITTLE children are not interested in all the real crap on tv
By the time your boy gets to 8 Aloha things will have changed

Of course I don't think endless adult telly is the way to go, but I don't know anyone that lets their small children do this. I think that to say all telly is horribly damaging is simply untrue. Why not say the truth, which is that limited amounts of suitable tv is good for children, but more than a couple of hours is not so good, and unlimited adult telly is definitely harmful. Otherwise people will just roll their eyes and ignore it completely. And I completely stand by what I said earlier. My ds has Aspergers and if this researcher is suggesting that I caused it by letting him watchthe odd Teletubby video at a young age then he can go jump off a cliff (which is very much the heavily censored version of what I would like to say ) It is so offensive, wrong and upsetting that I don't really know where to start.

but how do you know most kids do that, otter?

Loads of the kids orund me don't.

"Most kids come back from school and put the tv on and watch it until tea time"

I was referring to that bit - it's all getting confusing

Is anyone else ancient enough to remember doing their homework in front of Nationwide?

Balance is the key to life. My son (2.5) watches various progs each week. But I pick them out carefully as I its always supervised and there's a limit to what I can sit through. We learn get a bit of exercise in (important to stop obesity), we have fun with cooking (important for child to have healthy attitude towards food to stop obesity), we learn where things come from (important to increase knowledge and understanding), we learn songs and new games and have fun while we are out and about repeating them (important for child to exercise capability to learn and commit to memory). My child does not sit in front of chat shows or mindless nonsense from dawn till dusk, we choose specific childrens progs that he can enjoy whilst getting something from them so thuuuupppspsssshhh - I'll raise my child thanks not some bit of paper!!!!!

that study is indeed annoying but it is only one of many that say tv is not fabulous for under 3's

What i am trying to say is that children and teenagers would rarely move from infront of a television ad nauseum were they not restricted

Most children are not restricted

Delaying the onset of this and broadening their horizons whilst they are tiny can only be of benefit in my opinion

Otter Charlie and Lola started off as books, the first one published at least five years ago

My 4 year old dd knows Charlie and Lola because she is allowed to take 20 books out of the library each Saturday so has "read" all the Charlie and Lola ones a billion times [smug]

(She doesn't actually LET me watch it on TV because she is always worried that it might be the story where a spider appears, damn it, I LOVE Charlie and Lola)

Ones being ferried to after school activities may not
The majority of kids who live local to their school come in grab a snack and sit down in front of the tv 4.00 latest - thats it

i have read the books

because I need to cook dinner

if all my chld did, day in day out, was to read, then yes, I would encourage him/her to do some other tings as well (and we have thousands of books in the house and are all avid readers) because over all you should have moderation.

Like wise if all they wanted to do was play football, or swim, or watch TV or play on the internet.

I would want them to do a variety of different things.

like hunker, i watch tv for a living and i watched a lot when i was growing up. go on, ask me anything about Saturday and Sunday matinee fillums on BBC2. saw a lot of classics that way...

so, am i an arsehead or wot? aren't my neural pathways good enough for YOU PEOPLE??!!

(aitch, I watched that stuff too, and my neural pathways are good enough to......whispers......have allowed me to study neural pathways)

i had a wee crush on The Wicked Lady...

Ah well that's because it's proven that too much television turns you into a raving dyke

Oh I'm so glad someone who knows about neuro physics has joined in! Charlie and Lola were indeed books waaay before they were telly progs, I thought everyone knew that.

i do remember thinking that Charlie Chan was a bit

i do remember thinking that Charlie Chan was a bit

twice!