> Screen time today is way different than even 20 years ago.
Gee, it's almost like it's not about the screen itself at all.
Gee, it's almost like it's not about the screen itself at all.
Why does the study say screen time when the effects are, ostensibly, not about the screen? Again, a conclusion/agenda in search of evidence necessarily makes biased assumptions. THIS study (as with others) mischaracterizes itself. Seems like a questionable study from the outset. This is a poor approach to analysis.