logo
Parents, You're Focusing on the Wrong Part of Your Kid's Screen Use

Parents, You're Focusing on the Wrong Part of Your Kid's Screen Use

Yahoo6 hours ago

When it comes to monitoring kids and technology, parents are all doing the best we can. Especially in the summertime when rules fly out the window. However, a new study found that parents may actually be worried about the wrong thing when it comes to kids and screens.
A study published June 18 in JAMA, a journal of the American Medical Association, found that the amount of time kids spent on social media, mobile phones, and video games wasn't linked to more internalized symptoms of mental health issues like anxiety and depression. Surprisingly, it also wasn't associated with externalized symptoms of mental health problems like rule breaking, aggression, suicidal behaviors, or suicidal ideation. This sounds good right? The problem is, researchers found that screen addiction was linked to both internal and external symptoms of mental health problems.
More from SheKnows
PopSockets Partnered With This Celeb-Loved Jewelry Brand to Drop Beach-Chic Limited-Edition Accessories
There is a difference; a subtle distinction with big consequences. Yunyu Xiao, lead study author and an assistant professor in the department of population health sciences and department of psychiatry at Weill Cornell Medical College in New York, explained addiction as 'excessive use' that interferes with home responsibilities, schoolwork or other activities, per CNN. 'They find a craving for it and cannot stop using it,' he explained.
The study found one in two of the young people in the study were on a 'high trajectory of addictive use' for mobile phones, while over 40 percent were on the same path for video games. For the kids with high or increasing use of social media and mobile phones, they were two to three times more likely to engage in suicidal behavior and suicidal ideations than kids on the lower trajectory. These kids also had increased risk of symptoms of mental health problems, with a high use of video games associated with a greater risk of symptoms of mental health problems, suicidal behaviors, and suicidal ideation.
It's absolutely heartbreaking! And teens know they need help. In Feb. 2025, SheKnows spoke with teens in New York City about their phone use, and the results were concerning. One 16-year-old named Annabella told us that she spends 12 hours on her phone.
'My friends are on it [their phones], I feel like I couldn't get off it or certain apps, I don't know — I'm just, like, addicted,' Annabella admitted.
The Anxious Generation author Jonathan Haidt recommends not giving your child a phone until high school, not allowing social media until 16, and encouraging real-world independence and risk-taking in kids.
Ariana Hoet, Ph.D., executive clinical director of children's mental health organization On Our Sleeves, previously told SheKnows that she recommends designated screen-free times every day: during dinner, for example, and powering phones down a couple of hours before bedtime. You should also talk about screens as a family.
'You can talk about what social media platforms you're going to use. Who do you follow? What do you post? And then most importantly, when are the screen-free times? What are other activities you're doing? Who do you go to if you're worried about something?' Dr. Hoet told us. 'You also need to establish the consequences: what happens if these rules are broken?'
Dr. Becky Kennedy, psychologist, author, and mom of three previously told SheKnows that screen time isn't inherently bad for kids. It all depends on what the screen time is being used for and if your kids have a healthy balance. She suggests parents define screen time boundaries in advance, encourage kids to learn on their screen before playing, and anticipate the meltdowns around screen time by setting firm boundaries about when to put it up at the end of the day.
'To me, if you're a parent who's just struggling with screen time with your kid, you're probably doing it right. It's a tool we need to use,' she told us. 'It's something I don't think parents need to feel guilty about. It's just something parents need to have a level of mindfulness about relative to making sure we're setting up our home today for success — but that we're also setting up our kids for success long-term.'
Look out for these signs that your child might be addicted to cell phones or video games, per the Mayo Clinic:
Intense urges for screen time or video games that block out other thoughts.
Cutting back on social or recreational activities because of preference for screen time or video games.
Feeling irritable, anxiety, or anger when forced to stop playing, even for brief periods of time.
Lying to others about the extent of their use.
Needing more screen time over time to get the same level of enjoyment.
Neglecting their appearance, including lack of interest in grooming or clothing.
If you think your child is developing a phone or video game addiction, call their pediatrician and/or therapist for help managing their addiction in a screen-heavy world.Best of SheKnows
Tween & Teen Slang 2025: A Definitive Guide to 'What the Hellyante' Your Kid Is Saying Right Now
Celebrity Parents Who Are So Proud of Their LGBTQ Kids
Recent Baby & Toddler Product Recalls Every Parent and Caregiver Should Know About

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

HealthRX Expands Telehealth Website Experience to Include GLP-1 Weight Loss Solutions, Prescription Access, and 24/7 Wellness Support
HealthRX Expands Telehealth Website Experience to Include GLP-1 Weight Loss Solutions, Prescription Access, and 24/7 Wellness Support

Yahoo

time24 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

HealthRX Expands Telehealth Website Experience to Include GLP-1 Weight Loss Solutions, Prescription Access, and 24/7 Wellness Support

HealthRX enhances online platform to offer doctor-prescribed GLP-1 medications like Ozempic® and Zepbound® for adults seeking virtual weight loss support, prescription access, and 24/7 telehealth care BROOKLYN, June 19, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- HealthRX, a digital health platform serving adults across the United States, has announced an expanded online experience designed to support weight management and long-term wellness through a suite of integrated offerings. These include Health RX Telehealth™, Health RX Prescription Access™, and Health RX Wellness Support™, all accessible through its newly enhanced website at The update provides streamlined access to GLP-1 medications such as Ozempic®, Zepbound®, and compounded alternatives—subject to eligibility criteria and clinical discretion. The HealthRX platform is built to accommodate adults who are seeking a secure, doctor-supervised weight management option that minimizes barriers to care and supports routine-friendly wellness. A Digital Health Platform Designed for Results HealthRX offers a simplified path for adults to explore medically appropriate weight loss options from the comfort of home. Through the HealthRX intake process, users can connect with U.S.-licensed physicians to determine clinical eligibility for GLP-1 medications. The program emphasizes convenience and flexibility, removing the need for in-person consultations or insurance requirements. The platform's design integrates: Health RX Telehealth™ – Secure access to virtual consultations with board-certified physicians. Health RX Prescription Access™ – Direct, encrypted coordination with pharmacies for prescription fulfillment and renewals. Health RX Wellness Support™ – A collection of tools including coaching support, educational resources, medication reminders, and outcome tracking. Each service is built to align with common adult health goals—particularly those related to sustained weight management. Full details are available on the official HealthRX website at Highlight on GLP-1 Medication Access: Ozempic®, Zepbound®, and Tirzepatide Options GLP-1 medications have emerged as a physician-supervised option for individuals managing obesity or weight-related conditions. HealthRX facilitates access to FDA-approved GLP-1 treatments such as Ozempic®, Zepbound®, and Tirzepatide®, as well as compounded GLP-1 or GLP-1/GIP medications based on clinical suitability. These medications work by targeting appetite regulation and glucose control pathways and are prescribed in accordance with FDA labeling or compound-specific clinical judgment. The HealthRX platform outlines potential usage scenarios, average pricing tiers, and expected timelines for prescription delivery—all while emphasizing that outcomes vary by individual. For medication access information, visit HealthRX also confirms that compounded medications offered through the platform are prepared in U.S.-based facilities in accordance with USP <795> and <797> standards. The company notes that compounded drug products are not FDA-approved, and eligibility is determined during the virtual consultation process with a licensed provider. Three-Step Process Designed for Accessibility Visitors to the website are guided through a simple three-step intake process: Take the Assessment – Users begin by completing a short clinical questionnaire to determine preliminary eligibility. Meet a Board-Certified Physician – Within 24 hours, eligible users are connected to a licensed medical provider for an evaluation. Receive Medication – Upon approval, GLP-1 prescriptions are delivered securely to the patient's door with ongoing support available. This process is designed to make adult wellness and weight loss support accessible without long wait times, insurance hassles, or frequent office visits. A full description is provided at Pricing and Support Structure As listed on the platform: Ozempic® (Brand GLP-1) – $1,299/month (In Stock) Tirzepatide® (GLP-1 + GIP) – $1,299/month (Limited Stock) GLP-1 Injections (Compounded) – $189/month (Low Stock) GLP-1 Oral Tablets (Compounded) – $239/month (Low Stock) GLP-1 + GIP Injection (Compounded) – $349/month (In Stock) Pricing reflects bundled services that include medical evaluation, platform access, prescription coordination, and support. Details and plan tiers are explained at Transparent Clinical Oversight All HealthRX-affiliated physicians are U.S.-licensed and board-certified in relevant specialties such as internal medicine, emergency care, osteopathic medicine, and family medicine. Provider credentials and bios are available through the HealthRX platform. HealthRX confirms that all consultations, messaging, and record keeping are conducted through encrypted channels in compliance with HIPAA regulations. Privacy and user consent policies are explained at Health RX Wellness Support™ Adds a Preventive Layer Health RX Wellness Support™ complements prescription and telehealth services by offering educational and lifestyle tools, including: Digital health journals and medication tracking Reminder alerts for check-ins and prescription refills Curated content on nutrition, movement, and self-care Access to secure provider messaging These tools aim to reinforce adherence and increase long-term success for adults pursuing medically guided weight loss. More about the support program can be found at Verified Customer Experiences HealthRX highlights verified user reviews collected by third-party platforms: "Signing up took less than five minutes, and the process was clear." "The support staff answered every question. I already feel healthier." "After starting the treatment, I received my delivery within 48 hours." Individual experiences are unique, and HealthRX maintains a strict no-guarantee policy regarding outcomes. Additional testimonials and review information are linked from Platform Policies and Consumer Disclosures HealthRX outlines its key platform policies, including: No charge if a user does not qualify Cancellation is available anytime without penalties Refunds are processed within 24–48 hours if eligibility is not met Insurance is not required but may be used independently for reimbursement These policies are detailed in the platform's Terms of Service and FAQ sections at About HealthRX HealthRX is a U.S.-based virtual healthcare platform offering GLP-1-based weight management, online prescription access, and ongoing support through secure telehealth services. The platform includes Health RX Telehealth™, Health RX Prescription Access™, and Health RX Wellness Support™, designed to provide adults with personalized, remote wellness strategies. HealthRX is not a healthcare provider itself, but coordinates licensed services through verified clinical partners. More about the HealthRX platform can be found at Product and Contact Information Products and Services: Health RX Telehealth™ Health RX Prescription Access™ Health RX Wellness Support™ GLP-1 Medications: Ozempic®, Zepbound®, Tirzepatide®, Compounded Options Website: Contact Email: support@ +1 (208) 494-2534 Disclaimer This release is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Individual results may vary. Consumers should consult a licensed medical provider for personalized recommendations. HealthRX does not guarantee eligibility, outcomes, or medication access. GLP-1 medications may cause serious side effects, including possible thyroid tumors. Do not use if you or a family member have a history of medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC) or MEN 2. Compounded drugs are not FDA-approved, and their safety and effectiveness have not been evaluated by the FDA. HealthRX does not manufacture, prescribe, or dispense medication directly. All services are provided through licensed third parties. CONTACT: Email: support@ Phone: +1 (208) 494-2534Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

AGs in California and other states lead campaign to defend reproductive rights
AGs in California and other states lead campaign to defend reproductive rights

Los Angeles Times

time44 minutes ago

  • Los Angeles Times

AGs in California and other states lead campaign to defend reproductive rights

Democratic state attorneys general led by those from California, New York, and Massachusetts are pressuring medical professional groups to defend reproductive rights, including medication abortion, emergency abortions, and travel between states for health care in response to recent increases in the number of abortion bans. The American Medical Association adopted a formal position June 9 recommending that medical certification exams be moved out of states with restrictive abortion policies or made virtual, after 20 attorneys general petitioned to protect physicians who fear legal repercussions because of their work. The petition focused on the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology's certification exams in Dallas, and the subsequent AMA recommendation was hailed as a win for Democrats trying to regain ground after the fall of Roe v. Wade. 'It seems incremental, but there are so many things that go into expanding and maintaining access to care,' said Arneta Rogers, executive director of the Center on Reproductive Rights and Justice at the University of California-Berkeley's law school. 'We see AGs banding together, governors banding together, as advocates work on the ground. That feels somewhat more hopeful — that people are thinking about a coordinated strategy.' Since the Supreme Court eliminated the constitutional right to an abortion in 2022, 16 states, including Texas, have implemented laws banning abortion almost entirely, and many of them impose criminal penalties on providers as well as options to sue doctors. More than 25 states restrict access to gender-affirming care for trans people, and six of them make it a felony to provide such care to youth. That's raised concern among some physicians who fear being charged if they go to those states, even if their home state offers protection to provide reproductive and gender-affirming health care. Pointing to the recent fining and indictment of a physician in New York who allegedly provided abortion pills to a woman in Texas and a teen in Louisiana, a coalition of physicians wrote in a letter to the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology that 'the limits of shield laws are tenuous' and that 'Texas laws can affect physicians practicing outside of the state as well.' The campaign was launched by several Democratic attorneys general, including Rob Bonta of California, Andrea Joy Campbell of Massachusetts, and Letitia James of New York, who each have established a reproductive rights unit as a bulwark for their state following the Dobbs decision. 'Reproductive health care and gender-affirming care providers should not have to risk their safety or freedom just to advance in their medical careers,' James said in a statement. 'Forcing providers to travel to states that have declared war on reproductive freedom and LGBTQ+ rights is as unnecessary as it is dangerous.' In their petition, the attorneys general included a letter from Joseph Ottolenghi, medical director at Choices Women's Medical Center in New York City, who was denied his request to take the test remotely or outside of Texas. To be certified by the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology, physicians need to take the in-person exam at its testing facility in Dallas. The board completed construction of its new testing facility last year. 'As a New York practitioner, I have made every effort not to violate any other state's laws, but the outer contours of these draconian laws have not been tested or clarified by the courts,' Ottolenghi wrote. Rachel Rebouché, the dean of Temple University's law school and a reproductive law scholar, said 'putting the heft' of the attorneys general behind this effort helps build awareness and a 'public reckoning' on behalf of providers. Separately, some doctors have urged medical conferences to boycott states with abortion bans. Anti-abortion groups, however, see the campaign as forcing providers to conform to abortion-rights views. Donna Harrison, an OB-GYN and the director of research at the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, described the petition as an 'attack not only on pro-life states but also on life-affirming medical professionals.' Harrison said the 'OB-GYN community consists of physicians with values that are as diverse as our nation's state abortion laws,' and that this diversity 'fosters a medical environment of debate and rigorous thought leading to advancements that ultimately serve our patients.' The AMA's new policy urges specialty medical boards to host exams in states without restrictive abortion laws, offer the tests remotely, or provide exemptions for physicians. However, the decision to implement any changes to the administration of these exams is up to those boards. There is no deadline for a decision to be made. The OB-GYN board did not respond to requests for comment, but after the public petition from the attorneys general criticizing it for refusing exam accommodations, the board said that in-person exams conducted at its national center in Dallas 'provide the most equitable, fair, secure, and standardized assessment.' The OB-GYN board emphasized that Texas' laws apply to doctors licensed in Texas and to medical care within Texas, specifically. And it noted that its exam dates are kept under wraps, and that there have been 'no incidents of harm to candidates or examiners across thousands of in-person examinations.' Democratic state prosecutors, however, warned in their petition that the 'web of confusing and punitive state-based restrictions creates a legal minefield for medical providers.' Texas is among the states that have banned doctors from providing gender-affirming care to transgender youth, and it has reportedly made efforts to get records from medical facilities and professionals in other states who may have provided that type of care to Texans. The Texas attorney general's office did not respond to requests for comment. States such as California and New York have laws to block doctors from being extradited under other states' laws and to prevent sharing evidence against them. But instances that require leveraging these laws could still mean lengthy legal proceedings. 'We live in a moment where we've seen actions by executive bodies that don't necessarily square with what we thought the rules provided,' Rebouché said. Sciacca writes for KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.

MIT joins group of universities suing the DOD over funding cuts
MIT joins group of universities suing the DOD over funding cuts

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

MIT joins group of universities suing the DOD over funding cuts

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology has joined a lawsuit against the Department of Defense (DOD) over funding cuts related to indirect costs for military-based research. The institution joins a group of 11 other universities, including Brown University in Rhode Island, and three higher education organizations that filed the complaint against the DOD on Monday. Boston University supported the lawsuit as a member of the Association of American Universities. As of Tuesday, a federal judge had approved a temporary restraining order to halt the implementation of the cuts. 'We underscore that MIT drives US national security through its cutting-edge research, defense innovation and substantial contributions to military leadership,' said Kimberly Allen, a spokesperson for MIT, in an email. DOD declined to comment because it is ongoing litigation. Boston University didn't immediately respond to requests for comment on Wednesday. 'DOD's latest action would have an immediate and dire effect on our national security by disrupting research designed to help our military,' the group of those suing said in a statement released Monday. Read more: MIT sues federal science agency over cuts to 'crucial research' The lawsuit comes in response to the DOD's announcement that it would limit facilities and administrative reimbursements to a 15% cap for all DOD research grants. Facilities and administrative costs include maintenance and administrative staff, research facilities and safety expenses, among others, which the group cites as being essential costs in maintaining the country's status as a leader in military technology research. Initially proposed by U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth in a memo sent on May 14, the cuts are set to save the DOD $900 million per year, according to Hegseth. According to court filings, MIT received $107 million in funding from the DOD in the 2024 fiscal year. They estimate that a 15% cap on Facilities and administrative expenses by the DOD would result in an estimated loss of $21 million annually. MIT has expressed it intends to apply for new funding awards from the DOD in addition to pending funding proposals. MIT is also involved in lawsuits against other federal organizations over cuts to indirect costs in other departments, namely the National Institute of Health, the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Science Foundation. 'Far reaching consequences' — UMass Amherst sounds the alarm amid federal uncertainty As federal funding cuts hit Harvard, a private investment firm and other donors step up 20 NIH grants restored to UMass system after judge rules against Trump admin Trump admin asks court to rule against Harvard without a trial Federal judge orders Trump admin to reinstate hundreds of NIH grants Read the original article on MassLive.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store