Latest news with #NYU


CNET
6 hours ago
- Health
- CNET
Nano-Hydroxyapatite Toothpaste: The Benefits and Risks of the Fluoride-Free Alternative
As health concerns around fluoride in public drinking water continue to swirl, nano-hydroxyapatite toothpastes are becoming increasingly popular substitutes for fluoride toothpaste. Popular brands include Boka Davids and NOBS (No Bad Stuff), which are touted as fluoride-free alternatives that whiten teeth, repair enamel and prevent cavities. "As ingredient labels shift toward cleaner, fluoride-free formulas, one compound is taking center stage in modern oral care: nano-hydroxyapatite," Dr. Pia Lieb, DDS, cosmetic dentist and clinical assistant professor emerita at NYU College of Dentistry, explains. If you're thinking about replacing your fluoride toothpaste with a nano-hydroxyapatite alternative, this is what dental experts want you to know before you brush your teeth. What is nano-hydroxyapatite? "Nano-hydroxyapatite is a synthetic calcium phosphate compound that's used in some oral care products, including toothpastes," explains Dr. Ada Cooper, consumer advisor and spokesperson for the American Dental Association, says. "[It] has a structure that is similar to hydroxyapatite found in enamel, and nHAP gets incorporated into the tooth structure preferentially in demineralized areas." Nano-hydroxyapatite is also abbreviated as n-HA and n-HAp. Dr. Royce Lai of King Village Dental adds that this is technically a two-part question, since "hydroxyapatite has been around for decades and has been studied for at least 20 years." Newer and less studied, nano-hydroxyapatite is a version of hydroxyapatite with small, rod-shaped particles. "Hydroxyapatite is natural. It is a type of calcium that makes up bones and teeth," says Lai. "Nano-hydroxyapatite relates to the particle size. These are between 20 and 80 nanometers and are much smaller than the hydroxyapatite tubules that are a part of your teeth." According to Dr. Daniela Eversgerd, a cosmetic dentist and the founder of Allure Dental, nano-hydroxyapatite was developed by NASA in the 1970s for astronauts dealing with bone and enamel loss during long periods of space travel. Since the early 1990s, it has been approved for oral care products in Japan. Nano-hydroxyapatite toothpaste benefits "Nano-hydroxyapatite doesn't just protect your teeth -- it helps rebuild them," says Dr. Catrise Austin, a cosmetic dentist, author of Gum Health Made Simple and host of the Let's Talk Smiles podcast. She lists the following as potential nano-hydroxyapatite benefits: Enamel remineralization Tooth sensitivity relief Reduced bacterial adhesion Whitening and gloss enhancement "n-HA can actually fill microscopic cracks and help reverse or arrest early cavities," adds dentist Dr. Sandip Sachar. Austin cites a 2019 study that found a 10% hydroxyapatite toothpaste is equivalent or non-inferior to fluoride toothpaste for preventing and remineralizing dental cavities (or caries) in children. When it comes to teeth sensitivity, Lai cites a 2014 study concluding that 15% nano-hydroxyapatite helped sensitive teeth. "The particle size could get into space and work better than larger particles in micro-hydroxyapatite or fluoride," he explains. "The conclusion was that nano-hydroxyapatite could significantly reduce tooth sensitivity to hot and cold in two to four weeks of use." Referencing an 18-month 2023 clinical trial finding that a 10% n-HAp toothpaste protected adult teeth from new cavities as well as a standard 1,450-ppm fluoride paste, Dr. Christopher Tolmie, DDS, MBA, of PDS Health, states, "By patching enamel and calming swollen gums, nano-hydroxyapatite may cut off a hidden spark of chronic inflammation linked to heart disease and diabetes." Since nano-hydroxyapatite toothpastes are fluoride free, Dr. Yenile Y. Pinto, DDS, functional and biomimetic dentist and founder of Deering Dental, adds, "It's also been shown to reduce sensitivity and strengthen the enamel surface without the risk of fluorosis." Fluorosis occurs when you get too much fluoride as a child, causing white or brown spots on the teeth. The CDC reports that fluorosis typically doesn't affect tooth function and isn't painful. A 2020 systematic review of 32 studies concluded that "Nano-HA is a relatively novel material with outstanding physical, chemical, mechanical and biological properties that makes it suitable for multiple interventions. It outperformed most of the classic materials used in implantology and surgery, but it should be further investigated for bone engineering and caries prevention therapy." HengleinA 2023 comprehensive review found that, while more long-term studies are needed to establish the safety of regular use, "Nanohydroxyapatite is a promising revolutionary material in the prevention of early carious lesion mainly due to a greater source of free calcium." Ultimately, providing a 2021 review and 2022 scoping review, Cooper concludes, "Although there is some evidence that alternative ingredients, such as [nano] hydroxyapatite, prevent tooth decay by acting as a remineralizing or anti-cavity agent, the studies are preliminary. The only anti-cavity agent recognized by the Food and Drug Administration in its over-the-counter monograph is fluoride, a naturally occurring chemical." Cooper adds that all toothpastes with the ADA Seal of Acceptance contain fluoride. The administration specifically recommends brushing your teeth twice a day with fluoride toothpaste and regularly visiting your dentist. Nano-hydroxyapatite toothpaste risks "According to a [2021] narrative review from Odontology, the official journal of the Society of the Nippon Dental University, so far, there have been no reports of adverse dental or systemic effects of HAP-containing toothpastes because HAP has an excellent biocompatibility," states Cooper. According to Austin, the concern with nano-hydroxyapatite is that, because it's made of nanoparticles, some worry about how much might get absorbed into the body if regularly swallowed. "The European Commission's Scientific Committee raised concerns due to the lack of long-term safety data on ingestion, particularly in children," she says. This has led to temporary nano-hydroxyapatite restrictions (not a full-on banning) in Europe. The European Scientific Committee deems nHA safe in toothpaste up to 29.5% and up to 10% in mouthwash, per Tolmie. However, he states, "Regulators still bar it from breath-spray products to avoid lung exposure, so stick to pastes and rinses." Key concerns around nano-hydroxyapatite, according to Lieb, are: Potential ingestion and systemic absorption, especially in nano form Lack of long-term studies in humans on the cumulative effects Unknown impact of inhalation from aerosol products (not toothpaste) In terms of systemic absorption, Sachar specifies, "Because nano-hydroxyapatite particles are similar in composition to bone mineral, there has been some theoretical concern that if absorbed systemically, they could potentially contribute to unwanted calcifications in soft tissues (like blood vessels or kidneys)." However, she states that this is speculative and not supported by any current clinical nano-hydroxyapatite toothpaste only effective at 10%? "Most clinical formulations of nHA range from 5%-15%, with 10% emerging as the benchmark concentration in several Japanese and European studies," answers Lieb. "This concentration has demonstrated reliable enamel restoration while maintaining product stability and usability." However, she states that newer formulations are experimenting with lower concentrations and enhanced delivery systems (such as encapsulation or synergistic minerals), which may improve efficacy at reduced levels. "The effectiveness isn't just about percentage, it's also about particle quality and how it's delivered to the tooth surface," she explains. Tolmie adds, "Effective repair starts as low as 5% and plateaus around 10-15%. Several studies show that 5% n-HAp can mend enamel dings, divots and dents in the teeth, with benefits leveling off somewhere between 10% and 15%. One review even noted that 5% sometimes beats 10% because fewer particles clump, making them easier to slip into enamel defects; hence, most US brands sit comfortably in the 5-10% sweet spot." We also reached out to Dr. Foti Panagakos, who's a part of Boka's Oral Health Advisory Committee. "While there is a lot of discussion around nano-hydroxyapatite concentration and its effectiveness, what matters most is how it is formulated and the fact that the ingredient is backed by research," he explains. "This includes how nano-hydroxyapatite is stabilized, delivered and supported by other ingredients, which is why at Boka, years were spent working with oral health professionals to ensure our formula delivers on both safety and performance. Each tube of Boka toothpaste contains a precisely balanced concentration of nano-hydroxyapatite -- high enough to deliver measurable benefits and safe for daily use, with a formula that's gentle on dentin." Should people replace fluoride toothpaste with nano-hydroxyapatite? Eversgerd states that it all depends on each person's oral health needs. "Fluoride remains the gold standard for cavity prevention, supported by decades of large-scale, randomized controlled trials," she explains. "However, for patients seeking a fluoride alternative -- whether due to sensitivity, allergies, personal preferences or a desire for a biomimetic approach -- nano-hydroxyapatite provides a scientifically supported option." According to the Academy of Biomimetic Dentistry, a biomimetic approach is one in which damaged teeth are restored using materials mimicking natural teeth in function, strength and appearance. For high-risk patients, Eversgerd recommends fluoride, while she may recommend n-Ha to low-risk or fluoride-averse individuals. Austin seconds this, but adds that she also recommends fluoride toothpaste to children with poor brushing habits or communities with limited dental access. "nHA is a great option, but it's not a one-size-fits-all replacement for fluoride -- yet," Austin says. Lieb explains that nHA may also be a compelling alternative for patients with aesthetic concerns, such as whitening-induced sensitivity, and individuals in preventive care regimens post-restorative treatment. Pinto agrees that it depends on the person, stating, "For most of my patients, especially those with low to moderate cavity risk, nano-hydroxyapatite is an excellent option; gentler on the mouth, less drying and effective at rebuilding early damage. For people with high cavity risk, fluoride might still be the best choice, at least short term. For my high-risk patients, I often recommend a combo toothpaste that includes both ingredients when appropriate." Ultimately, if a patient isn't high risk and has health or safety concerns about fluoride, she thinks hydroxyapatite is a great option. When asked if there's a reason people should choose n-HAp over other anti-cavity toothpastes, Tolmie answers, "No, as long as patients are brushing their teeth with an anti-cavity toothpaste. There are differences in the way an n-HAp toothpaste and a fluoride toothpaste work to prevent decay, and some n-HAp toothpastes may feel smoother on the teeth. But anti-cavity toothpastes as a whole accomplish the same task. Do I wash a car with tap water or bottled water? We know that both of them get the job done." What's most important, according to Tolmie, is that patients ensure they're not swallowing toothpaste. What does the American Dental Association think? Cooper states that the ADA recommends brushing teeth twice daily for two minutes with fluoride toothpaste, as the naturally occurring mineral has been proven to remineralize weakened enamel and reverse early signs of tooth decay. "Additionally, the fluoride you take in from drinking water and other beverages continues to provide a topical benefit because it becomes part of your saliva, constantly bathing the teeth and helping to rebuild weakened tooth enamel," Cooper further explains. "The best scientific evidence has shown that adding fluoride to community water supplies is safe and effective. This is backed by decades of research and recognized by more than 100 health organizations." GoodboyDoes nano-hydroxyapatite toothpaste work? All of the dentists we consulted agree that nano-hydroxyapatite toothpaste works, but in the right context and with the right product. It's also not a miracle cure and should not replace your entire oral care routine, dentist's recommendations or regular appointments. Plus, Eversgerd adds that more long-term, large-scale trials are needed to fully validate whether it's equal to fluoride in preventing cavities. When asked if it's effective, Austin says, "Yes -- particularly for enamel remineralization and sensitivity. In my practice, I've seen patients who switched to nHA toothpaste experience noticeable improvements in comfort, plaque control and surface smoothness. But like any product, it works best when paired with consistent brushing, flossing and professional cleanings." Pinto agrees and has also seen the results firsthand. "It helps remineralize enamel, soothe sensitivity and support a healthier oral microbiome, especially when paired with a good routine (good home hygiene, healthy diet, hydration and nasal breathing)," she explains, noting that it's not a miracle cure, but does offer many benefits. On behalf of the ADA, Cooper echoes Eversgerd's earlier statement: "The use of nano-hydroxyapatite (nHAP) in over-the-counter products is growing, and some evidence shows that nHAP may contribute to remineralization, but the evidence is fairly new and often ambiguous, especially regarding clinical indications. " Do experts recommend nano-hydroxyapatite toothpaste? All of the experts we consulted do recommend nano-hydroxyapatite toothpaste, but only for certain patients. After all, according to Austin, "Nearly half of US adults over 30 have some form of gum disease, and you can't out-toothpaste a bad hygiene routine." Brushing your teeth regularly, flossing and regularly visiting your dentist are still essential, no matter what toothpaste you use. Though Lieb recommends nHA toothpaste for adult patients experiencing post-whitening sensitivity or early enamel erosion, low-caries risk individuals seeking natural alternatives and adults undergoing cosmetic dental work who want to protect their investment with gentle, remineralizing care, she doesn't recommend nano-hydroxyapatite for children with deciduous dentition. "In my professional opinion, fluoride remains the safest and most effective option for all patients under 14," says Lieb. "Its protective effect during the development of permanent dentition is unmatched, and its caries-prevention record is well established." Sachar states that she often recommends it for "patients seeking fluoride-free options, those with mild tooth sensitivity and for children at risk of swallowing fluoride toothpaste." However, she advises that patients with moderate to high cavity risk not fully abandon fluoride. Again, it's important to note that the "ADA recommends that adults brush their teeth twice daily with fluoride toothpaste for at least two minutes each time, or as directed by a licensed dentist," according to Cooper. This is because the proposed benefits of nHAP are fairly new and ambiguous. Getty Images The bottom line Though more research is needed, the dentists we consulted explained that nano-hydroxyapatite toothpaste can be an effective alternative to fluoride -- but only in the right context. The ADA doesn't recommend it. It's also not a miracle cure or a replacement for brushing regularly, flossing and professional dental appointments. If you're considering nano-hydroxyapatite toothpaste, consult your dentist first before making the switch. They know your teeth best and will be able to help you find the best toothpaste for your smile.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
'Anxious Generation' Author Jonathan Haidt Shares New Worries About Kids — and Why You Should Be Concerned (Exclusive)
His book has been a bestseller for more than a year and has prompted smartphone bans in schools across the country, but in a conversation with PEOPLE, Haidt says kids are still in danger When Jonathan Haidt's book The Anxious Generation debuted last year, it immediately became a bestseller — and a must-read for many parents navigating an era of pervasive smartphones and social media. Now, more than half of all states have passed laws banning or limiting phone use in schools — 17 states passed legislation just this year — and a new research poll finds that 74% of adults in the U.S. support classroom phone bans. Australia plans to restrict social media to those aged 16 and up starting in December, and several other European countries are also considering age restrictions. In a conversation with PEOPLE, Haidt, 61, a social psychologist and professor at New York University's Stern School of Business, says he's been encouraged by the rapid changes but warns that some changes are better than others. Haidt, who offers resources for parents at and on his Substack, weighs in on criticism of his book, the fears he has for kids, and the looming danger of Artificial Intelligence. PEOPLE: Are you surprised by the success of your book? HAIDT: I knew the book would be successful because whenever I mentioned I was writing it, parents said, "We need this tomorrow, can I see a draft?" But the the speed with which parents are organizing, the speed with which schools are going phone-free. I can't even keep track of it. PEOPLE: As you note, many schools and districts have opted to go phone-free, or ban phones in classrooms in the past year. What's working – and what isn't? HAIDT: The simplest fix, and it costs no money, is phone-free schools. That means when kids come in, they put their phone in a locked pouch, or a locker, and get it back at the end of the day. But many states and schools are doing something that's not very good: They banned phones only during instructional time. They do that because they're afraid of parents who say, 'I have to reach my student all the time.' But when class ends, kids lunge for their phones. And for the first 15 minutes of the next class, they're thinking about the drama going on. Phone bans during class time do nothing to help kids make friends. They do nothing to reduce the mental illness issue. It has to be bell-to-bell. I've never heard of a school that did it all day and regretted it or went back. PEOPLE: Critics of your book say you ignore the possible benefits of screen I recently found a horrifying statistic, which is that 40% of American 2-year-olds have their own iPad. A touchscreen device is not like television. Humans have always raised their children with stories. This is how culture is passed on. A TV screen is a reasonably good way of presenting stories. If your five-year-old watches a 90-minute movie on TV with an older sibling or with you, there's nothing wrong with that. The opposite is iPad time. The kid learns, "Might there be something more interesting if I swipe?" If this starts at age two, your kids lose the ability to pay attention to anything if it's boring for even a moment. By the time kids get to middle school, if they've been swiping and seeing micro stories that aren't really stories, a lot of damage has been done to their ability to pay attention. Us college professors all say the same thing: Kids can't read books anymore. Some of our students say they can't even watch a movie. It's too long. Our attention is being shattered. Let children's frontal cortex develop before you expose them to this. It's damaging an entire generation. And you should never give a child an iPhone as their first phone. You should work your way up. I stand by my rule, no smartphone before high school. PEOPLE: I'd like to talk age bans. Australia recently banned social media for those under Don't call it a ban. We don't say there's an age ban on driving. Just minimum age. There should be a minimum age. PEOPLE: But isn't there validity to the argument that if you keep kids away from social media completely, they're won't develop tools to learn to use it effectively? HAIDT: I hear this argument a lot, but I don't think it's valid psychologically. Our kids are going to be having sex and drinking alcohol, so it is valuable to have classes on that. We should be telling them about dangers. But have you ever heard anyone say, "We need to start them early because they need to know how to do this.' That's ridiculous. These devices, and especially these apps, were designed to hook your child. They were designed with full knowledge of brain development, dopamine circuits, motivation, insecurity. These are predatory programs that prey on children. PEOPLE: One of the biggest criticisms levied against your book is that it doesn't adequately acknowledge the way in which technology has allowed people, and particularly kids who might be isolated or marginalized, to connect and organize. HAIDT: That argument confuses the internet with social media. The internet solved that problem in the '90s. If you're a gay kid in rural Nebraska, life was really hard until the internet came along and suddenly you could get information everywhere. You could find organizations to help. I love the internet. Almost everybody loves the internet. Then in the 2000s, we get one application on the internet, which is a way of linking people together, giving them a newsfeed curated by an algorithm — and the algorithm is giving them whatever it can to keep them hooked. So who do you suppose is most harmed by this? Who do you suppose is most likely to be sextorted ? It's LGBTQ kids. Who do you think is most likely to say "This is harming my mental health?" It's LGBTQ kids. I often hear about the benefits [of social media]. I say, what benefits? Creativity? Have you worked with Gen Z? They can't pay attention. They're making little videos, but not much beyond that. Social media has very few benefits for children. For adults, yes, it's useful for business. I don't have anything to say to people over 18, but children have no need to connect with strangers. Children would be more connected if they put the phone down and got together with their friends. PEOPLE: Speaking of , we're in this moment where it was banned, the ban was rescinded and now we're waiting to hear about a . What are your thoughts about TikTok and what should happen? HAIDT: TikTok is the worst of them all. No one should be on TikTok. It damages your attention and exposes our children to garbage. We did a survey of Gen Z, these were in their late teens, early 20s, 50% of them said they wish TikTok had never been invented. They use it because they have to, but they see their life would be better if it didn't exist. I have very little hope Congress will do anything to protect children. So far, they have a perfect record of never protecting children ever on the Internet. But Australia and the UK are acting, and if their plans move ahead, and if the EU joins them and other countries, platforms are going to have to make it global because they don't want a different Instagram in each country. I'm hoping the rest of the world will fix this problem that America created. PEOPLE: What are your thoughts about how education cuts could affect kids and exacerbate what you're already seeing? HAIDT: Educational ability is declining since 2012, and cuts to funding are not going to help. But the biggest driver of the decline of education is the phones in the pockets and the Chromebooks on the desks. We spent billions of dollars putting a Chromebook or iPad on every desk. We thought this was an equity issue. But it turns out anyone with a computer on their desk can't focus. I teach college students, and MBA students at NYU. Three years ago, I had to go to a no-screens policy because even my graduate students cannot pay attention if they have a computer open. They're all multitasking. Adults can't pay attention, so how the hell do we expect 9-year-olds to pay attention when they have an iPad or a Chromebook on their desk? The best thing we can do for education is first, lock the phones away. Second, get devices off the desks. PEOPLE: At our school, kids have laptops with educational games. As a parent, there's a struggle between thinking more screen time isn't great, but games can be good for As soon as we introduce the technology, scores begin to drop. So we should start with the assumption that these things are not healthy, not helping unless they're proven to help. If you gamify math, the kid will be more engaged. So we think, this is good — but it's not. Suppose you gamify a third of your child's school day. What happens? Gamification is specifically targeted at giving kids a pulse of dopamine, which creates motivation to keep going. Okay, you think, that's good, they're motivated. But the brain adjusts, the dopamine circuits adjust and it now takes more dopamine to get up to normal. So the more you give them gamified educational technology, the harder it's going to be to have their attention to anything that's not on a screen. It's the same dilemma of parents who give their kid an iPad to shut them up. Yes, it will work in the short run, but now you always have to do it because they're not capable of sitting at a restaurant while you're eating. To be clear, there may be a role for some educational technology such as Khan Academy, but the one-to-one devices was the colossal mistake. You should try to avoid schools that will put an iPad or Chromebook on your child's desk. PEOPLE: That's most public schools!HAIDT: That's right. We have to change it. PEOPLE: How do you think AI will change the landscape for social media? HAIDT: In a sense, we've already had the first contact with AI, which was the algorithms. The algorithms made social media much more powerful. Early Facebook was not very addictive. It was just, you check out your friends' pages, they check out yours. But the algorithms, driven by AI, were super intelligent at hooking children with content, especially extreme content. We've already encountered AI and we lost. And our kids have been severely damaged by it. Our technology is becoming our master. This is all before the second wave of AI began with ChatGPT in late 2022, and what AI is already doing is showing that technology is going to become 100 times more powerful as our master. Those of us who feel like we're struggling with our phone addictions, it's going to get 10 times worse. Every app is going to get better and better at giving you what keeps you. Every app is going to get better and better at replacing real life. PEOPLE: What's your big fear with AI for kids? HAIDT: The most frightening thing to me is the AI companions. Our children already are socially deprived. They have poor social skills and they're lonely. This makes them even more likely as targets, as marketing targets for AI friends. But the more AI companions enter their lives, the less room and ability there will be for real friendships. PEOPLE: You talk about the value of giving kids independence. But for letting their kids walk to the store. How can parents foster independence in a world that's wary of it? HAIDT: The first thing is to look at the real world versus the virtual world. In the '90s we thought if our kids were on computers, they were safe, but if they went outside, they'd be abducted. It turns out both of those were not true. Crime rates have dropped tremendously since the '90s. Kidnapping is almost unheard of in the U.S. by strangers. The outside world is much safer than we realized. At the same time, if you let your kids on the Internet and social media, they're going to encounter pornography and strangers who want sex or money from them. We have to change our priorities. Our children have to learn to handle risk. They don't learn that online. Talking with a sex predator online doesn't toughen or benefit them. Going outside and getting lost and finding your way back is a powerful way to strengthen kids. We have to stop fearing the real world and be more afraid of the virtual world. You might be scared to send your eight-year-old six blocks to a grocery store, but what if he does it with his best friend? It's going to be a lot more fun. Everyone's going to be more secure. The more you do this with multiple families working together, the easier it is. Our goal isn't to snatch phones and iPads and screens. Our goal is to restore the fun, healthy, human childhood that most of us had. That's been taken from our kids. It is urgent that we restore it. Our kids are coming up broken. PEOPLE: The book emphasizes the importance of play, especially outdoor free play for kids mental health and development. What options do parents have if their kids are in public schools where the structure of the day, including play time, is limited? HAIDT: Two things that are easy and cost no money. Go to and download the kit for the Let Grow Experience. It gives kids more independence and fun and growth and it's free. So suppose your school has all the third graders do it. They go home, they decide something they can do by themselves. The best ones are where they go out of the house, to a neighbor's house to borrow a cup of sugar or go to a store. Imagine a town in which all third graders do that. Suddenly no one's afraid because, well, this is homework and the school told us to do it, and everyone else is doing it. Then what happens? Everyone sees eight year olds walking on the sidewalk. Nobody has seen that since 1997. The second program is called Play Club. Many parents are afraid to let their kids out, but they do trust the school playground. So a powerful thing to do is open the playground 30 minutes before class. You need an adult nearby, so that would be a small expense. But kids are desperate for free play and they get so little recess, so if you open the playground at 7:30, a lot of the kids are going to want to come and play soccer, play games, run around. It adds more free play to their day for very little money and it doesn't take away anything else from the school day. And it reduces truancy and lateness —since COVID, a lot of kids just aren't coming to school or they're coming late. PEOPLE: That's one of the things our school does, morning runs for the Wait, what do they do? They go on runs? PEOPLE: It's a track thing. On Monday mornings they can run around the track before Wait, they literally run around? That's it? That's what they do? That's an adult thing. We're so afraid to let go and let them play. They have to have free play. They're desperate for it. It's like if we raised our kids with no vitamin C whatsoever, and they all develop rickets, and then we say, "Well, we'll give you some lotion to put on the scars." No, just give them vitamin C. PEOPLE: Finally, one of your suggestions is connect with other parents with similar mindsets on phones/social media before your kids get to middle school. But you can't always choose who your kid hangs out with. Your phone-free kid may want to hang out with a kid who has a phone. What do you say to parents who feel like they're fighting a losing battle?HAIDT: Encourage your child to bring friends to the house, but there should be a rule that they put phones in a basket by the door. My children experience this. They go to a friend's house and the friend is on the phone all day long. What's the point? But your kid's not going to be damaged by occasionally seeing a smartphone or watching some TikTok videos. Half of American kids are online almost all the basically take themselves out of the game of life. When you give your child a phone, there's a 50% risk that your kid will be in that half. It's not so bad if he spends 10 minutes here and there on his friend's phone, that's not going to destroy his brain. But if he becomes one of the half that is addicted, it will probably cause permanent brain changes. The main thing is to shift from a mindset of threat to a mindset of discovery. Childhood should be about discovery, not fear. When kids are online, it becomes much more about fear. They're anxious. There's constant drama. But if we put them out in the world with other kids, they have fun. And we need to keep our eye on giving our kids fun. Read the original article on People Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
a day ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Dr. Jonathan Haidt Is Leading a Parenting Movement—Here's What He Wants You to Know About Technology and Kids' Mental Health
Parents Next Gen winner and author of 'The Anxious Generation,' Dr. Jonathan Haidt, says he's helping parents create stability for their children by reclaiming childhood. In an age dominated by screens, social media, and shrinking childhood freedoms, renowned psychologist and one of Parents' Next Gen winners, Jonathan Haidt, is leading a growing global movement to help parents reclaim their kids' mental health, independence, and joy. With the release of his bestselling 2024 book The Anxious Generation and his activism throughout 2025, Dr. Haidt has emerged as one of the most influential voices in parenting today. Dr. Haidt, a professor at NYU's Stern School of Business, has spent years researching the mental health crisis among young people. His conclusion? The dramatic rise in anxiety, depression, and social withdrawal is closely tied to the early and excessive use of smartphones and social media. Dr. Haidt is on a mission to help kids "break up" with their phones and reclaim mental health, which is why he's a Parents Next Gen winner. Not content with just influencing parents, Dr. Haidt turned to children themselves. He co-authored an interactive graphic novel called The Amazing Generation—a playful guide to help 5th to 8th graders 'break up with their phones' and rediscover the joys of real life, out in December 2025. Parents across the country have embraced it as a tool for opening conversations and creating family screen-time rules collaboratively. Dr. Haidt's influence reached even wider after recently appearing with Michelle Obama on her podcast. Together, they tackled one of today's thorniest parenting issues: how to set boundaries in a tech-driven world. 'Understand that your children are not your friends,' Obama emphasized, echoing Dr. Haidt's call for strong, deliberate parenting. The episode prompted an explosion of online dialogue and further fueled the movement of parents supporting each other in creating healthier home environments. Dr. Haidt spoke exclusively to Parents. What motivates you to do the work that you do? What motivates me? Gosh, so many different motivations. It started as just scientific curiosity about why the mental health stats suddenly got so horrible in 2012. What happened? Then it moved on to be, 'This is the biggest problem I have ever seen. This is actually changing an entire generation of human beings.' So now it's become really more of a Anxious Generation we are helping families and organizations around the world to make change. It's become so many different motivations, but it's been really thrilling because almost everyone wants to change this. How are you raising your children to be changemakers? I'm raising my kids, first, to be independent. I haven't really thought about making them changemakers per se. My daughter's 15, my son is 18, and we focused on just giving them more independence than we were ready for, like pushing ourselves to listen to Lenore Skenazy, who advocates for free-range we focused on just letting them out more in New York City, letting them navigate, letting them do errands. Now my kids, they go all over the city on city bikes. They're confident. So I've just been focusing on getting them to fly and then they'll find their way in the world. It seems like devices can be particularly threatening to boys' outlook and sense of self. How can we raise young boys to thrive and not just survive? Well, the most important thing for raising boys is that they have to have thousands or millions of real-world experiences, some of which involve risk and our kids, our boys, are having thousands or millions of video games. And it's not just the video games. It's the porn. It's the vaping. It's so many online activities. So, we've got to delay boys descending into video games and got to send them out into the world to play and have adventures, even though that's kind of scary for us. We have to overcome our own fears and give our boys the kind of childhoods that their fathers or grandfathers had, at least to the extent that we can. What would you say to parents who have an issue with delaying—they have a teen who is feeling excluded and wants social media? Let's say we're first on the smartphone. You can give your kid a non-smartphone. It's fine to have your kid be in contact with their friends. But just try to hold out on a smartphone because that's a gambling casino and pornography, and everything else in their pocket. On social media, it can be harder. If your kid has one other friend who isn't on social media, it's a lot easier than if every single friend is on social media. And finally, just educate yourself about social media. On my Substack we have posts giving quotations from employees at Snapchat and TikTok. And if you know what they know, you wouldn't let your kids on TikTok and Snapchat. So it's hard. My daughter is 15. I've not let her have any social media and I am imposing a cost on her in the short run. But in the long run, I think I have a happier daughter who is going to flourish and fly the nest. What would be your word of advice for parents? We all feel anxious about letting our kids out, letting them out of our control, letting them out of our view. But we have to do what's best for the kids, not what's best for our own feelings. And we have to overcome our anxiety if we want to give our kids a chance of overcoming their anxiety. We have to let them grow up, take small risks by themselves without us there, to discover that they can do it. It can be as simple as sending your kid into a grocery store. If you have a seven-year-old child who's been shopping with you 50 or 100 times, knows how to do it, you say, 'Here's some money, go get a quart of milk. I'll wait here in the parking lot,' or 'I'll wait at the front of the store.' Just start small, and you will be anxious that first time, but your kid is going to be jumping up and down with excitement that you gave them this chance to do something. We all need to feel useful, and our kids have to feel useful, so let them do useful things. That's how they'll grow up. One last question, because you gave so many hopeful ideas there. Do you have any specific advice for dads? So my advice to dads is that while moms have been sort of leading the movement to push back on smartphones, the other half of this is you have to give your kids an exciting, real-world childhood, which includes thrills and risk-taking and running around and wrestling. And this is where dads excel. Dad is the one who's going to pretend to be a predator stalking the child and pretending to be a big, scary monster. That sort of stuff is incredibly healthy for kids. Dad's the one who's going to be throwing them up in the air. That mix of fear and excitement with safety is the most powerful thing you can give your kids to overcome their own anxieties and become a force in the world. Dads are uniquely qualified, or I should just say on average, they enjoy it more, and they tend to gravitate to that role. So this is where I think dads are really really crucial. Read the original article on Parents Solve the daily Crossword

Economic Times
2 days ago
- Business
- Economic Times
Aswath Damodaran gives 4 reasons why companies should think twice before parking cash in Bitcoin
As Bitcoin prices flirt with record highs and corporate interest in the crypto asset gains momentum, valuation guru and NYU finance professor Aswath Damodaran has waded back into the Bitcoin debate with a sharp rebuttal to the growing chorus urging companies to stash their cash in crypto. ADVERTISEMENT In a July 18 blog post titled "To Bitcoin or not to Bitcoin? A Corporate Cash Question!", Damodaran lays out a clear stance: 'It is a terrible idea for most companies,' he said, adding, 'my reasoning has absolutely nothing to do with what I think of bitcoin as an investment and more to do with how little I trust corporate managers to time trades right.' Damodaran, renowned for his empirical approach to corporate finance and valuation, argues that Bitcoin fails to meet the core objectives of corporate cash holdings and instead introduces avoidable risks to both balance sheets and business narratives. At the heart of Damodaran's argument is a simple truth: corporate cash is meant to act as a financial shock absorber. Companies hold cash, he said, 'to meet unforeseen needs,' and to navigate crises or downturns when capital markets dry up. 'Replacing low-volatility cash with high-volatility bitcoin would undercut this objective, analogous to replacing your shock absorbers with pogo sticks,' Damodaran warned. Given Bitcoin's history of plunging during market sell-offs, he said, 'the value of bitcoin on a company's balance sheet will dip at exactly the times where you would need it most for stability.' Damodaran argued that allowing Bitcoin to play a prominent role on the balance sheet can distract from the company's core business story. 'It creates confusion about why a company with a solid business narrative from which it can derive value would seek to make money on a side game,' he said. Even worse, he said, Bitcoin's inherent volatility can obscure a company's performance: 'The ebbs and flows of bitcoin can affect financial statements, making it more difficult to connect operating results to story lines.' ADVERTISEMENT The professor made clear his skepticism about letting CEOs and CFOs dabble in timing markets. 'When companies are given the license to move their cash into bitcoin or other non-operating investments, you are trusting managers to get the timing right,' he noted. 'That trust is misplaced, since top managers… are for the most part terrible traders, often buying at the market highs and selling at lows.'Instead of letting corporate leaders gamble on Bitcoin, Damodaran argued that shareholders would be better off receiving that cash as dividends or buybacks to deploy it how they see fit. 'Put simply, if you believe that Bitcoin is the place to put your money, why would you trust corporate managers to do it for you?' Damodaran underscored a governance concern: 'Giving managers the permission to trade crypto tokens, bitcoin or other collectibles can open the door for self-dealing and worse.' He suggested that even if shareholders don't object, regulators might need to step in. 'The SEC (and other stock market regulators around the world) may need to become more explicit in their rules on what companies can (and cannot) do with cash,' he said. ADVERTISEMENT Though firmly against most firms converting cash to crypto, Damodaran outlined four carveouts where holding Bitcoin might be justifiable, albeit with strong governance and transparency:'The Bitcoin Savant': A company led by a CEO trusted for their trading acumen, like MicroStrategy's Michael Saylor, may earn shareholder buy-in to speculate with cash. ADVERTISEMENT 'The Bitcoin Business': For companies like Coinbase or PayPal, which handle Bitcoin as part of their operations, it can make sense to hold the asset as working capital.'The Bitcoin Escape Artist': Firms in countries with failed fiat currencies, such as Argentina, might rationally prefer Bitcoin over unstable local currencies.'The Bitcoin Meme': Companies like AMC or GameStop, whose stock prices are driven more by trading momentum than business fundamentals, may choose to amplify that volatility. ADVERTISEMENT Even in these cases, Damodaran called for 'shareholder buy-in,' 'transparency about Bitcoin transactions/holdings,' and 'clear mark-to-market rules.' Damodaran concluded by cautioning Bitcoin advocates who are eager to see institutional and corporate adoption. While more demand may boost prices in the short term, the longer-term costs could prove damaging. 'Adding these investors to the mix will put [Bitcoin's] volatility on steroids,' he warned, and 'may lead at least some of them to regret this push.' His final takeaway for companies considering a crypto pivot? No matter how bullish you are on Bitcoin, think twice before making it part of your corporate cash strategy. Also read | I don't promote stocks, seek out investors: Aswath Damodaran (Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of the Economic Times) (You can now subscribe to our ETMarkets WhatsApp channel)


Time of India
2 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Aswath Damodaran gives 4 reasons why companies should think twice before parking cash in Bitcoin
As Bitcoin prices flirt with record highs and corporate interest in the crypto asset gains momentum, valuation guru and NYU finance professor Aswath Damodaran has waded back into the Bitcoin debate with a sharp rebuttal to the growing chorus urging companies to stash their cash in crypto. In a July 18 blog post titled "To Bitcoin or not to Bitcoin? A Corporate Cash Question!", Damodaran lays out a clear stance: 'It is a terrible idea for most companies,' he said, adding, 'my reasoning has absolutely nothing to do with what I think of bitcoin as an investment and more to do with how little I trust corporate managers to time trades right.' Explore courses from Top Institutes in Select a Course Category Artificial Intelligence Degree Finance Leadership Public Policy others MCA Product Management PGDM Design Thinking Others Digital Marketing Data Science CXO Cybersecurity Management Project Management Data Science Technology Healthcare healthcare MBA Skills you'll gain: Duration: 7 Months S P Jain Institute of Management and Research CERT-SPJIMR Exec Cert Prog in AI for Biz India Starts on undefined Get Details Skills you'll gain: Duration: 7 Months S P Jain Institute of Management and Research CERT-SPJIMR Exec Cert Prog in AI for Biz India Starts on undefined Get Details Damodaran, renowned for his empirical approach to corporate finance and valuation, argues that Bitcoin fails to meet the core objectives of corporate cash holdings and instead introduces avoidable risks to both balance sheets and business narratives. 1. 'Bitcoin does not meet the cash motives' At the heart of Damodaran's argument is a simple truth: corporate cash is meant to act as a financial shock absorber. Companies hold cash, he said, 'to meet unforeseen needs,' and to navigate crises or downturns when capital markets dry up. 'Replacing low-volatility cash with high-volatility bitcoin would undercut this objective, analogous to replacing your shock absorbers with pogo sticks,' Damodaran warned. Given Bitcoin's history of plunging during market sell-offs, he said, 'the value of bitcoin on a company's balance sheet will dip at exactly the times where you would need it most for stability.' 2. 'Bitcoin can step on your operating business narrative' Damodaran argued that allowing Bitcoin to play a prominent role on the balance sheet can distract from the company's core business story. 'It creates confusion about why a company with a solid business narrative from which it can derive value would seek to make money on a side game,' he said. Even worse, he said, Bitcoin's inherent volatility can obscure a company's performance: 'The ebbs and flows of bitcoin can affect financial statements, making it more difficult to connect operating results to story lines.' 3. 'Managers as traders?' The professor made clear his skepticism about letting CEOs and CFOs dabble in timing markets. 'When companies are given the license to move their cash into bitcoin or other non-operating investments, you are trusting managers to get the timing right,' he noted. 'That trust is misplaced, since top managers… are for the most part terrible traders, often buying at the market highs and selling at lows.' Instead of letting corporate leaders gamble on Bitcoin, Damodaran argued that shareholders would be better off receiving that cash as dividends or buybacks to deploy it how they see fit. 'Put simply, if you believe that Bitcoin is the place to put your money, why would you trust corporate managers to do it for you?' 4. 'License for abuse' Damodaran underscored a governance concern: 'Giving managers the permission to trade crypto tokens, bitcoin or other collectibles can open the door for self-dealing and worse.' He suggested that even if shareholders don't object, regulators might need to step in. 'The SEC (and other stock market regulators around the world) may need to become more explicit in their rules on what companies can (and cannot) do with cash,' he said. The carveouts: When Bitcoin might make sense Though firmly against most firms converting cash to crypto, Damodaran outlined four carveouts where holding Bitcoin might be justifiable, albeit with strong governance and transparency: 'The Bitcoin Savant': A company led by a CEO trusted for their trading acumen, like MicroStrategy's Michael Saylor, may earn shareholder buy-in to speculate with cash. 'The Bitcoin Business': For companies like Coinbase or PayPal, which handle Bitcoin as part of their operations, it can make sense to hold the asset as working capital. 'The Bitcoin Escape Artist': Firms in countries with failed fiat currencies, such as Argentina, might rationally prefer Bitcoin over unstable local currencies. 'The Bitcoin Meme': Companies like AMC or GameStop, whose stock prices are driven more by trading momentum than business fundamentals, may choose to amplify that volatility. Even in these cases, Damodaran called for 'shareholder buy-in,' 'transparency about Bitcoin transactions/holdings,' and 'clear mark-to-market rules.' Cui Bono? Damodaran's final word Damodaran concluded by cautioning Bitcoin advocates who are eager to see institutional and corporate adoption. While more demand may boost prices in the short term, the longer-term costs could prove damaging. 'Adding these investors to the mix will put [Bitcoin's] volatility on steroids,' he warned, and 'may lead at least some of them to regret this push.' His final takeaway for companies considering a crypto pivot? No matter how bullish you are on Bitcoin, think twice before making it part of your corporate cash strategy. Also read | I don't promote stocks, seek out investors: Aswath Damodaran ETMarkets WhatsApp channel )