This new research provides concrete evidence of what many have long suspected: People lose track of time in the bathroom when they have their phones, said Dr. Trisha Pasricha, the study’s senior author, a gastroenterologist at Massachusetts General Hospital and an instructor at Harvard Medical School.

All this scrolling is messing with people’s health.

“The entire business model of these social media apps is to distract us, make us lose track of time and addict us to the algorithm,” Pasricha said. “We’re just now understanding how much smartphones impact lots of other factors in our lives.”

  • y0kai [he/him]@anarchist.nexus
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    not to defend smart phones, but I used to read books on the toilet before phones became popular and never had a problem. What’s different about a phone?

    • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Books weren’t designed to be addictive and make you lose track of time.

      FTA:

      About 37% of smartphone users spend over five minutes on the toilet compared with 7% of non-smartphone users.

      • y0kai [he/him]@anarchist.nexus
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Books weren’t designed to be addictive and make you lose track of time.

        Maybe not all books, but a good book is, to me, quite addictive and causes me to lose track of time.

        After reading the article though, I’m realizing I’m not a typical bathroom user. I’ve always had digestive issues unrelated to books and cell phones, so my loo time is much longer than average, it seems. I must be one of those 7%.

        • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          I know this is semantics, but I would say a good book is engaging rather than addicting. Many phone apps are specifically designed with addiction in mind, targeting the pleasure centers of your brain to keep you playing/scrolling/etc. But I also acknowledge that this is similar to style guides on keeping the reader interested.

          I would describe it as a difference in degree.

          • y0kai [he/him]@anarchist.nexus
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            That’s fair. The more “engaging” something is, the more its effects may mirror that of something “addicting”. I’m also thinking about how engagement is a factor of addictive marketing.

            The end result though, for me at least, is the same. If I’m engaged in my book, or addicted to my phone, I’m still sitting motionless, staring at a thing, and reading. The difference I suppose is on how hard it is to look away.

            I’m glad this is the only social media I really use!

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      I always used to read the paper (remember those?) or a magazine on the bog. I don’t think I’m spending more time there since I’ve had a brainrotting device.

  • Øπ3ŕ@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Oh, the article is talking about workplace hemorrhoids. You know. That one person (or more) that’ll keep score on worker bee bio-breaks and tattle for scraps? Yeah. Those class-traitors are a real problem.