Danny its all nonsense.
I just got 37/110 too, and I could not care less.
These people are a joke.
They had better not contact me for their annual test or something unpleasant may be said.Do not worry.
Someone look at this for me please
- Thread starter danny
- Start date
I just got 37/110 too, and I could not care less.
These people are a joke.
They had better not contact me for their annual test or something unpleasant may be said.Do not worry.
Hey,
I'm not an expert in neurodegeneration, but I do have both a BSc and a PhD in Neuroscience, and I can reassure anyone doing these tests to NOT WORRY if you get a low score! Everyone has different abilities regarding these tests, so a low score may just be what is NORMAL for you. If you took the test one year, then scored half as well a year later, then I might start to be concerned. But taking it once and getting a low score tells you very little really. As does taking it once and getting a high score, as I did. Apparently, I'm not at risk of Alzheimer's. Well, my family history says otherwise, unfortunately!! (yeah - the irony of a neuroscientist with familial neurodegeneration in the family isn't lost on me
)
Also, as others have said, people who can operate the mouse quickly will do MUCH better on these tests than people who can't, or who use a touchpad.
If you do get a low score and are still worried, then consider seeing your GP for a proper memory test. I'll put money on it that your GP will be able to put your mind at rest.
I'm not an expert in neurodegeneration, but I do have both a BSc and a PhD in Neuroscience, and I can reassure anyone doing these tests to NOT WORRY if you get a low score! Everyone has different abilities regarding these tests, so a low score may just be what is NORMAL for you. If you took the test one year, then scored half as well a year later, then I might start to be concerned. But taking it once and getting a low score tells you very little really. As does taking it once and getting a high score, as I did. Apparently, I'm not at risk of Alzheimer's. Well, my family history says otherwise, unfortunately!! (yeah - the irony of a neuroscientist with familial neurodegeneration in the family isn't lost on me
)Also, as others have said, people who can operate the mouse quickly will do MUCH better on these tests than people who can't, or who use a touchpad.
If you do get a low score and are still worried, then consider seeing your GP for a proper memory test. I'll put money on it that your GP will be able to put your mind at rest.
My score was 43...so I put that down to the fact that I have Dyslexia, an underactive thyroid, ADHD and M.E.
I have always had poor cognitive functioning...so that test didn't really tell me anything I didn't know already.
I have always had poor cognitive functioning...so that test didn't really tell me anything I didn't know already.
Age 57. Scored 65.
Hi,
I'm male, 57, using computer's trackpad uninterrupted at home, but I use computers extensively. Scored 65, apparently above average for age. My Mum has advanced A, now age 93, and of course I'm concerned about my future.
But...
'am going to attribute my score to all of that plus a bit of stress. However,I am going to seriously take a look at my lifestyle because it is pretty unhealthy at the moment!!!! I am also going to stay away from this type of research for a while.'
...really concerns me. if I were scoring lowly, and even at my score, I will continue to do everything readily available to chart and track my position, and to learn what I can do to give myself every chance of improvement. It is such oft quoted, and (forgive me for being a little harsh) excuses when faced with valuable information that make me wonder whether A is the result of an attitude.
My mum was always scatterbrained, though considered a practical and normally smart woman. When my dad died, she sat down and watched the world go by, using the excuse of 'it's time I had some relaxation'.
We know that if we don't exercise physically, that our bodies degrade. I wonder why it would be any different for our brain, given that this is also a physical item.
Are most here for reassurance and what seems to be called 'support' - or is this a place for real discovery of answers, and education that might improve our chances?
Hi,
I'm male, 57, using computer's trackpad uninterrupted at home, but I use computers extensively. Scored 65, apparently above average for age. My Mum has advanced A, now age 93, and of course I'm concerned about my future.
But...
'am going to attribute my score to all of that plus a bit of stress. However,I am going to seriously take a look at my lifestyle because it is pretty unhealthy at the moment!!!! I am also going to stay away from this type of research for a while.'
...really concerns me. if I were scoring lowly, and even at my score, I will continue to do everything readily available to chart and track my position, and to learn what I can do to give myself every chance of improvement. It is such oft quoted, and (forgive me for being a little harsh) excuses when faced with valuable information that make me wonder whether A is the result of an attitude.
My mum was always scatterbrained, though considered a practical and normally smart woman. When my dad died, she sat down and watched the world go by, using the excuse of 'it's time I had some relaxation'.
We know that if we don't exercise physically, that our bodies degrade. I wonder why it would be any different for our brain, given that this is also a physical item.
Are most here for reassurance and what seems to be called 'support' - or is this a place for real discovery of answers, and education that might improve our chances?
Disagree
Please excuse my further comment on another post:
' I am sure you cannot train your brain to avoid Alzheimers or Dementia and would put this stuff on a par with cancer patients being told they can sort it out with crank diets. '
Absolutely disagree.
As I understand it, cancer is the incorrect replication (mutation) of cells, and whilst diet must have a huge effect on the body's physical state, here we're talking about how to directly affect the health of the brain organ by making it work. Exercise.
If 'training the brain' has no effect on A or D, that will mean that those who never use their brains will have on average the same level of function as those who do - the fact of education and schools scotches that idea.
However, I don't understand (because I haven't considered or researched it) how the test in question produces more than a numerical result on a combination of a person's abilities at a certain point in time and in certain circumstances. As such, I would think its value is purely comparative - in other words as a measure of gain/loss over a certain period - and would therefore hold value for us only on the second taking of the test at some future date. As in, if I score 20 less points in a year's time, should I attribute the score loss to the onset of A or D, or to my then two broken arms?
Tests are interesting, but of more value may be what they are testing - and how the results can be used to provide information of value to our shared situation or concerns.
However...
We're surely talking here about how to measure our current brain state of health. Is there some test that will do this in some meaningful way that relates purely to our brains and in regard to degeneration - and not to other factors such as the limb breakages foretold by my psychic in his post-seance communication to me subsequent to my cheque bouncing.
Please excuse my further comment on another post:
' I am sure you cannot train your brain to avoid Alzheimers or Dementia and would put this stuff on a par with cancer patients being told they can sort it out with crank diets. '
Absolutely disagree.
As I understand it, cancer is the incorrect replication (mutation) of cells, and whilst diet must have a huge effect on the body's physical state, here we're talking about how to directly affect the health of the brain organ by making it work. Exercise.
If 'training the brain' has no effect on A or D, that will mean that those who never use their brains will have on average the same level of function as those who do - the fact of education and schools scotches that idea.
However, I don't understand (because I haven't considered or researched it) how the test in question produces more than a numerical result on a combination of a person's abilities at a certain point in time and in certain circumstances. As such, I would think its value is purely comparative - in other words as a measure of gain/loss over a certain period - and would therefore hold value for us only on the second taking of the test at some future date. As in, if I score 20 less points in a year's time, should I attribute the score loss to the onset of A or D, or to my then two broken arms?
Tests are interesting, but of more value may be what they are testing - and how the results can be used to provide information of value to our shared situation or concerns.
However...
We're surely talking here about how to measure our current brain state of health. Is there some test that will do this in some meaningful way that relates purely to our brains and in regard to degeneration - and not to other factors such as the limb breakages foretold by my psychic in his post-seance communication to me subsequent to my cheque bouncing.
And I absolutely disagree with you, if you really feel that "exercising" the brain can stave off dementia.
