Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 259 posts

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#231

Post by cbd1984 »

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #182
EC1 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A different claim, same bullshit "science". " According to the CDC one in five Americans have ADHD, anxiety, or depression. Impacting productivity, focus, and mood. We can help, with ThinkSuite!" Chemicals can't even help me, how would ThinkSuite? If I could cure this crap with a site, I would, but we can't.

> Chemicals can't even help me, how would ThinkSuite? That doesn't follow. Drugs aren't automatically better or more effective than non-drug therapies.

But known, proven therapies are better than apps with no peer review.

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#232

Post by estefan »

freehunter wrote: post #136
jordanlev wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was a kid, I remember a talk radio show my family listened to that was one of those consumer watchdog / product review shows. One of the advertisements that you head a lot back then was for purchasing a star (like, getting your name registered somewhere and when a new star was discovered by astronomers it would be named after you?)... It was obviously a scam and all you'd get is a bogus certificate in the mail…

My grandmother has a "star named after her". She knows it's fake but she says she appreciates the thought behind it. Like wearing costume jewelry, you know that green hunk of plastic the size of a walnut isn't a real emerald but that doesn't stop people from wearing them.

I'll name a grain of sand after her too if you ping me a $100... :-D

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#233

Post by corin_ »

FireBeyond wrote: post #95
lettergram wrote: post #10

I just wanted to share my thoughts, which are simply: "Thank God!" I've been working on a startup: http://synaptitude.me/ (demo is old) Essentially, we can do some of what Luminosity claims (and have independent studies to prove it). Every time someone goes: "Oh it's just like Lumosity" I have to go through and explain the difference. My wife has a degree in neuroscience and I minored in BioE, and we both just HATE L…

Wait... you offer a subscription as a "treatment plan" for "ADHD, anxiety and depression"?? You might seriously want to reconsider the wording thereof. Even metaphorically, that sounds dangerously close to something the FDA might object to.

What I'm about to write is about the extent of my knowledge on the subject, so don't assume I know more that justifies my thinking: CBT (cognitive behavioral therapy) has has been shown it can be effective even if done with computer software, and in the UK is something the NHS either offers or pushes people towards (I think, if I remember correctly, using a private company who provides the service online but an NHS referall gives you a code to access it for free). Based on this, I would assume it's perfectly possible to offer a "treatment plan" for "ADHD, anxiety and depression", but I have no idea what regulatory hoops, if any, would need to be cleared. (I also don't know if your parent comment's company does offer CBT, or if not whether what they offer does work.)

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#234

Post by cLeEOGPw »

ryanferg wrote: post #100
bberrry wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was under the impression that Dual-n-Back[0] had real benefits. Is that not the case? [0] http://brainworkshop.sourceforge.net/

So it definitely transfers 'near'. You'll get better at the dual-n-back test. And possibly other visio-spatial working memory tests. But the question of far transfer- will it make you smarter- is probably not. Here is a link to a 2015 meta-analysis that looks at the question of working memory training (including dual-n-backs) transferring to other working memory tasks: https://www.dropbox.com/s/084fvteji1tyz8t/2015-s…

That's exactly, if my understanding of changes happening to brain while performing any activity in general is correct, what should happen - you get better at doing that activity. So, unless your work contains some kind of dual-n-back activity, you are not getting better at it. You get better at work by doing work, not by playing brain game.

I am really happy they got fined for this deception.

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#236

Post by Nutmog »

sevensor wrote: post #50
cordite wrote: post #21

NPR plays ads on the radio about Lumosity and brain training, nearly every day for the last year here. It seemed ED to be more of a "We will give you a chance to raise an arbitrary number over time if you pay us" and heavy marketing ploy. Seems like if cow clicker got viral and took peoples money.

They play those ads on NPR here too. They always make me think about what my dad (a psychologist) told me about IQ tests: all IQ actually measures is how well you do on IQ tests. It's entirely possible to study for the test and improve your IQ. Of course, doing this doesn't make you any better at anything useful, but it might make you eligible for Mensa. (My dad is very skeptical when it comes to psychometrics.)

That's a valid criticism if the test taker is trying to cheat, but if its yourself trying to find out your own IQ and you didn't train for it, it's still a useful predictor of academic success.

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#237

Post by pbhjpbhj »

cbd1984 wrote: post #231
PhasmaFelis wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Chemicals can't even help me, how would ThinkSuite? That doesn't follow. Drugs aren't automatically better or more effective than non-drug therapies.

But known, proven therapies are better than apps with no peer review.

That's not a factual claim. Known, proven therapies are known and proven, period. They aren't automatically better than an untested therapy, that would mean no new therapy could ever be an improvement.

Your statement is illogical.

FWIW I'm making no claim here as to the efficacy of either proven or unreviewed therapies just calling out unsound reasoning.

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#238

Post by basseq »

geoelectric wrote: post #147
basseq wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is awesome. My wife is a PhD in Applied Cognition with a dissertation on working memory and attention (including improvement in games and activities). She similarly hates Lumosity. (If you ever want an independent review or consultation of your science, I'll put you in touch.)

Out of curiosity, aside from the normal advice re: sleep, diet, exercise, etc., is there an everyday/attainable activity she doesn't hate for working memory and attention?

It comes down to five things (in general; not specific to WM & attention, but inclusive of):

1. Diet - Eat reasonably well.

2. Physical Exercise - Can be as simple as walking around the neighborhood; just stay active.

3. Stress Relief - Stress wears you down; get zen when you can.

4. Socialization - Just being around other people helps you stay sharp.

5. Brain Exercise - Different and varied challenges. Crosswords, puzzles, board games, etc. all help. Something that's complex and engages your long-term planning engine is great: she likes strategy games (like Starcraft or Age of Empires). Basically, find ways to put your brain to work. And like physical exercise, variance is key.

The problem with Lumosity and #5 is that any "improvement" you see isn't improvement in mental acuity, but efficiencies in repetition.

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#239

Post by transfire »

drglitch wrote: post #8

About a year and a half ago i got dragged into the hype (via family subscription) - and actually enjoyed the games for about 3 days. after that, the fact that they had a total of about 5 variations, with totally predictable ordering, got really boring and i went back to 2048. You don't have to be a neuroscientist to see how this kind of predictable repetitive activity will make you "get better at it" every time you p…

> Cancelling took a couple of emails and threat to dispute the CC charge.

Now that is a reason I can understand. But fining them on the basis of questionable claims -- almost every product in the world does that.

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#240

Post by DanBC »

corin_ wrote: post #233
FireBeyond wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait... you offer a subscription as a "treatment plan" for "ADHD, anxiety and depression"?? You might seriously want to reconsider the wording thereof. Even metaphorically, that sounds dangerously close to something the FDA might object to.

What I'm about to write is about the extent of my knowledge on the subject, so don't assume I know more that justifies my thinking: CBT (cognitive behavioral therapy) has has been shown it can be effective even if done with computer software, and in the UK is something the NHS either offers or pushes people towards (I think, if I remember correctly, using a private company who provides the service online but an NHS r…

The different computer guided CBT programmes are tested for efficacy before they get recommended for use.

Here's some (quite old now) guidance: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta97

I use that url to give some idea what process is used to assess and recommend computer based CBT.

Post reply on HN