Questões de Inglês do ENEM

Examine a tira.

A tira evidencia que

Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão.

Digitizing Healthcare: How Technology Is Improving Medical Care 

                                                                                                                    by Tricia Hussung

A wide variety of digital innovations are revolutionizing healthcare — and technology in medicine is here to stay. How are these changes impacting the delivery of care, and what skills are needed to succeed in this bold new world? It’s no secret that, as a society, technology has become a part of our everyday lives. In fact, almost 60 percent of American adults own a smartphone, and 42 percent of that same population (American adults) owns a tablet computer. Though technology has been permeating almost every aspect of our lives, until recent years the medical field has been largely unaffected by the rapid pace of technological innovation that is characteristic of the Digital Age. However, this is changing.

This ubiquity of technology is beginning to extend into the medical field. Advances in medical technology are changing medicine by giving physicians more information — as well as better, more specific data. 

New Medical Technology: Innovations

So just what are these new advances in technology? The following are just a few of the many innovations that have occurred in medical technology over the past year alone. Some of these leading technologies are still being developed, while others are slowly being introduced into mainstream medical practice.

• The modern hospital experience: Several medical technology companies are looking to update hospital stays to keep pace with the needs of modern patients. To more easily integrate changing technology, these new rooms would feature interchangeable parts that are easily adapted to the specific situation of a patient. The seamless design would have a minimal impact on facility operations while increasing patient comfort and connectivity.
• Surgery simulation: The Roswell Park Cancer Institute has partnered with the University of Buffalo’s School of Engineering and Applied Sciences to create the Robotic Surgery Simulator (RoSS). This innovation allows real-world views of surgeries while eliminating the need for a live environment to train aspiring surgeons. It gives these medical professionals the space to experiment in a simulated environment, rather than risking making mistakes on real patients.
• Cloud-based data and software: Applications like referralMD help healthcare providers create referrals digitally and reach millions of patients and providers who are in search of treatment options. The current, paper method of referrals causes almost 50 percent of patient referrals to never actually result in doctor’s visits. This present gap in care “causes patients to lose treatment (and) the healthcare facility to lose money.” Software innovations like these are part of the relatively new field of health informatics, which aims to collect, store, analyze and present health data in a digital format. 

With widespread innovations like these affecting patient care practices, it is not surprising that the way medical records and information are stored and shared is changing as well. These technological advancements are costeffective and improve the ability of medical professionals to diagnose and treat health issues of all kinds. Two of the main changes that are revolutionizing the future of healthcare are electronic medical records and health information exchange. Future won´t be the same for medical field. Are you ready for what is coming?

Disponível em:<https://online.king.edu/news/digitizing-healthcare-how-technology-is-improving-medical-care/> . Acesso em: 09 maio 2018. (Adaptado).

Thematic Discussion on Nuclear Weapons

    The United States remains committed to the goal of nuclear disarmament, and to seeking to create conditions toward that end. And history makes clear that important progress can be made when security conditions allow. The easing of Cold War rivalries allowed the United States and Russia to make significant steps toward the shared dream of eventual nuclear disarmament after decades in which such movement was impossible. Disarmament success is predicated on patience, attention to detail, effective verification, and patient attention to the challenges of effecting the changes in the security environment that are necessary for progress. This last element is critical, considering the crucial role that nuclear deterrence plays in preserving and protecting international peace and security, and the potentially catastrophic consequences were deterrence’s restraining effect to be removed while it still remains necessary.

    The “Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons” violates all these tenets. Its obligations are longstanding worded, imprecise, vaguely worded and sometimes internally contradictory, while offering only an empty shell for verification. Worse, it is fundamentally at odds with today’s security challenges. It is not simply an unproductive instrument; it is likely to be a counterproductive one, with the potential to cause lasting harm to the nonproliferation regime and to the cause of disarmament alike.

    The ban treaty is based on the premise that addressing crucial international security issues is not necessary for disarmament. Ban treaty proponents would have us believe that we can do away with nuclear deterrence despite - to cite just one example - the danger posed by North Korea’s relentless pursuit of nuclear weapons and associated delivery systems, which stand in flagrant violation of international law.

     Furthermore, the Treaty does not contain a credible verification mechanism, demurring on the issue almost entirely. It does run counter to decades of progress in nonproliferation verification by endorsing the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement as its standard for safeguarding nuclear material.

    Finally, the ban treaty has the potential to do real damage to the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in other ways. It exacerbates political tensions on disarmament, dividing states into overly-simplified camps of “nuclear weapons supporters” and “nuclear weapons banners,” rather than recognizing shared interests – especially on the challenges involved in creating the conditions that would make possible further disarmament progress. Reinforcing this false dichotomy and worsening the world’s polarization on disarmament will make further progress within the institutions that have been vehicles for success, such as the NPT review process, significantly more difficult.

    Inspired by the NPT Preamble’s acknowledgement of the need to ease international tension and strengthen trust between States in order to facilitate disarmament, the United States stands ready to work with others on effective measures to create improved conditions for nuclear disarmament. This work is focused on overcoming technical challenges to make substantive progress when the security conditions improve. We also continue our longstanding work to support and strengthen the global nonproliferation regime against the many challenges it faces today, for who could deny that there can be no way to envision today’s nuclear weapons possessors ever putting down such tools without rock-solid assurances that no one else will take them up?

    There are no shortcuts to nuclear disarmament. Unrealistic attempts to skip to the finish line have the potential to undermine the institutions and standards we have worked so hard to build. Our collective experience demonstrates that inclusiveness and the search for consensus can lead to progress, while polarization is a recipe for failure. We urge all states to work with us in searching for common solutions to collective problems, pursuing a more secure world.

Thematic Discussion on Nuclear Weapons

    The United States remains committed to the goal of nuclear disarmament, and to seeking to create conditions toward that end. And history makes clear that important progress can be made when security conditions allow. The easing of Cold War rivalries allowed the United States and Russia to make significant steps toward the shared dream of eventual nuclear disarmament after decades in which such movement was impossible. Disarmament success is predicated on patience, attention to detail, effective verification, and patient attention to the challenges of effecting the changes in the security environment that are necessary for progress. This last element is critical, considering the crucial role that nuclear deterrence plays in preserving and protecting international peace and security, and the potentially catastrophic consequences were deterrence’s restraining effect to be removed while it still remains necessary.

    The “Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons” violates all these tenets. Its obligations are longstanding worded, imprecise, vaguely worded and sometimes internally contradictory, while offering only an empty shell for verification. Worse, it is fundamentally at odds with today’s security challenges. It is not simply an unproductive instrument; it is likely to be a counterproductive one, with the potential to cause lasting harm to the nonproliferation regime and to the cause of disarmament alike.

    The ban treaty is based on the premise that addressing crucial international security issues is not necessary for disarmament. Ban treaty proponents would have us believe that we can do away with nuclear deterrence despite - to cite just one example - the danger posed by North Korea’s relentless pursuit of nuclear weapons and associated delivery systems, which stand in flagrant violation of international law.

     Furthermore, the Treaty does not contain a credible verification mechanism, demurring on the issue almost entirely. It does run counter to decades of progress in nonproliferation verification by endorsing the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement as its standard for safeguarding nuclear material.

    Finally, the ban treaty has the potential to do real damage to the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in other ways. It exacerbates political tensions on disarmament, dividing states into overly-simplified camps of “nuclear weapons supporters” and “nuclear weapons banners,” rather than recognizing shared interests – especially on the challenges involved in creating the conditions that would make possible further disarmament progress. Reinforcing this false dichotomy and worsening the world’s polarization on disarmament will make further progress within the institutions that have been vehicles for success, such as the NPT review process, significantly more difficult.

    Inspired by the NPT Preamble’s acknowledgement of the need to ease international tension and strengthen trust between States in order to facilitate disarmament, the United States stands ready to work with others on effective measures to create improved conditions for nuclear disarmament. This work is focused on overcoming technical challenges to make substantive progress when the security conditions improve. We also continue our longstanding work to support and strengthen the global nonproliferation regime against the many challenges it faces today, for who could deny that there can be no way to envision today’s nuclear weapons possessors ever putting down such tools without rock-solid assurances that no one else will take them up?

    There are no shortcuts to nuclear disarmament. Unrealistic attempts to skip to the finish line have the potential to undermine the institutions and standards we have worked so hard to build. Our collective experience demonstrates that inclusiveness and the search for consensus can lead to progress, while polarization is a recipe for failure. We urge all states to work with us in searching for common solutions to collective problems, pursuing a more secure world.

Thematic Discussion on Nuclear Weapons

    The United States remains committed to the goal of nuclear disarmament, and to seeking to create conditions toward that end. And history makes clear that important progress can be made when security conditions allow. The easing of Cold War rivalries allowed the United States and Russia to make significant steps toward the shared dream of eventual nuclear disarmament after decades in which such movement was impossible. Disarmament success is predicated on patience, attention to detail, effective verification, and patient attention to the challenges of effecting the changes in the security environment that are necessary for progress. This last element is critical, considering the crucial role that nuclear deterrence plays in preserving and protecting international peace and security, and the potentially catastrophic consequences were deterrence’s restraining effect to be removed while it still remains necessary.

    The “Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons” violates all these tenets. Its obligations are longstanding worded, imprecise, vaguely worded and sometimes internally contradictory, while offering only an empty shell for verification. Worse, it is fundamentally at odds with today’s security challenges. It is not simply an unproductive instrument; it is likely to be a counterproductive one, with the potential to cause lasting harm to the nonproliferation regime and to the cause of disarmament alike.

    The ban treaty is based on the premise that addressing crucial international security issues is not necessary for disarmament. Ban treaty proponents would have us believe that we can do away with nuclear deterrence despite - to cite just one example - the danger posed by North Korea’s relentless pursuit of nuclear weapons and associated delivery systems, which stand in flagrant violation of international law.

     Furthermore, the Treaty does not contain a credible verification mechanism, demurring on the issue almost entirely. It does run counter to decades of progress in nonproliferation verification by endorsing the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement as its standard for safeguarding nuclear material.

    Finally, the ban treaty has the potential to do real damage to the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in other ways. It exacerbates political tensions on disarmament, dividing states into overly-simplified camps of “nuclear weapons supporters” and “nuclear weapons banners,” rather than recognizing shared interests – especially on the challenges involved in creating the conditions that would make possible further disarmament progress. Reinforcing this false dichotomy and worsening the world’s polarization on disarmament will make further progress within the institutions that have been vehicles for success, such as the NPT review process, significantly more difficult.

    Inspired by the NPT Preamble’s acknowledgement of the need to ease international tension and strengthen trust between States in order to facilitate disarmament, the United States stands ready to work with others on effective measures to create improved conditions for nuclear disarmament. This work is focused on overcoming technical challenges to make substantive progress when the security conditions improve. We also continue our longstanding work to support and strengthen the global nonproliferation regime against the many challenges it faces today, for who could deny that there can be no way to envision today’s nuclear weapons possessors ever putting down such tools without rock-solid assurances that no one else will take them up?

    There are no shortcuts to nuclear disarmament. Unrealistic attempts to skip to the finish line have the potential to undermine the institutions and standards we have worked so hard to build. Our collective experience demonstrates that inclusiveness and the search for consensus can lead to progress, while polarization is a recipe for failure. We urge all states to work with us in searching for common solutions to collective problems, pursuing a more secure world.

 A Minor Bird

I have wished a bird would fly away,

And not sing by my house all day;

Have clapped my hands at him from the door

When it seemed as if I could bear no more.

The fault must partly have been in me.

The bird was not to blame for his key.

And of course there must be something wrong

In wanting to silence any song.

FROST. R. West .running Brook Now Yolk Horny Hod and Company, 1928

No poema de Robert Frost, as palavras “fault" e "blame" revelam por parte do eu lírico uma

    Finally, Aisha finished with her customer and asked what colour Ifemelu wanted for her hair attachments.

    “Colour four.*

    “Not good colour," Aisha said promptly.

    “That's what I use."

    “It look dirty. You don't want colour one?"

    “Colour one is too black, it looks fake," Ifemelu said, loosening her headwrap. “Sometimes I use colour two, but colour four is closest to my natural colour."

    [...]

    She touched Ifemelu’s hair. "Why you don’t have relaxer?"

    “I like my hair the way God made it."

    “But how you comb it? Hard to comb." Aisha said.

    Ifemelu had brought her own comb. She gently combed her hair, dense, soft and tightly coiled, until it framed her head like a halo. “It's not hard to comb if you moisturize it properly," she said, slipping into the coaxing tone of the proselytizer that she used whenever she was trying to convince other black women about the merits of wearing their hair natural. Aisha snorted; she clearly could not understand why anybody would choose to suffer through combing natural hair, instead of simply relaxing it. She sectioned out Ifemelu's hair, plucked a little attachment from the pile on the table and began deftly to twist.

ADICHIE. C. Americanah A novel New York: Anchor Books. 2013

A passagem do romance da escritora nigeriana traz um diálogo entre duas mulheres negras: a cabeleireira, Aisha, e a cliente, Ifemelu. O posicionamento da cliente é sustentado por argumentos que

Disponível em. https//siles.psu.edu Acesso em 12 jun 2018.

Os recursos usados nesse pôster de divulgação de uma campanha levam o leitor a refletir sobre a necessidade de

Disponível em www csuchico edu Acesso em 11 dez 2017

Nesse pôster de divulgação de uma campanha que aborda a diversidade e a inclusão, a interação dos elementos verbais e não verbais faz referência ao ato de

In his posting, Po Bronson asks forum participants for help.

This help consists of:

Read the lyrics for the song “Smile”, by Charlie Chaplin.

Available at: <https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/charlie-chaplin-michael-buble-say-smile-unforgettable-ritzya>.Accessed on: 20 set. 2016.

Put T (true) or F (false) by the propositions below and then check the CORRECT sequence:

( ) The song suggests we should not smile if our heart is aching.

( ) Life still has meaning, despite fear and sorrow, if you just smile.

( ) Since life has no meaning at all, there is no use smiling.

( ) The song’s overall meaning is to motivate us to remain positive.

( ) The song encourages us to give up the pleasures of life.

Analyze the following diagram and then check the CORRECT statement.

Fonte: Available at: <http://www.unicef.org/factoftheweek/index_53803.html>. Accessed on: 10 set. 2016.

Read the following passage, paying attention to the words numbered 1-5

Gene Wilder’s passing away, the eternal Willy Wonka

TEXT

    MORE and more retired people are heading back to the nearest classroom — as students and, in some cases, teachers — and they are finding out that school can be lovelier the second time around. Some may be thinking of second careers, but most just want to keep their minds stimulated, learn something new or catch up with a subject they were always curious about but never had time for.

    For many, at least part of the motivation is based on widespread reports that exercising the brain may preserve it, forestalling mental decline and maybe even Alzheimer’s disease and other types of dementia. Is there any truth to it? And if there is, what type of learning is best suited to the older brain?

    Many studies do find that being mentally active is associated with a lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease. But the standard caveat applies: association does not prove cause and effect, and there is always the chance that the mentally active people who never got Alzheimer’s simply had healthier brains to begin with. Even, so, researchers say, there is no harm in telling people to try to stay engaged.

    “When you and I are having this conversation, you’re taking notes, thinking, remembering pieces of it, trying to relate it to other things,” said Arthur Toga, a professor of neurology and director of the laboratory of neuroimaging at the University of California, Los Angeles. “You’re changing the circuitry in your brain. That is because you have changed something in your brain to retain that memory.”

    Dr. Toga elaborated: “The conversation requires nerve cells in the brain to fire, and when they fire they are using energy. More oxygen and sugar must be delivered, by increased blood flow to those regions.

    “Why would that be good? If you are vasodilating, delivering more blood to certain regions of the brain, that is important. It increases the longevity and the health of those circuits. In adults, if I ask you to perform tasks you’ve never done before, the amount of brain it takes for you to try and do it is far greater than the amount of brain it takes for you to do something you’re already good at. So yes, exercising the brain is good.” Playing video games probably qualifies as a type of brain exercise, he said, though older people might not sharpen their skills as fast as younger ones do.

    Dr. Toga warned that while using the brain might help avert some of the mental slowing that normally comes with aging, it had its limits. “I do not believe that it forestalls degenerative disease, however,” he said. “That’s a different process.”

    But research continues. Dr. William Jagust, a professor of public health and neuroscience at the University of California, Berkeley, said there were two main theories that tried to explain why exercising the brain might make it more resistant to disease. One is the “cognitive reserve” theory, which says that if the brain is in the best possible shape with extensive neuronal connections from being used a lot, it may be able to withstand the onset of Alzheimer’s disease for a while and symptoms may take longer to develop.

    A hallmark of Alzheimer’s is deposits in the brain of an abnormal form of a protein called amyloid. “A paper we published showed that people who were more cognitively active over their whole life span had less amyloid,” Dr. Jagust said.

    “My interpretation is that people who are more cognitively active have more efficient brains,” Dr. Jagust said. “What seems to happen in aging is that older people seem to have less efficient brains.” A scan of brain activity on a 20- year-old being asked to remember something will show less activity needed than in an 80-year-old asked to perform the same task.

    “Older people seem to activate or bring on line brain areas that young people don’t use,” Dr. Jagust said. “They have to work their brains harder. So people who stay cognitively active may use their brains more efficiently.” That way, they may generate fewer amyloid deposits. But he emphasized that being mentally active throughout life — not just in old age — was what mattered.

    Nonetheless, Dr. Jagust acknowledged, “this is all theoretical.”

    It is a good idea to try something new.

    “A variety of things is important,” Dr. Toga said. “We try to encourage people to do certain things because it couldn’t hurt and may be good.Retaining lots of social interaction is really important. It involves so much of the brain. You have to interpret facial expressions and understand new concepts.

    [...]

    One of the largest programs for retirees is at the University of Wisconsin, Green Bay (it is not associated with Osher). Called Learning in Retirement, it is sponsored by the university, with more than 1,000 members and more than 240 courses a year. Michael W. Murphy, who spent more than 30 years as an English professor, said this program had brought him some of the greatest joy he had experienced in the classroom. Since 2001, when he stepped down from his post as acting dean at the university, he has been teaching poetry and other subjects to Learning in Retirement members. It is an unpaid position. “I’ve always enjoyed teaching, and the idea of teaching without having to read papers, correct tests and worst of all, give out grades, was really appealing,” Dr. Murphy said.

    To his delight, the students actually want to be there. They take the time to tell him how much they appreciate him and sometimes even break into applause after his lectures. The students include doctors, lawyers, professors and highschool dropouts. “The biggest problem I had teaching 18-year-olds was a kind of general apathy,” Dr. Murphy said. “They were looking forward to a career in high finance and I was trying to teach them to appreciate Tennyson. The fact that these people show up, and toddle in or waddle in, some with their walkers or wheelchairs, it’s heartwarming.”

www.nytimes.com/, March 7, 2012

One of the conclusions reached by Dr. Jagust related to the brain was that

TEXT

    MORE and more retired people are heading back to the nearest classroom — as students and, in some cases, teachers — and they are finding out that school can be lovelier the second time around. Some may be thinking of second careers, but most just want to keep their minds stimulated, learn something new or catch up with a subject they were always curious about but never had time for.

    For many, at least part of the motivation is based on widespread reports that exercising the brain may preserve it, forestalling mental decline and maybe even Alzheimer’s disease and other types of dementia. Is there any truth to it? And if there is, what type of learning is best suited to the older brain?

    Many studies do find that being mentally active is associated with a lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease. But the standard caveat applies: association does not prove cause and effect, and there is always the chance that the mentally active people who never got Alzheimer’s simply had healthier brains to begin with. Even, so, researchers say, there is no harm in telling people to try to stay engaged.

    “When you and I are having this conversation, you’re taking notes, thinking, remembering pieces of it, trying to relate it to other things,” said Arthur Toga, a professor of neurology and director of the laboratory of neuroimaging at the University of California, Los Angeles. “You’re changing the circuitry in your brain. That is because you have changed something in your brain to retain that memory.”

    Dr. Toga elaborated: “The conversation requires nerve cells in the brain to fire, and when they fire they are using energy. More oxygen and sugar must be delivered, by increased blood flow to those regions.

    “Why would that be good? If you are vasodilating, delivering more blood to certain regions of the brain, that is important. It increases the longevity and the health of those circuits. In adults, if I ask you to perform tasks you’ve never done before, the amount of brain it takes for you to try and do it is far greater than the amount of brain it takes for you to do something you’re already good at. So yes, exercising the brain is good.” Playing video games probably qualifies as a type of brain exercise, he said, though older people might not sharpen their skills as fast as younger ones do.

    Dr. Toga warned that while using the brain might help avert some of the mental slowing that normally comes with aging, it had its limits. “I do not believe that it forestalls degenerative disease, however,” he said. “That’s a different process.”

    But research continues. Dr. William Jagust, a professor of public health and neuroscience at the University of California, Berkeley, said there were two main theories that tried to explain why exercising the brain might make it more resistant to disease. One is the “cognitive reserve” theory, which says that if the brain is in the best possible shape with extensive neuronal connections from being used a lot, it may be able to withstand the onset of Alzheimer’s disease for a while and symptoms may take longer to develop.

    A hallmark of Alzheimer’s is deposits in the brain of an abnormal form of a protein called amyloid. “A paper we published showed that people who were more cognitively active over their whole life span had less amyloid,” Dr. Jagust said.

    “My interpretation is that people who are more cognitively active have more efficient brains,” Dr. Jagust said. “What seems to happen in aging is that older people seem to have less efficient brains.” A scan of brain activity on a 20- year-old being asked to remember something will show less activity needed than in an 80-year-old asked to perform the same task.

    “Older people seem to activate or bring on line brain areas that young people don’t use,” Dr. Jagust said. “They have to work their brains harder. So people who stay cognitively active may use their brains more efficiently.” That way, they may generate fewer amyloid deposits. But he emphasized that being mentally active throughout life — not just in old age — was what mattered.

    Nonetheless, Dr. Jagust acknowledged, “this is all theoretical.”

    It is a good idea to try something new.

    “A variety of things is important,” Dr. Toga said. “We try to encourage people to do certain things because it couldn’t hurt and may be good.Retaining lots of social interaction is really important. It involves so much of the brain. You have to interpret facial expressions and understand new concepts.

    [...]

    One of the largest programs for retirees is at the University of Wisconsin, Green Bay (it is not associated with Osher). Called Learning in Retirement, it is sponsored by the university, with more than 1,000 members and more than 240 courses a year. Michael W. Murphy, who spent more than 30 years as an English professor, said this program had brought him some of the greatest joy he had experienced in the classroom. Since 2001, when he stepped down from his post as acting dean at the university, he has been teaching poetry and other subjects to Learning in Retirement members. It is an unpaid position. “I’ve always enjoyed teaching, and the idea of teaching without having to read papers, correct tests and worst of all, give out grades, was really appealing,” Dr. Murphy said.

    To his delight, the students actually want to be there. They take the time to tell him how much they appreciate him and sometimes even break into applause after his lectures. The students include doctors, lawyers, professors and highschool dropouts. “The biggest problem I had teaching 18-year-olds was a kind of general apathy,” Dr. Murphy said. “They were looking forward to a career in high finance and I was trying to teach them to appreciate Tennyson. The fact that these people show up, and toddle in or waddle in, some with their walkers or wheelchairs, it’s heartwarming.”

www.nytimes.com/, March 7, 2012

TEXT

    MORE and more retired people are heading back to the nearest classroom — as students and, in some cases, teachers — and they are finding out that school can be lovelier the second time around. Some may be thinking of second careers, but most just want to keep their minds stimulated, learn something new or catch up with a subject they were always curious about but never had time for.

    For many, at least part of the motivation is based on widespread reports that exercising the brain may preserve it, forestalling mental decline and maybe even Alzheimer’s disease and other types of dementia. Is there any truth to it? And if there is, what type of learning is best suited to the older brain?

    Many studies do find that being mentally active is associated with a lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease. But the standard caveat applies: association does not prove cause and effect, and there is always the chance that the mentally active people who never got Alzheimer’s simply had healthier brains to begin with. Even, so, researchers say, there is no harm in telling people to try to stay engaged.

    “When you and I are having this conversation, you’re taking notes, thinking, remembering pieces of it, trying to relate it to other things,” said Arthur Toga, a professor of neurology and director of the laboratory of neuroimaging at the University of California, Los Angeles. “You’re changing the circuitry in your brain. That is because you have changed something in your brain to retain that memory.”

    Dr. Toga elaborated: “The conversation requires nerve cells in the brain to fire, and when they fire they are using energy. More oxygen and sugar must be delivered, by increased blood flow to those regions.

    “Why would that be good? If you are vasodilating, delivering more blood to certain regions of the brain, that is important. It increases the longevity and the health of those circuits. In adults, if I ask you to perform tasks you’ve never done before, the amount of brain it takes for you to try and do it is far greater than the amount of brain it takes for you to do something you’re already good at. So yes, exercising the brain is good.” Playing video games probably qualifies as a type of brain exercise, he said, though older people might not sharpen their skills as fast as younger ones do.

    Dr. Toga warned that while using the brain might help avert some of the mental slowing that normally comes with aging, it had its limits. “I do not believe that it forestalls degenerative disease, however,” he said. “That’s a different process.”

    But research continues. Dr. William Jagust, a professor of public health and neuroscience at the University of California, Berkeley, said there were two main theories that tried to explain why exercising the brain might make it more resistant to disease. One is the “cognitive reserve” theory, which says that if the brain is in the best possible shape with extensive neuronal connections from being used a lot, it may be able to withstand the onset of Alzheimer’s disease for a while and symptoms may take longer to develop.

    A hallmark of Alzheimer’s is deposits in the brain of an abnormal form of a protein called amyloid. “A paper we published showed that people who were more cognitively active over their whole life span had less amyloid,” Dr. Jagust said.

    “My interpretation is that people who are more cognitively active have more efficient brains,” Dr. Jagust said. “What seems to happen in aging is that older people seem to have less efficient brains.” A scan of brain activity on a 20- year-old being asked to remember something will show less activity needed than in an 80-year-old asked to perform the same task.

    “Older people seem to activate or bring on line brain areas that young people don’t use,” Dr. Jagust said. “They have to work their brains harder. So people who stay cognitively active may use their brains more efficiently.” That way, they may generate fewer amyloid deposits. But he emphasized that being mentally active throughout life — not just in old age — was what mattered.

    Nonetheless, Dr. Jagust acknowledged, “this is all theoretical.”

    It is a good idea to try something new.

    “A variety of things is important,” Dr. Toga said. “We try to encourage people to do certain things because it couldn’t hurt and may be good.Retaining lots of social interaction is really important. It involves so much of the brain. You have to interpret facial expressions and understand new concepts.

    [...]

    One of the largest programs for retirees is at the University of Wisconsin, Green Bay (it is not associated with Osher). Called Learning in Retirement, it is sponsored by the university, with more than 1,000 members and more than 240 courses a year. Michael W. Murphy, who spent more than 30 years as an English professor, said this program had brought him some of the greatest joy he had experienced in the classroom. Since 2001, when he stepped down from his post as acting dean at the university, he has been teaching poetry and other subjects to Learning in Retirement members. It is an unpaid position. “I’ve always enjoyed teaching, and the idea of teaching without having to read papers, correct tests and worst of all, give out grades, was really appealing,” Dr. Murphy said.

    To his delight, the students actually want to be there. They take the time to tell him how much they appreciate him and sometimes even break into applause after his lectures. The students include doctors, lawyers, professors and highschool dropouts. “The biggest problem I had teaching 18-year-olds was a kind of general apathy,” Dr. Murphy said. “They were looking forward to a career in high finance and I was trying to teach them to appreciate Tennyson. The fact that these people show up, and toddle in or waddle in, some with their walkers or wheelchairs, it’s heartwarming.”

www.nytimes.com/, March 7, 2012

TEXT

    MORE and more retired people are heading back to the nearest classroom — as students and, in some cases, teachers — and they are finding out that school can be lovelier the second time around. Some may be thinking of second careers, but most just want to keep their minds stimulated, learn something new or catch up with a subject they were always curious about but never had time for.

    For many, at least part of the motivation is based on widespread reports that exercising the brain may preserve it, forestalling mental decline and maybe even Alzheimer’s disease and other types of dementia. Is there any truth to it? And if there is, what type of learning is best suited to the older brain?

    Many studies do find that being mentally active is associated with a lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease. But the standard caveat applies: association does not prove cause and effect, and there is always the chance that the mentally active people who never got Alzheimer’s simply had healthier brains to begin with. Even, so, researchers say, there is no harm in telling people to try to stay engaged.

    “When you and I are having this conversation, you’re taking notes, thinking, remembering pieces of it, trying to relate it to other things,” said Arthur Toga, a professor of neurology and director of the laboratory of neuroimaging at the University of California, Los Angeles. “You’re changing the circuitry in your brain. That is because you have changed something in your brain to retain that memory.”

    Dr. Toga elaborated: “The conversation requires nerve cells in the brain to fire, and when they fire they are using energy. More oxygen and sugar must be delivered, by increased blood flow to those regions.

    “Why would that be good? If you are vasodilating, delivering more blood to certain regions of the brain, that is important. It increases the longevity and the health of those circuits. In adults, if I ask you to perform tasks you’ve never done before, the amount of brain it takes for you to try and do it is far greater than the amount of brain it takes for you to do something you’re already good at. So yes, exercising the brain is good.” Playing video games probably qualifies as a type of brain exercise, he said, though older people might not sharpen their skills as fast as younger ones do.

    Dr. Toga warned that while using the brain might help avert some of the mental slowing that normally comes with aging, it had its limits. “I do not believe that it forestalls degenerative disease, however,” he said. “That’s a different process.”

    But research continues. Dr. William Jagust, a professor of public health and neuroscience at the University of California, Berkeley, said there were two main theories that tried to explain why exercising the brain might make it more resistant to disease. One is the “cognitive reserve” theory, which says that if the brain is in the best possible shape with extensive neuronal connections from being used a lot, it may be able to withstand the onset of Alzheimer’s disease for a while and symptoms may take longer to develop.

    A hallmark of Alzheimer’s is deposits in the brain of an abnormal form of a protein called amyloid. “A paper we published showed that people who were more cognitively active over their whole life span had less amyloid,” Dr. Jagust said.

    “My interpretation is that people who are more cognitively active have more efficient brains,” Dr. Jagust said. “What seems to happen in aging is that older people seem to have less efficient brains.” A scan of brain activity on a 20- year-old being asked to remember something will show less activity needed than in an 80-year-old asked to perform the same task.

    “Older people seem to activate or bring on line brain areas that young people don’t use,” Dr. Jagust said. “They have to work their brains harder. So people who stay cognitively active may use their brains more efficiently.” That way, they may generate fewer amyloid deposits. But he emphasized that being mentally active throughout life — not just in old age — was what mattered.

    Nonetheless, Dr. Jagust acknowledged, “this is all theoretical.”

    It is a good idea to try something new.

    “A variety of things is important,” Dr. Toga said. “We try to encourage people to do certain things because it couldn’t hurt and may be good.Retaining lots of social interaction is really important. It involves so much of the brain. You have to interpret facial expressions and understand new concepts.

    [...]

    One of the largest programs for retirees is at the University of Wisconsin, Green Bay (it is not associated with Osher). Called Learning in Retirement, it is sponsored by the university, with more than 1,000 members and more than 240 courses a year. Michael W. Murphy, who spent more than 30 years as an English professor, said this program had brought him some of the greatest joy he had experienced in the classroom. Since 2001, when he stepped down from his post as acting dean at the university, he has been teaching poetry and other subjects to Learning in Retirement members. It is an unpaid position. “I’ve always enjoyed teaching, and the idea of teaching without having to read papers, correct tests and worst of all, give out grades, was really appealing,” Dr. Murphy said.

    To his delight, the students actually want to be there. They take the time to tell him how much they appreciate him and sometimes even break into applause after his lectures. The students include doctors, lawyers, professors and highschool dropouts. “The biggest problem I had teaching 18-year-olds was a kind of general apathy,” Dr. Murphy said. “They were looking forward to a career in high finance and I was trying to teach them to appreciate Tennyson. The fact that these people show up, and toddle in or waddle in, some with their walkers or wheelchairs, it’s heartwarming.”

www.nytimes.com/, March 7, 2012

TEXT

    MORE and more retired people are heading back to the nearest classroom — as students and, in some cases, teachers — and they are finding out that school can be lovelier the second time around. Some may be thinking of second careers, but most just want to keep their minds stimulated, learn something new or catch up with a subject they were always curious about but never had time for.

    For many, at least part of the motivation is based on widespread reports that exercising the brain may preserve it, forestalling mental decline and maybe even Alzheimer’s disease and other types of dementia. Is there any truth to it? And if there is, what type of learning is best suited to the older brain?

    Many studies do find that being mentally active is associated with a lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease. But the standard caveat applies: association does not prove cause and effect, and there is always the chance that the mentally active people who never got Alzheimer’s simply had healthier brains to begin with. Even, so, researchers say, there is no harm in telling people to try to stay engaged.

    “When you and I are having this conversation, you’re taking notes, thinking, remembering pieces of it, trying to relate it to other things,” said Arthur Toga, a professor of neurology and director of the laboratory of neuroimaging at the University of California, Los Angeles. “You’re changing the circuitry in your brain. That is because you have changed something in your brain to retain that memory.”

    Dr. Toga elaborated: “The conversation requires nerve cells in the brain to fire, and when they fire they are using energy. More oxygen and sugar must be delivered, by increased blood flow to those regions.

    “Why would that be good? If you are vasodilating, delivering more blood to certain regions of the brain, that is important. It increases the longevity and the health of those circuits. In adults, if I ask you to perform tasks you’ve never done before, the amount of brain it takes for you to try and do it is far greater than the amount of brain it takes for you to do something you’re already good at. So yes, exercising the brain is good.” Playing video games probably qualifies as a type of brain exercise, he said, though older people might not sharpen their skills as fast as younger ones do.

    Dr. Toga warned that while using the brain might help avert some of the mental slowing that normally comes with aging, it had its limits. “I do not believe that it forestalls degenerative disease, however,” he said. “That’s a different process.”

    But research continues. Dr. William Jagust, a professor of public health and neuroscience at the University of California, Berkeley, said there were two main theories that tried to explain why exercising the brain might make it more resistant to disease. One is the “cognitive reserve” theory, which says that if the brain is in the best possible shape with extensive neuronal connections from being used a lot, it may be able to withstand the onset of Alzheimer’s disease for a while and symptoms may take longer to develop.

    A hallmark of Alzheimer’s is deposits in the brain of an abnormal form of a protein called amyloid. “A paper we published showed that people who were more cognitively active over their whole life span had less amyloid,” Dr. Jagust said.

    “My interpretation is that people who are more cognitively active have more efficient brains,” Dr. Jagust said. “What seems to happen in aging is that older people seem to have less efficient brains.” A scan of brain activity on a 20- year-old being asked to remember something will show less activity needed than in an 80-year-old asked to perform the same task.

    “Older people seem to activate or bring on line brain areas that young people don’t use,” Dr. Jagust said. “They have to work their brains harder. So people who stay cognitively active may use their brains more efficiently.” That way, they may generate fewer amyloid deposits. But he emphasized that being mentally active throughout life — not just in old age — was what mattered.

    Nonetheless, Dr. Jagust acknowledged, “this is all theoretical.”

    It is a good idea to try something new.

    “A variety of things is important,” Dr. Toga said. “We try to encourage people to do certain things because it couldn’t hurt and may be good.Retaining lots of social interaction is really important. It involves so much of the brain. You have to interpret facial expressions and understand new concepts.

    [...]

    One of the largest programs for retirees is at the University of Wisconsin, Green Bay (it is not associated with Osher). Called Learning in Retirement, it is sponsored by the university, with more than 1,000 members and more than 240 courses a year. Michael W. Murphy, who spent more than 30 years as an English professor, said this program had brought him some of the greatest joy he had experienced in the classroom. Since 2001, when he stepped down from his post as acting dean at the university, he has been teaching poetry and other subjects to Learning in Retirement members. It is an unpaid position. “I’ve always enjoyed teaching, and the idea of teaching without having to read papers, correct tests and worst of all, give out grades, was really appealing,” Dr. Murphy said.

    To his delight, the students actually want to be there. They take the time to tell him how much they appreciate him and sometimes even break into applause after his lectures. The students include doctors, lawyers, professors and highschool dropouts. “The biggest problem I had teaching 18-year-olds was a kind of general apathy,” Dr. Murphy said. “They were looking forward to a career in high finance and I was trying to teach them to appreciate Tennyson. The fact that these people show up, and toddle in or waddle in, some with their walkers or wheelchairs, it’s heartwarming.”

www.nytimes.com/, March 7, 2012