Kim Jensen at the NATSAP Conference – Interview

Jon Dabach:        We’re talking to Kim Jensen today about his experience at the NATSAP conference. Kim, why don’t you give us an idea of what the conference was like?

Kim Jensen:        It’s a conference that really, some of the things that came out of it are really interesting. There were 3 or 4 of the presentations that dealt with digital media and its effects. That has become a real hot button topic. There’s also one program that now is structured specifically for digital media addiction, which is something new here in the US, but in China there’s 400 to 500 RTCs over there dealing specifically with Internet addiction and gaming addiction.

Jon Dabach:        That’s interesting. Did that company over here mention whether or not they would look into those Chinese programs for guidance?

Kim Jensen:        They did, to look at the way that it was structured. The feedback that I got was that the Chinese government’s programs were more punitive, so they weren’t holistic in the sense that they’re actually looking at addiction. It is much more of a punitive way of dealing with the masses that have got themselves in trouble in that manner.

Apparently, if you go online and you Google search “gamer death,” there’s a YouTube video of a guy sitting down in one of those gaming cafes in Taiwan, where you could buy time by the hour, and he bought 24 hours of time there to game, and slowly through the surveillance cameras over this period of time, you just see his body shrinking, and shrinking, and eventually he passes away, but nobody around him notices, because they’re so stuck in their own world there of gaming, or whatever it was that they were doing.

Jon Dabach:        How tragic. Did the local program talk specifically about some of the treatment methods they’re using?

Kim Jensen:        I asked one of the presenters afterward what outcomes and measures that they were using, and they’re going to email me their presentation. That might be helpful to be able to get what the source that was cited from was used in the presentation. They tested adolescents, an adolescent control group, and half of them read from a book and half of them read from a kindle, the same material. The group that read from the Kindle was able to only retain 80% as much as what the controlled group was able to read from a paperback book.

Jon Dabach:        That’s fascinating.

Kim Jensen:        The hypothesis is that what’s happening is that in essence, you’re creating this ADHD type of behavior through the viewing of material online, because it’s going into short-term memory, it’s not going into long-term memory, which is where it’s going when you’re reading the book. There’s something that’s firing with the lights and all that. There was another point that they brought up, that the blue light from the media, whether it’s the iPad or the computer, or the phone, or whatever, the blue light is disrupting the circadian rhythms, and that’s a reason you’re seeing a lot of issues with sleep hygiene in the young adult population. Now that they’re staying up all night, and sleeping at odd times during the day, it’s because this blue light that is emitted from the screens tricks the eyes into thinking that it’s daytime. It’s really messing with the circadian rhythms of these people that utilize the media mal-adaptively.

Jon Dabach:        That makes sense, because people don’t realize how cool the color temperature is of daylight. It is a bluish-white. That really does make sense. It seems like there’s a lot of progress being made on this front here in the US now.

Kim Jensen:        A friend of mine, he was the key note speaker up at the YATA conference last year, and he did his PhD on social media and Internet addiction. He actually developed a protocol to be able to measure success in treatment and the protocol developed for the treatment of Internet addiction. His name is Dr. Don Grant. He wasn’t there this time. He was at another conference, but he was the only one speaking at that one. At this conference, they had three, so there’s quite an increase in the topic because it’s such a problem right now.

Jon Dabach:        I know you are a fan of the great outdoors and wilderness based programs. Do you see unplugging like that, being beneficial, or is it possible that something like that isn’t a way to treat people and teach them to cope, to integrate back into normal everyday life?

Kim Jensen:        Yeah, that’s a real issue. It’s a problem. I don’t know that … because it’s everywhere. You go sit down in the class, and now you’re required to use the same types of media that you’re having the issue with. I’m trying to think, yeah, I believe there is one treatment program available but the name is escaping me. The thing about the wilderness is that it provides a respite, so you have a respite from it, and then you’re able to start to look at, and address, “What are the causes behind the use? What are the causes behind the emotional pain that you’re going to through to use that, or any other drugs that you’re masking depression, or anxiety, or oppositional defiancy of the younger population.

Jon Dabach:        Right. I could see it being a good immersion into therapy, but I see that you then need to teach the skill set of what they do in their normal daily life.

Kim Jensen:        Well, it’s interesting you bring that up, of all the kids they saw and treated in the wilderness program, with the skills they learned, the question is still how do they prove that it’s effective? How are you able to then take it with you back into the world, which I see a lot of the time with folks – that they go to wilderness, and some of them, I’m thinking almost 50% percent, come back and relapse and go back into the same behaviors.

There is one group, I can’t think of his company now. His name is Steve Sawyer, and they’re using HRV, heartbeat rate variables, and what they’re doing is they have a monitor, and it hooks up to the earlobe, and they’re able to follow the heart rate. What happens then is they’ll be having a conversation in the therapy session, and when they start to get agitated, then you’re seeing that on the screen.

A normal intervention would look like you’re getting escalated, and then you’re chasing it. You’re escalated, now what can you do to calm down?

What they’re doing is they’re noticing the increase, and when they’re noticing the increase, then they’re starting the intervention. They’re nipping it in the bud before it starts through this heart rate variable, to be able to teach them the coping skills in the moment prior to the escalation, which I thought was brilliant.

Now that they have the monitor, when they go out in the field, it’s actually a hand-held monitor so they can sit there and show the client. Look you got escalated, and let’s look at the data from last week when we were talking, see you did better here. You’re prolonging the trigger event, so you’re dealing with it more effectively, which was really fascinating.

Jon Dabach:        And it probably builds a great amount of confidence. It’s a tangible marker for the patient.

Kim Jensen:        Part of that, too, is that they’re forced to listen to their bodies. They’re forced to listen inside. Similar to the breath work in yoga, you can see that the heart rate slows down by doing that. What they’re asking them to do is sit with their body, notice when they start to get agitated, and then implement whatever interventions that they’re working on. It was fascinating, because it’s using the science to help with the intervention versus traditional talk therapy.

Jon Dabach:        Right, and it’s using new technology too, which shows that if used in the right way could be quite beneficial. Well, this was a fascinating talk. Thanks for reporting back to us with all the great information, Kim.