MindWeavers
|
This article is part of the Health Portal project of Spinwatch. |
MindWeavers is a spin off company from Oxford University founded by Professor David Moore in 2000. The firm specialises in "software-based products that apply world-leading neuronal-level science to harness the dynamism of the human brain" [1]
Contents
Funding
MindWeavers secured its funding through a private placement handled by City and Merchant Group plc, which provides corporate finance and investment services to small and medium sized businesses. Tim Lyle chairman of City and Merchant expressed his excitement at his involvement with the company "We are very pleased to be involved with MindWeavers at this exciting stage of the Company’s development. The vigorous response to our fundraising bodes well for the future, as MindWeavers aims to convert strong investor demand into buoyant consumer take-up of the Company’s product range. Assuming the anticipated growth in sales generated by the marketing drive currently underway, we look forward to helping MindWeavers to be admitted to trading on the PLUS Markets in 2008."[2]
People
- Chief Executive, Bruce Robinson
The scientists involved in this project are:
- David Moore, Director of the Medical Research Council's Institute of Hearing Research and expert on "the Auditory Brain"
- Director, Baroness Professor Susan Greenfield
Products
Products include Phonomena that is designed to improve ability to hear the sounds of language and MindFit a computer brain training game.
The MindFit game, which cost £89.99 on release is licensed by MindWeavers, and personally endorsed by Susan Greenfield. MindFit's production is a result of collaboration between Oxford University and game makers CogniFit, based in Israel. Greenfield claimed that although "It is not a guarantee against getting Alzheimer's...MindFit is proven to work in scientific trials". [3]. However, when the games were investigated by Which? [4] the consumer magazine reported they were sent only three studies by MindWeavers to support their product. None of them were published in reputable scientific journals and two of the studies had "basic design flaws" [5] Adrian Owen of Which? found that two of the studies had no control group making any improvement in brain performance impossible to find and to distinguish from any form of regular computer use. [6] Given Greenfield's concerns for the harm caused by the use of the computer games in children and of social networking this endorsement seems contradictory. The third unpublished study was less problematic, it suggested that MindFit's product may compare more favourably to similar products. However, it did not support the claim that MindFit had advantages for the brain over playing other computer games like tetris, contrary to claims reported upon the launch of the product.[7]. The claim that MindFit was a "cognitively challenging" and therefore activity protects against Alzheimer’s remains doubtful. Chris Bird another Which? reviewer said even if that was true, it was unlikely brain-training would be more effective than doing crosswords or joining a book club. [8]
References
- ↑ ISIS Innovation, MindWeavers accessed 25th October 2011
- ↑ MindWeavers, Press Release August 2007, accessed 25th October 2011
- ↑ Roger Highfield, Top neuroscientist backs computer brain game The Telegraph, 7th September 2007, accessed 25th October 2011
- ↑ Ben Goldacre, Susan Greenfield: Why won't she publish her theory? Secondary Blog, 8th January 2010, accessed 25th October 2011
- ↑ Adrian Owen, Brain training Mindfit Which?, 25th February 2009, accessed 25th October 2011
- ↑ Adrian Owen, Brain training Mindfit Which?, 25th February 2009, accessed 25th October 2011
- ↑ Roger Highfield, Top neuroscientist backs computer brain game The Telegraph, 7th September 2007, accessed 25th October 2011
- ↑ Chris Bird, Brain training Mindfit Which?, 25th February 2009, accessed 25th October 2011
