Recent studies are suggesting that a fundamentalist mindset may put individuals at greater risk of developing dementia in later life.

Note that within the context of the discussion religiosity has nothing to do with whether one believes in a god or not. Instead it is connected to the extent to which one advocates or strongly adheres to a particular devotional code. Thus the definition of fundamentalist includes rigid non-belief as well. To support this view consider the following extract from The Crowd: A Study of The Poplar Mind written in 1896 by Gustav le Bon. 

Juxtaposed to these seemingly opposing groups, however, I observed a 76 year old family member who has one of the most cogent social and mental dispositions of anyone I know. What I particularly noted about her is that she never spoke about religion or addressed any topic in religious terms. This notwithstanding that she had an apparent strong private religious faith which one could tell by her regular church attendance and activities within her greater religious community. She was also completely open to other religions and would not hesitate to attend a service in another religious denomination or faith if invited or had an opportunity to do so. This is as opposed to the extremely religious Christian grouping who, without fail, are condemning of other views, even other Christian denominations.

These apparent contrasting states of mental health motivated me to investigate a possible link between religiosity and dementia and found the following study. Titled Religious Education and Midlife Observance are associated with Dementia three decades later in Israeli Men, it was a joint collaboration between three esteemed institutions including the Department of Psychology at the Mount Sinai Medical School in New York. It observed 1,690 middle-aged and elderly patients. The sample was from 2,604 survivors of 10,059 participants in a Ischemic Heart Disease study, and it determined that 18.9% had developed dementia. Based on a religious self-definition and practice, the prevalence rates amongst those considered most religious were three times greater than the least religious group (9.7%, 17.7%, 14.1% and 28.8% from least to most religious).[1]

What the data suggests is that the least religious had a very low incidence while the most had a particularly high incidence. Compared to all the other categories it had roughly twice the incidence of their average. Thus based on this one study one can simplistically infer that one has a very high probability of becoming demented if one is also very religious. On the other hand, those who tend not to be religious have a significantly lower incidence. This low-religious group could include atheists, agnostics, as well as those with some or other concept of God but do not attend a worship group.

However an anomaly was evident when looking at the type of education the patients received: that is whether they received exclusively religious, mixed or secular education. The data here indicated that those who attended exclusively religious education were about 2.3 times more at risk than those who had a mixed education, while it was only 1.8 times greater for those who received a secular education. Interestingly, the secular group fared somewhat worse than the mixed group.

On further research I found another study at the Duke Medical Centre investigating brain differences based on faith funded by the National Institutes of Health and the Templeton Foundation. The study asked 268 people aged between 58 to 84 about their religious group, spiritual practices and life-changing religious experiences. Protestants who did not identify themselves as born-again were found to have less atrophy in the hippocampus region (the part of the brain involved in memory forming, organizing and storing) than did born-again Protestants, Catholics or those with no religious affiliation. Participants who said they had undergone a religious experience were also found to have more atrophy than those who did not. [2]

Again, there may be many reasons for the above results, but it is generally in line with the findings of the Israeli study, particularly with regards to the extremely religious. This is particular because mainline American Protestants are generally considered far more moderate than Catholics and born-again groups. The born-again groups being associated with the so-called Bible Belt and socially conservative Evangelical Protestantism.

However what must be considered when looking at the Israeli context are that those considered low in the religiosity rank would likely be secular Jews (also referred to as Jewish Atheists). Unlike atheist in Western Europe and the United States, Jewish atheist still consider themselves Jewish and therefore observe many of the religious traditions, though not to the extent the more orthodox Jews do. Thus, unlike their western counterparts, there most likely would be some religious aspect, but notably, without the associated dogma.

The anomaly between the Israeli and American results, therefore, may well be as a consequence of the type of atheism practiced in the respective communities. Thus the level of fundamentalism or rigidity of observance of a particular view is the likely determining factor for the degree of mental degeneration found. One can therefore reasonably assume that the non-believers in the United States had similar results to more rigid religious groups primarily because non-belief is more fundamentalist or intolerant there than that observed in Israel. Another inference one can make is that non-belief per se is not responsible for mental degradation, but rather the specific attitude towards belief which may be the causal factor.

What is particularly interesting about the American study is that it is widely assumed that the non-religious—and atheists in particular—are generally more intelligent than those who may be religious. At least this is the assumption of many non-believers. Part of the argument for this is that this is evident in them having made the decision to be non-religious to begin with. This is because the perception is that non-believers are generally more intellectual, and that they become non-believers for intellectual reasons. It is also argued that intelligent people tend to do the associated discourse towards atheism primarily because they are cognitively more capable to do so—i.e. in questioning long-standing beliefs and assumptions.  [3],[4]

However, the greater atrophy observed in this supposedly more “intellectually competent” group than moderate Protestants may potentially be because mainstream Protestants could well be more open to conflicting or psychologically paradoxical perspectives, particularly the paradoxes around our creation. For this reason they may not overtly engage conditional thinking—in other words, having hardwired patterns of thinking—as fundamentalists (that is both religious and scientific fundamentalists), tend to do. The problem with many such “intelligent” individuals, are that they often are so intelligent that they are able to devise arguments that convinces themselves of their rightness. Then there is the more murky issue of intelligence versus wisdom where ones level of wisdom would not necessarily be reflected on one’s IQ score.

Another reason that more moderately religious may experience less brain degeneration is that there may be some psychological comfort in having the view to begin with. This comfort derived from the notion of faith has the effect of lowering levels of stress and other associated conditions. This is contrasted with fundamentalists of all ilk who are more inclined to higher levels of obsession and/or delusion.

A study at the Faculty of Psychology at the University of Desarrollo into medical literature between 1990 and 2010 does indicate a general link between religion/spirituality and mental health. The study found that close to 75% of the studies reviewed indicate that those who have some or other religious faith exhibited improved mental health. Specifically they indicated definite improvements in levels of suicide, depression and substance abuse. And in line with the previous studies, some evidence in a lower incidence of dementia. [5]

Note though, if the previous findings were true—i.e. that strongly religious individuals were more prone to mental degeneration—then the strongly religious sample would  somewhat neutralize the overall results or there may be contradicting results depending on which community was studied making any definitive conclusion impossible. For instance in the North-Western United States there may be a lower incidence amongst believers than in the Bible Belt region making the results based on pure religiosity inconclusive.

Again, there is yet to be more studies that need to be done for the respective findings to be deemed conclusive, though a pathological trend appears to be evident. It being that higher levels of fundamentalism (or dogmatism) may have some impact on increased mental degeneration in later life.

The irony with a superficial look at the Duke Medical Centre Study is that I too would fall under the non-religious grouping and would therefore have a greater risk of developing diminished brain capacity. It however is my hope that, because I don’t discount the possibility of a “Creator”, and that I think I’m open minded to most perspectives, and do not outrightly condemn them as hocus pocus since I always attempt to keep an open mind, that I may offset my predisposition to have my mental faculties greatly diminished in old age. This is as the Israeli study potentially shows: that the general demeanor of Secular Jews towards religion (specifically Judaism) may in fact be cognitively beneficial.

Perhaps the cure, then, is simply how we orientate ourselves psychologically to the greater mystery of life, and in so doing, to be reasonably assured that one will live a long and mentally healthy life.[6]

© Newton Fortuin – 21 January 2012