Stop saying that "X" changes the brain

If you pay any attention to media coverage of novel medical and neuropsychological research, you will come into frequent contact with a particular sort of claim. Namely, that something changes the brain. That something could be any number of different things, depending on the news of the day and the predilections of the source.

Want evidence? OK.

How does reading pop-science articles on the changing brain change the brain?

That took all of two seconds. You can get more specific with your history, too, if you want to have some fun with that. Does eating ice cream change the brain? Does breathing pure oxygen change the brain? Do battles with irritable bowel syndrome change the brain?

Here's the thing, everyone - everything changes the brain. I had a latte and an empanada earlier today, and I can tell you with absolute certainty that doing so changed my brain. How can I be so certain? Because I am able to relay to you the fact that I did it. I have been changed in a manner that results in my ability to describe the experience, what most would call "memory." To say that any given experience "X" changes the brain is to say nothing of importance. You'd be harder-pressed to find an experience that doesn't result in the brain changing. 

Is it worthwhile to know how the brain changes as a result of experience? In other words, should we study which regions may be more affected by particular sorts of experience, or how neurotransmitter release differs by exogenous factors, and the like? Sure. This kind of information has its uses. But the general statement about any particular event changing the brain is absolutely pointless and you would be better served saving your breath.