The “trouble of the video game” is now recognized by the WHO


WHO comes to validate a proposal filed in January 2018 in order to recognize the addiction to the video game as a disorder in full. The member states assembled in Geneva (Switzerland) have in effect endorsed this company, which has built-in the 11th revision of the international Classification of diseases (ICD-11). It shall come into force from the 1st January 2022.


The organization describes this disorder as ” a behavior (…) that is characterized by a loss of control over the game, a higher priority is given to the game, to the point that it takes precedence over other centers of interest and daily activities, and by the prosecution or the growing practice of the game in spite of adverse impacts “.


Of course, it is stated that this disorder affects a tiny portion of the players. And fortunately, given the number of people today concerned. The time allotted for practice, but also a variety of signs of social exclusion are in particular used to define if there is a disorder.



The video game is an industry that is still young, it seems natural that the health authorities have taken a long time to deal with that. But the rapid development of the mobile game or the spectacular advances in virtual reality have been able to put even more light on some of the drifts (even if the latter takes advantage in many areas of science and technology).


“Studies suggest that the disturbances of the game affect only a very few people who participate in digital games or video games. However, people who participate in the games must be attentive to the time they spend on gambling activities, in particular in relation to the exclusion of other daily activities. The ICD-11 has been updated for the 21st century and reflects the progress of science and medicine. “


A decision to which the industry of the video game were not slow to react through a press release, highlighting the lack of evidence, transparency and practical case.



“The” trouble of the video game ” is not based on evidence strong enough to justify its inclusion in one of the most important tools for the establishment of standards of the WHO. “



Many scientists believe that this classification has been carried out too quickly, and can lead to poor care.

Comments