I hate social media, And think it’s probably harmful to kids. But the evidence just isn’t there. Where are the meta reviews? Is there a Cochrane study? No, it’s just based on vibes. And I doubt the surgeon general is homophobic, but I can guarantee this will be used to further the current trans/gay panic
Go to pubmed. Type “social media mental health”. Read the studies, or the reviews if you don’t have the time.
The average American teenager spends 4.8 hours/day on social media. Increased use of social media is associated with increased rates of depression, eating disorders, body image dissatisfaction, and externalizing problems. These studies don’t show causation, but guess what, we literally cannot show causation in most human studies because of ethics.
Social media drastically alters peer interactions, with negative interactions (bullying) associated with increased rates of self harm, suicide, internalizing and externalizing problems.
Mobile phone use alone is associated with sleep disruption and daytime sleepiness.
Looking forward to your peer-reviewed critiques of these studies claiming they are all “just vibes.”
You’re doing the same thing antivaxers do. Doing your own research on pubmed is honestly a terrible way to reach conclusions, unless you have the necessary background in that field. OR if there’s a metaamalysis published in a journal that has a more generalist audience.
And you didn’t even link to the studies or give citations
Pretty disingenuous to say this person is acting like an antivaxxer for reading medical journals, when one comment down you admit to forming your opinion by browsing nature, and not being a field expert yourself.
Your comments display hypocrisy and you should commit one way or another.
If you do the search I suggested you will find relevant reviews immediately. If you add keywords based on my post text you will find the primary sources immediately.
Teenage suicide rates were declining for over a decade, especially in males. Now they are increasing in both males and females. You would have to be a complete monster to not want to study, understand, and reverse this trend.
Edit: I’m not saying I’m familiar with what the studies say, although some draw a clear link with adverse mental health impacts on kids. Not sure how far that goes. I’m also not saying I agree with the SG or the need for warning labels, but to say this is based on “vibes” is, ironically, speculative at best.
My opinion is mostly based on commentary and articles in the journal Nature. Every year or so they publish something about how there are some correlations, but very little evidence of a causative link, and more research is needed.
I don’t claim to be an expert, and its possible nature had lead me astray. But following a popular, general journal like nature is a better way to reach conclusions than a pubmed search (unless you have the necessary training)/experience to interpret papers on childhood psychology, which I don’t)
So you acknowledge that you don’t have the skills necessary to interpret papers so… what, you decide that Nature adequately represents their findings enough to dismiss them? Even though you say there is little evidence of a causative link? Even though the surgeon general says they feel there is and cites that evidence to back it up?
The onus is on the state to justify their control with science. They haven’t done that and clearly you haven’t done that either. You’re literally just posting vibes.
Do I really need to point out that you yourself are “literally just posting vibes” ?
You didn’t even bother investigating whether or not they had justified their stance with science. I’m not convinced you made it past the headline, much less read any of the content that article linked to.
The funny thing is I actually did read two of the studies I quickly found and which you too can find. But you seem more interested in adhering to a certain… vibe.
I hate social media, And think it’s probably harmful to kids. But the evidence just isn’t there. Where are the meta reviews? Is there a Cochrane study? No, it’s just based on vibes. And I doubt the surgeon general is homophobic, but I can guarantee this will be used to further the current trans/gay panic
Go to pubmed. Type “social media mental health”. Read the studies, or the reviews if you don’t have the time.
The average American teenager spends 4.8 hours/day on social media. Increased use of social media is associated with increased rates of depression, eating disorders, body image dissatisfaction, and externalizing problems. These studies don’t show causation, but guess what, we literally cannot show causation in most human studies because of ethics.
Social media drastically alters peer interactions, with negative interactions (bullying) associated with increased rates of self harm, suicide, internalizing and externalizing problems.
Mobile phone use alone is associated with sleep disruption and daytime sleepiness.
Looking forward to your peer-reviewed critiques of these studies claiming they are all “just vibes.”
You’re doing the same thing antivaxers do. Doing your own research on pubmed is honestly a terrible way to reach conclusions, unless you have the necessary background in that field. OR if there’s a metaamalysis published in a journal that has a more generalist audience.
And you didn’t even link to the studies or give citations
Pretty disingenuous to say this person is acting like an antivaxxer for reading medical journals, when one comment down you admit to forming your opinion by browsing nature, and not being a field expert yourself.
Your comments display hypocrisy and you should commit one way or another.
If you do the search I suggested you will find relevant reviews immediately. If you add keywords based on my post text you will find the primary sources immediately.
Kids these days with their new fangled smartphones. Back in my day we made new friends at a lynching or at the sockhop.
Everything after I was 21 is shit!
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6630a6.htm
Teenage suicide rates were declining for over a decade, especially in males. Now they are increasing in both males and females. You would have to be a complete monster to not want to study, understand, and reverse this trend.
You didn’t bother looking, clearly.
Edit: I’m not saying I’m familiar with what the studies say, although some draw a clear link with adverse mental health impacts on kids. Not sure how far that goes. I’m also not saying I agree with the SG or the need for warning labels, but to say this is based on “vibes” is, ironically, speculative at best.
My opinion is mostly based on commentary and articles in the journal Nature. Every year or so they publish something about how there are some correlations, but very little evidence of a causative link, and more research is needed.
I don’t claim to be an expert, and its possible nature had lead me astray. But following a popular, general journal like nature is a better way to reach conclusions than a pubmed search (unless you have the necessary training)/experience to interpret papers on childhood psychology, which I don’t)
So you acknowledge that you don’t have the skills necessary to interpret papers so… what, you decide that Nature adequately represents their findings enough to dismiss them? Even though you say there is little evidence of a causative link? Even though the surgeon general says they feel there is and cites that evidence to back it up?
I mean… what?
If the major psychological/pediatric organizations come out in support of this, I’ll eat my words.
I would interpret the American Academy of Pediatricians stance as being supportive. But that’s open to interpretation, I suppose.
https://www.aap.org/en/patient-care/media-and-children/center-of-excellence-on-social-media-and-youth-mental-health/youth-advisory-panel/youth-advisory-panel-feedback-to-policymakers/
The onus is on the state to justify their control with science. They haven’t done that and clearly you haven’t done that either. You’re literally just posting vibes.
Do I really need to point out that you yourself are “literally just posting vibes” ?
You didn’t even bother investigating whether or not they had justified their stance with science. I’m not convinced you made it past the headline, much less read any of the content that article linked to.
The funny thing is I actually did read two of the studies I quickly found and which you too can find. But you seem more interested in adhering to a certain… vibe.
Have a nice day.
Oh we got trouble, right here in River City. We need something to keep the kids moral after school.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seduction_of_the_Innocent
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence
Tell me you didn’t read the article without telling me.
Why would you conclude that? Because it conflicts with your “vibe”?
Yeah buddy whatever you want to be true is.
You know they are turning the frogs gay? Read about it on my 5G Mark of the Beast Covid microchip
It’s a pity you aren’t worth responding to. Have a nice day!
So why did you do it kiddo?