[HN Gopher] Social isolation and the brain in the pandemic era
___________________________________________________________________
Social isolation and the brain in the pandemic era
Author : rntn
Score : 53 points
Date : 2022-11-13 15:31 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nature.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nature.com)
| Animats wrote:
| That's a strange article. They seemed to have started with a
| conclusion and looked for supporting data.
|
| They don't seem to have controlled for reduced physical activity.
| They even seem to claim obesity is a result of reduced social
| contact. That's a stretch.
| Clamchop wrote:
| That doesn't seem like the correct reading to me. The health
| consequences of isolation appears to have its own body of
| research. The article summarizes and cites these, but doesn't
| appear to be intended to engage with the question of what the
| health consequences of isolation are, since those are argued or
| established elsewhere.
|
| So the question is how bad were lock downs for health, not if
| they were bad.
|
| And anyway, reduced physical activity is one such consequence
| and it's not clear why you would control for it.
| tlb wrote:
| As an individual, your social isolation and your physical
| activity are both independently under your control. So it's
| useful to know their relative impacts on mental health.
|
| Suppose it turned out that, when controlling for physical
| activity, isolation had no effect on health. Then, in the
| next pandemic, you should mostly focus on exercise. Or if
| isolation is more important, then you should focus on that.
| boopmaster wrote:
| Agreed. Over a million dead and zero processing time to grieve,
| and morgues overflowing such that temporary freezers are used
| to store the dead.
|
| [sarc] Not sure what about that could cause anxiety or
| depression in anyone, they just needed to hang out more.
| [/sarc]
| SnowHill9902 wrote:
| Pandemic <> quarantine.
| ahMath8 wrote:
| tjr225 wrote:
| Cue the requisite hacker news hurfing and durfing about how this
| is actually good due to being introverted.
| giraffe_lady wrote:
| I think in this case it will get subsumed under the more robust
| HN consensus of "the worst thing about covid is the
| consequences of the mitigation measures."
| willnonya wrote:
| This seems to be less a study of behavior than a hunt to justify
| a feeling.
|
| Social isolation has been an increasing part of the culture since
| we started replacing human interaction with 'social' media. When
| combined with the short duration of most pandemic isolation it
| seems more like people are trying to conflate loneliness with
| some external force rather than accepting that it is a normal
| human state.
| sacrosancty wrote:
| I agree. It also, it's too political to take one thing
| seriously on its own. After so many people have nailed their
| egos to the belief that social distancing and isolation, as
| well as mask wearing, etc. are very definitely good and that
| anyone violating those rules is very definitely bad, it's hard
| for them to accept that it might have been harmful. Similarly,
| for their opponents who were offended by those measures, it's
| hard not to go hunting for reasons why they were bad.
| brnaftr361 wrote:
| You don't think that the pandemic, the measures taken to
| mitigate it, the fiscal and monetary policies made in attempt
| to avert the disaster, the realized impact, and the hyper-
| political ultrapolarized interpretations of the goings-on, and
| the paranoia instilled at the social and individual level (and
| etc......) couldn't possibly manifest into the future?
|
| This isn't an isolated thing, it had and continues to have
| runoff impacts. A lot of wild reactivity originated, you can
| see that in all the economic data. It's not a "short duration"
| it's borderline cataclysmic, maybe you're just too insulated to
| see it.
| lob_it wrote:
| As a technology native, a quiet environment is the same feeling
| as chilling in the zone (if working on something interesting).
| Its not a shared experience for sure.
|
| I enjoy golf the same way (chlling in the zone during a good
| workout, similar to a runners high).
|
| I also happened to enjoy over 20,000 one-on-one interactions
| with work experience and technology, with the majority of it
| face-to-face.
|
| Being "all people'd out (not tired of people, just not seeking
| empty calories for the sake of it)" is a 21st century perk.
|
| The 1st world has always enjoyed "peace and quiet" for their
| own personal reasons :)
| taolegal wrote:
| Humans have millions of years of evolution searing into our DNA
| the impulse to be social creatures. And it always struck me as
| _actually_ anti-science to be very hush-hush or even outright
| ignorant of the profound negative consequences of social
| isolation. Even worse that the least vulnerable should be forced
| into social isolation.
| recuter wrote:
| Population density through out history has been far lower with
| far fewer people around and much more spread out. People didn't
| typically live in cities.
|
| Travel was difficult and dangerous. Frequently forbidden when not
| impractical (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement).
|
| If you think lockdowns in say, China, are harsh:
|
| Russian Serfs were only freed 1861. Less than a century after
| Joseph II decided to end feudalism
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serfdom_Patent_(1781).
|
| Some form of social isolation was the norm for most of human
| history. So I don't think you are doomed to grow crazy if you
| stay by yourself, we're just not used to it. No longer the norm.
|
| Being left alone with a smartphone and "social" media apps
| however might cause a person to spiral.
| AntiRemoteWork wrote:
| hibikir wrote:
| Looking at population density at a global level, or at a
| national level, is going to be giving you misleading results.
| If your goal is to evaluate whether people in history lived
| close to other people, you need a very different metric:
| Population density of the neighborhood where the median person
| lives.
|
| For instance, if you look at population density overall,
| Germany has a far higher population density than Spain. This
| is, however, because most of Spain is empty. Even when you look
| at rural areas, what you see is not American style homesteads,
| but people living in a relatively dense village, and traveling
| to their farm. In that environment, social isolation is very
| difficult: Just buying food and going to some kind of workplace
| leads to being very close to a whole lot more people than, say,
| your average American does.
|
| So when we go back in time in most places, we might not see
| that much cross-settlement travel, but how dense are the
| settlements? How much can you avoid other human beings? Just
| like travel was dangerous, living in a place that was a long
| distance from your next neighbor was also dangerous: The best
| protection against attack was to have enough neighbors very
| close, as to make it really difficult to get away with
| attacking you. We have ruins of many settlements, going back
| well before writing, and it's normal to see places that might
| have housed a dozen or so families, all in screaming distance.
|
| Therefore, I don't see how we can support that some form of
| relative social isolation was the norm everywhere. If anything,
| it's the modern American suburb, where in practice we don't
| need to exchange a word with the neighbors, and most retail
| transactions are impersonal, is what happens to be historically
| novel. The pandemic just made it more extreme.
| recuter wrote:
| I like this reply and agree with most of what is written.
|
| > So when we go back in time in most places, we might not see
| that much cross-settlement travel, but how dense are the
| settlements?
|
| Depending on when and where sometimes not very dense at all.
|
| > How much can you avoid other human beings?
|
| You don't need to avoid anyone but going days and weeks
| without speaking to people was not so inconceivable as it is
| now.
|
| > If anything, it's the modern American suburb, where in
| practice we don't need to exchange a word with the neighbors,
| and most retail transactions are impersonal, is what happens
| to be historically novel.
|
| That's the slightly different lament of not knowing your
| neighbors. The loss of togetherness and sense of community.
| The bad vibes. I agree with all that, you can feel more alone
| surrounded by an ocean of people than being part of a small
| tight knit group of people surrounded by an ocean.
| Conversely, mental health problems have been on the rise for
| a long time prior to the pandemic. No doubt it brought these
| issues to the forefront and didn't help things.
|
| All I pointed out is that there is no shortage of precedent
| or examples of isolation and it does not necessarily imply
| that your mental health _has_ to deteriorate.
|
| _Forced_ isolation or alienation from neighbors on the other
| hand is far more likely to be harmful. So is substituting
| actual social relationships with parasocial interactions
| online and apps.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| There really is very little historical precedent for people
| being totally alone, all of the example you cited are of
| right communities, which is the opposite of alone.
|
| In fact the overwhelming weight of researcher points to
| isolation wrecking your mental health. I pointed to a meta-
| analysis of investigations into solitary confinement
| earlier. There's no shortage of research showing similar
| results for contemporary non-carceral isolation. Here is an
| analysis pointing to increased deaths from drinking and
| drugs due to COVID isolation[1], point the opposite
| direction of your conclusion.
|
| [1] https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/19/12835
| Behemoth66 wrote:
| I believe you're confusing meeting new people and isolation.
|
| Living alone was extremely rare until recent history [1]. Not
| having freedom of movement, or not living in a city does not
| mean social isolation. Villages back in history used to
| celebrate holidays together, families were much larger,
| everyone knew everyone since birth etc...
|
| I just woke up but don't feel like pulling up the sources but I
| believe the exact opposite of your statement. Social isolation
| is a modern phenomenon that was extremely rare before in
| history. It was incredibly difficult to survive just by
| yourself.
|
| [1] https://archive.org/details/goingsoloextraor00eric
| comfypotato wrote:
| The paper is discussing a hyper isolation that hasn't often
| been seen historically. As stated, 1 in 10 Europeans didn't see
| any friends or family outside of their household for an entire
| year.
|
| I do agree with you that it's ultimately apples and oranges to
| compare our current social state to our ancestors'.
| recuter wrote:
| For a long long time 9/10 of Europeans didn't leave their
| village for a multitude of reasons. If the village is small
| and remote enough that's functionally the same thing.
|
| When you did leave you might not see your family and friends
| for years if you even managed to come back alive.
|
| If you lived in a viking settlement or out in the wilderness
| of the Wild West or some secret monastery at the top of a
| mountain range in Tibet that's pretty damn isolated. Or a
| lighthouse. Or an island. 'etc.
| wwtrv wrote:
| Well back then all of your friends and relatives were
| probably living in the same village. Now they might be
| spread-out over hundreds of kilometers or even much more.
|
| Seems like fundamentally different situations to me.
|
| > If you lived in a viking settlement or out in the
| wilderness of the Wild West or some secret monastery at the
| top of a mountain range in Tibet that's pretty damn
| isolated. Or a lighthouse. Or an island. 'etc.
|
| That was a statistically insignificant proportion of the
| population even back then (assuming by 'viking settlement'
| you mean in Greenland or something like that)
| janef0421 wrote:
| It was actually fairly rare for people to spend their
| entire lives in their villages during the medieval era.
| People would regularly travel within their region, and it
| was typical for a person to undertake multiple longer
| journeys within their lifetime, often to religious sites.
| chitowneats wrote:
| What about those of us trapped somewhere with no friends or
| family in the local area? Serfs had their spouses,
| children, and parents to socialize with, even when cut off
| mostly from the rest of society.
|
| Some percentage of us experienced an alone-ness that really
| has no historical precedent. For some, it persisted many
| months.
| recuter wrote:
| I fall into that percentage. I got stuck in a very severe
| lockdown whilst traveling. It was unpleasant to say the
| least.
|
| However we should disentangle the stress of the
| situation, the uncertainty about the future, the
| arbitrary restrictions on previously taken for granted
| personal freedoms and the abrupt change to a lifetime of
| normalcy from the bummer of being alone.
|
| Solitude and loneliness are not the same thing.
|
| Some people actually thrived during lockdown. Others
| choose to isolate with no relation to it. All I am saying
| is that it is not written in your DNA that your mental
| health _must_ deteriorate due to lack of socializing.
|
| It is not so much unprecedented as it is unusual and
| involuntary.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| Can you point to any research that supports your
| extraordinary claim?
| ch4s3 wrote:
| > If the village is small and remote enough that's
| functionally the same thing
|
| No it isn't. Interacting with with 120-150 neighbors[1] on
| a daily basis is a richer form of social interaction than
| is available to most people in the West today. For most of
| history people lived in groups of up to a few hundred,
| being isolated wasn't the norm.
|
| [1] https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/news-wires-white-
| papers...
| jasmer wrote:
| My grandparents lived on a farm there was nobody around
| for some distance.
|
| And many 'villages' in Europe were just 2 or 3
| households, not really villages.
|
| I think the OP's point is reasonable for context.
| recuter wrote:
| My condolences, as it is apparently clinically
| _impossible_ for them not to have developed severe
| psychological issues as a result. ;)
| ch4s3 wrote:
| The discussion here is clearly about COVID isolation and
| the wild bullshit claims you're making about history.
| Being in a community of even 3 households isn't remotely
| similar to a single adult in COVID isolation and that
| should be obvious.
|
| You're doing a great job ignoring any criticism of your
| claims.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| You're talking about a completely different time period.
| This is also historically abnormal. Premodern farmers
| almost universally lived in villages of 100 or more
| people. Check out some sources I linked.
|
| Widely dispersed freeholding is super unstable and even
| more so without modern tools and techniques.
| comfypotato wrote:
| You're speaking to my point. A household of 4-5 and a
| typical village have extremely different social dynamics.
| Similarly the groupings (villages, tribes, etc.) of primal
| humans were much larger than a household of 4-5.
|
| (Your examples of lighthouses and religious hermits are too
| rare to be seriously compared to the average person. These
| extreme examples are probably similar to what I'm talking
| about, though. We just don't know as much about them as we
| do a typical village.)
|
| Pandemic aside, we live in a world where it is much more
| possible to live in this hyper isolation than ever before.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| I'm sorry, this is nonsense. Serfs worked fields in small
| groups in housheolds of 5-8 individuals[1] and communally
| feasted dozens of times per year not to mention attending
| religious services. Hunter gatherers spen(d)t hours a day just
| gossiping[2] and engaged in communal rituals[3].
|
| We also know from studying prisoners that isolation breaks
| peoples' brains[4].
|
| [1] https://acoup.blog/2020/07/24/collections-bread-how-did-
| they...
|
| [2]https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12052-010-0306-1
|
| [3]
| https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/97804294...
|
| [4]https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.0084
| ...
| [deleted]
| Out_of_Characte wrote:
| The entire causal relationship of lockdowns and social isolation
| doesn't sit right with me, I'm sure there are anxious people that
| decided to spend more time isolated but my uncle couldn't do that
| after a few months, got covid and died. I didn't even attempt to
| isolate insofar friends had the same mindset and none of them
| isolated or reduced interactions exept bars were closed. So its
| not clear to me that people are capable of suvervising their own
| social interactions. Maybe threatening to 'reduce social
| interaction' had the opposite effect of creating scarcity which
| induced demand. This would have been stating the obvious if we're
| talking economics.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-11-13 23:01 UTC)