27 replies to this topic

[JBForrester]

Recent studies indicate that feelings of loneliness can indicate more of a risk of mental decline or dementia in later years. This is a scary thought, yet hopeful in the sense that the feeling of loneliness is something that humans can actively change.

Excerpt:
"'Interestingly, the fact that 'feeling lonely' rather than 'being alone' was associated with dementia onset suggests that it is not the objective situation, but, rather, the perceived absence of social attachments that increases the risk of cognitive decline,' they add."

http://www.scienceda...t Science News)

Hope that after reading this many of you have decisively decided not to feel lonely anymore : )

Edited by JBForrester, 13 December 2012 - 12:13 AM.

[nowayout]

I take issue with their hypothesis that it is "the perceived absence of social attachments that increases the risk of cognitive decline" and claiming that the "objective situation" is that they are not alone and therefore should not be lonely. How paternalistic! What are they implying, that these people are insane or hallucinating? I would rather say that common sense suggests that it may not simply be the existence of social relationships that matter, but also the quality of the relationships, and that the "objective situation" is that the subjects are correctly judging the quality of their attachments to be so bad that they leave them feeling lonely for good objective reasons. I think it is well established that certain relationships can be even worse for a person's mental health than being alone, so it should not be surprising that other relationships can be neutral for long term mental health.

Edited by viveutvivas, 13 December 2012 - 02:09 AM.

[sthira]

I think it is well established that certain relationships can be even worse for a person's mental health than being alone, so it should not be surprising that other relationships can be neutral for long term mental health.

Great point. When I look at my married friends, many seem so miserable. So if you're having bad times with someone else then it's less dementia-causing than if you're just happily alone? That doesn't make sense. Even so, loneliness is part of the human condition; every one of us gets lonely from time to time, and yet all of us don't become demented.

[JBForrester]

I think it is well established that certain relationships can be even worse for a person's mental health than being alone, so it should not be surprising that other relationships can be neutral for long term mental health.

Great point. When I look at my married friends, many seem so miserable. So if you're having bad times with someone else then it's less dementia-causing than if you're just happily alone? That doesn't make sense. Even so, loneliness is part of the human condition; every one of us gets lonely from time to time, and yet all of us don't become demented.

Yes, I think it's very possible to "feel lonely" while in relationships, and I observed many who have been in such a situation. However, I think their main point is that basically "feeling lonely", whether in relationships or not (which is why they don't say "being alone"), is not healthy for the brain. I don't think that the word "perceived" is meant to say that such people are unaware of being physically in the presence of others or have a support network, it's just declaring a logically true statement: it is perceived because some people do have friends or company (see definition below), whether goods friends or bad friends.
It sounds to me that your idea of "feeling lonely" is an idea of being depressed, thus an abstract idea of mentally being alone. However, my idea of "being lonely", which is passive - as opposed to "being alone", which is active - is instead an image of social exclusion, rejection, and worst of all, dying alone as a result, as opposed to a chosen autonomy or an intentional rejection of others, where isolation is an option.

lonely:
adjective ( lonelier , loneliest )
- sad because one has no friends or company
- without companions; solitary

This is why they say "perceived". It's quite a literal translation.
To constantly feel that you are an outcaste in society, or to create negative imaginary social interactions in your head, cannot be good physiologically in the long run. And of course, if you have a significant other who reinforces all of those negative self-perceptions and fears, then it is just as bad, or worst.
Point of story: The common misperception that being alone is unhealthy is now seemingly untrue - it's rather continually feeling lonely, which indicates that it is more mental than physical, and that even if we physically cannot always change a situation, we have the ability to change our position and perspective mentally.

Edited by JBForrester, 13 December 2012 - 10:55 AM.

[Marios Kyriazis]

Social bonds have three characteristics:
1 The number of your bonds, i.e. how many contacts or friends you interact with
2. The strenght of the bond, whether you interact with them once a year or several times a day
3. The quality of the bond, whether this is meaningful, interactive, socially satisfying etc

Improving all there of these characteristrics is essential in longevity and health

[RJ100]

I have very few social bonds and I prefer it this way - I'm not lonely at all.

I maintain that having few/weak social connections is not the cause of issues with longevity and health, but is instead a symptom of something wrong with the brain. The amygdala, perhaps. Issues later in life weren't brought about by isolation - they were there all the time waiting to emerge.

Edited by RJ100, 13 December 2012 - 05:43 PM.

[JBForrester]

I have very few social bonds and I prefer it this way - I'm not lonely at all.

I maintain that having few/weak social connections is not the cause of issues with longevity and health, but is instead a symptom of something wrong with the brain. The amygdala, perhaps. Issues later in life weren't brought about by isolation - they were there all the time waiting to emerge.

Can you elaborate about the statement, "instead a symptom of something wrong with the brain"? I have very few social bonds as well, but I would also say that I prefer it this way, to a certain degree. Out of choice, I never stayed in one place in my later teen and early 20s years, as the idea of being stagnant didn't appeal to me, and perhaps I wanted to run away from my smothering parents. Unfortunately, I didn't realize the importance of social bonds during those years while my brain was still growing, and I would hop from one group of friends to the next, or just choose to be alone. As of now, it is very difficult for me to imagine ever having a deep social bond with another, which scares me a bit. Hopefully there's hope though, as I would like to change this.

I'm curious though, what is wrong with the amygdala in people who lack social connections? I know the amygdala has to do with risk-taking in teens and fear in adults, but unsure as to how it relates to social interactions and connections and would love to understand what you mean.

[RJ100]

Amygdala volume and social network size in humans

The lack of plentiful and/or strong social bonds doesn't lead to health and longevity issues, imo. There's correlation but no causation. It's the poor state of your brain, whether structurally or chemically, that leads to something like a poor social network and eventually to health and longevity issues.

[Marios Kyriazis]

Amygdala volume and social network size in humans

The lack of plentiful and/or strong social bonds doesn't lead to health and longevity issues, imo. There's correlation but no causation. It's the poor state of your brain, whether structurally or chemically, that leads to something like a poor social network and eventually to health and longevity issues.

Lack of social bonds results in poor external information input. Social isolation diminishes the amount of brain stimulation and this has repercussions not only on the nervous system but also on hormonal and immune components (as well as on oxidation parameters). It is not only health that suffers, but also longevity. The cause between poor brain stimulation and poor health has been shown in many studies. So has the cause between a socially-enriched environment and health improvement.

[RJ100]

Amygdala volume and social network size in humans

The lack of plentiful and/or strong social bonds doesn't lead to health and longevity issues, imo. There's correlation but no causation. It's the poor state of your brain, whether structurally or chemically, that leads to something like a poor social network and eventually to health and longevity issues.

Lack of social bonds results in poor external information input. Social isolation diminishes the amount of brain stimulation and this has repercussions not only on the nervous system but also on hormonal and immune components (as well as on oxidation parameters). It is not only health that suffers, but also longevity. The cause between poor brain stimulation and poor health has been shown in many studies. So has the cause between a socially-enriched environment and health improvement.

Wait now - mental stimulation is not the same as social bonds. I lack friends and relations but I input plenty of "external information" and "brain stimulation".

Obviously there are plenty of people out there whose quality of life would benefit from exiting their isolation, but I'm not buying it as some universal truth that social isolation leads to health and longevity issues.

[JBForrester]

Amygdala volume and social network size in humans

The lack of plentiful and/or strong social bonds doesn't lead to health and longevity issues, imo. There's correlation but no causation. It's the poor state of your brain, whether structurally or chemically, that leads to something like a poor social network and eventually to health and longevity issues.

Lack of social bonds results in poor external information input. Social isolation diminishes the amount of brain stimulation and this has repercussions not only on the nervous system but also on hormonal and immune components (as well as on oxidation parameters). It is not only health that suffers, but also longevity. The cause between poor brain stimulation and poor health has been shown in many studies. So has the cause between a socially-enriched environment and health improvement.

Wait now - mental stimulation is not the same as social bonds. I lack friends and relations but I input plenty of "external information" and "brain stimulation".

Obviously there are plenty of people out there whose quality of life would benefit from exiting their isolation, but I'm not buying it as some universal truth that social isolation leads to health and longevity issues.

So please tell me, is there a way of increasing the volume of the amygdala? Please tell me yes.

[Marios Kyriazis]

Wait now - mental stimulation is not the same as social bonds. I lack friends and relations but I input plenty of "external information" and "brain stimulation".

Obviously there are plenty of people out there whose quality of life would benefit from exiting their isolation, but I'm not buying it as some universal truth that social isolation leads to health and longevity issues.

Social bonding is an easy and quick way to increase one's mental stimulation. If you believe and are entirely sure that your input of information and mental stimulation is excellent without any social bonding, then so be it.

What matters from the longevity point of view, is the input of meaningful, actionable and relevant information. It doesn't matter how one achieves this. Only that the social bonding method is the easiest for most people.

Also, I assume that your particular input of information may be happening via online methods. This, in my view, is another form of social bonding, albeit a virtual one. See my article here:
http://hplusmagazine...-human-avatars/

[Marios Kyriazis]

So please tell me, is there a way of increasing the volume of the amygdala? Please tell me yes.

The volume of something is not necessarily directly related to its function. The benefit may be related to the complexity of its internal structure, or to other organs, and/or to the interconectedness of those organs.

[RJ100]

What matters from the longevity point of view, is the input of meaningful, actionable and relevant information. It doesn't matter how one achieves this. Only that the social bonding method is the easiest for most people.

I don't disagree with you on this.

Interesting article.

I suppose I'm biased on this topic, as I'm one of those who would not benefit from this - whatever positive stimulus others get from social bonds eludes me. I have a deep and meaningful relationship with my wife and adequate relationships with my coworkers and aside from that I do not find friendships rewarding.

The volume of something is not necessarily directly related to its function.

Not necessarily, but in the case of the amygdala it seems so. I would bet money that mine is stunted.

[The Immortalist]

Amygdala volume and social network size in humans

The lack of plentiful and/or strong social bonds doesn't lead to health and longevity issues, imo. There's correlation but no causation. It's the poor state of your brain, whether structurally or chemically, that leads to something like a poor social network and eventually to health and longevity issues.

Lack of social bonds results in poor external information input. Social isolation diminishes the amount of brain stimulation and this has repercussions not only on the nervous system but also on hormonal and immune components (as well as on oxidation parameters). It is not only health that suffers, but also longevity. The cause between poor brain stimulation and poor health has been shown in many studies. So has the cause between a socially-enriched environment and health improvement.

There is more types of stimulation then social stimulation. There's books, movies, playing music, writing books, playing video games, computer programming, exercise, solving math problems, being a scientist and doing experiments, etc that all greatly stimulate the brain.

Why can't those kinds of stimulation listed above and other types not mentioned replace social stimulation?

Edited by The Immortalist, 15 December 2012 - 12:41 AM.

[JBForrester]

So please tell me, is there a way of increasing the volume of the amygdala? Please tell me yes.

The volume of something is not necessarily directly related to its function. The benefit may be related to the complexity of its internal structure, or to other organs, and/or to the interconectedness of those organs.

So for people like me and RJ100 who haven't had an enormous amount of social stimulation, how can we get back whatever it is we lost? And can we fully get it back?

[nowayout]

Amygdala volume and social network size in humans

The lack of plentiful and/or strong social bonds doesn't lead to health and longevity issues, imo. There's correlation but no causation. It's the poor state of your brain, whether structurally or chemically, that leads to something like a poor social network and eventually to health and longevity issues.

Lack of social bonds results in poor external information input. Social isolation diminishes the amount of brain stimulation and this has repercussions not only on the nervous system but also on hormonal and immune components (as well as on oxidation parameters). It is not only health that suffers, but also longevity. The cause between poor brain stimulation and poor health has been shown in many studies. So has the cause between a socially-enriched environment and health improvement.

There is more types of stimulation then social stimulation. There's books, movies, playing music, writing books, playing video games, computer programming, exercise, solving math problems, being a scientist and doing experiments, etc that all greatly stimulate the brain.

Why can't those kinds of stimulation listed above and other types not mentioned replace social stimulation?

I have a suspicion that social stimulation may provide orders of magnitude more challenging mental input than those activities you mention that are solitary. In fact, lots of people take refuge in precisely some of these activities because the demands of social interaction are too much input for them to handle. I solve math problems for a living, and I can assure you that the kind of mental activity I use for that involves a very limited kind of stimulation compared to just hanging out with other people. In fact, solving math problems is a way for me to retreat and calm down when I feel overstimulated by the demands of being social. Being social is much more overwhelming.

And no, texting or talking on the internet is not a social activity. The bandwidth is minuscule compared to standing next to the person.

Social stimulation also provides many other effects on neurotransmitters impossible to obtain from solitary activities. It's hard to get a rush of oxytocin from a book, for example. These kinds of effects may be a crucial difference.

By the way, some of the activities that you mention, such as being a scientist or a programmer, incorporate a lot of interaction with coworkers, employers, students, etc. They are not usually solitary activities.

Edited by viveutvivas, 15 December 2012 - 01:32 AM.

[nowayout]

It seems that there is a fundamental design flaw in the human mind. Our minds are fundamentally unstable, and need frequent recalibration by social interaction not to spiral out of control into complete insanity.

It is well established that even the stablest individuals very quickly start having serious mental problems when they are held in solitary confinement. Even in everyday life, I think many of us have had the experience of quickly losing perspective on our problems, or starting to have excessive emotional lability, when we have gone through a lonely spell. It should not be surprising, then, that long periods of loneliness can contribute to dementia. It would be surprising if it didn't.

Edited by viveutvivas, 15 December 2012 - 01:43 AM.

[JBForrester]

It seems that there is a fundamental design flaw in the human mind. Our minds are fundamentally unstable, and need frequent recalibration by social interaction not to spiral out of control into complete insanity.

It is well established that even the stablest individuals very quickly start having serious mental problems when they are held in solitary confinement. Even in everyday life, I think many of us have had the experience of quickly losing perspective on our problems, or starting to have excessive emotional lability, when we have gone through a lonely spell. It should not be surprising, then, that long periods of loneliness can contribute to dementia. It would be surprising if it didn't.

Interesting point.

What are long periods of loneliness, though? Is it one long chunk of a period of loneliness (e.g. buying a cabin in Alaska and living a self-sustainable life) or do you think it can be incremental (e.g. spending tons of time with people at work or school during the day, but always spending every evening alone at home)?

[nowayout]

I am pretty sure the mental damage can be incremental as in the example you state, just from my personal experience of being single for the past three years.

[The Immortalist]

It seems that there is a fundamental design flaw in the human mind. Our minds are fundamentally unstable, and need frequent recalibration by social interaction not to spiral out of control into complete insanity.

It is well established that even the stablest individuals very quickly start having serious mental problems when they are held in solitary confinement. Even in everyday life, I think many of us have had the experience of quickly losing perspective on our problems, or starting to have excessive emotional lability, when we have gone through a lonely spell. It should not be surprising, then, that long periods of loneliness can contribute to dementia. It would be surprising if it didn't.

How might we correct this design flaw of the human mind? It's odd because it seems like it's a trait counter-productive to survival if we all go insane if we get stuck alone in the wilderness for a long period of time.

Maybe it is to motivate us to seek out people since humans can't accomplish much alone? That said why does the feeling of loneliness have to be so psychologically tormenting? Why can't it just be a painless reminder that happens every so often if we end up in a lonely situation?

Edited by The Immortalist, 15 December 2012 - 02:54 AM.

[JBForrester]

I am pretty sure the mental damage can be incremental as in the example you state, just from my personal experience of being single for the past three years.

Yes, but what about students, such as those whose majors require massive amounts of alone time, e.g. med school students? That is an example of incremental alone time. And what about those whove chosen a celibate life, such as monks? Many of whom do live a very peaceful life. Can we say that certain activities make up for the alone time, such as massive memorization of text books or meditation?
At the same time, another observation is the stereotypical "nutty professor" - those that we see who've obviously lost the knack at normal social conduct, perhaps from the consequence of locking themselves up in a reading/writing frenzy.

However, considering that young students do this as well but come out seemingly sane, is it fair to say that after a certain age this habit is detrimental? If so, at what age?

[JBForrester]

Also, does anybody know any nootropic stacks or supplements that would be good to take after extreme periods of isolation?

[Marios Kyriazis]

Also, does anybody know any nootropic stacks or supplements that would be good to take after extreme periods of isolation?

I agree with most of the comments by viveutvivas above.

Regarding the issue of nootropics, this is something that I was thinking about for some time. Certainly some nootropics would be of use in a general sense, as facilitators of neuronal function. These should also be useful not only for dealing with the problems of extreme isolation, but also as 'boosters' of information-processing (information obtained via social contacts and via other external brain input). But I am not aware of any specific examples or any published research in this area.

[nupi]

Also, does anybody know any nootropic stacks or supplements that would be good to take after extreme periods of isolation?

Probably something like MDMA (only half-kidding)

[renfr]

Also, does anybody know any nootropic stacks or supplements that would be good to take after extreme periods of isolation?

Supplements that increase myelin.
In other terms most of cholinergics.
I read a study somewhere saying people without a lot of social interactions have decreased myelin content versus those who socialize a lot. Myelin is essential for the protection of our axons and for transmission of nerve messages, dementia, alzheimers or multiple sclerosis are all linked to a progressive destruction of myelin sheath and therefore of neurons.
What's interesting is that myelin is both a cause and a consequence of decreased social interaction.
Edit : here's the study http://www.medicalne...cles/253347.php

Edited by renfr, 20 December 2012 - 06:44 AM.

[Valor5]

Thank you that's awesome that we can identify the physical manifestation of this disease. But I would like to throw in my thoughts. From research I have done, Daniel Goldman in his book emotional intelligence or one of the others makes the point of happiness stemming from good associations, friendships and I fully agree relationships can be both bad and good as most things in life. Secondly, the place social interactions has in our life and that maybe we can not take a cookie cutter approach for all people. For example perhaps some because of their interests, occupation can not really logistically be "social" but it does not detract from their health or humanity. This can be argued. What if someone is an accountant and thoroughly loves accounting verses someone who is a judge like "Judge Judy" for example. Will Judge Judy live longer because she has the more social role?

My last point is the pathology of this itself. I believe that some people are prone to loneliness because of innate shame or guilt rightfully or wrongfully attributed. For example in society we do not let pedophiles or other criminals around our children and this is for the overall betterment of society. But at the same time there are individuals who maybe because of feelings of shame or inadequacy or unduly afraid never get to enjoy and grow in society and it its interactions. I believe it is a learning curve. Where some like criminals never quite figure it out and the rest of us we eventually figure out how to get along and strike the appropriate balance.

[JBForrester]

Another Study: Loneliness, Like Chronic Stress, Taxes the Immune System

http://www.scienceda...t Science News)