"Living alone was not associated with dying prematurely for those in the highest socioeconomic group — the 19 percent of study participants who had a university degree or worked in an executive position. But for the rest, the lower the socioeconomic status, the higher the risk for death. The authors emphasize that the remaining 81 percent of the population was not deprived or living in poverty, but consisted mainly of middle-class and skilled and unskilled workers."
Socioeconomic class moderates mortality even among the loners? That's not unexpected.
That said, I wonder if Danish society contributes particularly to loneliness. Most happiness studies (a trend in recent years) place Denmark at the top of happiness indices, but my understanding is happiness in this context often doesn't reflect an emotional well-being among individuals, only a quantitative aggregate one. Much has been said about the Danish concept of hygge (cozyness) but Scandinavian life in general is very privatized. I wonder if Danish social connectedness metrics are perhaps not so stellar.
I had a long conversation at a hostel in Denmark with a Danish reporter whose opinion was that the metrics of Denmark as being a happy place are completely misleading, and that modern Danish society was deeply lonely.
It's fuzzy because it was a few years ago, but I remember she said that it's common for young Danish people to move to the city when they become adults and completely lose touch with their families, and that social relationships at least in Copenhagen tended to be unfulfilling and superficial.
Entirely hearsay. I'd be curious to hear other perspectives. (She was also older than the millennial generation, so may have been out of touch herself.)
>Most happiness studies (a trend in recent years) place Denmark at the top of happiness indices...
I wonder if the "happiness" part is a misnomer and should actually be "contentment". Having experienced the Nordic/Scandinavian cutlures, myself (Sweden), they are pretty private but it's not impossible to have a social life - compared to, say, Ireland. I think the general demeanor of Scandinavians is pretty jovial but this also seems to be geographically-dependent (e.g.: city versus "country").
All of that being said, it's no surprise that the more money you have, the longer you live. I have a suspicion that it is related to the lesser amounts of stressors regarding to any fiscal matters.
(Not saying that no one stresses about fiscal matters in that 19% but if it is due to fewer fiscal stressors, then it might be worth noting.)
I wonder what the break-down of the cardiovascular health group is...
Yes if you look at Scandinavian societies in isolation, they are happy people. The type of happiness you can feel for every minute that you do not freeze to death.
If we look at Scandinavian societies in comparison to the rest of the world and taking in consideration things like family, social connections, friendships, and general person to person connections, then you end up with a sad sad story.
Especially for an outsider living in Scandinavia. Basically one observes a pack of humanoid-like snow people that have a compeletly different value system from the rest of the world. Weak social and family relations, no morals outside of what is legal and not, and the worst of all is that they have the feeling that they are better.
A lot can be told about these people by looking at their past.
Another thought along those lines, is that men tend to try and ignore discomfort. If a man gets a pain in his chest, he is likely to think to himself, "I'll wait and see if it gets worse!" If the same man is living with someone, he might say to them, "I have a slight pain right here!" pointing to his chest. Then that person would begin to pressure him to have it checked.
> Having someone else around to call an ambulance for you when you're having a heart attack can have a large effect on the outcome.
This was my first thought as well when I saw the study. The study doesn't really indicate if deaths are do to this factor or to other longer term factors. I wonder how much of the study (and it might not be much) can be explained by not having someone around to call 911. Or if you are living alone not having something like life alert. Additionally, something like life alert does not always help. Falls is a major issue for older populations, and if you are knocked out because of a fall (or fall because you passed out) having someone to call an ambulance is critical.
not fond of this but people were designing smart floor to detect falls and call for help
about the latter... I know doctors don't like when people inflates tiny issues but I've seen a few people die because they didn't listen to naggers around them
Having someone else around who's a negative influence on dietary, entertainment, and general physical activity choices can have a large effect on the probability you'll need an ambulance.
I don't know... this feels like yet another article abusing statistics to generate a headline. There are just so many factors that could have a high comorbidity.
The bigger issue I see is not living alone, but living without a social net -- I personally really enjoy living alone, but I also have regular social gatherings in my life.
> The bigger issue I see is not living alone, but living without a social net
Anecdotal, but my grandfather insisted on living alone - he drove, went to the bar and hung out with his friends every single day, and someone in our family would either visit him or talk to him on the phone a few times a week - in other words, a social net.
He insisted on his independence and liked his space, so we didn't harass him every single day even though he only lived 15 minutes away.
One evening, he fell down and couldn't get to the phone. He was on the floor for probably just 36 hours before we found out and called the ambulance. He died a few days later in the hospital, having never fully emerged from his diabetic coma.
We thought that checking in with him every other day was enough, but it was not.
Anecdotal, but a friend of mine died because he had a seizure at home and no one stopped by to check in for over a day. If he had a housemate, he would have been far more likely to be found and rescued.
As a single father of two teenagers who is - according to my kids - doing a good job, it’s almost like I’m societies worst nightmare. The idea that men could bring up children alone seems to terrify people, I assume because it puts a bunch of social norms in question like “every man must have a woman in his life or he’s going to self-destruct”.
A few years ago there was an extremely broad study of all males living within a town, totalling 900 men in all. They monitored orgasm frequency over decades. As a result they were able to show that those who were below average in their orgasm frequency had a 50% higher chance of dying from any cause. That was alongside all sorts of findings about the general health dangers of abstinence. I imagine there is likely a pretty strong correlation between those who live alone and those who are starved for orgasm.
63 to 95 years old? Hell, the first month I moved cross-country (at 22) I got really, really sick and couldn't get out of bed to buy groceries. After the third day I considered asking my estranged dad (who I was getting away from) to fly cross the country, or asking my landlord for help, or calling the hospital or 911. I literally had NO idea what to do. I wasn't dying I just couldn't stand up without barfing or getting dizzy.
It was incredibly scary for a young kid trying to find a job and start a new life. I immediately saw the value in the door-to-door checkup services for the elderly.
I think this is one of the cases where observing past and using it to predict future adds a bias that's no longer valid these days. Most people I know that are alone seem to be happy, the ones in relationships seem a mixed bag (some oscillating between high highs and low lows). Again, there is surely bias among people I meet (I can't make a stratified dataset with perfectly balanced classes), though it might be an indicator that socioeconomic and health conditions changed dramatically recently, invalidating long-term trends.
"3 years ago, my sister found me unresponsive covered in my own vomit and shit in my bed. Called 911 and my life was saved. All I had was the flu, but it had caused brain swelling. The last thing I remember was going to sleep the night before, feeling perfectly fine.
The ONLY reason I'm alive is because I was supposed to dog-sit for my sister's best friend starting that day. When she couldn't get a hold of me, she notified my sister, who came to my house to check on me."
> “It’s paradoxical that the more we live in concentrated populations in big cities, the more people are living alone” said the lead author, Dr. Magnus T. Jensen
How is that in any way paradoxical? High density living causes people to subconsciously value individual connections less as they are surrounded by people in their day to day lives. This causes them to seek out alone time because their bodies are fatigued from the constant interaction. And causes them to have less social energy to devote to the people close to them.
High density living performs the same trick on the brain that social media does. It fools a persons mind into thinking they are not alone, but in reality they are actually spending all of that time without individual close human connection. In reality they are spending all of their time alone. Along with that comes all physiological aspects of that constant alone time. Things like depression and general lack of emotional depth that we know has a significant effect on life expectancy.
I think it's less that and more so that those who buy large houses in the low-density outskirts simply have extra rooms for elder parents/divorcing relatives/recently graduated children/homeless friends/etc.
I've found it very difficult to find people to cohabitate with who aren't bringing down the living standards important to me. From long-term girlfriends to random folks I shared rent with when I was in the SF Bay area, it has always been a regression from what I have living alone.
Bay area is one of the worst places to find a girlfriend though, so if this is important for you, you need to move to a place with different supply/demand balance.
Congratulations. If you have the slack to maximize these things, you're probably in the top tier of statistics of this study that get X'd out to make their point.
This leads me to this: it's interesting to think about which way the correlation goes - are these early deaths caused by living alone, or is it a symptom of other things wrong in their life that lead to a lack of girlfriends and random people and family in their life?
When I first moved to the USA from India, 20 years ago, I sought the help of a realtor to find a house in New England Area. He figured I was earning more than his clientele base and started showing me houses which were secluded and touted it as a huge plus. My reaction then (now I am sympathetic to isolation as a luxury and privilege) was that he was showing me such dives because I was a minority. In India, you were never far away from people and isolation was a novelty that you dabbled with in your vacation time (mountain resorts and such). As life would have it, I ended up in Manhattan later in life.
"“It’s paradoxical that the more we live in concentrated populations in big cities, the more people are living alone ... Social isolation is a global problem"
Not paradoxical at all, considering the rash of entire old neighborhoods being torn down, to be replaced with exercise shoppes and bubble-tea shoppes and rectilinearly-architected enclaves of mere empty-headed dormitude. Faux-wood-trimmed concrete festooned with dark-blue surveillance knobs and plastic trees are fairly inadequate stand-ins for soul.
It seems odd this article concludes the solution to isolation is redesigning cities to force social interaction. Whereas the rich are more immune to the negative health effects of isolation.
Maybe instead the economy should be redesigned so the haves vs have nots isn’t so extreme and force social interaction amount the two groups. But most importantly this would combat the stress (cortisol) such a large segment of society has as a result of financial burdens and debt.
Are you sure it's proposing that cities force social interaction? Could it be a proposal to provide more options for living arrangements with a lot of social interaction, like group homes? Such arrangements do force interaction, but people would be choosing to put themselves in that situation, and would be able to get themselves out of the situation by simply moving to another apartment in the same city.
[+] [-] wenc|7 years ago|reply
"Living alone was not associated with dying prematurely for those in the highest socioeconomic group — the 19 percent of study participants who had a university degree or worked in an executive position. But for the rest, the lower the socioeconomic status, the higher the risk for death. The authors emphasize that the remaining 81 percent of the population was not deprived or living in poverty, but consisted mainly of middle-class and skilled and unskilled workers."
Socioeconomic class moderates mortality even among the loners? That's not unexpected.
That said, I wonder if Danish society contributes particularly to loneliness. Most happiness studies (a trend in recent years) place Denmark at the top of happiness indices, but my understanding is happiness in this context often doesn't reflect an emotional well-being among individuals, only a quantitative aggregate one. Much has been said about the Danish concept of hygge (cozyness) but Scandinavian life in general is very privatized. I wonder if Danish social connectedness metrics are perhaps not so stellar.
[+] [-] ajkjk|7 years ago|reply
It's fuzzy because it was a few years ago, but I remember she said that it's common for young Danish people to move to the city when they become adults and completely lose touch with their families, and that social relationships at least in Copenhagen tended to be unfulfilling and superficial.
Entirely hearsay. I'd be curious to hear other perspectives. (She was also older than the millennial generation, so may have been out of touch herself.)
[+] [-] renholder|7 years ago|reply
I wonder if the "happiness" part is a misnomer and should actually be "contentment". Having experienced the Nordic/Scandinavian cutlures, myself (Sweden), they are pretty private but it's not impossible to have a social life - compared to, say, Ireland. I think the general demeanor of Scandinavians is pretty jovial but this also seems to be geographically-dependent (e.g.: city versus "country").
All of that being said, it's no surprise that the more money you have, the longer you live. I have a suspicion that it is related to the lesser amounts of stressors regarding to any fiscal matters.
(Not saying that no one stresses about fiscal matters in that 19% but if it is due to fewer fiscal stressors, then it might be worth noting.)
I wonder what the break-down of the cardiovascular health group is...
[+] [-] Viker|7 years ago|reply
If we look at Scandinavian societies in comparison to the rest of the world and taking in consideration things like family, social connections, friendships, and general person to person connections, then you end up with a sad sad story.
Especially for an outsider living in Scandinavia. Basically one observes a pack of humanoid-like snow people that have a compeletly different value system from the rest of the world. Weak social and family relations, no morals outside of what is legal and not, and the worst of all is that they have the feeling that they are better. A lot can be told about these people by looking at their past.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante
Yes, I do live here and I do believe that "When in Rome...", but this is not Rome, it's like more like a zoo with golden toilets and snow monkeys.
[+] [-] eecc|7 years ago|reply
Ok, it’s not precisely the same country but they’re very close
[+] [-] neonate|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] RyanRies|7 years ago|reply
Having someone else around to nag you into going to the doctor when you otherwise might not go, etc.
[+] [-] TopHand|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dr_orpheus|7 years ago|reply
This was my first thought as well when I saw the study. The study doesn't really indicate if deaths are do to this factor or to other longer term factors. I wonder how much of the study (and it might not be much) can be explained by not having someone around to call 911. Or if you are living alone not having something like life alert. Additionally, something like life alert does not always help. Falls is a major issue for older populations, and if you are knocked out because of a fall (or fall because you passed out) having someone to call an ambulance is critical.
[+] [-] outworlder|7 years ago|reply
So, Apple Watch or similar tech?
I expect vitals monitoring to become more commonplace. It doesn't help with your second example, though.
[+] [-] craftyguy|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] agumonkey|7 years ago|reply
about the latter... I know doctors don't like when people inflates tiny issues but I've seen a few people die because they didn't listen to naggers around them
[+] [-] newnewpdro|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Qub3d|7 years ago|reply
The bigger issue I see is not living alone, but living without a social net -- I personally really enjoy living alone, but I also have regular social gatherings in my life.
[+] [-] brandonmenc|7 years ago|reply
Anecdotal, but my grandfather insisted on living alone - he drove, went to the bar and hung out with his friends every single day, and someone in our family would either visit him or talk to him on the phone a few times a week - in other words, a social net.
He insisted on his independence and liked his space, so we didn't harass him every single day even though he only lived 15 minutes away.
One evening, he fell down and couldn't get to the phone. He was on the floor for probably just 36 hours before we found out and called the ambulance. He died a few days later in the hospital, having never fully emerged from his diabetic coma.
We thought that checking in with him every other day was enough, but it was not.
Be careful.
[+] [-] gowld|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] harryf|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] otakucode|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] iheartpotatoes|7 years ago|reply
It was incredibly scary for a young kid trying to find a job and start a new life. I immediately saw the value in the door-to-door checkup services for the elderly.
[+] [-] bitL|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] akeck|7 years ago|reply
"3 years ago, my sister found me unresponsive covered in my own vomit and shit in my bed. Called 911 and my life was saved. All I had was the flu, but it had caused brain swelling. The last thing I remember was going to sleep the night before, feeling perfectly fine.
The ONLY reason I'm alive is because I was supposed to dog-sit for my sister's best friend starting that day. When she couldn't get a hold of me, she notified my sister, who came to my house to check on me."
[+] [-] kokokokoko|7 years ago|reply
How is that in any way paradoxical? High density living causes people to subconsciously value individual connections less as they are surrounded by people in their day to day lives. This causes them to seek out alone time because their bodies are fatigued from the constant interaction. And causes them to have less social energy to devote to the people close to them.
High density living performs the same trick on the brain that social media does. It fools a persons mind into thinking they are not alone, but in reality they are actually spending all of that time without individual close human connection. In reality they are spending all of their time alone. Along with that comes all physiological aspects of that constant alone time. Things like depression and general lack of emotional depth that we know has a significant effect on life expectancy.
[+] [-] tomatotomato37|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yesenadam|7 years ago|reply
That doesn't sound right to me - what makes you say that?
[+] [-] m3kw9|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] newnewpdro|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xiphias2|7 years ago|reply
Bay area is one of the worst places to find a girlfriend though, so if this is important for you, you need to move to a place with different supply/demand balance.
[+] [-] satokema_work|7 years ago|reply
This leads me to this: it's interesting to think about which way the correlation goes - are these early deaths caused by living alone, or is it a symptom of other things wrong in their life that lead to a lack of girlfriends and random people and family in their life?
[+] [-] somberi|7 years ago|reply
When I first moved to the USA from India, 20 years ago, I sought the help of a realtor to find a house in New England Area. He figured I was earning more than his clientele base and started showing me houses which were secluded and touted it as a huge plus. My reaction then (now I am sympathetic to isolation as a luxury and privilege) was that he was showing me such dives because I was a minority. In India, you were never far away from people and isolation was a novelty that you dabbled with in your vacation time (mountain resorts and such). As life would have it, I ended up in Manhattan later in life.
[+] [-] 8bitsrule|7 years ago|reply
Not paradoxical at all, considering the rash of entire old neighborhoods being torn down, to be replaced with exercise shoppes and bubble-tea shoppes and rectilinearly-architected enclaves of mere empty-headed dormitude. Faux-wood-trimmed concrete festooned with dark-blue surveillance knobs and plastic trees are fairly inadequate stand-ins for soul.
So ... how do we like this music, hmmm?
[+] [-] will_brown|7 years ago|reply
Maybe instead the economy should be redesigned so the haves vs have nots isn’t so extreme and force social interaction amount the two groups. But most importantly this would combat the stress (cortisol) such a large segment of society has as a result of financial burdens and debt.
[+] [-] CryptoPunk|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] novia|7 years ago|reply
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/new-study-claims-being...
[+] [-] jayeshsalvi|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] diogenescynic|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dana321|7 years ago|reply
Correlation != Causation
[+] [-] bcit-cst|7 years ago|reply
https://www.iep.utm.edu/hume-cau/#H6
[+] [-] NeoBasilisk|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] charliebrownau|7 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] ataturk|7 years ago|reply
[deleted]