There are now so many RCTs showing the mental health benefits of reducing social media use for at least a week.
Here's a new one showing that young adults get LESS lonely when they reduce, even though their friends are not reducing. From Gary Goldfield et al.
sciencedirect.com/science/ar…
Social media does not give teens real community; it prevents them from spending time with real people.
And, of course, Meta itself did an RCT, with similar results:
metasinternalresearch.org/
Imagine how much loneliness would drop if an entire school, or community, or an entire generation, reduced or quit at the same time.
Better yet, imagine how much less lonely, anxious, and depressed young people would be if social media was never invented, or if there had been an age limit of 16 when they were 10, so they did not all go through puberty spending 5 hours a day swiping and comparing, instead of hanging out with friends.
Meta is facing survivor parents and a jury for the first time in its history this week, in Los Angeles. It will argue that the data is all correlational, and that nobody can prove causation. They have been saying this for years and it is demonstrably false. There are so many different lines of evidence demonstrating causation. Zach Rausch and I lay out seven lines of evidence here:
osf.io/xsje9/files/hmf8e
My two favorites, after the RCTs: Teens themselves say it has harmed their mental health, and employees of Meta, Snap, and TikTok discuss the many harms that their products cause, in emails and internal reports that leaked or were discovered. They know that they are harming children at an industrial scale.
This is why so many countries around the world are now following Australia's bold move and raising the age for opening accounts to 16. 2026 will be a big year of change in the battle to reclaim childhood from big tech.