Image by Emre on Unsplash.
The Washington Post ran an article with the captivating headline, Loneliness Increases Dementia Risk. They presented the findings of a “large” study.
A large study found that loneliness increased dementia risk by 31% and cognitive impairment risk by 15%.
The first question I’d ask is, What is the ABSOLUTE risk reduction? If you’re not familiar with the concept of absolute risk, you’ll find several good videos. If you’re going to talk to anyone about medical research, this is something you must know.
Briefly put: a 31% risk reduction could mean that 1 out of 1 million people who are NOT lonely will have signs of dementia, while 3 out of 1 million will report signs of dementia. So we’d be comparing 1 out of 1 million with 3 out of 1 million; 2 out of a million are at increased risk. I don’t know the actual numbers because they’re not reported. If you find them buried somewhere in the original research, let me know.
The second question I’d ask is, is the study causal or correlational? A causal study means that A causes B. A correlational study means that A and B occur together; when you see B, you also see A a certain percentage of the time.
But they may not be causal. A ridiculous example: If people are seen carrying umbrellas when the skies are grey, that’s a correlation. The skies don’t cause people to carry umbrellas and the umbrellas certainly don’t cause the skies to become gray.
So it’s possible that people who are experiencing symptoms of dementia are also feeling lonely. They may not be seeing things clearly. They also may have a greater likelihood of describing themselves as “lonely.”
We can’t have a true experiment here. We couldn’t take 1000 people and make them feel lonely while another 1000 feel “not lonely.” We couldn’t then watch the 2 groups for a few years and compare their rates of dementia.
There’s also a problem of definition. Two people might have the same level of social activity but entirely different perceptions of loneliness. In fact, feelings of loneliness are considered when the researchers control for social activity.
So it’s a lot less exciting — and also a lot more accurate — to say, “People who report feelings which they describe as “lonely” are somewhat more likely to experience cognitive loss.” It’s really about how they define their activities and report loneliness.
So it seems to boil down to the way people define themselves. We need to unpack the term “loneliness.” I am betting it means different things to different people. You may define yourself as lonely when you can’t find someone to help you hang a picture. Another person might feel they need more money to hire a handyman. The first person carries a script of, “I’m lonely because I can’t find anyone to do this for free.” The second might say, “I’m economically challenged because I can’t hire someone.” Or, “I’m frustrated because I’m new to the area and don’t know anyone to hire.”
Sometimes people try to make you feel like a loser because you don’t meet their unrealistic social expectations…like hospital personnel who insult you when you can’t find a ride home, let alone someone to stand by for half a day “just in case.” Those expectations emerged when people had large, close families that lived nearby and friends that never moved.
The comments on this article were astonishing. Lots of people were eager to claim their solitude.
Even more surprising was the researchers’ advice for curing loneliness. After saying loneliness was unrelated to social activity, they recommended initiating social activities to address loneliness. Join groups of like-minded people, they said. Cultivate your current contacts before finding new ones.
Mindset change? Nope. Re-defining your loneliness? No way.
I shudder to think of the amount of ink (and dollars) spent reporting and researching loneliness.A lot of people would be less lonely if they had more money or could afford to move.
