Social isolation, healthcare, and entitlements

[United Marxist Nations]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3150158/

Social isolation of otherwise healthy, well-functioning individuals eventually results in psychological and physical disintegration, and even death. Over the past few decades, social scientists have gone beyond evidence of extreme social deprivation to demonstrate a clear link between social relationships and health in the general population. Adults who are more socially connected are healthier and live longer than their more isolated peers. This article describes major findings in the study of social relationships and health, and how that knowledge might be translated into policy that promotes population health. Key research findings include: (1) social relationships have significant effects on health; (2) social relationships affect health through behavioral, psychosocial, and physiological pathways; (3) relationships have costs and benefits for health; (4) relationships shape health outcomes throughout the life course and have a cumulative impact on health over time; and (5) the costs and benefits of social relationships are not distributed equally in the population.

Many types of scientific evidence show that involvement in social relationships benefits health. The most striking evidence comes from prospective studies of mortality across industrialized nations. These studies consistently show that individuals with the lowest level of involvement in social relationships are more likely to die than those with greater involvement (House, Landis, and Umberson 1988). For example, Berkman and Syme (1979) showed that the risk of death among men and women with the fewest social ties was more than twice as high as the risk for adults with the most social ties. Moreover, this finding held even when socioeconomic status, health behaviors, and other variables that might influence mortality, were taken into account. Social ties also reduce mortality risk among adults with documented medical conditions. For instance, Brummett and colleagues (2001) found that, among adults with coronary artery disease, the socially isolated had a risk of subsequent cardiac death 2.4 times greater than their more socially connected peers.

In addition to mortality, involvement in social relationships has been associated with specific health conditions as well as biological markers indicating risk of preclinical conditions. Several recent review articles provide consistent and compelling evidence linking a low quantity or quality of social ties with a host of conditions, including development and progression of cardiovascular disease, recurrent myocardial infarction, atherosclerosis, autonomic dysregulation, high blood pressure, cancer and delayed cancer recovery, and slower wound healing (Ertel, Glymour, and Berkman 2009; Everson-Rose and Lewis 2005; Robles and Kiecolt-Glaser 2003; Uchino 2006). Poor quality and low quantity of social ties have also been associated with inflammatory biomarkers and impaired immune function, factors associated with adverse health outcomes and mortality (Kiecolt-Glaser et al. 2002; Robles and Kiecolt-Glaser 2003). Marriage is perhaps the most studied social tie. Recent work shows that marital history over the life course shapes a range of health outcomes, including cardiovascular disease, chronic conditions, mobility limitations, self-rated health, and depressive symptoms (Hughes and Waite 2009; Zhang and Hayward 2006).

As we see, social isolation has a greatly deleterious effect on human health, not only with regard to disease, but also in regard to stress and suicide. Moreover, these health effects can greatly impact the economic standing of the person dealing with them. These health and economic costs no doubt cost society a great sum, so, surely, it would be far better to treat the underlying problem at a much smaller cost. So, why do we not have social as well as economic welfare? It would certainly be far more efficient to provide social contact to such individuals than it would be to treat their ever growing physical and mental health problems, so it should be done in the name of both efficiency and serving human happiness.

[Uxupox]

If I want to be alone then dammit I'll be alone! HEALTH CONSEQUENCES BE DAMNED. Goddamn seminaries already have taken a toll on me.

[United Marxist Nations]

If I want to be alone then dammit I'll be alone! HEALTH CONSEQUENCES BE DAMNED. Goddamn seminaries already have taken a toll on me.

If you are in a seminary, I assume you have chosen such a lifestyle, but there are many for whom it was not a choice.

[Uxupox]

If I want to be alone then dammit I'll be alone! HEALTH CONSEQUENCES BE DAMNED. Goddamn seminaries already have taken a toll on me.

If you are in a seminary, I assume you have chosen such a lifestyle, but there are many for whom it was not a choice.

I'm not talking about ecclesiastical seminaries. I'm talking about those damn reunions my lab director makes me go too.

[Mugrul]

Individuals are not self-sufficient alone. The way we think of ourselves and view ourselves comes from our own social contexts. So yes the state shouldn't only pursue liberal values like equal opportunity and freedom, but also integration and harmony.

[United Marxist Nations]

If you are in a seminary, I assume you have chosen such a lifestyle, but there are many for whom it was not a choice.

I'm not talking about ecclesiastical seminaries. I'm talking about those damn reunions my lab director makes me go too.

In that case, are you entirely sure that you have chosen such a lifestyle, or have you simply adopted one out of failure to integrate into society?

[United Marxist Nations]

Individuals are not self-sufficient alone. The way we think of ourselves and view ourselves comes from our own social contexts. So yes the state shouldn't only pursue values like equal opportunity and freedom, but also integration and harmony.

But how should it be done? Should the country have professional friends, partners, etc? Are friendship and companionship a right?

[Costa Fierro]

Well this is depressing.

[United Marxist Nations]

Well this is depressing.

Yes. Let us drink to our early demise.

[Costa Fierro]

Well this is depressing.

Yes. Let us drink to our early demise.

No thanks. I'd rather live.

[United Marxist Nations]

Yes. Let us drink to our early demise.

No thanks. I'd rather live.

Then should we not drink to it together, then?

[Costa Fierro]

No thanks. I'd rather live.

Then should we not drink to it together, then?

You can drink as much you want, but I don't want to die an early death.

[Sokegria]

Can this world get ANY WORSE?


Oh wait, I forgot. It can always get worse.


I'm so fucking done.

[United Marxist Nations]

Then should we not drink to it together, then?

You can drink as much you want, but I don't want to die an early death.

But we're already going to!

[Uxupox]

I'm not talking about ecclesiastical seminaries. I'm talking about those damn reunions my lab director makes me go too.

In that case, are you entirely sure that you have chosen such a lifestyle, or have you simply adopted one out of failure to integrate into society?

I never failed to adapt to society.

[Esternial]

Government-issued kittens?

You have the right to be fucking adorable.

[Sokegria]

Government-issued kittens?

You have the right to be fucking adorable.

What in the world are you talking about?

[The Orson Empire]

As someone who likely has social anxiety, this isn't reassuring....

[United Marxist Nations]

Government-issued kittens?

You have the right to be fucking adorable.

I honestly hate cats. Fuckers scratch me.

[Emerald Ilses Empire]

Except....How can you determine exactly what is beneficial or detrimental? We know in extreme cases of isolation, such as solitary confinement, individuals will experience severe problems. However, in terms of broader day-to-day individuals, it is extremely hard to detect such detrimental solitary behavior, as well as even what behavior is damaging and which isn't. This problems is further perplexed by the fact that ~30-50% of the population are estimated to be introverts (If you subscribe to trait theory). These are people who actually gain energy from secluding themselves time to time, and I would suspect would be highly discriminated against (As they are already within MANY school and child program) in any form of "social welfare".

To accurately tell beforehand if people are suffering from social isolation, you would need a organization (GO or NGO) to monitor ALL the activities of individuals, successfully detect damaging social isolation, and then successfully convince the individual to be treated (As it is with any therapy, you can't solve anything if the individual doesn't want to be helped). Ignoring all sense of privacy rights and judging merely on effectiveness, this will be ENORMOUSLY expensive to maintain and run, easily more expensive than the current total coasts of healthcare spent on by governments.

To counter this monitoring, you could do an "opt in" program, however this itself has it's own problems. People who are socially isolated and don't believe they have any problems won't get treated, and you will get many people who AREN'T suffering from isolation coming in for free treatment. It would be extremely hard to differentiate between actually cases and fake ones merely due to the placebo affect, and could possibly even have the same result as legalizing suicide (For those unfamiliar, there are a LARGE amount of studies and reports suggesting that legalizing assisted suicides actually increase the overall suicide rate, some citing rate increases as large as 6.3%. In this scenario, a possible (though disputed) effect of enacting social welfare to combat isolationism could increase isolationism)).

While social welfare to ensure everyone remains happy and having a healthy social life sounds good, it is nigh impossible to implement due to the lack of knowledge on the matter, the costs and inefficiency of maintaining a social welfare program, and the lack of any reasonable way of managing such a program. I am afraid it is one of those problems where attempting to solve it will be extremely expensive, for only little chance of positive effects, with there still being a chance of negative effects.

[Kalayaan and Sabah Confederacy]

Individuals are not self-sufficient alone. The way we think of ourselves and view ourselves comes from our own social contexts. So yes the state shouldn't only pursue liberal values like equal opportunity and freedom, but also integration and harmony.

And how's Tito?

[Apiatica]

Government-issued kittens?

You have the right to be fucking adorable.

Actually not a bad idea, with pets in general. They've been shown to be rather therapeutic.

[United Marxist Nations]

Except....How can you determine exactly what is beneficial or detrimental? We know in extreme cases of isolation, such as solitary confinement, individuals will experience severe problems. However, in terms of broader day-to-day individuals, it is extremely hard to detect such detrimental solitary behavior, as well as even what behavior is damaging and which isn't. This problems is further perplexed by the fact that ~30-50% of the population are estimated to be introverts (If you subscribe to trait theory). These are people who actually gain energy from secluding themselves time to time, and I would suspect would be highly discriminated against (As they are already within MANY school and child program) in any form of "social welfare".

To accurately tell beforehand if people are suffering from social isolation, you would need a organization (GO or NGO) to monitor ALL the activities of individuals, successfully detect damaging social isolation, and then successfully convince the individual to be treated (As it is with any therapy, you can't solve anything if the individual doesn't want to be helped). Ignoring all sense of privacy rights and judging merely on effectiveness, this will be ENORMOUSLY expensive to maintain and run, easily more expensive than the current total coasts of healthcare spent on by governments.

To counter this monitoring, you could do an "opt in" program, however this itself has it's own problems. People who are socially isolated and don't believe they have any problems won't get treated, and you will get many people who AREN'T suffering from isolation coming in for free treatment. It would be extremely hard to differentiate between actually cases and fake ones merely due to the placebo affect, and could possibly even have the same result as legalizing suicide (For those unfamiliar, there are a LARGE amount of studies and reports suggesting that legalizing assisted suicides actually increase the overall suicide rate, some citing rate increases as large as 6.3%. In this scenario, a possible (though disputed) effect of enacting social welfare to combat isolationism could increase isolationism)).

While social welfare to ensure everyone remains happy and having a healthy social life sounds good, it is nigh impossible to implement due to the lack of knowledge on the matter, the costs and inefficiency of maintaining a social welfare program, and the lack of any reasonable way of managing such a program. I am afraid it is one of those problems where attempting to solve it will be extremely expensive, for only little chance of positive effects, with there still being a chance of negative effects.

If a program for escaping crippling loneliness existed, I think most people would report their loneliness in the hope of escape, much as is the case with economic welfare. Suffering is subjective, so anyone who is suffering should be aware of their suffering.

How could it increase isolation?

[The Liberated Territories]

The last person I want to talk to when I am alone is the government.

[Esternial]

Government-issued kittens?

You have the right to be fucking adorable.

Actually not a bad idea, with pets in general. They've been shown to be rather therapeutic.

I find a good human makes a good alternative, too. Sometimes they make a lot of noise and just want to talk and talk, but I personally prefer sitting silently on the couch in completely silence whilst watching television.

Cuddling is optional.