Social media as bad for children as smoking, British doctors say : world

[-] halfwaythere@lemmy.world 22 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

One causes children to do dumb shit. The others actually kill them. Yeah completely comparable.

More than half of 132 doctors surveyed saw at least one case of health harm that could be related to tech and devices every week, and over a third saw evidence of harm multiple times a week, it said.

Harms ranged from physical injuries, for example caused by replicating acts of extreme ‌pornography, ⁠to mental health impacts, such as trauma from seeing violence online.

Britain is consulting on restricting children's access to social media, including a possible ban for under-16s, as well as curfews, app time limits and curbs on what it has described as addictive design features.

All of this is propaganda to enforce ID checks and tracking for using the Internet.

Its really weird to me that instead of making social media companies responsible for their content with actual real consequences including shutting them down and criminal charges and painful monetary fines, they are pushing world wide ID and tracking on the rest of us.

[-] Canconda@lemmy.ca 12 points 3 days ago

Its really weird to me that instead of making social media companies responsible for their content with actual real consequences including shutting them down and criminal charges and painful monetary fines, they are pushing world wide ID and tracking on the rest of us.

We need more people saying this. Almost everyone has been tricked into accepting the false dichotomy of mass ID or nothing.

[-] shani66@ani.social 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Personally i think the better option is to force parents to parent. Can't? Too bad, they'll be better off under parents who can.

Everyone else kills the Internet and this can solve many more problems.

[-] Canconda@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago

Sure. But isn't that a quintessential example of "easier said than done"? Like it's not a solution on it's own.

IMO metaphorically we have lions waiting on the edge of camp to prey on the weakest of us. Sure we can teach kids about the lions and keep them away from them whenever possible. But it would also be prudent to remove the lion's easy access to vulnerable people.

I think age restricting social media is akin to putting a fence. Not gonna stop determined lions or children, but it will eliminate the lions' line of sight.

I don't think age verification for accounts fundamentally requires giving every corporation our ID. We legislate it such that corps are only required to cease services upon suspicion(reports etc) and have an appeals process that legally cannot use direct ID verification. Instead they use 3rd party verification like online banks. This is already a working alternative method used to access Canadian government services. It piggy backs of the security people already have on their personal finances. The 3rd Party simply verifies the person is of age and discloses no other data. There may need to be some tweaks to that model but it's already working in Canada.

[-] Canconda@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

One causes children to do dumb shit. The others actually kill them. Yeah completely comparable.

You're comparing the outcome a lifetime of smoking to the early stage consequences of social media use. Kind of apples to oranges. I'd wager way more kids are getting bullied, committing suicide, getting addicted to xyz, and being indoctrinated or exploited somehow... than are getting lung cancer.

Cigarettes didn't become mass produced until 1880. By 1920 most US states had restricted the sale to over 18. So the timing of this conversation about social media makes sense. Considering USA banned ALL tobacco advertising in 1971, we need to look critically at how social media has bypassed this to popularize youth vaping; leading to popcorn lung.

[-] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 11 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Absurd claim.

Smoking is physically inhaling a burning substance that directly puts chemicals INTO YOUR BRAIN.

Smoking IS NOT equivalent to a kid to social media that is a ridiculous claim.

This is spreading misinformation and you need to stop.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/05/science-not-settled-how-weak-evidence-fueling-national-push-ban-social-media-youth

[-] Canconda@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 days ago

The whole purpose of this comparison is to invoke exactly this reaction.

directly puts chemicals INTO YOUR BRAIN.

Social media use causes the chemical dopamine to be produced in the brain.

Social Media is arguably worse. Both are addictive, but the damage from smoking heals over time. Social media permanently alters brain development and leaves people with debilitating psychological scars.

The immediate consequences of social media use are also worse. Bullying, predation, advertisements for smoking/vaping.

We need to treat social media use as seriously as smoking. That's the point.

[-] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Dopamine is a natural chemical in the brain and you really don't understand how it works, you are just repeating "Dopamine make brain feel good when it shouldn't! Social Media make BAD Dopamine!".

.....Cigarettes also "create" Dopamine in the brain too...?

but the damage from smoking heals over time.

The damage of smoking doesnt heal over time you idiot, it kills you.

No, kids smoking a physical addictive drug by inhaling burning smoke is far far far worse than using social media and you are out of your damn mind to suggest otherwise.

[-] Canconda@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Dopamine is a natural chemical in the brain

So are formaldehyde and THC.

The damage of smoking doesnt heal over time you idiot, it kills you.

Clearly I meant if you stop smoking the damage heals. As compared to psychological damage from exposure to whats on the internet.

Didn't take much for you to crash out and resort to adhominims eh? Must be from the smoking right? Couldn't possible be social media wiring you to be an irrational person.

[-] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Crashing out? I am pointing out that you are a willfull idiot if you believe this and don't see how you are being manipulated by authoritarian forces that don't care at all about kids and never did.

[-] Canconda@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

You haven't addressed the substance of my argument and are instead saying things like,

you are a willfull idiot

you are being manipulated by authoritarian forces

That's crashing out.

edit: Do you think I'm some shill for the tobacco lobby lmao?

Like if we're gonna devolve to ad hominims than aren't you the one getting paid by zuckerfucker in this scenario?

[-] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Yes I am saying you are being an idiot, I have explained why and provided a directly relevant source to the EFF to demonstrate why.

You don't "heal" from smoking cigarettes it just either kills you or you stop smoking before it does.

Drawing a close comparison to a software app on a device that a kid may view and be emotionally affected by is insane, one is an external stimulus, the other is a drug that is inhaled in a way that immediately physically hurts the body, potentially locks in a lethal disease into that person's future and radically changes brain chemistry over time to be supremely dependent upon nicotine.

About 1000 persons seeking treatment for alcohol or drug dependence were asked, relative to cigarettes, about the difficulty of quitting the use of the substance for which they were seeking treatment, the strength of their strongest urges to use, and the pleasure they derived from use. Fifty-seven percent said that cigarettes would be harder to quit using than their problem substance. These ratings were related to the level of cigarette dependence and the perceived difficulty of quitting the use of the problem substance. The alcohol-dependent persons were about four times more likely than the drug-dependent persons to say that their strongest urges for cigarettes were at least as great as their strongest urges for their problem substance. Cigarettes were generally rated as less pleasurable than alcohol or other drugs. Thus, experiential experts on dependence judge cigarette dependence as at least as "addictive" as other drug use, but not as pleasurable, indicating important similarities and differences between cigarette dependence and other forms of dependence on psychoactive substances.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2913388/

Cigarettes have been established by decades of research to have ended the lives of a stupendous amount of people. Tobacco kills more than 7 million people per year.

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/tobacco

Of course social media can be toxic, especially corporate social media with no actual investment into human moderation or mitigating rightwing hate speech against vulnerable minorities... but those are choices about how we chose to build social media and what values we built social media according to (endless growth potential being basically the only actual one).

Social media does not have to be that and it is absurd to spend time here, on the fediverse, while believing that social media should be banned for youths in such a draconian way.

[-] Canconda@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 days ago

You don't "heal" from smoking cigarettes it just either kills you or you stop smoking before it does.

You are so close to understanding what I'm saying.

Well since ad hominims are on the table. You suck at reading comprehension.

[-] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Does it also make the children look as cool and sophisticated as smoking ?

[-] frongt@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 days ago

You could draw social parallels, yes.

[-] blimthepixie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 days ago

You might as well say Instagram gave me vibration white finger

World News

Rules