
Forced social isolation causes neural craving similar to hunger - prostoalex
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/forced-social-isolation-causes-neural-craving-similar-to-hunger/
======
ericol
More or less for my entire life I've had the idea that my social needs were
not on par with the rest of the people, and this quarantine seems to have
proven just that.

Bear in mind _I do_ enjoy social life; when I was living in Spain in my 30s
(and single) I had a very active social life, and had a moderate (~30) amount
of friends split in 2 groups with which I continuously interacted.

When I left Spain for my place of origin I had only a handful of friends, and
then I moved to where I live now and have only one friend, whom I see
sporadically.

Nowadays I mostly interact with my partner and daughter, and the people I work
with (I've been working remotely for 13 years) and to be honest, I have no
cravings for social life (Except that I miss going for a stroll every once in
a while at nights).

~~~
briefcomment
Can you really call living with your family isolation? There are people out
there who live with no one, aren't near family, and can't see friends because
of the lockdowns.

~~~
Trasmatta
Yep, this me. I haven't been able to see friends or family since March 15th.
So I haven't even touched another human in that long. It's been really bad for
my mental health. I have a hard time empathising with people who say they've
been super lonely but still live with family.

~~~
wwweston
Feeling it too. Last few weeks I decided that I was going to negotiate some
limited contact (occasional masked walks and hugs) with a few select people.

This is arguably a little irresponsible of me; I have a housemate who is a
social worker and not isolating, which makes me a potential link in a
transmission chain. But on the other hand, we're spending nearly zero time
together in shared spaces (we literally go weeks w/o seeing each other) and
I'm very conscientious about what I touch and when in shared spaces. And
delivery or random passers-by on walks are my only other form of exposure, so
it seems like a managed risk if not absolutely minimized.

I think some who live alone are going to find this kind of quaran-team
approach important as we break past the first few miles of the marathon. The
trick may be in really doing it thoughtfully in a planned-out conscientious
manner rather than waiting until arriving at some breaking point and throwing
caution to the wind.

~~~
J-dawg
> This is arguably a little irresponsible of me

I'd say it isn't irresponsible at all. You've got to do what you need to do to
look after your own mental health. One thing I am utterly sick of is the
shaming of anyone that breaks "the rules" that seems to have become
normalised. Especially when it comes from people who have families and
partners at home.

We seem to be obsessed with the idea that you could be somehow responsible for
someone's death if they get infected via you, even after several degrees of
separation. I guess this idea has some logic to it, but it's such a departure
from how we think about things normally.

By the same logic, many of us have probably helped to "kill" a few
elderly/vulnerable people in the past by passing on the influenza virus.

I'm not saying we shouldn't all take sensible precautions, like isolating when
you have symptoms and hand washing etc. But this shaming needs to stop.

------
cletus
I am an introvert. Many people (including many introverts) thinks this means
you don't like people or social gatherings. That's not the case. Or at least
it's not _necessarily_ true.

Here's the best way I can describe it: being an introvert means that social
interactions _cost_ you energy. Being an extrovert (since I'm not one) _seems_
to mean that social interactions _gain_ you energy.

I see this in a relative of mine who is clearly an extrovert. Social
interactions are her _drug_. She craves them and gets almost like a high from
them and honestly gets really hyper as a result.

Compare this to me. At work I've had these extended work gatherings for
several days where it's a lot of team-building, brainstorming and so on. By
the end of the day I'm physically exhausted from all these interactions. Some
people are not. Some will go to dinner in the evenings then out to a bar to
drink and then back to someone's Airbnb for another gathering after that.
That's all fine for them but it's just way too much for me.

So it's not like I don't like interacting with these people. It's merely a
question of how much mental energy I'm capable of expending before I need to
recharge.

So you see these differences really exposed by the forced isolation. I miss
some of the interaction (and, to be fair, the food) of being in the office but
otherwise I'm fine. You can clearly see that other people are not. While I
have a natural excuse to avoid many draining activities, others are clearly
being denied their recharging activities.

So yeah, I can totally buy neural cravings here. For some.

~~~
pengaru
For me, part of the draining effect isn't just due to being an introvert...
it's because I tend to engage far too willingly in what most would treat as
shallow casual interactions.

I tend to treat even strangers with too much respect to give them less than my
full attention and thoughtful responses. That makes it a draining chore.

------
esotericn
Er, yeah, I've been saying this for months.

We are social animals. Literally just existing is stressful at the moment for
most of us, because there's a constant urge that is not being satisfied.

Not only for socialisation but simply the low-level stress of constantly
having to 'check yourself' when you realise literally everything you'd
normally be doing is either disabled or handicapped in some way.

To me, lockdowns feel like some sort of irrational loss aversion strategy. If
you gave me the option in, say, 2017, of halving my mortality rate for a year,
but the cost was that I had to endure relatively strong anxiety for that year,
there's no way I'd take that bet regardless of my age.

Mucking around with your mental health is not wise. Add on top of that all of
the economic effects, the political effects of dividing populations, domestic
abuse, "non-essential" healthcare like dentistry, and so on and so forth, and
honestly I reckon it's been a net negative.

~~~
daveFNbuck
There are also mental health consequences to large-scale death and hospitals
being over capacity. Would you choose a year of watching your friends and
family randomly die over a year of staying home most of the time?

~~~
esotericn
I believe my comment about halving mortality addresses this.

They're already likely to arbitrarily die - if in 2017 I could reduce that
probability by half (coronavirus roughly doubles mortality across all age
groups) by having everyone stay inside or perform the various rituals like
standing far apart, wearing masks etc I wouldn't do it.

If instead of decreasing life expectancy by less than a year it were something
like 10 (and so we went full hazmat, disallowing things like even entering a
supermarket in favour of MRE deliveries) then the calculus would be different.

The main inescapable issue, which exists lockdown or not, is visiting elderly
or immunocompromised relatives, not because of the absolute risk, but because
of the impact that being able to say "my visit probably killed Grandma" would
have.

~~~
daveFNbuck
Coronavirus may only double overall mortality, but having no hospital capacity
would cause a further increase in deaths. We'd probably just end up in a real
lockdown (shelter in place orders are not a lockdown) and have a bunch of
extra dead people.

------
Nav_Panel
This was Maslow's point from back in the 40s, that there's no real distinction
between physiological and social hunger, besides the fact of an importance
hierarchy (one needs to be decently fed in order to start caring a lot about
sociality, although even a person in starvation may care somewhat).

Glad to see it's being neurologically researched as well.

~~~
richardbrevig
Yes, all needs in the hierarchy are basic and necessary!

~~~
somerandomqaguy
I wouldn't classify social interaction as a need. There's plenty of examples
of people without any human contact surviving, to the point that we have a
well established word for these people; hermit.

Imperial Japanese holdouts after the end of WW2 are the classical example, and
to a lesser degree you have hikikomori in modern day. The most extreme example
is Christopher Thomas Knight (the North Pond Hermit) with only one claim
instance of human interaction in that period; he said, "Hi" to a hiker.

A need has a specific meaning; more or less, you will die if you don't have
water for more then a week. It doesn't matter how strong willed you are, lack
of water will kill you. Lack of social interaction will not universally kill
everyone.

~~~
richardbrevig
Please review Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs [1]. I'm just communicating what he
said in his book Motivation and Personality. His theory is taught in every
introduction to psychology textbook.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs)

~~~
ngold
I enjoyed a non personal specific event. Thank you.

------
rb808
Honestly its scary the talk of another year like this. I have a family and
even with them around living all day in my apt is starting to drive me crazy.
I'd hate to be living by myself. Its a lot like solitary confinement.

My Brother had the bug, had a mild cough for a few days and lost his taste.
I'm very jealous.

~~~
chrisseaton
> Honestly its scary the talk of another year like this.

I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting you will not be able to leave
your house for another year. I think everywhere has concrete plans to re-open
everything short of mass gatherings pretty soon. That's the cautious countries
and the less cautious countries alike.

~~~
nprz
Currently around ~5% of the US has contracted COVID. 60-70% of the population
needs to become infected in order to gain herd immunity. Meaning we're about
7% of the way to herd immunity. We still have a long way to go.

~~~
chrisseaton
I don't think anyone's saying they're aiming at herd immunity any more, are
they? The European and North American countries opening up, which is all of
them, are just saying they have the situation generally under control enough
to relax restrictions.

~~~
nprz
I mean it will continue to spread until that percent of the of the population
is infected. Containment is not possible. So right now it's a balancing act of
opening up the economy and preventing an explosive outbreak. The hope is a
vaccine will be created soon and a large proportion of the population will
gain immunity through a vaccine rather than just naturally contracting the
virus.

~~~
0xFFC
Yes. Those restrictions were from the time we were thinking the virus is more
deadly than this (1-2% IFR).

Now with more publications, data suggests an IFR of 0.1-0.6%. Which is pretty
low and does not worth crashing the economy.

This does not mean vulnerable people has to pay the price no. It is trade off.
We have to reopen and go back to normal, while helping vulnerable people.

Even some paper suggest far more infections than we thought.

~~~
ummonk
The IFR is proving to be ~1%.

For 0.1-0.6% to be true, 50-100% of NYC would have to have gotten infected
with COVID-19...

~~~
jjjensen90
IFR is not a fixed value and is affected by many things. For example, intial
viral load may be higher in NYC than many other places, vitamin D levels, air
pollution, etc. There is no single IFR for any disease.

~~~
ummonk
Yes, IFR is not a fixed value. But a range (0.1-0.6%) was provided by the
person I was responding to. Even assuming NYC hit the top of the range of IFRs
(which seems questionable given that NYC isn't a particularly old city), one
would need an infection rate of 50%, which contradicts serology studies that
turned out to be half that.

IFR in other locations (e.g. small towns in Europe where blood tests show
widespread exposure) has also consistently come in at roughly 1%.

~~~
0xFFC
The data you are putting out there is _completely_ wrong.

You can check this subreddit for publications:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/COVID19/](https://www.reddit.com/r/COVID19/)

All most all the publications from the past 2 months show an IFR if 0.1-0.6 or
at most 0.8%.

~~~
ummonk
Searched for IFR estimates there and grabbed a few sample calculations:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/gw5l4q/serology_fr...](https://www.reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/gw5l4q/serology_from_andorra/fssxqoa/)
[https://www.reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/g6035k/new_serolog...](https://www.reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/g6035k/new_serology_from_geneva_switzerland_shows_55_of/fo6u5i5/)
[https://www.reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/gnbpkk/antibody_re...](https://www.reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/gnbpkk/antibody_results_from_sweden_73_in_stockholm/fr92ppe/)
[https://www.reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/gnbpkk/antibody_re...](https://www.reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/gnbpkk/antibody_results_from_sweden_73_in_stockholm/frad6i0/)

So, 0.77-1.25% for this range of estimates.

~~~
0xFFC
Funny how you cherry picking those.

 _confirmation bias_. Look at the other publications.

~~~
ummonk
To prove that 0.1-0.6% is wrong, one only needs to show a single example that
had an IFR > 0.6%. I provided several. You meanwhile have provided none.

And this range of IFR estimates (~0.7-1.1%) is what you tend to see across
localities where serological tests result in substantial positive antibody
rates. Studies based on low (e.g. <5%) exposure rates aren't that meaningful
because false positives can dwarf the true-positives, skewing the results.

~~~
0xFFC
> You meanwhile have provided none.

When I say you cherrypick, I am talking about this:

[https://www.reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/g4tqvk/dutch_antib...](https://www.reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/g4tqvk/dutch_antibody_study_of_blood_donors_reveals_3/fnzkn4k/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)

And so, so mare which I don’t have time to find one by one right now. Like the
study from Finland, or other places.

I don’t have anything to add to this discussion, since this clearly shows you
are _incapable_ of research. One other point is there is non negligible amount
of people who does not develop antibodies therefore they are not detected in
serological tests. I would expect IFR go down.

(You could have find in other publications too:

[https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.13.20101253v...](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.13.20101253v1)

[https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.09.20033357v...](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.09.20033357v1)

The only required skill required is googling and having open mind.)

“ Iceland, (1st May) reports ten deaths in 1798 patients, CFR. 0.56%. If we
assumed 1% of the population (364,000) is infected, then the corresponding IFR
would be 10/3640 = 0.3%. Iceland’s test and quarantine measures may have
shielded the elderly group, and deaths may still go up as they lag infection
by about two weeks.

Iceland’s higher rates of testing, the smaller population, and their ability
to ascertain all those with Sars-CoV-2 means they can obtain. an accurate
estimate of the CFR and the IFR during the pandemic (most countries will only
be able to do this after the pandemic).

Current data from Iceland suggests their IFR is somewhere between 0.3% and
0.56%.” -CEBM

P.S. FYI Iceland has done more test than anybody I think (ratiowise).

I have a suggestion for you: READ MORE!

------
davidw
I have been having backyard beers with a friend at a time, at a distance, on
nice days. Feels safe enough and it is nice to see friends!

------
kstenerud
I've spent the majority of my life in social isolation, mainly because I keep
forgetting to maintain relationships. I'd drop off the radar for months on
end, until a concerned friend or family member would manage to get in contact
with me (I don't use social media because it's too much bother to maintain).
In 2001, after the dotcom crash, I took a yearlong sabbatical where I saw no
one, spoke to no one, and by the time I was pulled into the open again it hurt
to speak.

TBH until I met my wife, I never thought it possible to be comfortable living
with someone.

I know I'm an extreme exception, but I'm one of those people who don't feel a
craving for human contact.

~~~
anonytrary
That's not forced; that's your choice. I'm someone who also naturally ends up
being alone, however, being _forced_ to be alone is a completely different
situation. The power of choice is everything and it seems essential to this
study.

~~~
kstenerud
That conclusion of the study is highly suspect. "To address this challenge,
the researchers had 40 socially-connected healthy human adults spend 10 hours
(9am to 7pm) alone, with no social interaction and no other social stimulation
(e.g., twitter, email, reading fiction)."

The subjects _chose_ to spend 10 hours away from all social interaction in
order to participate in the study. That's not the same as being _forced_.

However, the results were striking. Just like _choosing_ to fast from food,
_choosing_ to fast from social interaction caused similar cravings in the
subjects.

------
mensetmanusman
We need to ban solitary confinement in prisons.

~~~
rb808
I have a lot more sympathy for animals in the zoo as well.

~~~
djsumdog
I have never liked zoos! The animals look so sad. The San Diego and Cincinnati
zoos are very large and that helps, but I still don't enjoy going to them. The
reptiles are usually fine, but many of the mammals really shouldn't be locked
up like that. A polar bear swims up to 600km a day in the wild.

I like aquariums. Most fish are fine in a big enough tank; turtles too. I
avoid aquariums with Dolphins or Whales. Considering how much they swim in the
while, that seems cruel too.

~~~
JoshuaDavid
> A polar bear swims up to 600km a day in the wild.

Off topic, but there's no way that can be true. 600km in a day is 25 km / hour
for 24 hours straight. Looking online, it looks like the top swimming speed of
a polar bear is closer to 10 km / hour.

That said, I agree about the sadness of zoos.

------
cameronbrown
Would explain why I'm eating a bowl of cereal at 9PM nowadays...

I would encourage people to see friends at a distance whenever possible. We
must remember to balance our mental health (greatly affected by seeing others)
with our physical health.

------
starpilot
I just haven't been able to read books when I've been isolated a lot. It's
just like my mind can't focus, it's so anxious and doesn't considering the
reading to be important. My theory is it's similar to waking up in the middle
of the night when lonely. The mind is searching for dangers from being
isolated and alone.

I also notice my urge to buy stuff goes up when I am lonely. Another salve for
the pain.

------
danybittel
I call bullshit. I stopped reading at the setup: "the researchers had 40
socially-connected healthy human adults spend 10 hours (9am to 7pm) alone,
with no social interaction and no other social stimulation (e.g., twitter,
email, reading fiction)." All they did was deprive them of social media. I
think it's well known by now that this is a source of dopamin.

~~~
ddeck
Additionally, they also forced them to get up in the early morning on the
social isolation day, locked them in an unfamiliar room, and gave them close
to nothing to do:

 _On the day of the isolation session, participants arrived at the McGovern
Institute for Brain Research, MIT building 46, at 8.15am...Subsequently,
participants gave their phones and laptops to the experimenter and were guided
to a room containing an armchair, a desk and office chair, and a fridge with a
selection of food, snacks and beverages. Participants remained in that room
from 9am until 7pm._ [1]

It's not clear to me why reading material was withheld. It seems to make it
harder to draw conclusions regarding the social isolation aspect.

For the fasting session, they only had to report for the 7pm fMRI session. It
strikes me that the type of people with time to participate in an experiment
like this likely correlates with people that get up later than 6-7am each
morning (as would have been required for the isolation session), but it seems
there wasn't any accounting for possible sleep deprivation effects.

[1]
[https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.25.006643v2....](https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.25.006643v2.full.pdf)

------
amelius
In some circles, there's even an expression for a related phenomenon: "skin
hunger"

[https://globalnews.ca/news/6929793/coronavirus-disability-
to...](https://globalnews.ca/news/6929793/coronavirus-disability-touch-
deprivation/)

~~~
LUmBULtERA
I feel like they could have come up with a better name.

------
smcameron
I've lived alone my whole adult life. I haven't seen anyone I know since March
8. Doesn't seem to bother me. Guess I'm a freak.

~~~
searchableguy
I think there is also difference in the type of people. I feel people on the
spectrum are able to empathize over text more than others and so can socialize
somewhat more or feel less need to.

------
8bitsrule
People whose chosen occupations require a lot of time away from people they
know well -- authors, artists, explorers, prospectors and geologists,
traveling musicians and salespersons, fur trappers, truckers for example --
probably cope better with social distancing.

Being isolated for long periods can lead us to difficulty articulating our
thoughts well. The 'gears get rusty'. Not so much for authors I'd guess ...
but a fading ability to connect no doubt leaves many increasingly frustrated
and feeling even more isolated. I'd guess that, for desert travelers, the word
'oasis' meant a lot more than just water.

------
searchableguy
I wonder what people will think of criminal and justice systems after this
(probably nothing). We send people to prisons all the time for extended period
without outside contact in an abusive environment between the real nasty
criminals and authorities.

Is it really a good idea to send someone to prison for months for a small
mistake that many might end up making _and getting caught_?

Is overusing imprisonment for different types of crimes okay?

A murderer will be fine in a prison since they are harmful for the society but
someone stealing food because they couldn't afford any doesn't seem as harmful
that they need being locked up.

------
tomrod
This... makes a lot of sense. I get hunger cravings even when full when I have
those 70+ (rare) or even 55+ (more often) hour weeks.

~~~
Swizec
> when I have those 70+ (rare) or even 55+ (more often) hour weeks

This is likely a different phenomena. You're burning more fuel by working
longer. Especially if it comes with less sleep as well.

The brain is quite a fuel-hungry organ and will crave sugars and carbs when
stressed. If you're also sleeping less, you're burning more physical energy as
well simply by being active longer.

I regularly lose weight during hard weeks unless I compensate by eating more.

------
phkahler
This makes sense to me because I dont think the feeling we call hunger is
actually our bodies call to eat. I think from an evolutionary origin it is
supposed to be a call to action. If that is so, then social isolation could
trigger the same feeling.

------
rajeevtfi
Eric Berne talked about this long time back in 1964 in his book "Games People
Play"

~~~
Nav_Panel
Hah yes the classic "8 stroke American greeting" to prevent "spinal
shriveling", good stuff.

------
pteraspidomorph
Like for many people here, my need for socialization seems to be vastly
inferior to the average. However, after years of living very isolated, I can
strongly relate to the craving as it's described in this article.

------
op03
Cravings are satisfied a thousand different ways these days. Social
interaction has a lot of competition.

------
adelHBN
According to a May 25, 2020, WSJ article
([https://www.wsj.com/articles/together-review-all-the-
lonely-...](https://www.wsj.com/articles/together-review-all-the-lonely-
people-11590430598?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=1\)61%) of Americans felt
lonely during the Covid-19 crisis. While this percentage is higher than
normal, the issue is not new. 2-3 years ago President Trump brought on a
"loneliness" advisor (not for himself, for Americans), and since at least 2018
the UK has a Minister of Loneliness. This is becoming a global issue,
including in China, where children are not spending time with their elderly
parents the way their previous generations did.

------
LargoLasskhyfv
_Stressfressen_

~~~
kaybe
_Kummerspeck_

