Online Sociality Linked to Lower Death Risk

Facebook users in California had slightly better health outcomes than nonusers, even after controlling for other factors. Christopher Intagliata reports.

ImageSource (MARS)

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Exercise and healthful eating are linked to better health—and so is having a decent circle of friends. Now it looks like that link between friends and better health is true for the major online social network, too: Facebook.

Researchers compared the health records of 12 million Facebook users to non-users, in California. After controlling for things like age, race, and gender, they found that being on Facebook was associated with a slightly lower risk of death in a given year. 

Now, some of that could be explained by the fact that Facebook users might be more affluent, or have better access to healthcare. So the researchers did a second analysis—by looking only at Facebook and non-Facebook users on the California voter rolls, a sort of proxy control for socioeconomic status. And the association still held up. The study is in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. [William R. Hobbs et al., Online social integration is associated with reduced mortality risk]


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Of course correlation does not equal causation. Posting more photos isn't going to increase your lifespan. But the takeaway here is that, in some cases—like when people tag you in their photos—that online world can reflect real world ties. Interactions on Facebook are thus reflective of your actual human relationships—and might even reinforce them. Which certainly seems like a thumbs up.

—Christopher Intagliata

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe