Going to the gym, eating fruits and vegetables, and not smoking; everything you need to live a long and healthy life right? Wrong. According to a recent study by co-author Julianne Holt-Lunstad, from the journal PLoS Medicine, social relationships are just as important in living a healthy lifestyle.
Researchers investigated 148 studies to determine the connection between social relationships and mortality. Specifically, these researchers looked at the correlation between lifespan and healthy social relationships. They contrasted this correlation with the lifespan of those with poor social relations.
Prof Holt-Lunstad states that those with good friendships have a 50% chance of living longer than those with poor social relationships. Different types of social relationships that were included in the research were marital status, social integration (such as community involvement), number of housemates, and number of social contacts.
The researchers concluded that hospitals and health care centres should provide their patients with increased social interaction. Furthermore, more visitors and longer visiting hours should be instituted. The authors argue that if these two provisions were followed, patient mortality would decrease.
Figure 1: Aspects of social relationships that were measured.
Out of the 148 studies, most accurate results came from the studies which included multiple aspects of one’s social community. This increase in variables leads to a better representation of an individual’s lifestyle. For example, a person may not be married, but could still be involved in community meetings, lunches with friends, school fundraising, and weekly dinners with his/her parents. This person’s lifestyle would be more positive than someone who does not live alone, but is in an abusive relationship and is not allowed to visit other people. According to the data, no single factor is the most important; one must look at a plethora of influences on one’s life to accurately determine a result.
From the 308,849 participants in the study, it was found that factors such as age, sex, initial health status and follow up period did not change. Therefore, the connection between mortality and social interactions should not be thought of as only helpful to one age group. In fact, it was found in earlier research “that infants would die without social interaction,” which explains why, a few hundred years ago, the infant mortality rate in orphanages was so high. No matter their age, human beings crave social interaction.
The study included 49% females and 51% males, as well as representatives from continents such as North America, Europe and Asia. On average, the participants were 64 years old and the follow up period was approximately 7.5 years.
It is well known that factors like smoking, obesity, and alcohol consumption increase the risk of death. Now, these contemporary researchers are “considering insufficient social relationships a risk factor of mortality” as well. While alcohol and smoking still endanger the health of many, the psychological harm of poor relationships should not be ruled out.
According to the authors, of those on their deathbeds, people with more visits generally live longer. This means that you can make a difference in someone’s life just by a visit. It’s time to start seeing your grandparents in the hospital; it could be the healing they need on top of their medication.
This new research is a positive sign for those who do have healthy habits, but still want to take a more active role in increasing the longevity of their lives. Conversely, those with poor living and social habits should take this study as a warning: being physically healthy is no longer enough.
So whether it’s going to the gym with a buddy, or going out to lunch with your Mom, make time for your social life because soon enough, health care advisors are going to be telling you to take more time for social events.
Reference List:
Funmunch.com. 2009. Picture.
Holt-Lunstad, H., Smith T., and Layton B. 2010. Social relationships and mortality risk: a meta-analytic review. PLoS Medicine.
No comments:
Post a Comment