
Even some teens say social media is hurting their mental health
Against the backdrop of a deepening mental health crisis among American teenagers, a newly released survey of teens and their parents by Pew Research Center reveals that teens are increasingly concerned about social media's effect on people their age. And their parents are even more likely to identify these platforms as a primary influence affecting their children's well-being.
The Pew survey of more than 1,390 U.S. teens (ages 13 to 17) and parents, conducted in fall 2024 and released Tuesday, revealed 55 percent of parents report being extremely or very concerned about teens' mental health and 44 percent of this group identified social media as the factor that has the biggest negative impact on teens.
Teenagers identified a broader range of influences and pressures that affect their mental health — including bullying, pressures and expectations, and the state of the world — and were less likely than their parents to point to social media as the biggest threat. Among teens who said they are at least somewhat concerned about their peers' mental health, 22 percent identified social media as the factor with the most negative impact. But the survey also revealed a growing wariness among teens about the influence of social media: Roughly half (48 percent) said it has a mostly negative effect on their peers, an increase from 32 percent in 2022.
Teens also noted that social media is taking up more of their time and focus: 45 percent say they spend too much time on social media — up from the 36 percent in the 2022 Pew survey — and teen girls were more likely than boys to say that it is harming their mental health, their sense of confidence or their sleep.
These findings support a general trend that researchers have been following for well over a decade, said Tamar Mendelson, professor and director of the Center for Adolescent Health at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
'Since around 2011, when smartphones were really coming into action, we saw that rates of mental health issues like depression and anxiety began to increase and have been increasing since that time,' Mendelson said. 'We saw the bump during covid, but even before that, we were seeing that these rates were increasing, and particularly for girls.'
Still, the existing research about social media's influence on teens is nuanced, Mendelson said, and these digital spaces can also offer benefits. A majority (74 percent) of the teens Pew surveyed see the platforms as positive spaces where they connect and nurture friendships, while 63 percent of teenagers said social media offers a place to showcase their creativity. And 34 percent said they sometimes find helpful resources regarding mental health there.
'I am a believer that it's more how social media platforms are used, not simply the fact that they're used,' Mendelson said. Beyond the amount of time spent online, she said, 'one question is: What is social media replacing in a young person's life? If it's replacing meals with family, healthy bedtimes, time spent actually socializing with friends in person, then that's concerning.
'The other piece is — what are they doing online? We know that some sites and activities are really helpful for young people: They can be connecting with communities that make them feel seen; they can be actually learning things online that are helpful to them; they can be playing games with friends that are not harmful.'
Among other negative influences on mental health, 17 percent of teens identify bullying — in person and online — as a primary cause of issues, while 16 percent say pressures and expectations have the most significant impact.
Those sources of stress were revealed in greater detail in survey data released by Pew last month, which emphasized a gender divide among the pressures on — and perceptions of — today's teens. A majority of teens (68 percent) said they feel a great deal or a fair amount of pressure to get good grades, and 42 percent said the girls in their school receive better grades than boys, while just 3 percent said boys fare better. Girls were more likely to say they feel a great deal or fair amount of pressure to look good (55 percent) or to fit in socially (45 percent). Boys were more likely than girls — by a 20-point margin — to say they feel a great deal or fair amount of pressure to be physically strong, and they also were more likely to say they feel pressure to be good at sports.
Anxiety and depression topped the list of problems that teens identified among their peers at school, and 39 percent of teens who say anxiety and depression is common at their school say it's more prevalent among girls.
That may not be an accurate perception, though. Judy Chu, an author, researcher and lecturer at Stanford University with expertise in the psychosocial development of boys, notes that boys often convey emotional distress in different ways — and that disruptive or aggressive behavior can be a sign that they're suffering, too. (The survey showed that boys are more likely to be viewed as aggressive or disorderly — 63 percent of teens said that boys are more disruptive in class, and 44 percent of those said physical fights are more common among boys.)
Our societal focus has often swung between girls and boys, 'and it kind of feeds into this zero-sum thing,' Chu said. 'Should we be focusing on girls? Should we be focusing on boys? The answer is we should be focusing on both, because our social constructions of gender are harmful for everyone.'
Social media amplifies those constructions, Mendelson said: 'The standards for beauty or strength can be very unrealistic — through social media, we're seeing models and athletes, and we're comparing ourselves. But then these stereotypical gender norms also really cut off important aspects of our identities: For boys, a lot has been written about toxic masculinity and how it means that males don't get the same opportunities to learn how to express their feelings, to seek support or be vulnerable, and that can have really negative effects on mental health. And girls may feel that they can't express anger, they can't be competitive, assertive or ambitious.'
The stigmatization of male vulnerability also affects boys' ability to thrive in classrooms, Chu added: 'Boys have always been, and continue to be, socialized toward masculine norms — but vulnerability is essential in order to learn. You have to bring that humility. You have to be able to admit, at least to yourself, that you don't know something in order to go and learn it, or to ask for help from someone who can teach you.'
The Pew survey also showed that parents are attuned to these challenges and want to engage with their teens about mental health. Eight in 10 parents say they would be extremely or very comfortable talking to their teen about mental health (teens aren't quite as comfortable, with 52 percent saying they feel the same way). And by double-digit margins, more adults said there is too little emphasis on encouraging boys to talk about their feelings and to do well in school rather than too much emphasis.
'I think that's great news,' Mendelson said. 'That was one of a few hopeful elements in the data.'
Chu also found this encouraging, but noted that parents and society still have much work to do to create a space where teens can feel supported as they push against deeply instilled gender norms.
'Gen Xers grew up not being nurtured perfectly either, so these adults have healing and learning to do as well,' she said. While it's beneficial to encourage boys to be comfortable with vulnerability, and for girls to be more assertive and less concerned about their appearance, she said, it's also necessary to create a culture where those shifts are welcomed rather than stigmatized.
'We know what we need, but society, through our systems and our organizations, has not yet responded,' she said. 'The call has been there for decades, and we should be further along than we are.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
My 5-year-old survived cancer – twice. Don't put politics before medical research.
My 5-year-old survived cancer – twice. Don't put politics before medical research. | Opinion When you're watching your child battle cancer, every advancement matters. We can't afford to let misinformation and polarized politics dictate the future of lifesaving research. Show Caption Hide Caption Cuts to health research could impact clinical studies and trials at the NIH The Trump administration wants to cut health spending in the coming year, and plans to cut the budget at the National Institutes of Health by $18 billion. Few issues in American politics have consistently united both parties like the fight against cancer. While funding levels and strategies may differ, Democrats and Republicans alike recognize that cancer doesn't discriminate – and neither should our commitment to defeat it. Under the Biden administration, the Cancer Moonshot was relaunched to accelerate progress toward a cure. More recently, President Donald Trump announced his 'Stargate' initiative, which aims to harness artificial intelligence in detecting and treating cancer, including through personalized mRNA vaccines. In the United States, cancer is the leading cause of death by disease for children after infancy. Across the political spectrum, there remains a shared hope: that no one should have to endure the pain of losing a loved one or fight this deadly disease. Yet today, that consensus is showing signs of strain. State legislatures across the country are advancing bills to ban or severely restrict the use of – and further research into – breakthrough technologies like mRNA, a technology that is driving promising advancements in cancer. What should be a story of American scientific innovation is being twisted into a political talking point. And it's putting lives at risk. Opinion: Biden's diagnosis shows two things. Cancer hits everyone and some forgot that. My daughter survived cancer twice. Politicians can't imagine what we went through. If the politicians pushing these bans spent even a few minutes inside a pediatric oncology unit, maybe they'd understand. They'd see floors filled with sick children on small bicycles, pulling IV poles behind them. Children in hospital beds, brave beyond measure. And parents clinging to hope. I've seen it firsthand. I'm a mother whose 5-year-old daughter has survived cancer – twice. My daughter Charlie is one of a small percentage of pediatric cancer patients whose tumors don't show up on standard blood tests. Her cancer went undetected for more than a year. By the time doctors found it, it had already spread to her liver. She was just 3 years old and had Stage 4 cancer. Once Charlie's cancer was detected, we rushed into treatment: high-dose chemotherapy, stem cell transplants and multiple surgeries. After months of treatment, we got the news every parent prays for: Charlie was cancer-free. But just a few months later, scans revealed a relapse. Two small nodules were found on her lung. Her baby brother was only two months old when we learned her cancer had returned. Relapse treatment was grueling. Charlie lost weight and muscle mass. She needed a feeding tube to stay nourished, hydrated and medicated. But through it all, she never lost her smile. Her strength became ours. And while we juggled caring for a newborn and two other children, we held onto hope, because science gave us a reason to. Thanks to expert care at Seattle Children's and research-backed protocols, she's once again cancer-free. She started preschool this year. She's coloring, laughing and chasing her siblings again. Public funding for research saved my daughter's life Every option we had was made possible by decades of public investment in research. Families who came before us joined clinical trials. Lawmakers chose to fund pediatric science and cancer research. That is the same kind of work mRNA research builds on today. Researchers are developing an mRNA-based diagnostic test that could catch cancers like hers earlier, when they're more treatable. The test uses mRNA from her original tumor to detect any circulating cancer cells through a simple blood draw. Catching a relapse early could be lifesaving. We first learned about this test in 2023, and knowing it's almost within reach brings us, and families like ours, so much hope. Beyond mRNA-based diagnostic tests, mRNA has also shown early promise as a therapy for cancer patients, enabling personalized treatment that could more effectively target one's tumor. That kind of innovation is exactly what's under threat right now. The role of mRNA technology in oncology has been studied for decades, and yet some lawmakers want to roll this progress back, arguing it is untested and unsafe. This technology, along with many innovations that come from federally supported medical research, is a critical source of hope for families around the world. I'm a doctor. So is my mother. When she got cancer, I realized how little that mattered. | Opinion When you're watching your child battle cancer, every advancement matters. I know firsthand how critical it is to catch cancer early and have access to every possible treatment option. When politicians politicize science – when they ban or restrict it based on misinformation and politics – they aren't protecting families like mine. They're limiting our options. They're slowing down the breakthroughs that could save lives. We can't afford to let misinformation and polarized politics dictate the future of lifesaving research. Thanks to innovation in medical research, Charlie is thriving today, but far too many kids are still fighting. Let's ensure science continues to move forward for all of our children. Emily Stenson is a childhood cancer advocate and the mother of 5-year-old two-time cancer survivor Charlie Stenson. She lives in Seattle.


Boston Globe
11 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Palestinians say Israeli fire kills 12 near aid sites
Advertisement Eleven of the latest bodies were brought to Nasser Hospital in the southern city of Khan Younis. Palestinian witnesses said Israeli forces fired on some at a roundabout around a kilometer (half-mile) from a site run by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, or GHF, in nearby Rafah. Israel's military said it fired warning shots at approaching 'suspects' who ignored warnings to turn away. It said the shooting happened in an area that is considered an active combat zone at night. Al-Awda Hospital said it received the body of a man and 29 people who were wounded near another GHF aid distribution point in central Gaza. The military said it fired warning shots in the area at around 6:40 a.m., but didn't see any casualties. Advertisement A GHF official said there was no violence in or around its distribution sites, all three of which delivered aid on Sunday. The group closed them temporarily last week to discuss safety measures with Israel's military and has warned people to stay on designated access routes. The official spoke on condition of anonymity in line with regulations. The new aid hubs are set up inside Israeli military zones where independent media have no access. The GHF also said it was piloting direct delivery to a community north of Rafah. Witnesses said the first shootings in southern Gaza took place at around 6 a.m., when they were told the site would open. Many headed toward it early, seeking desperately needed food before crowds arrived. Gaza's roughly 2 million Palestinians are almost completely reliant on international aid because nearly all food production capabilities have been destroyed. Adham Dahman, who was at Nasser Hospital with a bandage on his chin, said a tank fired toward them. 'We didn't know how to escape,' he said. 'This is [a] trap for us, not aid.' Zahed Ben Hassan said someone next to him was shot in the head. 'They said it was a safe area from 6 a.m. until 6 p.m. ... So why did they start shooting at us?' he said. 'There was light out, and they have their cameras and can clearly see us.' The military announced on Friday that the sites would be open during those hours, and the areas would be a closed military zone the rest of the time. Children cried over their father's body at the hospital. 'I can't see you like this, Dad!' one girl said. Advertisement The new aid hubs are run by GHF, a new group of mainly American contractors. Israel wants it to replace a system coordinated by the United Nations and international aid groups. Israel and the United States accuse the Hamas militant group of stealing aid. The UN denies there is systematic diversion. The UN says the new system is unable to meet mounting needs, allows Israel to use aid as a weapon by determining who can receive it and forces people to relocate to where aid sites are positioned. The UN system has struggled to deliver aid, even after Israel eased its blockade of Gaza last month. UN officials say their efforts are hindered by Israeli military restrictions, the breakdown of law and order and widespread looting. Experts warned earlier this year that Gaza was at critical risk of famine, if Israel didn't lift its blockade and halt its military campaign. Both were renewed in March. Israeli officials have said the offensive will continue until all hostages are returned and Hamas is defeated or disarmed and sent into exile. On Sunday, Israel's military invited journalists into Khan Younis to show a tunnel under the European Hospital, saying they found the body of Mohammed Sinwar, the head of Hamas' armed wing, there after he was killed last month. Israel has barred international journalists from entering Gaza independently since the war began. '(Israeli forces) would prefer not to hit or target hospitals,' army spokesperson Brig. Gen. Effie Defrin said. Sinwar's body was found in a room under the hospital's emergency room, Defrin said. Hamas has said it will only release the remaining hostages in return for Palestinian prisoners, a lasting ceasefire and an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. Talks mediated by the U.S., Egypt, and Qatar have been deadlocked for months. Advertisement Hamas started the war with its attack on southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, when Palestinian militants killed around 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and took another 251 hostage. They still hold 55 hostages, fewer than half of them alive, after most of the rest were released in ceasefire agreements or other deals. Israel's military campaign has killed more than 54,800 Palestinians, according to Gaza's Health Ministry. It says women and children make up most of the dead, but doesn't say how many civilians or combatants were killed. Israel says it has killed more than 20,000 militants, without providing evidence. The war has destroyed vast areas of Gaza and displaced around 90 percent of its population.
Yahoo
14 hours ago
- Yahoo
The #1 Nut to Help You Lose Weight, Recommended by Dietitians
Nuts are high in calories and fat, so should you avoid them if you're trying to lose weight? Luckily, you shouldn't. Studies have shown that people who include nuts in their diets experience great metabolic health benefits. In fact, a review found that people who regularly eat nuts have less weight gain and a reduced risk of obesity. Registered dietitian Bianca Tamburello, RDN, with Fresh Communications, says, 'Nuts are a great food for weight loss because they're packed with healthy fats, which boost satiety, and protein and fiber to keep you full.' But she does note, 'Nuts are nutrient-dense and pack a good amount of calories per serving, but this is not a reason to avoid them. Be aware of portions and aim for one to two servings per day,' she adds. All nuts are wholesome foods perfectly packaged by nature, and each one provides health benefits. Yet, when it comes to weight loss, we'll have to go with almonds as the best nut to help you lose weight. Let's dive into the reasoning. If you're looking for a satisfying snack to improve your health while losing weight, look no further than almonds. With almonds, you know you'll be giving your body a boost of quality nutrients that may aid you in your weight-loss goals. Almonds are great for weight loss for several reasons. 'Fiber is an important nutrient in most diets, especially knowing the average American only eats about half of the daily recommended amount,' says Samantha MacLeod, M.S., RDN, a registered dietitian with Fresh Communications. 'If you are trying to lose weight, fiber can be important because it helps you to stay fuller and more satisfied for longer.' Two ounces of almonds contain over 7 grams of fiber. Additionally, high-fiber foods like almonds have been shown to help reduce inflammatory molecules in the body, such as interleukin-6 (IL-6) and tumor necrosis factor (TNF). Fiber-rich foods like almonds are also associated with improved metabolism, a lower risk for heart disease and type 2 diabetes, better digestive function, and possibly even a lower risk of colon cancer. Almonds are high in anti-inflammatory plant compounds called flavonoids, polyphenols and proanthocyanidins. Research has found that almonds, particularly their skin, may have even more antioxidants than previously thought. Foods with anti-inflammatory benefits, like almonds, help support weight loss since evidence shows that excessive weight can lead to or can be caused by chronic inflammation. This increases your risk of metabolic conditions such as type 2 diabetes and insulin resistance. Data has also shown that eating almonds may help balance your microbiome, contributing to reduced inflammation. MacLeod also notes that the fiber in nuts can help keep blood sugar levels stable, which also helps reduce that inflammation. Your body is constantly rebuilding and maintaining your bones, muscles, cells and tissues, and it needs protein to do it. Tamburello notes that over-restricting food, a common mistake when losing weight, can lead to eating too much later on. Foods high in protein slow down digestion, keeping you full. Additionally, protein is key to maintaining your muscle mass. Muscle mass is a metabolically active tissue that helps increase your basal metabolic rate (BMR)—how many calories your body needs for basic functions. A higher metabolic rate leads to burning more calories. Two ounces of almonds have over 12 grams of protein, making them a great high-protein food to help you maintain your muscle mass. Almonds are a good choice if you're ready to include nutritious and delicious foods in your diet to help you lose weight, but any nut can help you with your goals. If you enjoy another nut more than almonds, feel free to make a swap. Other great options are: Cashews: Cashews haven't been studied as much as other nuts, but the existing studies show that eating cashews may help you maintain a healthy body composition. Participants in the studies had more muscle mass tissue and a lower fat mass, plus reduced inflammation in their blood vessels. Walnuts: Walnuts have consistently been shown to improve health markers that are beneficial for weight loss. Regular walnut consumption has been shown to improve the health of your microbiome because they are rich in polyphenols, which can help reduce inflammation, and fiber, which helps produce short-chain fatty acids—improving overall health. A healthy gut benefits all aspects of health, including aiding in weight loss efforts. Pistachios: These little green nuts can also support you on your weight-loss journey. One study found that the participants who ate pistachios daily saw decreased waist circumference (associated with visceral fat) and better blood pressure levels. The group eating pistachios also had higher blood plasma levels of antioxidants like lutein and beta carotene. Even though almonds and other nuts are high in calories, they have plenty of health benefits that can aid you in your weight-loss journey. MacLeod says, 'Generally speaking, nuts are high in fat and can be calorie-dense, but that does not mean you should exclude them from your diet if you are trying to lose weight!' And as we've seen here, the health benefits go beyond weight loss for overall health. Read the original article on EATINGWELL