No Loneliness Epidemic: Why Ongoing Debate?
Most people experience periods of loneliness, isolation or solitude in their lives. But these are different things, and the proportion of people feeling lonely is stable over time. So why do we keep talking about an epidemic of loneliness?
Before the COVID pandemic, several studies showed that rates of loneliness were stable in England, the US, Finland, Sweden and Germany, among other places, over recent decades.
While COVID changed many things, loneliness levels quickly returned to pre-pandemic levels. In 2018, 34% of US adults aged 50 to 80 years reported a lack of companionship “some of the time” or “often”. That proportion rose to 42% during the pandemic but fell to 33% in 2024.
That’s a lot of lonely people, but it is not an epidemic. In some countries, such as Sweden , loneliness is in decline – at least among older adults.
Despite these statistics, the idea that loneliness is increasing is pervasive. For example in 2023, the US surgeon general warned about an “epidemic of loneliness and isolation” . The UK even has a government minister with an explicit responsibility for addressing loneliness.
Loneliness is a problem, even if it is not an epidemic. Social connection is important for physical and mental health. Many people feel lonely in a crowd or feel crowded when alone. In 2023, the World Health Organization announced a “Commission on Social Connection” . The WHO is right: we need to reduce loneliness in our families, communities and societies.
But the idea that loneliness is an “epidemic” is misleading and it draws us away from sustainable solutions, rather than towards them. It suggests that loneliness is a new problem (it is not), that it is increasing (it is not), that it is beyond our control (it is not), and that the only appropriate reaction is an emergency one (it is not).
In the short term, loneliness is an undesirable psychological state. In the long term, it is a risk factor for chronic ill health .
Loneliness is not a sudden crisis that needs a short-term fix. It is a long-term challenge that requires a sustained response. An emergency reaction is not appropriate – a measured response is. Initiatives by the US surgeon general and WHO are welcome, but they should be long-term responses to an enduring problem, not emergency reactions to an “epidemic”.
Conceptual clarity is essential if true loneliness is to be addressed. Pathologising all instances of being alone risks medicalising normal human experiences such as solitude. Some people feel alive only in crowds, but others were born lighthouse keepers. In a hyper-connected world, loneliness should be solvable, but solitude must be treasured.
So, if there is no loneliness epidemic, why do we keep talking as if there is? Media framing of the issue and the human tendency to panic reinforce each other. We click into news stories based on subjective resonance rather than objective evidence.
Human behaviour is shaped primarily by feelings, not facts . We dramatise, panic, and overstate negative trends. If trends are positive, we focus on minor counter-trends, ignore statistics and make things up.
In the case of loneliness, the problem is real, even if the “epidemic” is not. Loneliness is part of the human condition, but alleviating each other’s loneliness is also part of who we are – or who we can become.
Addressing loneliness is not about solving a short-term problem or halting an “epidemic”. It means learning to live with each other in new, more integrated ways that meet our emotional needs. Loneliness is not the problem. It is a consequence of living in societies that are often disconnected and fragmented.
The solution? We cannot change the essentials of human nature – and nor should we try. But we can be a little kinder to ourselves, speak to each other a little more, and cultivate compassion for ourselves and other people.
We need to connect with each other better and more. We can. We should. We will.
Brendan Kelly does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.