Wharton psychologist and ex-Pentagon advisor unpacks the real mental health crisis among youth. Netizens ask, 'Are we sure it's just kids?'
When it comes to
youth mental health
and technology, it turns out the culprit isn't just how long kids are on their phones—but why they can't put them down.
Adam Grant
, organizational psychologist at
Wharton
and former advisor to the Pentagon, recently stirred up the internet with a stark observation about screen use and emotional wellbeing.
In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Grant wrote, 'The biggest risk to young people's mental health is not screentime. It's addictive behavior,' referencing a new study published in JAMA Health Forum titled Addictive Screen Use Trajectories and Suicidal Behaviors, Suicidal Ideation, and Mental Health in US Youths. The study tracked youth behavior over four years and delivered an unsettling insight: children who struggled to control their use of social media, games, or phones were more likely to show signs of mental distress, including suicidal thoughts and behaviors.
— AdamMGrant (@AdamMGrant)
The Red Flag Isn't Time; It's Compulsion
Grant, whose work has shaped conversations on productivity, purpose, and emotional health, emphasized that it's not merely about counting screen hours. 'We should worry less about time than distress and compulsion,' he wrote. The study backs this up with numbers: around one-third of children showed increasing "addictive" use of phones and social media as they aged, with video games not far behind. These patterns weren't linked just to how long they were on devices—but to how much they felt unable to stop.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Shape your journey in the unforgiving desert world of Arrakis!
G2A.COM
Shop Now
Undo
Children with high or increasing compulsive use were found to be more than twice as likely to attempt self-harm than those with lower levels of screen dependency. Moreover, they experienced higher levels of anxiety, sadness, and anger—conditions that alarmingly persisted over time.
Design or Disorder? A Heated Debate Online
The study triggered intense reactions online, with many users echoing a recurring theme: this isn't just a youth issue.
You Might Also Like:
Wharton professor reveals the most underrated career skill, but research says it takes more than you to master it
'Would love to see this same lens applied to adult behavior,' one user commented. 'Feels like this is more like a global dilemma at this point.' Another chimed in: 'Screens are designed to be addictive. Isn't this like saying ultra-processed food isn't a risk—just the compulsive eating of it?'
Indeed, many pointed fingers not only at behavior but also at big tech's intent—highlighting the built-in psychological hooks that keep users, regardless of age, scrolling long after they mean to stop.
What This Means for the Future of Mental Health
The JAMA study's findings go beyond parenting concerns—they shine a light on how addiction is being redefined in a digital world. It's not the hours on a device but the loss of control that signals a deeper emotional struggle. Grant, known for his work on languishing and emotional regulation, implies this is a teachable moment for both parents and policymakers.
'It boils down to emotional regulation,' a user reflected in response. 'Noticing, understanding, and managing the feeling that makes you do what you do is crucial.'
You Might Also Like:
Sundar Pichai met his IIT batchmate-turned monk who looked 'younger'. His reply: 'You deal with Google, I with God'
A Global Crisis Disguised as a Youth Problem?
While the study focuses on adolescents, many agree the findings reflect a broader epidemic. From compulsive doomscrolling to late-night binge-watching, adults are hardly immune. As one commenter noted, 'Are we sure it's just kids struggling with control?'
— KevinHenrikson (@KevinHenrikson)
In Grant's words, it's not time, it's torment. And it may be time we all look up from our screens—not just to monitor our kids, but to check in with ourselves.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
26 minutes ago
- Time of India
Drinking diet soda? Here's how it sabotages weight loss
A recent study from USC's Keck School of Medicine reveals that diet sodas, particularly those with sucralose, may increase food cravings and appetite, especially in women and obese individuals. Researchers found that artificial sweeteners can trigger brain activity linked to cravings and reduce hormones that signal fullness. People nowadays are obsessed with diet soda, due to its promise of zero sugar and zero calories. It almost looks like a guilt-free beverage, especially for those trying to lose weight. But diet drinks might not be the sweet spot. Switching to diet soda may leave more than just a synthetic aftertaste. A new study found that drinking diet soda may sabotage your weight loss journey. Researchers from the Keck School of Medicine of USC found that diet sodas may increase food cravings and appetite, especially in women and people who are obese. The study is published in JAMA Network Open . The culprit in diet soda The researchers found that drinks that contain the artificial sweetener sucralose are linked to increased food cravings. This was one of the largest studies to examine the effects of an artificial sweetener, also called a nonnutritive sweetener (NNS), on brain activity and appetite responses in different segments of the population. Over 40 percent of adults in the US currently use NNSs to satisfy their sweet tooth. Many consider it a calorie-free way to accomplish weight loss goals. 'There is controversy surrounding the use of artificial sweeteners because a lot of people are using them for weight loss. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Top Public Speaking Course for Children Planet Spark Book Now Undo While some studies suggest they may be helpful, others show they may be contributing to weight gain, type 2 diabetes, and other metabolic disorders. Our study looked at different population groups to tease out some of the reasons behind those conflicting results,' Kathleen Page, MD, corresponding author and an associate professor of medicine at the Keck School of Medicine, said in a statement. The study To understand the effects of artificial sweeteners on health, the researchers studied 74 participants. The participants were divided based on gender and categorized as healthy weight, overweight or obese, over three separate sessions. During each visit, the participants consumed 300 milliliters of either a drink sweetened with table sugar (sucrose), a sucralose-sweetened drink, or water. The researchers used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to measure three things: activation of regions of the brain responsible for appetite and food cravings in response to pictures of high-calorie foods such as a burger and donut, and glucose (blood sugar), insulin, and other metabolic hormones in the blood. Artificial sweeteners were linked to more cravings The researchers found increased activity in regions of the brain responsible for food cravings and appetite in both women and obese people after they consumed sucralose-containing drinks, when compared to those who drank real sugar drinks. The levels found that after drinking the zero-calorie artificially sweetened drinks, the participants had lower levels of hormones that signal fullness, compared to when they drank the sugar-sweetened drink. This suggests that diet drinks may not really help curb hunger. They also found that female participants who drank artificial sweetener drinks snacked more, whereas snack food intake did not differ for male participants. Shreyas Iyer and Ibrahim Ali Khan's Nutritionist Nicole Kedia Breaks Down Their Diet SECRETS 'Our study starts to provide context for the mixed results from previous studies when it comes to the neural and behavioral effects of artificial sweeteners. By studying different groups, we were able to show that females and people with obesity may be more sensitive to artificial sweeteners. For these groups, drinking artificially sweetened drinks may trick the brain into feeling hungry, which may in turn result in more calories being consumed,' Page said. So, if you enjoy drinking diet sodas, thinking it may help you with weight loss, think again.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Is drinking cold water bad for your health? Know its risks and benefits
The debate around drinking cold water has sparked curiosity, with some believing it may harm digestion by contracting the stomach. However, there's no solid evidence to back this up. Both cold and room-temperature water keep you hydrated effectively. Cold water can be especially refreshing after a workout, helping cool the body and possibly giving a small metabolism boost. While it might bother those with sensitive teeth or digestion, most people can enjoy it without issues. In the end, it comes down to personal preference. What matters most is staying hydrated - water, at any temperature, is essential for mental and physical health. Risks of drinking cold water Drinking cold water can have unexpected effects on your body. According to Healthline, a 1978 study involving 15 people found that cold water increased the thickness of nasal mucus, making it harder to pass through the respiratory tract, whereas hot water and chicken soup had the opposite effect, easing breathing. For individuals with certain health conditions, cold water can exacerbate symptoms. Research suggests that drinking cold water can trigger migraines in prone individuals (2001 study) and worsen achalasia symptoms, a condition affecting food passage through the esophagus (2012 study). by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Uber luxury living at Hyderabad's billionaire junction Sumadhura Group Learn More Undo In traditional Chinese medicine, consuming cold water with hot food is believed to create an imbalance, which is why meals are often served with warm water or tea. Similar beliefs exist in other cultures, such as the idea that cold water on a hot day may not provide cooling relief. However, more research is needed to confirm or deny these claims. Positive effects of drinking cold water As per reports benefits of drinking cold water include: Beneficial for athletes or individuals engaging in strenuous physical activity Helps prevent overheating during exercise (2012 study) Makes workout sessions more successful Assists in maintaining a lower core temperature, enhancing physical performance. Cold water is super refreshing on hot days or after a tough workout. It helps cool you down, slows your heart rate, and makes you feel better faster. Does cold water help you with weight loss? Drinking cold water may aid in weight loss to a small extent. Benefits include Lower calorie intake when replacing sugary drinks Improved digestion Slight increase in calorie burn as the body works to warm the water to core temperature Also read | Is sugar the reason behind your headaches? Here's what you need to know
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Tetrapodophis: The 120 million-year-old four-footed snake-discovery and controversy
Credit: Instagram/@ In 2015, a fossil unearthed in a German museum collection set the world abuzz. The specimen, Tetrapodophis amplectus, Latin for "four-footed snake," was hailed as the first documented four-limbed snake. If confirmed, it would be a landmark item of evolutionary history, filling in the gap between early lizards and contemporary snakes. Though the find has since been clouded with scientific controversy and legal entanglement, questioning not just evolutionary theory but ethics involved in fossil acquisition as well. ( source: Wikipedia ) A unique fossil, like no other Approximately 20 centimeters in length, Tetrapodophis's fossil contains more than 150 vertebrae, a truncated tail, and a snake-like elongated body. The novel aspects of the fossil were its minute but intact fore- and hindlimbs, both with five digits, coupled with traits such as hooked teeth, a flexible skull, and prey remains in its stomach, indicating a carnivorous diet. The fossil was published in the journal Science by Dr. David Martill and colleagues, who ruled out the possibility that it came from a marine reptile, concluding instead that it was direct evidence of how snakes evolved from burrowing lizards. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo Tetrapodophis is estimated to have existed between 113 and 120 million years ago during the Early Cretaceous, according to Martill, and was probably suited to living on land. Scientific evidence suggests While the early excitement was palpable, however, most within the field of paleontology questioned the fossil's categorization. In 2016 and once more in 2021, paleontologist Dr. Michael Caldwell of the University of Alberta spearheaded the re-examination of the specimen. His research group contended that Tetrapodophis did not possess several central anatomical features common in true snakes. Among the features being questioned were the skull's structure, which did not have the movable joints and cranial kinesis characteristic of snakes; the vertebrae, which did not show the articulations characteristic of snakes and fossils; and the limb and rib morphology in general, which was similar to that of aquatic lizards called dolichosaurs. What humongous secrets science can uncover is truly fascinating. Caldwell and others suggested that the specimen had been incorrectly identified and was a member of the family Dolichosauridae, an extinct group of marine reptiles more closely related to mosasaurs than to early snakes. The scientific controversy served to illustrate a long-standing debate in paleontology: did snakes evolve from terrestrial lizards or from marine ancestors? Tetrapodophis became the center of this broader question. Legal disputes over a fossil? Know why Complicating matters was the dodgy provenance of the fossil. It was in a German private collection, but it was thought by many to have come from the Crato Formation in northeastern Brazil a place famous for its Early Cretaceous fossils. Brazil strictly prohibits the unauthorized exportation of fossils as national heritage. The release of the 2015 paper attracted severe criticism from Brazilian paleontologists and authorities, who argued that the fossil was exported illegally from the country. The controversy triggered further debate concerning the morality of fossil collection and the role of academic journals in ensuring specimens are legal. In 2024, following years of diplomatic pressure, the owners of the fossil consented to the repatriation of Tetrapodophis to Brazil. It was subsequently moved to the National Museum in Rio de Janeiro, where it will be examined further by Brazilian scientists. Update? Up to 2025, there has been no scientific agreement on Tetrapodophis's actual classification. A 2023 reclassification in the group of stem-snakes—animals that constitute a common ancestor with the contemporary snakes but belong outside the group has yet to convince most scientists, as they argue the necessity of further fossil records and adult specimens. The case of Tetrapodophis remains unresolved, not only as a paleontological puzzle but also as a case study in ethics, international law, and the evolving nature of science itself. It reminds us of the dramatic and sometimes contentious interaction between science, law, and heritage. More significantly, it reminds us of how a single fossil can disprove long-held theories, invoke global legal action, and realign the global debate on scientific accountability.
