Loneliness isn’t just an emotional struggle—it’s a public health crisis with consequences worse than obesity, sedentary living, and even smoking. In fact, social disconnection increases the risk of premature death by 30 percent, the equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day.
Now, for the first time, Canada has national guidelines for social connection, thanks to a team of experts led by SFU health sciences professor Kiffer Card. Developed in collaboration with GenWell and the Canadian Alliance for Social Connection and Health, these guidelines provide both individuals and policymakers with the tools to strengthen relationships and prioritize connection as a pillar of well-being.
We sat down with Kiffer Card to discuss the urgent need to address social disconnection, the science behind meaningful connection, and what governments, communities, and individuals can do to help build a more connected Canada. —Noa Nichol
Social disconnection has been called a public health crisis—worse than smoking and obesity. Why do you think this issue has been so widely overlooked until now?
I think we all recognize the importance of relationships in our lives, but we don’t necessarily connect them to our health—at least not in the same way we link diet and exercise to well-being. A major reason for this is that we’ve had almost 80 years of health promotion education around diet and 50 years around exercise, yet there hasn’t been a comparable investment in educating people about the importance of social connection as a determinant of health.
Governments have historically assumed that social connection was natural—that people would simply develop relationships on their own. Unfortunately, we now know that’s no longer something we can take for granted. Our world is increasingly structured around highly individualistic and technology-driven systems: we commute alone, we spend our workdays isolated in cubicles or behind office doors, our apartments are getting smaller—making it harder to host gatherings—and we’re spending more time in front of screens rather than interacting in person. As a result, community spaces are underutilized, parks fall into disrepair, and social organizations struggle as membership declines.
All of these signs indicate that the world we’ve built isn’t one where social connection happens naturally. I think we all watched this shift occur gradually—particularly since the 1990s, with acceleration in the early 2000s—but it wasn’t until the COVID-19 pandemic that people worldwide were forced to confront isolation firsthand. That collective experience of loneliness brought social connection to the forefront of public consciousness and created an opportunity to rethink how we design our lives and communities.
Your research shows that social isolation is harmful even if individuals don’t feel lonely. Can you explain the distinction between loneliness and social disconnection?
Yes. Loneliness is a subjective feeling—the perception that one’s social needs are not being met, regardless of the number of relationships one has. Social disconnection (or isolation), on the other hand, is more objective—it refers to a lack of sufficient social ties or participation in the broader social fabric.
You can have a large network of acquaintances and still feel lonely, while conversely, you might have only a few social contacts but not feel lonely if those relationships are deep and meaningful. The key takeaway from our research is that even if someone doesn’t feel lonely, having limited social contact or engagement can still harm health in ways comparable to other well-known risk factors. We also found that individuals who are more introverted tend to suffer more when their social needs aren’t met.
Ultimately, this reinforces the idea that we all need to prioritize social connection. As humans, we are inherently social creatures—we have a universal need to belong and connect.
What were some of the most surprising findings from your review of over 4,500 academic research papers on social connection?
One of the most striking findings was the sheer breadth of health outcomes linked to social connection. We saw strong associations not only with mental health and emotional well-being but also with chronic illnesses such as heart disease, diabetes, and even survival rates after major illnesses.
Looking at the data, it becomes clear that social connection isn’t just an important determinant of well-being—it’s tied to many of the leading health challenges our communities face, from the youth mental health crisis to addiction and homelessness.
The guidelines provide recommendations for both individuals and communities. Can you share some key actions people can take in their daily lives to build stronger social connections?
Absolutely. At the individual level, building social connections can start with simple, intentional actions—like scheduling regular meetups with friends and family, participating in neighborhood activities, or volunteering. Another important step is to practice empathy and active listening in our interactions.
For example, reaching out to a neighbor or colleague who might seem isolated, offering support, and being present in conversation can have a powerful impact. Technology can also be used more mindfully—video calls or social media check-ins can complement real-life connections when used to foster genuine dialogue rather than replace in-person interactions.
Of course, not everyone is comfortable with the same forms of connection. What feels right for one person might be different for another. The key is to take steps that feel natural and continue to build on them as comfort levels grow.
At the community level, what policies or programs could have the biggest impact on improving social connection in Canada?
Providing accessible opportunities is critical—meeting people where they are and making social connection easier to prioritize in daily life. Many people lead busy lives, and social connection often takes a backseat.
Even small interventions, such as posted signs encouraging conversations or designated social spaces, can be effective. Low-barrier initiatives like these can yield significant returns by subtly shifting social norms and making interaction more natural.
How do you envision governments and public health officials integrating these guidelines into their existing frameworks? What are the biggest challenges in making this a national priority?
The first step is framing social connection as a vital determinant of health. Once governments adopt this perspective, they can integrate relevant metrics—such as community engagement levels and social support networks—into routine public health assessments.
Public health officials can also collaborate across sectors (housing, education, transportation) to ensure that new policies foster social cohesion. One of the biggest challenges is that social connection transcends traditional healthcare boundaries, requiring cross-ministerial and cross-community coordination, which can be complex.
Another challenge is securing sustained funding and political commitment, especially since the benefits of social cohesion take time to manifest in measurable health outcomes.
Social connection has been linked to mental health, chronic illness, and even longevity. What are some of the long-term health benefits of fostering strong social networks?
Long-term benefits include a reduced risk of depression, anxiety, and stress-related disorders. Strong social ties have been associated with better immune function and lower rates of chronic conditions like heart disease and hypertension.
Research also suggests that people with robust social networks recover more quickly from illnesses and have lower mortality rates. Over time, these benefits contribute to healthier aging, greater life satisfaction, and potentially lower healthcare costs for both individuals and society.
The guidelines emphasize accessibility and inclusion in communities. What are some barriers that prevent people from forming social connections, and how can they be addressed?
Common barriers include geographical distance, mobility challenges, financial constraints, and stigma related to mental health or disability. Language and cultural differences can also hinder participation in community activities.
To address these issues, communities should create safe, inclusive public spaces that cater to diverse needs. Providing accessible transportation, offering free or low-cost community programs, and ensuring interpreters or multilingual resources are available can help bridge these gaps.
At a broader level, reducing stigma through education and inclusive policy-making is essential—people should feel they belong, regardless of their background, health status, or socioeconomic situation.
With discussions already happening with the World Health Organization, do you see these guidelines expanding beyond Canada? What would global adoption of social connection policies look like?
The health implications of social connection are universal, so there is strong interest in adopting similar frameworks worldwide. Global adoption would require adapting the guidelines to fit different cultural norms and social structures, but the core principles—recognizing social connection as a determinant of health, fostering inclusive community design, and providing accessible resources—would remain the same.
Ideally, organizations like the WHO would integrate these principles into global health agendas, similar to how they address non-communicable diseases. The goal is to make social connection a fundamental part of public health strategies worldwide.
Looking ahead, what changes do you hope to see in Canada’s public health landscape as a result of these guidelines? How can individuals and organizations help drive this movement forward?
I hope to see a systematic integration of social connection metrics into public health planning, alongside established measures like disease incidence and healthcare access. This could lead to increased funding for community-building initiatives, greater emphasis on mental health services, and a broader understanding that fostering social ties is as essential as promoting physical activity.
Individuals can contribute by engaging with their communities—volunteering, organizing neighborhood events, or simply checking in on friends and family. Organizations can help by fostering inclusive workplace cultures, offering flexible work arrangements to support social engagement, and partnering with local groups to sponsor community events.
If governments, businesses, nonprofits, and residents all prioritize social connection, we can build a more resilient and healthier Canada.
share:
Be the first to comment