US states sue TikTok, claiming its addictive features harm youth mental health

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/oct/08/us-states-tiktok-lawsuit-mental-health

On closer inspection, this case misuses neuroscience so severely that it seems like it could potentially make it illegal in the US for young people to have fun.

Seriously

/1

US states sue TikTok, claiming its addictive features harm youth mental health

Lawsuits allege platform’s ‘dopamine-inducing’ algorithm can lead to anxiety, depression and body dysmorphia

The Guardian

There are so many neuropsychological flaws in this case

E.g. filings state TikTok is designed to be "intentionally addictive". The conclusion here is that TikTok, a software construct, causes addiction.

Many would agree that this is valid. But, do you know who *doesn't* think it's valid?

THE AMERCIAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION!

/2

The American Psychiatric Association (APA) produces the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), a core text which lists all the mental disorders, and their diagnostic criteria, acknowledged by the APA.

Various forms of addictions are in there. But 'TikTok addiction' is not.

/3

You may disagree. You may think the DSM/APA are too restrictive/narrow/biased/etc. And you may be 100% correct to think this. That's a very salient arument.

But even so, in the here and now, the point remains that US states are suing TikTok, in US courts, on the grounds that it causes an addictive disorder, one that, according to the US medical system, doesn't exist

/4

I'm no sort of legal professional, let alone a relevant American one, but I can't help but assume that this is a tricky conclusion to sell to anyone.

/5

There's also the a basic parroting of the usual 'TikTok [or insert SM app of choice] is seriously bad for young people's mental health!' claims, despite even the most extensive research finding little to no evidence that this is actually the case.

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-31872-001

Yes, many 'concerned parents' passionately believe this to be true. But you'd *hope* that STATE LEVEL LEGAL CASES would require a higher threshold of evidence than 'loads of people say so!'

/6

And for the inevitable replies:

YES, I have read Jonathan Haidt's Anxious Generation

YES, he's done much research. But so have I, and countless professional researchers. We all think he's wrong.

NO, he doesn't 'make some good points'. He says what you assume is true. That's a very different thing. 'Validating your feelings' is not the same as 'accuracy'.

It is, however, the same as 'massive book sales', depressingly.

/7

@Garwboy omg yes, this. It frustrates me incredibly, all this buying into Haidt. He's so full of shit.
@CatherineFlick @Garwboy I if course asked him publicly about if he had researched previous generations properly - for example I grew up with a lot of anxiety being in a place between a major naval base and air field during the cold war.... But his attack on some something very specific rather than looking at larger systematic causes.