The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
So there is a much higher transcription factor which is the regulator of a gene. If that is up-regulated by loneliness, then the genes which follow this transcription factor will go up. In this loneliness, you see that a very important protein in DNA regulation is called NF-kB, which is a factor which switches on and off about 200 genes, very strongly involved in the immune response but also responsible for this vascular growth factor.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
If the protein is not expressed, forget about it and leave. But if that protein is under control of the gene, which is under control of loneliness, you influence your disease.
So there's really empirical evidence that social isolation, at least in the context of these animal studies, literally increases the inflammatory response via NF-kB.
There was actually a study showing loneliness changes, like, a massive amount of gene expression and, like, up-regulates NF-kappaB, cortisol, like all these pro-inflammatory genes.