Latest social media advice: skip the sunscreen. Experts disagree.

A recent study shows how adolescents diagnosis types shape their social media experiences

• Teens with diagnosed mental health conditions spend roughly 50 minutes more on social media each day.

• Those with internalizing conditions report more social comparison, mood shifts from feedback, and less satisfaction with friend counts.

• Externalizing conditions are linked mainly to time spentbut not the same emotional effects seen in other youth.

Concerns about social medias effects on young people are widespread, but most research focuses on healthy teens rather than those already experiencing mental health conditions.

A recent U.K. study led by the University of Cambridge changes that, zeroing in on how adolescents with clinically assessed diagnoses use and feel about social media differently from their peers without such conditions.

The link between social media use and youth mental health is hotly debated, but hardly any studies look at young people already struggling with clinical-level mental health symptoms, researcher Luisa Fassi, said in a news release.

Our study doesnt establish a causal link, but it does show that young people with mental health conditions use social media differently than young people without a condition. This could be because mental health conditions shape the way adolescents interact with online platforms, or perhaps social media use contributes to their symptoms. At this stage, we cant say which comes first only that these differences exist.

The study

The researchers analysed data from the 2017 NHSDigital Mental Health of Children and Young People (MHCYP) survey, involving 3,340 adolescents aged 11 to 19 in England. Importantly, mental health conditions werent selfreported trained clinicians assessed participants via structured interviews with teens, and sometimes their parents and teachers too.

They didnt just measure screen time. The study captured both quantitative and qualitative dimensions of social media use how long teens reported spending online, but also how they felt about it. This included social comparison, mood effects from likes/comments, satisfaction with online friendships, self-control, honest self-disclosure, and authentic self-presentation.

Participants were grouped into those with any mental health condition, and further split into internalizing (anxiety, depression, PTSD) versus externalizing (ADHD, conduct disorders). The researchers then compared these groups to peers without conditions across multiple usage dimensions.

The results

The group with any mental health condition reported spending notably more time on social media on average, about 50 extra minutes a day compared to peers without a condition.

When it comes to emotional experiences, those with internalizing conditions stood out. Nearly 48% reported frequent upward social comparisons online about twice the rate of teens without mental health conditions (~24%).

Around 28% said their mood shifted because of social media feedback (likes/comments), compared with about 13% of peers. They also felt less control over their time, and were less satisfied with the number of online friends, and less able to share honestly or authentically online.

In contrast, teens with externalizing conditions like ADHD mainly differed from peers only in time spent online other engagement and emotional dimensions showed no significant differences.

So many factors can be behind why someone develops a mental health condition, and it's very hard to get at whether social media use is one of them, Fassi said.

A huge question like this needs lots of research that combines experimental designs with objective social media data on what young people are actually seeing and doing online. We need to understand how different types of social media content and activities affect young people with a range of mental health conditions such as those living with eating disorders, ADHD, or depression. Without including these understudied groups, we risk missing the full picture.

Voice service providers warned that they could be cut off from routing calls

By Truman Lewis of ConsumerAffairs

Operation Robocall Roundup launched nationwide this week, as a coalitionof 51 attorneys general sentwarning letters to 37 voice service providers, demanding they immediatelytake actionto stopillegal robocalls from being routed through their networks.

Consumers were promised huge earnings but the results were similar to most multi-level-marketing schemes

By Truman Lewis of ConsumerAffairs

• Three defendants will pay $2.5 million to settle FTC and Nevada allegations over deceptive earnings claims tied to a financial training MLM scheme.

• The group, operating under names like IM Mastery Academy and IYOVIA, targeted young people via social media with promises of luxury lifestyles.

• The FTC says the scheme caused more than $1.2 billion in consumer harm since 2018.

Three key figures behind a sprawling financial training and alleged multi-level marketing (MLM) schemeonce known as IM Mastery Academyhave agreed to pay $2.5 million to settle allegations brought by the Federal Trade Commission and the state of Nevada. The regulators say the trio used deceptive income promises and glamorized social media marketing to lure consumersespecially young adultsinto buying financial education packages and joining a recruitment-driven business opportunity.

The defendantsGlobal Dynasty Network, LLC, Jason Brown, and Matthew Rosawere top earners and promoters of the program, according to the joint federal-state complaint. The companies and individuals operated under a variety of names, including IYOVIA, IM Academy, iMarketsLive, and IM Mastery Academy, and promised participants the opportunity to profit through forex trading and crypto education, along with lucrative commissions for recruiting others.

In reality, the FTC says the business relied on exaggerated or baseless income claims, with few consumers making real money. Since 2018, total consumer losses linked to the scheme have exceeded $1.2 billion, the agency alleges.

Luxuries, lies, and MLM profits

Brown and Rosa, described as among the highest-paid promoters in the scheme, allegedly pocketed more than $36 million in profitsmost of it funneled through their company, Global Dynasty Network. The FTC says Brown even hired a third party to post fake positive reviews online under a pseudonym to boost the companys image.

Their promotional strategy relied heavily on aspirational lifestyle marketing, including posts on Instagram and TikTok showcasing luxury cars, international travel, and high-end shoppingimplying that these were funded by trading gains or MLM commissions. In reality, many participants lost money or failed to earn back their initial investment.

The defendants also trained other marketers to make similar deceptive claims while avoiding detection, the complaint says.

The terms of the settlement

Under the proposed settlement, the three parties are barred from making earnings claims about any product or service unless they have written evidence that the results are typical. They are also permanently banned from:

• Misrepresenting earnings or product performance in any business they operate or promote.

• Violating the Telemarketing Sales Rule, including false claims about profitability.

• Offering negative option services (subscriptions that renew automatically) without clear disclosures and affirmative consent from consumers.

While the judgment against the trio totals $36 million, that amount is suspended after they pay $2.5 million, based on their reported financial condition. If they are found to have misrepresented their finances, the full amount could become due.

A broader warning on MLMs

The case underscores ongoing concerns about deceptive marketing in the MLM and financial education spaces, particularly those that promise wealth through crypto, forex, or online investing. The FTC has been increasingly aggressive in policing such schemes in recent years, including actions against companies like Success By Health and Digital Altitude.

Consumers are urged to approach MLM and trading education opportunities with caution, particularly when high earnings claims are not backed by clear evidence, and when profitability appears tied more to recruitment than actual product value.

Tip: Always verify earnings claims before buying into a business opportunity. If someone flaunts luxury goods as evidence of success, ask for documentationnot just Instagram posts.