Which is why I said it reads like copium. It seems like you have an unwavering position that social media is bad for people's emotional states and mental health. And when presented some new evidence that challenges this belief your immediate response was to come up with a bunch of ways your core belief could still hold given the new evidence.

That to me isn't coming at it with an open mind or with curiosity. Is it not interesting that there's maybe a different larger effect that explains people's observations?