First of all, I’d like to thank you for commenting and bringing your unique perspective to this topic. You must remember that I did not conduct these studies. I merely found the results interesting and interpreted some of the data. I left a large portion of it open, which is why I asked questions.

Secondly, if you think an introverted personality type is someone who lives in complete social isolation, than you are incorrect. No one is a complete extrovert or a complete introvert, rather we adopt different characteristics at different times. There are many different “kinds” of introverts and extroverts, and it is not simply that black and white.

Introverts generally have an inward focus. Introversion in and of itself is defined as: “The direction of or tendency to direct one’s thoughts and feelings toward oneself.” Where do you get the notion that this means an introverted personality type lives in complete social isolation? Prove me wrong here. Unfortunately, just telling me that I am proving your notion that extroverts don’t get introverts is not enough.

If you live in complete social isolation, and I know that you don’t, this would be considered abnormal. Extroverts and introverts may be different, but all humans need social interaction to some degree. This has been proven time and time again.

I think you got a bit confused with the quote about psychological distress. It simply meant that that previous conditions, like a disease (be it mental or physical) was not the cause for the elevated risk of morbidity.

Buddhist monks live in communities. They do not live in social isolation. They live in monasteries. I’m not quite sure I see your point on this one.

but moving from this point you say the article says there is an elevated risk to mortality – what does that actually mean? What real data is there to support that claim?
Further you or the article go on to say that this increased risk is not related to among other things “psychological distress” but how can anxiety not be considered a form of psychological distress, especially if it resulted in the physiological changes.

on to another point – what about the elevated levels of peace, beingness and awakening that are found in yogis, Buddhist monks and many others -humans who choose to live in isolation and live good long supposedly anxiety free lives. I think it is important to question ALL of our basic beliefs about “human beings.” Is it really that we are ’social’ or is there something underlying this more surface/superficial label that is at the crux of who and what we are?

back to you

While the difference between an introverted personality type and an extroverted one may be large, it isn’t important to this particular study.

Having very little to no social interaction is not normal for an introverted personality type. It is abnormal in the sense that the human being is a social creature, which goes to show why some social interaction is necessary.

This article is not saying that you have to have a lot. In fact, it isn’t even saying that having a lot is beneficial. It is just saying that very little to no social interaction, or social isolation, can have an effect on morbidity.