Leading doctors have declared social media as harmful to young people as smoking, sparking fresh calls from UK health campaigners for a ban. The comparison, drawn by a coalition of paediatricians and mental health specialists, cites rising rates of anxiety, depression, and self-harm among teenagers linked to platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat. The warning comes as the government faces mounting pressure to regulate tech giants, with campaigners arguing that social media firms have knowingly exposed children to harm, much like tobacco companies did decades ago.
Dr. Amanda Kirby, a child psychiatrist and member of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, said the evidence is now overwhelming. “We are seeing a generation of young people whose mental health is being eroded by constant comparisons, cyberbullying, and addictive algorithms. The parallels with smoking are stark – both are addictive, both are marketed to the vulnerable, and both cause long-term damage.” The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health echoed this, issuing a rare joint statement with other medical bodies that called for immediate action.
Health campaigners including the Children’s Commissioner and the NSPCC have seized on the comparison, urging ministers to introduce a statutory duty of care for under-18s. They demand that social media platforms be required to prove their products are safe before release, similar to regulations for medicines and toys. “If the government can ban smoking in cars with children, it can restrict the algorithms that trap kids online,” said Sarah Murphy, head of policy at the charity 5Rights.
The debate has reignited tensions between No.10 and Silicon Valley. The Online Safety Bill, currently before Parliament, would force platforms to remove illegal content but stops short of a ban on targeted advertising to minors or age verification for harmful content. Critics say the bill has been watered down after lobbying by tech firms. A spokesperson for the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport said the government is “committed to making the UK the safest place to be online” but declined to comment on a potential ban.
However, some experts question whether the smoking analogy is accurate. Dr. Aaron Balick, a psychotherapist specializing in digital culture, warned that the comparison risks oversimplification. “Smoking has no benefits. Social media connects young people to friends, support networks, and information. A blanket ban could isolate vulnerable teens who rely on these spaces for community.” He advocates for digital literacy education and better design rather than prohibition.
Yet the rising trend of poor mental health among the young cannot be denied. NHS data shows that 1 in 6 children aged 5-16 now have a probable mental disorder, up from 1 in 9 in 2017. Hospital admissions for self-harm among 13- to 16-year-old girls have almost doubled in the same period. Parents’ groups say the crisis is at the kitchen table. “We’re not anti-technology, but we see our kids glued to screens, anxious and withdrawn,” said Jess Symons, a mother of two from Leeds. “We need the government to act as firmly as they did on cigarettes.”
The tobacco analogy is powerful in the UK, where smoking bans in public places and plain packaging have dramatically cut smoking rates. For campaigners, that success provides a blueprint. They are demanding an outright ban on social media for under-16s, following similar moves in France and Australia. On Monday, a parliamentary petition calling for a ban reached 100,000 signatures, triggering a debate in Westminster.
As the country grapples with the fallout of a pandemic that accelerated screen time, the doctors’ intervention may prove a turning point. The question is whether the government will now treat social media as a public health emergency – or allow the profits of tech companies to trump the health of a generation.
