[ghi5goio3qno4i3]

True but I was referring specifically to a line in the article attributed to one of the director's of the study:

"Robert Waldinger, the current director of the study, summarized – in what is now one of the most viewed TED Talks to date – the findings from decades of research. The main result, he concluded, is that social connections are one of the most important factors for people’s happiness and health. He said: “Those who kept warm relationships got to live longer and happier, and the loners often died earlier”."

Hence why I was musing about whether it was conclusive to actually say that the whether it was that act of having close relationships itself that made him see this result, or if the longevity he was seeing was a result of the inherent monitoring and support that occurs with peers. For instance, a spouse may notice a lump on her partner's back, or friends pitching in after someone is let go from a job. If we could somehow control for that support network, would that equalize the life spans of people in a study like this?

To be fair, this is just useless speculation. I doubt very much that it would be possible to run an experiment like this.