March 27, 2023 - 10:00am
Are we embracing beauty treatments that make us less empathetic? The New Scientist reports that researchers conducted fMRI brain scans on people before and after receiving Botox injections, which revealed that the treatment appears to alter our ability to react to emotion in others.
Botox is a now-commonplace beauty treatment in which botulinum toxin is injected into facial muscles. Injections partially paralyse the face, reducing expressive mobility and thus the appearance of wrinkles. In the study, 10 women were shown pictures of happy and sad faces interspersed with neutral faces before and after receiving Botox injections. All showed reduced activity in response to the images, following the injections.
This most recent study is consistent with earlier research which suggests Botox treatment is associated with reduced ability to interpret emotional stimuli and lower brain activity in response to emotional images. Scientists hypothesise that recognising and microscopically imitating others’ faces is one key mechanism by which we’re able to recognise and respond to others’ feelings — and that hampering an individual’s ability to do so by paralysing facial muscles has a corresponding effect on our capacity to identify and respond emotionally to others.
Botox has grown enormously in popularity over the last two decades, with one source estimating four to five million people a year receive the treatment, of which 94% are women. Earlier this year fashion director Anna Murphy wrote in the Times about how, in her industry, her refusal to use Botox makes her the exception, rather than the norm, with many beginning “prejuvenation” treatments in their early twenties.
What does it do to a culture when a significant subset of (nearly always) women undergo cosmetic treatments that make them measurably less empathetic? Do people just get used to elevated levels of callousness and self-absorption? It doesn’t stretch credulity very far to imagine that in fashion and entertainment, where these “tweakments” are normalised, this might be the case. (Though equally, it’s hard to be sure which way the causality runs in this instance.)
But what happens if we embrace social norms more broadly that actively militate against the normal transmission and processing of emotion? Evidence suggests that Botox isn’t the only way hampering facial mimicry can affect our ability to respond to others. A 2019 New York Times article reported, for example, on how stroke paralysis, Parkinson’s, face-hardening algae masks, hockey face guards and other impediments to facial mobility can also impede the accuracy with which we identify and mimic emotions.
Since 2019, two other recent emotion-hindering phenomena have also grown in prominence. Three years after the start of the pandemic, for example, there’s already some considerable literature on the disruptive impact of mask-wearing on children’s speech development and capacity to recognise emotions and other important social and emotional data. But the other change accelerated by the pandemic — with still more pervasive effects, and less likelihood of being reversed than masking — is the transition Covid-19 impelled to a digital-first culture.
We’ve mostly taken the face masks off now, but remote working and other digital mediations of our social lives are here to stay. And given that paralysing our ability to mimic others’ expressions with Botox flattens or muddies emotional communication, it’s a reasonable bet that mediating it via technologies that attenuate, warp or simply conceal emotional signals is also likely to have far-reaching effects on how we interact. And, importantly, on whether we retain the ability to put ourselves in others’ shoes — something that, at scale, will have far-reaching effects on the public conversation. The ever more rancorous tone of political discourse since Covid is an ominous signal on this front.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeSmall anecdote: I met my partner’s aunt for the first time in 2012. She was a difficult character who had been estranged from her sister (my MIL) for years and this was the grand reset (supposedly).
When I met her, I didn’t know that she had had botox and I remember feeling really freaked out that I couldn’t read her reaction to me. Her face had been so paralysed by the toxin she could barely even raise the corners of her mouth in a smile and it sent all my intuitions about reading other people and their emotions into a tailspin.
As it turned out, she didn’t like me at all – because I was young and at that point wrinkle- and grey hair free. Not friendship material for a woman that panicked about ageing, clearly.
I never, EVER want to be like her. She looked awful – her skin had that taut, waxy appearance that betrays unnatural treatment. Almost corpse-like.
I found that my first thought on seeing celebrities who have clearly had a lot of Botox is that they look embalmed.
I found that my first thought on seeing celebrities who have clearly had a lot of Botox is that they look embalmed.
Small anecdote: I met my partner’s aunt for the first time in 2012. She was a difficult character who had been estranged from her sister (my MIL) for years and this was the grand reset (supposedly).
When I met her, I didn’t know that she had had botox and I remember feeling really freaked out that I couldn’t read her reaction to me. Her face had been so paralysed by the toxin she could barely even raise the corners of her mouth in a smile and it sent all my intuitions about reading other people and their emotions into a tailspin.
As it turned out, she didn’t like me at all – because I was young and at that point wrinkle- and grey hair free. Not friendship material for a woman that panicked about ageing, clearly.
I never, EVER want to be like her. She looked awful – her skin had that taut, waxy appearance that betrays unnatural treatment. Almost corpse-like.
Mary didn’t mention the burqa, perhaps intentionally, but I will.
The Burqa however is removed in domestic female only spaces, which for Islamic women, excluded from the working world, would presumably be where they spend much of their time. Botox is permanently neutering the expression.
That being said, I would be unsurprised if Burqa still affected self expressiveness in Islamic women.
The Burqa however is removed in domestic female only spaces, which for Islamic women, excluded from the working world, would presumably be where they spend much of their time. Botox is permanently neutering the expression.
That being said, I would be unsurprised if Burqa still affected self expressiveness in Islamic women.
Mary didn’t mention the burqa, perhaps intentionally, but I will.
“…given that paralysing our ability to mimic others’ expressions with Botox flattens or muddies emotional communication, it’s a reasonable bet that mediating it via technologies that attenuate, warp or simply conceal emotional signals…”
Yes, but this is no different from any other type of communication where people are not communicating face to face, so have no access to visual facial cues.
So, yet another problem created by technology, which surely can also be fixed by (more) technology: can we not ask Madonna’s plastic surgeon to also patch an OLED panel on the forehead, so she can flash up appropriate emojis as a substitute for the facial cues she can no longer generate?
“…given that paralysing our ability to mimic others’ expressions with Botox flattens or muddies emotional communication, it’s a reasonable bet that mediating it via technologies that attenuate, warp or simply conceal emotional signals…”
Yes, but this is no different from any other type of communication where people are not communicating face to face, so have no access to visual facial cues.
So, yet another problem created by technology, which surely can also be fixed by (more) technology: can we not ask Madonna’s plastic surgeon to also patch an OLED panel on the forehead, so she can flash up appropriate emojis as a substitute for the facial cues she can no longer generate?
Thinking of cancelling my subscription to Unherd cuz nobody had the balls to defend Kellie Jay Keen. Phony Cowards.
You know what else I noticed; there’s been very little in the Hancock files.
What are the Hancock files?
What are the Hancock files?
It’s only been a day or so, give it chance. If you want basic, ill thought out vacuous comment pieces just so you can act outraged there are hundreds of websites that cater for that. I’d rather wait for a well written article on an array of subjects personally
You know what else I noticed; there’s been very little in the Hancock files.
It’s only been a day or so, give it chance. If you want basic, ill thought out vacuous comment pieces just so you can act outraged there are hundreds of websites that cater for that. I’d rather wait for a well written article on an array of subjects personally
Thinking of cancelling my subscription to Unherd cuz nobody had the balls to defend Kellie Jay Keen. Phony Cowards.
Maybe these phenomena will be a corrective to the delusions of #Empathy, which is, in my opinion, simply projection, in most cases. “My emotions are always the right ones, so, of course, other people have the same emotions as I do. I’m so empathetic!”
Your scepticism is absolutely right. Empathy is over-rated and can be destructive in political dynamics. Empathetic judges are bad judges. Empathy evolved in cave dwelling clans where tight social cohesion was critical, but is mostly pointless in larger societies.
To the extent that I believe “empathy” exists, it’s at the visceral level at which one person, especially a mother, feels distress at the distress of a second person, especially a child.
Beyond that, I think it’s often important to try to understand other people’s emotions and points of view, and the best way to do that is to listen to them when they talk about how they feel and what they think.
And both your example are ’empathy’. It gives essential space and a sense of agency. It’s the way we connect and feel accepted and safe. It moves beyond threat and fear and ideology. Empathy is essential to personal wellbeing and culture. Brene Brown on YouTube gives a clear description to this.
And both your example are ’empathy’. It gives essential space and a sense of agency. It’s the way we connect and feel accepted and safe. It moves beyond threat and fear and ideology. Empathy is essential to personal wellbeing and culture. Brene Brown on YouTube gives a clear description to this.
Empathy is core to existence and experience. And the article was about empathy in the role of childhood and cultural at the wider inclusive leveI. To diminish and exclude empathy as a positive cultural element, it is to cut off a leg and claim limping is the only right way! Judges are an aspect of culture; they have a specific and difficult job; a balancing act – they are not the mark or measure of culture. Criminality and lack of empathy go together. Defining Empathy as something that is now past it’s sell by date and only valuable to troglodytes is to misunderstand empathy’s socially cohesive role, and it’s role in mental health. Your pov detaches empathy from the reality of the mind’s neurological maturation and emotional lifelong capacity. Your allusion to cave dwellers makes you sound like a cultural divisive snob. This BS needs to be dug back into the ground! In the main problems facing cultural are drivers of disconnection, and that exactly what you describe with, “moistly pointless in larger society”. Do I really need to mention the 3rd Reich of Germany? When you distance from Empathy at the larger cultural level; you get all kinds division and disorder.
To the extent that I believe “empathy” exists, it’s at the visceral level at which one person, especially a mother, feels distress at the distress of a second person, especially a child.
Beyond that, I think it’s often important to try to understand other people’s emotions and points of view, and the best way to do that is to listen to them when they talk about how they feel and what they think.
Empathy is core to existence and experience. And the article was about empathy in the role of childhood and cultural at the wider inclusive leveI. To diminish and exclude empathy as a positive cultural element, it is to cut off a leg and claim limping is the only right way! Judges are an aspect of culture; they have a specific and difficult job; a balancing act – they are not the mark or measure of culture. Criminality and lack of empathy go together. Defining Empathy as something that is now past it’s sell by date and only valuable to troglodytes is to misunderstand empathy’s socially cohesive role, and it’s role in mental health. Your pov detaches empathy from the reality of the mind’s neurological maturation and emotional lifelong capacity. Your allusion to cave dwellers makes you sound like a cultural divisive snob. This BS needs to be dug back into the ground! In the main problems facing cultural are drivers of disconnection, and that exactly what you describe with, “moistly pointless in larger society”. Do I really need to mention the 3rd Reich of Germany? When you distance from Empathy at the larger cultural level; you get all kinds division and disorder.
Your scepticism is absolutely right. Empathy is over-rated and can be destructive in political dynamics. Empathetic judges are bad judges. Empathy evolved in cave dwelling clans where tight social cohesion was critical, but is mostly pointless in larger societies.
Maybe these phenomena will be a corrective to the delusions of #Empathy, which is, in my opinion, simply projection, in most cases. “My emotions are always the right ones, so, of course, other people have the same emotions as I do. I’m so empathetic!”
I thought that Botox was merely an Ulsterman’s pronunciation of bum cheeks?
So.. dont ask the Orange man if he likes to kiss his wife’s botox lips….
So.. dont ask the Orange man if he likes to kiss his wife’s botox lips….
I thought that Botox was merely an Ulsterman’s pronunciation of bum cheeks?
Sharing a queue with the lags and their girlfriends in a courthouse recently I was struck at how many of the latter appeared to be full of botox and lip fillers. I suspect that the main drivers for the increased prevalence of these treatments are Love Island, and price.
Sharing a queue with the lags and their girlfriends in a courthouse recently I was struck at how many of the latter appeared to be full of botox and lip fillers. I suspect that the main drivers for the increased prevalence of these treatments are Love Island, and price.
Over and above all else, the favoured botox frozen look appears to be somewhere between sulky and stroppy.
Agreed – and therefore a perfect fit for our permanently adolescent times. Just awful, isn’t it? I recognise its a personal choice, but why, oh why?
Agreed – and therefore a perfect fit for our permanently adolescent times. Just awful, isn’t it? I recognise its a personal choice, but why, oh why?
Over and above all else, the favoured botox frozen look appears to be somewhere between sulky and stroppy.
Mary, thank you for this very interesting article. I have to admit that I am not surprised by the results of the New Scientist report, even though, only 10 women participated to the trial. More than any possible chemical and physical/visual effect, the perpetual search of self importance and eternal youth has something to do with the disappearance of empathy. Has anyone seen Sharon Stone’s selfie posted for her 65 birthday? Both dramatic and hilarious!
I also found interesting. A pity N was so small and moreover that there was no control group. It’s also possible that they were merely exhibiting fatigue at interacting with the researchers rather than lack of empathy.
I also found interesting. A pity N was so small and moreover that there was no control group. It’s also possible that they were merely exhibiting fatigue at interacting with the researchers rather than lack of empathy.
Mary, thank you for this very interesting article. I have to admit that I am not surprised by the results of the New Scientist report, even though, only 10 women participated to the trial. More than any possible chemical and physical/visual effect, the perpetual search of self importance and eternal youth has something to do with the disappearance of empathy. Has anyone seen Sharon Stone’s selfie posted for her 65 birthday? Both dramatic and hilarious!
I’d be completely unable to cope under current circumstances if I lost the ability to raise my eyebrows.
It would have finished Roger Moore’s career
It would have finished Roger Moore’s career
I’d be completely unable to cope under current circumstances if I lost the ability to raise my eyebrows.
I have never (I think) met anyone who has had Botox.
Is that because I am not form London or do I need to get out more?
Same here. Perhaps I need to get out more as well
Notice if someone is wrinkling their nose a lot. It’s the compensation for not being able to furrow ones brows.
Same here. Perhaps I need to get out more as well
Notice if someone is wrinkling their nose a lot. It’s the compensation for not being able to furrow ones brows.
I have never (I think) met anyone who has had Botox.
Is that because I am not form London or do I need to get out more?
I left subscribing to NS some time ago when I saw repeated instances of identity marxism gaining headway in content and advertising. When I wrote to the editor I received to response, so that was that.
Here, Harrington mentions a study group of “people” so I decided to go to the report, with no success. The bulk of the NS article is behind a paywall. The last readable line say 10 women so I don’t know if men are included. Also, different age cohorts do not appear to be mentioned – apart from one.
I left subscribing to NS some time ago when I saw repeated instances of identity marxism gaining headway in content and advertising. When I wrote to the editor I received to response, so that was that.
Here, Harrington mentions a study group of “people” so I decided to go to the report, with no success. The bulk of the NS article is behind a paywall. The last readable line say 10 women so I don’t know if men are included. Also, different age cohorts do not appear to be mentioned – apart from one.
V interesting and further makes one aware of how much interpretation can be lost in just on-line dialogues such as that we daily have on UnHerd. Not much we can do about that other than be mindful something is probably being lost.
V interesting and further makes one aware of how much interpretation can be lost in just on-line dialogues such as that we daily have on UnHerd. Not much we can do about that other than be mindful something is probably being lost.
This needed an editor’s hand. Syntactically the second paragraph communicates that the women viewing photos were given the injections and hence the treatment made THEM less empathetic , but it was meant to communicate that 10 women viewed before and after photos of women who had the injections.
This needed an editor’s hand. Syntactically the second paragraph communicates that the women viewing photos were given the injections and hence the treatment made THEM less empathetic , but it was meant to communicate that 10 women viewed before and after photos of women who had the injections.
Post Covid I expected pretty much all market research to go back to face to face given the importance of body language and obvious.limitations of zoom in this refard. Over 50% remains online. Clients favouring cost/speed over deeper analysisdrawn from non-verbal sources. We are living ever more superficial lives with superficial data inputs. In a complex system that spells disaster.
Post Covid I expected pretty much all market research to go back to face to face given the importance of body language and obvious.limitations of zoom in this refard. Over 50% remains online. Clients favouring cost/speed over deeper analysisdrawn from non-verbal sources. We are living ever more superficial lives with superficial data inputs. In a complex system that spells disaster.
The devil is in the detail. Having a had a little experience with MRI data analyses, I can say it’s not that simple and you would not want to believe everything you read about results from this kind of study.
The devil is in the detail. Having a had a little experience with MRI data analyses, I can say it’s not that simple and you would not want to believe everything you read about results from this kind of study.
I would like to propose the idea that this can actually work to help HSP. As someone who is on the spectrum for some reason my empathy of others emotions is so overwhelming Having had botox not for 10yrs. I can 100% say unfortunately when it wears off I can feel the intensity of emotions became too much again. The botox allows me to put distance between others emotions and my ability to take them on board. I certainly still feel empathy and emotions of others, it’s just not as intense. I cannot speak for neurotypcals. I already feel they are distanced from emotions even without botox, in a way I am unfortunately not. But I think this needs to be looked into medically to help balance out those people who feel too much.
Hi Emily Hart,
I appreciate your reasons for wishing to reduce the interest of others. AS is full of talk about ‘masking’, and presents it (in the main) as a b&w issue. Your story shows it isn’t!
I’m very social/ but tire quickly (working within my limits) and I acknowledge I have an advantage compared to some (and thus also a bias to consider).
What has helped me, is to understand the issue as a neurological one, not one of personal lacking. I have made improvements (slowly) and within my capacity. Small improvement are always welcome when you take them at your pace.
I also don’t think NT’s are distant from emotions; ‘they’ just deal with them in a different way. The ‘Double Empathy Problem’ explains this.
I recommend YouTube’s ‘yo samdy sam and the uncanny valley’. I think this will put it in a way you understand. Hope this helps.
V.
Hi Emily Hart,
I appreciate your reasons for wishing to reduce the interest of others. AS is full of talk about ‘masking’, and presents it (in the main) as a b&w issue. Your story shows it isn’t!
I’m very social/ but tire quickly (working within my limits) and I acknowledge I have an advantage compared to some (and thus also a bias to consider).
What has helped me, is to understand the issue as a neurological one, not one of personal lacking. I have made improvements (slowly) and within my capacity. Small improvement are always welcome when you take them at your pace.
I also don’t think NT’s are distant from emotions; ‘they’ just deal with them in a different way. The ‘Double Empathy Problem’ explains this.
I recommend YouTube’s ‘yo samdy sam and the uncanny valley’. I think this will put it in a way you understand. Hope this helps.
V.
I would like to propose the idea that this can actually work to help HSP. As someone who is on the spectrum for some reason my empathy of others emotions is so overwhelming Having had botox not for 10yrs. I can 100% say unfortunately when it wears off I can feel the intensity of emotions became too much again. The botox allows me to put distance between others emotions and my ability to take them on board. I certainly still feel empathy and emotions of others, it’s just not as intense. I cannot speak for neurotypcals. I already feel they are distanced from emotions even without botox, in a way I am unfortunately not. But I think this needs to be looked into medically to help balance out those people who feel too much.
First thing, to those thinking that empathy is overrated, it’s clearly not. It’s entwinned with facial expression status and belief systems. It’s part and parcel of fluid communication that, can when the parties are willing, adjust such ‘reactions’ to ‘others’. We can learn to get over ourselves!
Second; I can say, Absolute and YES to Botox effecting empathic perception and communication. That’s why the word empathy was used, not understanding. Establishing empathies allows for effective dialogue and a sense of being listened to.
From another angle; ideas regarding ‘Autism’ has been plagued by ideas of empathic response. In resent history has it been reasserted by experiment, that (by as far anything can be proven) that Autistic folk are not ‘disordered’, but have a been incorrectly judged by observers, by what is now know as the ‘Double Empathy’ Issue. I prefer, as one Autism advocate compared it to, ‘the Uncanny Valley’ of AI robotics, that leaves those relating to AI robots designed to emulate humans, with a sense of vague distrust and disconnection – a lack of empathy!
Ever related to someone with a palsy, or neurological damage to one side of their face? If you’re like me, it’s a novel and far from daily experience; I tend to curb my curiosity for difference and look to the unaffected side.
Mary, Mary, where are you Mary? It’s the reservation calling.
…on her book tour.
…on her book tour.
Mary, Mary, where are you Mary? It’s the reservation calling.
So people without facial lines are unable to read emotions in others? This article appears to have a single objective; to dehumanise people that have had Botox. Why, what is the point?
Naturally it’s aimed at all those air-headed and emotionless women that have the cheek to not age, fade and disappear quietly. Men have it too; I’ve had it and freely tell people. I don’t care what they think; my body.
@Paul T. “So people without facial lines are unable to read emotions in others” This is never stated in the article. The article is about others empathising with those with reduced facial expression because of Botox and it’s impact. And empathic response is key with children: adults can learn to adjust to changes their fundamental responses.
To describe a group of people as “air-headed” and “emotionless” is reductive and would be deplored on a popular format such as You Tube by many, let alone this platform. I was under the illusion that this platform would be free such poorly considered commentary. I am changing my mind rapidly.
@Paul T. “So people without facial lines are unable to read emotions in others” This is never stated in the article. The article is about others empathising with those with reduced facial expression because of Botox and it’s impact. And empathic response is key with children: adults can learn to adjust to changes their fundamental responses.
To describe a group of people as “air-headed” and “emotionless” is reductive and would be deplored on a popular format such as You Tube by many, let alone this platform. I was under the illusion that this platform would be free such poorly considered commentary. I am changing my mind rapidly.
So people without facial lines are unable to read emotions in others? This article appears to have a single objective; to dehumanise people that have had Botox. Why, what is the point?
Naturally it’s aimed at all those air-headed and emotionless women that have the cheek to not age, fade and disappear quietly. Men have it too; I’ve had it and freely tell people. I don’t care what they think; my body.