The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology says no modelling or analysis has been performed and that internal materials are being withheld under FOI laws.

Campaigners and MPs warn against rushing into a ban on social media for under-16s, urging robust evidence and caution about unintended consequences, while advocating stronger regulation at the design source rather than outright bans.

Britain is piloting six-week measures in about 300 teenagers, including app bans, time limits, and overnight curfews, to inform policy.

There is growing pressure to act on child online safety with a preference for evidence-based policy, and ministers are weighing options like app bans, time limits, overnight curfews, and an Australia-style ban.

A Freedom of Information request reveals no internal modelling has been done, with the ministry stating releasing materials could cause misunderstanding and hinder frank analysis as pilots and consultations continue.

University of Cambridge research led by Professor Amy Orben highlights gaps in high-quality causal evidence linking adolescent social media use to mental health and calls for rigorous experimental studies to establish causality.

The government has not modelled potential impacts of an under-16 ban, including mental health, access to news, or how youths might bypass restrictions, according to a FOI request.

DSIT says it is commissioning further analysis, running a national consultation and pilots, and will rely on expert academic panels to guide decisions based on the strongest available evidence.

The government is emphasizing ongoing actions—national consultation, public engagement with parents and children, and expert academic input—to understand impacts before decisions are made.

Orben’s findings emphasize the need for stronger experimental studies to determine whether reducing use improves mental health.

DSIT has not conducted internal modelling on the potential impacts of an under-16 social media ban, citing lack of clear, agreed evidence.