Last night I read an interesting article in The New York Times which essentially said that friendships can actually prolong our lives. The story points out that this is true as we grow older as well as if we're diagnosed with a serious illness. But what is also true is that if a friend gains weight you are 60% more likely to pick up a few pounds yourself. In short, friendships are powerful in the more than just the 'you're my BFF' sense (like Lucy & Ethel).

The truth is, however, that the article left me wondering about how we use the word  'friend' these days. Does it have the same meaning when we use the word so casually? Some people use the word to apply to colleagues and acquaintances as well as their nearest and dearest. Does a random connection on a social network truly qualify as a 'friend'? What I am really trying to say is I wonder what happens when we muddy the waters by using the word so arbitrarily. Do we run the risk of losing the benefits of true friendship? 

Well it's time to consider that notion. Up until now, who we called 'friend' was totally at our discretion. It still is. But when you factor in the idea that the quality and the length of our very lives is part of the equation, our practices may require some review. Personally, I've always been very particular about who I let into my inner circle (maybe too particular).  So when I call you my friend, there is a high level of trust, honesty, respect that accompanies our shared laughter or tears. My friends don't always agree with me but they do 'get' me and are not afraid to call me on my stuff. That doesn't happen overnight so there is also a shared history. 

So although I may be friendly with scores of other folks I will continue to reserve the word 'friend' for those who've earned that distinction. It's just a bonus that it is good for my health in the long run.

Tell me this: Do you distinguish between friends and acquaintances? What constitutes a friend in your book?