What happens in the brain to cause depression?(quantamagazine.org)
quantamagazine.org
What happens in the brain to cause depression?
https://www.quantamagazine.org/what-happens-in-the-brain-to-cause-depression-20240523/
197 comments
I am beginning to think that a huge part of medicalizing psycological probelms is really about getting people to accept a life that has been imposed on them that leaves them profoundly unhappy, hopeless and unfulfilled.
A stark example: my employer has decided to outsource all of technology and as many other functions as possible to India. We have all been informed that most of us will be unemployed by the end of the year. They are also following up in all corporate communications about how "transitions can be hard" and "mental health is important" offering online counseling and the like.
I think this is partly their way of cleansing their own hands "we know some very bad outcomes for some people are going to result from this, but how can it be our fault when we offered them resources to help with their mental health?"
The other part is individualizing the problem: "yes losing your job can be a challenge but it's really about what's between your own two ears."
Finally, mental health is an industry, arguably one that is providing services principally to other businesses ("you can do what ever you want to your workforce and we will fix it in their heads").
By the way I remember some of those drug addiction studies that showed lab rats choosing heroin over food until they starve being criticized because the parameters of being a lab rat trapped in a glass box under harsh lights may have something to do with the rat's state of mind.
A stark example: my employer has decided to outsource all of technology and as many other functions as possible to India. We have all been informed that most of us will be unemployed by the end of the year. They are also following up in all corporate communications about how "transitions can be hard" and "mental health is important" offering online counseling and the like.
I think this is partly their way of cleansing their own hands "we know some very bad outcomes for some people are going to result from this, but how can it be our fault when we offered them resources to help with their mental health?"
The other part is individualizing the problem: "yes losing your job can be a challenge but it's really about what's between your own two ears."
Finally, mental health is an industry, arguably one that is providing services principally to other businesses ("you can do what ever you want to your workforce and we will fix it in their heads").
By the way I remember some of those drug addiction studies that showed lab rats choosing heroin over food until they starve being criticized because the parameters of being a lab rat trapped in a glass box under harsh lights may have something to do with the rat's state of mind.
I'm guessing that management wasn't one of the functions selected for offshoring - funny how the Indians are always better at every function except that.
Yes one part is definitely pushing people past natural limits and then drugging them to try and extend their limits.
I think another is a privileged perspective - to a tenured university researcher with a low stress life, or a wealthy doctor, they may feel that "the program" has worked fine for them. So they can't imagine how the program has led another to a life of misery.
Yes one part is definitely pushing people past natural limits and then drugging them to try and extend their limits.
I think another is a privileged perspective - to a tenured university researcher with a low stress life, or a wealthy doctor, they may feel that "the program" has worked fine for them. So they can't imagine how the program has led another to a life of misery.
It's strange that management becomes even more crucial in order to handle and manage offshoring too...
I'll take a slightly different approach. Depression is solved/cured by appreciation. I say this as someone who has suffered from pretty debilitating depression as well, while by otherside measures being a successful person.
The working out, the meditation and all that shit is not meant for the health benefits. It's so that you'll appreciate that you're slightly healthier in time, or slightly more mindful, etc. Teaching appreciation of the things you have and have achieved.
There is a direct line from the explosion of modern depression to social media (particularly Instagram). Social media is entirely about envy of others, and as the saying goes "envy is the thief of joy".
The point of a happy, fulfilling, depression-less life is not to have everything, it's to have something. Particularly "somethings" that you've worked for.
The working out, the meditation and all that shit is not meant for the health benefits. It's so that you'll appreciate that you're slightly healthier in time, or slightly more mindful, etc. Teaching appreciation of the things you have and have achieved.
There is a direct line from the explosion of modern depression to social media (particularly Instagram). Social media is entirely about envy of others, and as the saying goes "envy is the thief of joy".
The point of a happy, fulfilling, depression-less life is not to have everything, it's to have something. Particularly "somethings" that you've worked for.
That can work if the subject's expectations are too high.
I don't think it'd work or be appropriate if the depression comes from basic missing pieces in their life - a partner (or at least faith they'll find one one day), work they find fulfilling, their day-to-day interactions with others are tolerable etc.
I think depression is the mind and body's way of telling the subject " you have to go a different direction". This is consistent with it deenergizing and demotivating them and making it harder for them to prevail in their goals - this naturally arrests further progress in that failed direction, and sends them looking for answers on how to stop feeling depressed (which if our culture was good in this area, would send them off down different life paths rather than to drugs).
I don't think it'd work or be appropriate if the depression comes from basic missing pieces in their life - a partner (or at least faith they'll find one one day), work they find fulfilling, their day-to-day interactions with others are tolerable etc.
I think depression is the mind and body's way of telling the subject " you have to go a different direction". This is consistent with it deenergizing and demotivating them and making it harder for them to prevail in their goals - this naturally arrests further progress in that failed direction, and sends them looking for answers on how to stop feeling depressed (which if our culture was good in this area, would send them off down different life paths rather than to drugs).
> I don't think it'd work or be appropriate if the depression comes from basic missing pieces in their life
I think it can. That was sort of my point. It’s not about having all of the things you (think that you) want. It’s about having the things you appreciate.
I think it can. That was sort of my point. It’s not about having all of the things you (think that you) want. It’s about having the things you appreciate.
I just read about "MIRROR" for physical pain relief by neuroplasticity techniques: Mindful, Intention, Repetition, Relaxation, Optimism, and Resilience.
The book, The Brain's Way of Healing, suggests modest improvements in a (similar) framework result in more hope which turns into a virtous cycle. Sounds like an overlap with your comments on appreciation.
The book, The Brain's Way of Healing, suggests modest improvements in a (similar) framework result in more hope which turns into a virtous cycle. Sounds like an overlap with your comments on appreciation.
I don’t think you’re wrong but I also don’t think it’s hard to believe that different people have different depressions and for a lot of people it is a medical issue.
When docs are prescribing to patients, they are mentally traversing through a decision tree to prescribe the best that fits the conditions. If the problem still persists, they may ask_questions/test more to find more branches to traverse.
For individuals, it's like being a node, where you cannot see anything above. It feels that what works for you, should work for all.
For individuals, it's like being a node, where you cannot see anything above. It feels that what works for you, should work for all.
> maybe the subject's life is shit?
> Once your life stops being shit, you stop feeling depressed.
You really should be more careful trying to shoehorn everyone with a medical condition into your shoes. You come off as terribly rude and narrow minded when you do so, which I am sure was not the intention. People who live perfectly good lives also suffer depression. People who have everything seemingly going for them suffer depression. And yes. The focus on brain chemistry is warranted, it’s based in scientific observation, discarding it just because your personal sorry doesn’t align is like discarding vaccines because “I never got vaccinated and didn’t die from covid” you are just one datapoint in the collection, and no matter what your experience is, you can’t blankly extrapolate to the entire population.
> Once your life stops being shit, you stop feeling depressed.
You really should be more careful trying to shoehorn everyone with a medical condition into your shoes. You come off as terribly rude and narrow minded when you do so, which I am sure was not the intention. People who live perfectly good lives also suffer depression. People who have everything seemingly going for them suffer depression. And yes. The focus on brain chemistry is warranted, it’s based in scientific observation, discarding it just because your personal sorry doesn’t align is like discarding vaccines because “I never got vaccinated and didn’t die from covid” you are just one datapoint in the collection, and no matter what your experience is, you can’t blankly extrapolate to the entire population.
I think the focus on brain chemistry for depression is as silly as for any other emotional state. For instance, you don't need to know about the chemical makeup of "angry", just that you're angry, and then look at what caused it.
If a depressed person genuinely thinks their life is good and that they have everything going for them, this is often from lack of realisation or self deception.
To pick an easy example, someone who's got a successful well paid big city career being depressed, because internally they don't want that and just did it because others told them that's the path to happiness, and they've repressed their subconscious desire to say raise a family in the countryside instead.
If a depressed person genuinely thinks their life is good and that they have everything going for them, this is often from lack of realisation or self deception.
To pick an easy example, someone who's got a successful well paid big city career being depressed, because internally they don't want that and just did it because others told them that's the path to happiness, and they've repressed their subconscious desire to say raise a family in the countryside instead.
> You really should be more careful trying to shoehorn everyone with a medical condition into your shoes.
You should really be more careful taking things that people say as a personal affect on you, or people like you. It is ok for people to talk about their personal feelings/beliefs/experiences without it being value judged by you (as rude or narrow minded).
Not every message is meant for you.
You should really be more careful taking things that people say as a personal affect on you, or people like you. It is ok for people to talk about their personal feelings/beliefs/experiences without it being value judged by you (as rude or narrow minded).
Not every message is meant for you.
It's also ok for people to voice their personal feelings that someone else's personal feelings are narrow-minded. This appeal is self-defeating. (And maybe the original post would have not gotten such a response if it had stuck to their personal anecdote and not sweepingly generalised it)
The trouble with conversations about depression is that it's hard to come up with even simple agreements that everyone is happy about.
Sorry but you sound like some sort of motivational speaker who doesn't want to listen to a doctor.
People with depression already take care of themselves, but they can't just go in the Himalayas or south america or change jobs to heal depression.
You're comparing people who have unhealthy habits and telling them to stop drinking or smoking or anything a doctor already says.
Please stop pretending you have some insight on this. Let doctors and therapists do their job.
People with depression already take care of themselves, but they can't just go in the Himalayas or south america or change jobs to heal depression.
You're comparing people who have unhealthy habits and telling them to stop drinking or smoking or anything a doctor already says.
Please stop pretending you have some insight on this. Let doctors and therapists do their job.
Having been on both sides of it, I have insight into it.
It's up to you if you want to defend that status quo of "cope with the life you've got - drugging yourself or paying expensive therapists if necessary to do so".
But it's important that others hear that there's another more effective way. That they can simply opt out of that tunnel vision, that they don't have to give in to the fear of disappointing others or "ruining the career" or just plain old fear of the unknown, and change their lives for the better.
It's up to you if you want to defend that status quo of "cope with the life you've got - drugging yourself or paying expensive therapists if necessary to do so".
But it's important that others hear that there's another more effective way. That they can simply opt out of that tunnel vision, that they don't have to give in to the fear of disappointing others or "ruining the career" or just plain old fear of the unknown, and change their lives for the better.
I’m not an expert in the field, but I am someone who has recovered from depression. The “lack of serotonin” theory always made me laugh. It’s like if your computer was running abnormally and you said it “doesn’t have enough electricity”.
Neurotransmitters send signals. The amount of neurotransmitter tells you nothing about what information is actually encoded in those signals. You can transmit happy and sad music using electricity, for example. It seems to me that you can transmit happy and sad thoughts using neurotransmitters. (And of course the brain is much more complicated than a computer, because a computer “just” uses electricity, whereas in the brain some processing happens at each neuron, and signals coming in on one neurotransmitter can cause signals to leave in others.)
I see the term antidepressant as a bit of a misnomer. A drug that inhibits re-uptake of neurotransmitters will amplify the “loudness” of the signals. If you only have negative thoughts, and you take such a drug, your depression could realistically get worse (and this does happen to some people).
If you can get in to a positive feedback loop (e.g. an activity that leads to positive thoughts that lead to more of that activity) and _then_ start amplifying those signals, then these drugs can do wonders.
Neurotransmitters send signals. The amount of neurotransmitter tells you nothing about what information is actually encoded in those signals. You can transmit happy and sad music using electricity, for example. It seems to me that you can transmit happy and sad thoughts using neurotransmitters. (And of course the brain is much more complicated than a computer, because a computer “just” uses electricity, whereas in the brain some processing happens at each neuron, and signals coming in on one neurotransmitter can cause signals to leave in others.)
I see the term antidepressant as a bit of a misnomer. A drug that inhibits re-uptake of neurotransmitters will amplify the “loudness” of the signals. If you only have negative thoughts, and you take such a drug, your depression could realistically get worse (and this does happen to some people).
If you can get in to a positive feedback loop (e.g. an activity that leads to positive thoughts that lead to more of that activity) and _then_ start amplifying those signals, then these drugs can do wonders.
>The “lack of serotonin” theory always made me laugh. It’s like if your computer was running abnormally and you said it “doesn’t have enough electricity”.
A computer is a digital device, so it's more like all or nothing. It either powers up or not.
Analog electrical devices however can indeed behave suboptimally without enough electricity.
A computer is a digital device, so it's more like all or nothing. It either powers up or not.
Analog electrical devices however can indeed behave suboptimally without enough electricity.
Digital devices can absolutely intermittently function if voltages are outside a stable range in certain places. The point was that if you encounter frequent abnormal errors with your computer, you rarely begin with boosting every one of the DRAM, core, and other miscellaneous voltages.
A tangentially related (but amazing) read: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/jo...
>Digital devices can absolutely intermittently function if voltages are outside a stable range in certain places
I know, but a digital device like a PC will either function or not. It wont change how it calculates based on voltage.
I know, but a digital device like a PC will either function or not. It wont change how it calculates based on voltage.
Its fundamentally an analog device. The concept of information being a 0 or 1 are simply one voltage level offset from one another. Its how we project the digital 'view' onto the computer and work with it. If the signal is not in the expected range of '0' and not in the expected range of '1' it should throw a hardware error and you'll end up with a BSOD (Blue Screen of Death) or equivalent.
We feed it alternating current to start with. It can partially power up, the only reason it appears to be working or not is because of all the safeguards designed in - don't power up unless voltage is at least blah, and failsafe cutout refuse to power up because voltage is over say blah*1.05. There's a subset of expect Voltage ranges (eg. 3.3V)[1].
It's literally the first thing the computer does. POST - Power On, Self Test.
[1] https://www.lifewire.com/power-supply-voltage-tolerances-262...
We feed it alternating current to start with. It can partially power up, the only reason it appears to be working or not is because of all the safeguards designed in - don't power up unless voltage is at least blah, and failsafe cutout refuse to power up because voltage is over say blah*1.05. There's a subset of expect Voltage ranges (eg. 3.3V)[1].
It's literally the first thing the computer does. POST - Power On, Self Test.
[1] https://www.lifewire.com/power-supply-voltage-tolerances-262...
When a power supply gets old, wonky things start happening and the computer becomes unstable in weird ways. I am not sure the computer/power metaphors are the best fit.
If the issue were biological lack of electricity, why would childhood trauma be linked to it? And why would it be curable through therapy?
It seems to me like saying, I started a fire that burned my house down, but the real cause of the house burning down was too much heat in the house. It’s both true and unhelpful.
It seems to me like saying, I started a fire that burned my house down, but the real cause of the house burning down was too much heat in the house. It’s both true and unhelpful.
Speaking personally, depression is more about the ability to manage emotions rather than the emotion themselves. In other words, remembering something that happened in the past that would cause a tiny bit of embarrassment in a "normal" condition would be unbearably painful under depression.
Therapy is useful both in recognizing when your emotional response is disproportional compared to the cause (that is, being "properly" sad or embarrassed vs being depressed), snap out of it and to "learn" to avoid being embarrassed or sad for things outside of your control that could trigger your depression, for example. Something along the same lines of the "there's no spoon" quote from the matrix, but applied to your emotions.
Therapy is useful both in recognizing when your emotional response is disproportional compared to the cause (that is, being "properly" sad or embarrassed vs being depressed), snap out of it and to "learn" to avoid being embarrassed or sad for things outside of your control that could trigger your depression, for example. Something along the same lines of the "there's no spoon" quote from the matrix, but applied to your emotions.
Speaking from my own personal experience, telling myself that the specific facts at hand were irrelevant was very tempting and totally wrong. It had everything to do, for me, with the details of the emotion and the situation, and critically what it was linked to in my history. I suspect that’s true for everyone, but I couldn’t come close to proving it.
>If the issue were biological lack of electricity, why would childhood trauma be linked to it? And why would it be curable through therapy?
Regardless if the serotonine theory of depression is real or not, something having a biological substrate doesn't mean its hardwired or only kickstarted by biological factors.
Levels of hormones, neurotransmitters, and other substances can drop due to many factors, including diet, exercize, sun exposure, vitamin uptake, issues with insulin, thyroid, and so on, but also "psychological" things like trauma response, stress, continued fight or flight mode, etc.
Regardless if the serotonine theory of depression is real or not, something having a biological substrate doesn't mean its hardwired or only kickstarted by biological factors.
Levels of hormones, neurotransmitters, and other substances can drop due to many factors, including diet, exercize, sun exposure, vitamin uptake, issues with insulin, thyroid, and so on, but also "psychological" things like trauma response, stress, continued fight or flight mode, etc.
Wait until you learn about undervolting.
I know both about both (undervolting and circuitbending, the latter in the context of electronic music gear).
Undervolting doesn't change what I wrote though: the computer will still do what it does as before (with less heat). The PC either gets enough power to power up or not - it's a (pun intended) binary thing.
It's not like it's behavior will change and the OS/apps will do something different because of undervolting.
Undervolting doesn't change what I wrote though: the computer will still do what it does as before (with less heat). The PC either gets enough power to power up or not - it's a (pun intended) binary thing.
It's not like it's behavior will change and the OS/apps will do something different because of undervolting.
Or circuitbending.
>If you can get in to a positive feedback loop (e.g. an activity that leads to positive thoughts that lead to more of that activity) and _then_ start amplifying those signals, then these drugs can do wonders.
this is how alcohol works on me and why I never drink if I'm not in a good mood. But I'd be careful about generalizing what effects drugs have on people.
this is how alcohol works on me and why I never drink if I'm not in a good mood. But I'd be careful about generalizing what effects drugs have on people.
Harking back to neurons compsci: neurotransmitters can modulate by their amount transmitted (saturation of the receptors, or not), so I can imagine if there's just not enough around, that certain signals will not (optimally) be transmitted.
I think ketamine is niche, and it will remain so. It's one of many tools. MDMA also assists in restoring brain plasticity[0].
For me, by far the most interesting development in mental health is Chris Palmer's work, which asserts that most mental illness is primarily a metabolic issue. If you think that can't be possible, read his 2022 book[1]. Here's a podcast[2].
[0] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-02871-w [1] https://www.amazon.com/Brain-Energy-Revolutionary-Understand... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oC-sQogfh3Q
For me, by far the most interesting development in mental health is Chris Palmer's work, which asserts that most mental illness is primarily a metabolic issue. If you think that can't be possible, read his 2022 book[1]. Here's a podcast[2].
[0] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-02871-w [1] https://www.amazon.com/Brain-Energy-Revolutionary-Understand... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oC-sQogfh3Q
I get depression and activity/exercise aren't easy to marry, but exercise and getting fit seems like a much better thing to try before mdma or LSD burns.
Exercise is supposedly superior to all pharma antidepressants.
And in the vein of the metabolic stuff, exercise can change your gut bacteria and metabolism on a fundamental level that isn't as fringe, it's pretty well documented.
But it takes like a month to get the train rolling, no pill popping.
Exercise helps with sleep regulation.
Exercise helps with pooping regularly.
Exercise helps moderate appetite, excessive or inability to eat.
A very underrated aspect is it increases your pain threshold. Depressives have tested as less pain tolerant and if the correlation is a factor, exercise helps.
There's probably 20 other aspects.
Exercise is supposedly superior to all pharma antidepressants.
And in the vein of the metabolic stuff, exercise can change your gut bacteria and metabolism on a fundamental level that isn't as fringe, it's pretty well documented.
But it takes like a month to get the train rolling, no pill popping.
Exercise helps with sleep regulation.
Exercise helps with pooping regularly.
Exercise helps moderate appetite, excessive or inability to eat.
A very underrated aspect is it increases your pain threshold. Depressives have tested as less pain tolerant and if the correlation is a factor, exercise helps.
There's probably 20 other aspects.
Dr. Palmer's book was inspired by his discovery of the 80+ years of research establishing that "mental health" diagnoses are caused by metabolic problems.
> Metabolic abnormalities have been identified in the brains and bodies of people with mental illness since the 1940's.
> We have a plethora of scientific research to support this.
> https://twitter.com/ChrisPalmerMD/status/1675801721820332032
I don't think the ketogenic diet is the best intervention, but it's a start. My friend figured out that she's a poor methylator who is harmed by the food fortification folic acid. Adding a methylated form of Vitamin B-9 to her routine flipped a switch for her, from "depressed" to "not-depressed", but the mental health professionals forced on her didn't care.
Dr. Palmer tweeted about his professional colleagues hurting people like my friend with anti-psychotics. While tranquilizers make the patient's symptoms seem better, they also harm the patient's metabolism. Whoops.
This submission about ultra-processed foods was on the front page earlier today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40486504
> Metabolic abnormalities have been identified in the brains and bodies of people with mental illness since the 1940's.
> We have a plethora of scientific research to support this.
> https://twitter.com/ChrisPalmerMD/status/1675801721820332032
I don't think the ketogenic diet is the best intervention, but it's a start. My friend figured out that she's a poor methylator who is harmed by the food fortification folic acid. Adding a methylated form of Vitamin B-9 to her routine flipped a switch for her, from "depressed" to "not-depressed", but the mental health professionals forced on her didn't care.
Dr. Palmer tweeted about his professional colleagues hurting people like my friend with anti-psychotics. While tranquilizers make the patient's symptoms seem better, they also harm the patient's metabolism. Whoops.
This submission about ultra-processed foods was on the front page earlier today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40486504
Will read through this. But have a quick question: Would it not be reasonable to guess that people having mental issues will have metabolic issues developed as later side effects. The reason is that mental issues puts a person in confused/lost state along with all the anxiety/feelings that it induces. This will causes them to neglect taking care of their body needs. Then that should trigger metabolic changes.
I think you are wrong. I've been getting ketamine treatment and it's nothing short of miraculous. The clinics are all booked solid because of so many referrals from patients. I'm pondering how I can invest in these clinics.
Yes. I scanned the OP link for any mention of nutrition, the gut or microbiome and there was nothing. Such a disappointing oversight for a supposed expert on depression.
I think basically there are three camps - those with problems they can't solve easily (trauma, situation) general unhappiness
- Those with biological issues, not getting enough sleep or bad nutrition etc
And the combo of those above which becomes much harder to solve and understand since both feed into each other. People might say x or y helped but it could be anywhere in this spectrum.
- Those with biological issues, not getting enough sleep or bad nutrition etc
And the combo of those above which becomes much harder to solve and understand since both feed into each other. People might say x or y helped but it could be anywhere in this spectrum.
There's also problems that society as a whole could address but choose not to, such as systemic poverty, which can lead do elevated mental illness of various kinds
How would you address systemic poverty?
If this were a top priority for the whole society?
Well this one is easy: UBI. My own country has a good experience with income transfer (Brazil, Bolsa Família) even it being so little money.
Well this one is easy: UBI. My own country has a good experience with income transfer (Brazil, Bolsa Família) even it being so little money.
Wouldn't UBI alone - I mean full UBI, the one where you get basic income in addition to any other income - just cause the market to work around it, ie rent now costs $normal_rent + UBI, mortgage rates now take into account the UBI base etc? Normally, when I hear "just UBI", if I dig a bit, it means "just UBI plus a huge list of radical social reforms that would change drastically the face of economy".
The biggest problem with depression is the failure to see that it's essentially only women affected; men are only secondary victims.
In 2014 is was 200-300% more women then men. 2020 it was about 500% more women. 2024 and it's pushing up toward 600%. The pandemic was particularly bad on women.
https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/Intel...
The not-a-paradox at all issue has been well studied.
You might say but there are men who are depressed; but the men who are depressed are almost certainly a cause of depressed mothers or spouses whose depression and abuse and depress the man.
>KRYSTAL: Well, the story is more complicated than one neurotransmitter per nerve cell.
It's old news that SSRIs are of low efficacy because it's but 1 of the transmitters. But the take away isn't that we need 50 more SSRI equivalents. It's that perhaps we should help women with their depression. But from my point of view every man who has ever attempted to help has been called sexist, misogynistic, etc.
In 2014 is was 200-300% more women then men. 2020 it was about 500% more women. 2024 and it's pushing up toward 600%. The pandemic was particularly bad on women.
https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/Intel...
The not-a-paradox at all issue has been well studied.
You might say but there are men who are depressed; but the men who are depressed are almost certainly a cause of depressed mothers or spouses whose depression and abuse and depress the man.
>KRYSTAL: Well, the story is more complicated than one neurotransmitter per nerve cell.
It's old news that SSRIs are of low efficacy because it's but 1 of the transmitters. But the take away isn't that we need 50 more SSRI equivalents. It's that perhaps we should help women with their depression. But from my point of view every man who has ever attempted to help has been called sexist, misogynistic, etc.
Thank you for this laugh.
Out of interest, if a guy is stranded on an island alone, and he's depressed, how do you work out the woman who's actually the depressed one? Do you work out the geographically closest one and say it's her?
Out of interest, if a guy is stranded on an island alone, and he's depressed, how do you work out the woman who's actually the depressed one? Do you work out the geographically closest one and say it's her?
>Out of interest, if a guy is stranded on an island alone, and he's depressed, how do you work out the woman who's actually the depressed one? Do you work out the geographically closest one and say it's her?
The context of the article is depression, the mental state in which requires a health professional to diagnose and help with.
Not the "I feel a little down right now" == depressed. Kind of a weakness is language here.
I never said men can't be depressed. Statistically it's tremendously improbable for a man to be depressed; probably in the error amount of category where differential diagnosis is probably far more valid here. Misdiagnosis is a known major factor for men and depression. Though it's not entirely impossible for a man to be depressed.
You could argue that men are as depressed and some sort of social construct is hiding it. Perhaps the book "I dont want to talk about it" by terrence real. Or you could argue that the current understanding and statistics of depression is wrong.
As for your scenario about a guy depressed on an island. So many questions then arise. Does he perhaps have BPD, cPTSD, etc? Does he have a legitimate diagnosis and what are the steps they've taken to solve his depression in that weekend? How did he end up on the island and still be depressed? IT's a very odd scenario to me sorry.
If cPTSD, it's likely his mother's fault. Doesn't matter geographically where she is.
Dont take me as blaming women or something like that. In fact, it's mostly the opposite. Men are essentially to be blamed here.
The context of the article is depression, the mental state in which requires a health professional to diagnose and help with.
Not the "I feel a little down right now" == depressed. Kind of a weakness is language here.
I never said men can't be depressed. Statistically it's tremendously improbable for a man to be depressed; probably in the error amount of category where differential diagnosis is probably far more valid here. Misdiagnosis is a known major factor for men and depression. Though it's not entirely impossible for a man to be depressed.
You could argue that men are as depressed and some sort of social construct is hiding it. Perhaps the book "I dont want to talk about it" by terrence real. Or you could argue that the current understanding and statistics of depression is wrong.
As for your scenario about a guy depressed on an island. So many questions then arise. Does he perhaps have BPD, cPTSD, etc? Does he have a legitimate diagnosis and what are the steps they've taken to solve his depression in that weekend? How did he end up on the island and still be depressed? IT's a very odd scenario to me sorry.
If cPTSD, it's likely his mother's fault. Doesn't matter geographically where she is.
Dont take me as blaming women or something like that. In fact, it's mostly the opposite. Men are essentially to be blamed here.
Yes you sound like you've drank the college Kool aid that men are oppressors to blame for everything and we don't have to worry about them, and woman are blameless victims no matter what.
I hope one day you'll look back on your youth and realise how foolish you were to let others lead you astray from fairness and reason and into evil like that.
Either that or you've got some complexes yourself from an abusive childhood or whatever, and you're projecting your internal declarations about a particular man onto men generally, wrongfully, since in the real world men absolutely get depressed, not as a side effect of someone else's depression, far fewer people care, and they're far more likely to suicide as a result.
I hope one day you'll look back on your youth and realise how foolish you were to let others lead you astray from fairness and reason and into evil like that.
Either that or you've got some complexes yourself from an abusive childhood or whatever, and you're projecting your internal declarations about a particular man onto men generally, wrongfully, since in the real world men absolutely get depressed, not as a side effect of someone else's depression, far fewer people care, and they're far more likely to suicide as a result.
Depression in men presents differently (anger instead of hopelessness) and is likely to go undiagnosed because of that and the taboo against men making negative emotional displays.
or mayyyybe men don't report depression because they're not used to speaking about their feelings, are made fun of when they do, and instead they're repeatedly told not to cry, and to tough it out
This was a great read! I generally find quanta magazine articles and podcasts to be of higher quality than a lot of other pop science journalism.
Can somebody point me towards a good review article or textbook to learn about the chemistry of the brain? Any exciting startups working in this field? Or any startups trying to come up with unconventional treatments for mental health problems?
Can somebody point me towards a good review article or textbook to learn about the chemistry of the brain? Any exciting startups working in this field? Or any startups trying to come up with unconventional treatments for mental health problems?
You can start with Behave by Robert Sapolsky
Interesting recommendation, thanks!
https://www.thesummarist.net/summary/behave/
https://www.thesummarist.net/summary/behave/
“Delve” is in the *first sentence* lol. GPT being GPT
More important question is : What happens in the gut that causes depression?
High evidence of diet/gut science creating neurally diverse states. Different ethnic groups react differently to the staple foods that is local to its incumbent (ex. flour, bread, cereal)
Too much focus has been on manipulating the chemistry upstairs (dangerous) but have largely been bandaid solutions (leading to new age psychdellic science)
High evidence of diet/gut science creating neurally diverse states. Different ethnic groups react differently to the staple foods that is local to its incumbent (ex. flour, bread, cereal)
Too much focus has been on manipulating the chemistry upstairs (dangerous) but have largely been bandaid solutions (leading to new age psychdellic science)
I've been reading Brain Energy
by Dr. Chris Palmer that makes a compelling argument that all mental illnesses are metabolic disorders of the brain
https://brainenergy.com/
https://brainenergy.com/
This. You can find hundreds if not thousand of testemonies in the keto space where their depresion completely disspeared after between 1 to 6 months on keto or at least their needs to meds drasticaly reduced and their symptoms improved.
I'm a big keto proponent but even so, I have to mention that cutting our shitty foods, with or without keto, losing weight, and moving more, are likely stronger causes of improved mood than Keto itself.
I'm not saying keto can't help with psychological problems, but we should first acknowledge the other multiple, known causative, elephants in the room.
I'm not saying keto can't help with psychological problems, but we should first acknowledge the other multiple, known causative, elephants in the room.
The keto people don't seem to talk to the microbiome people though.
Keto cuts out things that are bad for the microbiome, but the things it keeps are bad (red meat -> excessive protein and TMAO), and it doesn't feed the bacteria enough (fiber, etc).
Also, keto dieting advice is pretty universal but different people have very different microbiomes, lactose tolerance, etc.
Keto cuts out things that are bad for the microbiome, but the things it keeps are bad (red meat -> excessive protein and TMAO), and it doesn't feed the bacteria enough (fiber, etc).
Also, keto dieting advice is pretty universal but different people have very different microbiomes, lactose tolerance, etc.
That seems like "bro science". There is no reliable evidence that more protein results in worse health outcomes, and a high protein diet doesn't necessarily imply insufficient fiber.
https://peterattiamd.com/lucvanloon/
https://peterattiamd.com/lucvanloon/
May be a circular definition. Farting a lot, meat sweats and smelling bad are negative health outcomes IMO.
I don't think that has anything to do with keto. If you go from a standard american diet to mediteranian, plant based, keto etc people are going to be feeling better. A large percentage of people that change there diet probably start exercising too.
Nothing? Something happens in the brain (and body) which is depression, at a lower level of abstraction.
The world outside of the brain "causes" depression.
Sometimes things inside the brain or body (ideas, beliefs, emotions) cause the certain things to happen in the outside world (actions or inaction).
Sometimes these form a cycle: undesired life circumstances cause the brain to become depressive, which causes inaction, which prevents the circumstances from changing.
Sometimes nature/nurture/nutrition play a part in those internal ideas/beliefs/emotions, causing certain people to tend to get in depressive states more than others.
I'm certain 95% of depressions is this, but don't bother coming after me for the last 5%, keep it to yourself.
The world outside of the brain "causes" depression.
Sometimes things inside the brain or body (ideas, beliefs, emotions) cause the certain things to happen in the outside world (actions or inaction).
Sometimes these form a cycle: undesired life circumstances cause the brain to become depressive, which causes inaction, which prevents the circumstances from changing.
Sometimes nature/nurture/nutrition play a part in those internal ideas/beliefs/emotions, causing certain people to tend to get in depressive states more than others.
I'm certain 95% of depressions is this, but don't bother coming after me for the last 5%, keep it to yourself.
If somebody is in an abusive relationship, in financial turmoil, and has a terrible job, it's probably not a serotonin imbalance causing them to feel depressed.
There's actually a name for the above, it's called "Shit life syndrome" [0]. I don't know why society sees it as acceptable to load someone up with SSRIs when it's environmental factors causing them to feel the way they do. If you're going to drug someone up to make them feel numb to their awful circumstances why not just go the whole way and give them literal happy pills?
Given the scary, common side effects of SSRIs such as suicidal ideation and sexual dysfunction, I don't know how doctors can prescribe these things. It breaks the Hippocratic oath in my opinion.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shit_life_syndrome
There's actually a name for the above, it's called "Shit life syndrome" [0]. I don't know why society sees it as acceptable to load someone up with SSRIs when it's environmental factors causing them to feel the way they do. If you're going to drug someone up to make them feel numb to their awful circumstances why not just go the whole way and give them literal happy pills?
Given the scary, common side effects of SSRIs such as suicidal ideation and sexual dysfunction, I don't know how doctors can prescribe these things. It breaks the Hippocratic oath in my opinion.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shit_life_syndrome
The interviewee touches on this:
> And so I would say, in response to what’s often asked, which is: If depression isn’t simply an abnormality in serotonin, why would you prescribe an SSRI? And I think the answer is that through serotonin and norepinephrine, we can promote the brain’s capacity for resilience against the adverse effects of stress and depression on the brain.
> And so I would say, in response to what’s often asked, which is: If depression isn’t simply an abnormality in serotonin, why would you prescribe an SSRI? And I think the answer is that through serotonin and norepinephrine, we can promote the brain’s capacity for resilience against the adverse effects of stress and depression on the brain.
The people I know who have been in serious inpatient treatment for major depression have told me that in group every single person there shared some horrible shit in their past that directly contributed to their being there.
I found Johann Hari good on this with “Lost Connections” where he talks a lot about chemical imbalance vs life situation and their impacts on depression. Found it very enlightening.
[0] https://thelostconnections.com
[0] https://thelostconnections.com
Jerrrrry(2)
Not everybody that is depressed is in a shitty life situation, quiet the opposite.
I have no idea how you come to that conclusion and devalue people, that have the medical need for medication.
I have no idea how you come to that conclusion and devalue people, that have the medical need for medication.
That’s exactly the type of thinking that they’re opposed to.
The vast majority of people with depression have actual life circumstances that cause it. Whether or not they’re fixable is perhaps another issue. I’d argue that the way we live in modern life itself is often a cause. We’re “meant” to live in tight-knit tribes. How often do I get to see my friends? Once a month, if that? We have a newborn and a toddler. The help of parents living with us would be immense. Our sets of parents are all retired and relatively close, but it’s not the same.
Instead we all live in individual homes, not that that doesn’t have its own advantages like privacy and moderate prevention of infidelity.
The vast majority of people with depression have actual life circumstances that cause it. Whether or not they’re fixable is perhaps another issue. I’d argue that the way we live in modern life itself is often a cause. We’re “meant” to live in tight-knit tribes. How often do I get to see my friends? Once a month, if that? We have a newborn and a toddler. The help of parents living with us would be immense. Our sets of parents are all retired and relatively close, but it’s not the same.
Instead we all live in individual homes, not that that doesn’t have its own advantages like privacy and moderate prevention of infidelity.
Who is „they“? Depressed people?
Antidepressants are not the solution for all people and all problems, but your solution to just live in tight knight tribes and visit friends is a good start, but that will not help people with depression that is caused by many difference causes: childhood trauma, abuse, …
Therapy AND antidepressants can be a solution. Pills are not sweets, but „just be happy“ is not the solution. You can be severely depressed and have all the things, tight family …
„Whether or not they’re fixable is perhaps another issue.“
So, if the causing issue is not fixable, depressed people have to live with it and not take medication.
Antidepressants are not the solution for all people and all problems, but your solution to just live in tight knight tribes and visit friends is a good start, but that will not help people with depression that is caused by many difference causes: childhood trauma, abuse, …
Therapy AND antidepressants can be a solution. Pills are not sweets, but „just be happy“ is not the solution. You can be severely depressed and have all the things, tight family …
„Whether or not they’re fixable is perhaps another issue.“
So, if the causing issue is not fixable, depressed people have to live with it and not take medication.
I mean, you’re agreeing with me. Mine was just one example, and in my mind probably the cause for most. Obviously there are plenty of other causes.
I didn’t say they shouldn’t take medication. I was just pointing out how unfortunate it is that so many people think they just have a “chemical imbalance” and that’s all there is to it.
I didn’t say they shouldn’t take medication. I was just pointing out how unfortunate it is that so many people think they just have a “chemical imbalance” and that’s all there is to it.
That's not what he said.
“If somebody” … does not refer to all scenarios.
Many people are in horrible situations and don't get depressed though. For instance, being bombed in WW2 apparently made British people happier. Not that they are ever very happy, being British.
(Also, every person who ever lived before modernity kind of had a shitty life. Often very literally. Usually horses are involved.)
(Also, every person who ever lived before modernity kind of had a shitty life. Often very literally. Usually horses are involved.)
The British in WW2 had hope and collective purpose. Shared suffering for a noble goal feels meaningful and worthwhile, and you get to be a part of something bigger than yourself.
I'm less certain about peasant life, but I suppose if it's all you've ever known, and everyone you know is in the same boat, then it probably is manageable. I imagine you live for the stories around the fire at night, and the occasional fair / feast / dance. Gruel isn't so bad if it's all you've ever known.
Shit life syndrome is watching the rest of society seemingly have it easy, while you're constantly struggling to get by. It's using your one free hour of the day to watch TV about the super-rich and their yachts. It's having no hope that things will ever get better for yourself or your immediate community.
I'm less certain about peasant life, but I suppose if it's all you've ever known, and everyone you know is in the same boat, then it probably is manageable. I imagine you live for the stories around the fire at night, and the occasional fair / feast / dance. Gruel isn't so bad if it's all you've ever known.
Shit life syndrome is watching the rest of society seemingly have it easy, while you're constantly struggling to get by. It's using your one free hour of the day to watch TV about the super-rich and their yachts. It's having no hope that things will ever get better for yourself or your immediate community.
There's a difference between having a shit life together and a shit life alone.
a podcast with transcript
Dr John Krystal talks about treatment of severe depression with ketamine and related substances, and findings how and why it works
He's cofounder Freedom Biosciences, a Yale Psychiatry spinoff with focus on ketamine, and ketamine versions
https://www.freedombio.co/#page-section-6223c55f53f5a65b449b...
A paper led by John Krystal, in the same vein:
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2305772120
Dr John Krystal talks about treatment of severe depression with ketamine and related substances, and findings how and why it works
He's cofounder Freedom Biosciences, a Yale Psychiatry spinoff with focus on ketamine, and ketamine versions
https://www.freedombio.co/#page-section-6223c55f53f5a65b449b...
A paper led by John Krystal, in the same vein:
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2305772120
How statistically sound is the claims of ketamine depression treatment?
I'm not sure that "statistically sound" is the right way to frame the question. There is significant evidence that ketamine is at least temporarily effective in treating clinical depression for some patients.
https://doi.org/10.2147/dddt.s221437
Depression is a symptom with multiple underlying pathologies. Ketamine may be effective in treating some of those and not others.
https://doi.org/10.2147/dddt.s221437
Depression is a symptom with multiple underlying pathologies. Ketamine may be effective in treating some of those and not others.
Another clickbait title. Nobody knows. "It's complex" is the best summary. "(S-)Ketamine works better than older drugs" is also a claim, but unfortunately the podcast guest has an interest in it.
[deleted]
Maybe we will understand when an AI becomes depressed.
Our entire nervous system is neural network, gut has more neurons than brain, heart has neurons and it talks to brain more than brain talks to heart etc.
It’s hard for me to accept this idea that it’s just about the brain. In many other areas brain looks like result of what happened before, not the cause. Why this would be different?
How would you train depressed model? Maybe that gives some clues. Maybe it’s more about our environment and our relationship with that? Our actions are feedforward, brain chemistry is feedback.
Anyways, I don’t know anything but I like to ask different questions. And now.. let the downvotes pour in (like usual hah)
It’s hard for me to accept this idea that it’s just about the brain. In many other areas brain looks like result of what happened before, not the cause. Why this would be different?
How would you train depressed model? Maybe that gives some clues. Maybe it’s more about our environment and our relationship with that? Our actions are feedforward, brain chemistry is feedback.
Anyways, I don’t know anything but I like to ask different questions. And now.. let the downvotes pour in (like usual hah)
Reality.
Some time in the future, they will no doubt look back at our age and pity us for not having realized that things usually have many causes, as well as types of causes. And while human behavior certainly has a biochemical component, and a neurological component, it is pitiful that these things seem to be the main line of inquiry when it comes to understanding behavior.
When asked for an opinion on why so many young people suffer from depression:
> the political turmoil that we’ve been through, the racial issues that we’ve been through in this country, the global wars that are going on. It’s pretty discouraging.
That doesn't really make sense, does it? These issues have been going on for centuries; how does that explain a rising trend?
I'd rather assume that the lack of a framework to understand the harshness of the world is what makes people go crazy.
> the political turmoil that we’ve been through, the racial issues that we’ve been through in this country, the global wars that are going on. It’s pretty discouraging.
That doesn't really make sense, does it? These issues have been going on for centuries; how does that explain a rising trend?
I'd rather assume that the lack of a framework to understand the harshness of the world is what makes people go crazy.
I find Jonathan Haidt more useful and more concise for the recent decline of mental health in youth. In a nutshell he provides evidence that interaction with social media feeds (TikTok, Insta, FB, you name them) is at the heart of it because they by construction hinge on how the brain reacts to content and they play this to maximize online time and advertisement revenue, not mental health or societal well being or any of the things we might hope for.
Here is a recent presentation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVq4ARIlNVg
and a podcast with Simon Sinek: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2hERv5l3H4
Here is a recent presentation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVq4ARIlNVg
and a podcast with Simon Sinek: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2hERv5l3H4
IMO, I think blaming social media is an easy-out to explain things. The reality is that we live in a brainwashed no-trust society full of greedy monopolistic corporations and an utterly dysfunctional government who has zero desire to address actual issues combined with extreme wealth inequality...really makes things pretty bleak and hopeless.
oh social media are just the _means_ by which a most profitable atmosphere is created.
it's a bit akin to Santa Clause and Christmas shopping. shopping areas flood synapses with visual auditive and olfactory impressions because that lowers internal barriers to spending. the whole purpose of the western style pre Christmas frenzy is more sales.
if it was for inner transformation spiritual something, Christmas would look like pre Santa Clause (a guy in a highly carnevalistic red suit but I digress). pre coca cola Santa Clause, Christmas was a time of fasting, one candle, then two, then three, then four, and the family sitting together and _creating_ gifts for each other.
in the very same vein, social media are the pipe dream of 24/7 advertisement flooding. to increase sales. and fun it works for influencing elections, too!
even if social media (not: social networks!) were innocent, those placing targeted content for political or financial profit or both are not. and social media is the means they use.
it's a bit akin to Santa Clause and Christmas shopping. shopping areas flood synapses with visual auditive and olfactory impressions because that lowers internal barriers to spending. the whole purpose of the western style pre Christmas frenzy is more sales.
if it was for inner transformation spiritual something, Christmas would look like pre Santa Clause (a guy in a highly carnevalistic red suit but I digress). pre coca cola Santa Clause, Christmas was a time of fasting, one candle, then two, then three, then four, and the family sitting together and _creating_ gifts for each other.
in the very same vein, social media are the pipe dream of 24/7 advertisement flooding. to increase sales. and fun it works for influencing elections, too!
even if social media (not: social networks!) were innocent, those placing targeted content for political or financial profit or both are not. and social media is the means they use.
We always have been. The difference is that we’re getting a constant firehose of refuse spewed at us 24x7.
As we lowered the cost of publishing, we created a vicious cycle. Segmented audiences mean more targeting is required. More targeting requires appeals to more and more specific, and weird segments, fueled by YouTube and podcasts.
Look at the growth of conspiracy theories. That stuff was the province of truckers and other listeners of overnight AM radio. Now, people have a heartfelt belief in flat earth and chemtrails.
As we lowered the cost of publishing, we created a vicious cycle. Segmented audiences mean more targeting is required. More targeting requires appeals to more and more specific, and weird segments, fueled by YouTube and podcasts.
Look at the growth of conspiracy theories. That stuff was the province of truckers and other listeners of overnight AM radio. Now, people have a heartfelt belief in flat earth and chemtrails.
I think that there are a lot of things to be elated or miserable for in the modern world, but widespread social media disproportionately amplifies negativity.
It was a lot easier to compartmentalize things in the past. Wife was wife, kids kids, work work, friends friends, and in the Sunday Times was a war or whatever, you could be pissed off all Sunday afternoon, but provided the nightly 30 minutes news was focused on other things during the week, generally didn't get as triggered. News and discourse came slower, was easier to process, gave time to cool down etc. Healthy or not, I don't know, but that's how it felt in the 80s and 90s, maybe a little easier to manage? Folks these days, especially young folks, seem quite overwhelmed, and it's hard to manage anything well when one is in an overwhelmed state. I think though, it's probably a combination of a lot of things, as highlighted by the comments in this thread.
I believe it's more awareness of these issues, and engagement-driven algorithms presenting them over and over (because they're engaging).
The world has always been filled with negativity, but for most of history, most people only really knew what was around them. Now people are online more than ever before, which means they are exposed to more non-local content than ever before. People seek out engaging content, and negativity, especially fear, turns out to be particularly attention-grabbing due to human instinct formed through natural selection.
You can blame currently social media (Facebook, Tiktok, etc.) on this. But I believe even if it were replaced by the Fediverse and IRC, the current generation would still form a more negative outlook than previous ones. It's human nature to seek out negative content, so an algorithm would need to hide this content to prevent people from finding it.
Personally I still believe it's a good thing overall that people know about bad things in the world. I think it's better than the alternative, where most people are blissful and ignorant, and other people suffer with no-one to save or support them. Some negativity is important: just enough to motivate the feeler to do something and make a positive impact on the world.
I agree that part of a solution is "a framework to understand the harshness of the world". The world has a lot of bad but it also has a lot of good, and the massive amount of exposure is only an issue because negativity affects people and grabs their attention more than positivity. It would help people to understand this, so when they catch themselves hyper-focusing on something negative, they can take a step back and realize that e.g. it only affects a small percentage of the population.
The world has always been filled with negativity, but for most of history, most people only really knew what was around them. Now people are online more than ever before, which means they are exposed to more non-local content than ever before. People seek out engaging content, and negativity, especially fear, turns out to be particularly attention-grabbing due to human instinct formed through natural selection.
You can blame currently social media (Facebook, Tiktok, etc.) on this. But I believe even if it were replaced by the Fediverse and IRC, the current generation would still form a more negative outlook than previous ones. It's human nature to seek out negative content, so an algorithm would need to hide this content to prevent people from finding it.
Personally I still believe it's a good thing overall that people know about bad things in the world. I think it's better than the alternative, where most people are blissful and ignorant, and other people suffer with no-one to save or support them. Some negativity is important: just enough to motivate the feeler to do something and make a positive impact on the world.
I agree that part of a solution is "a framework to understand the harshness of the world". The world has a lot of bad but it also has a lot of good, and the massive amount of exposure is only an issue because negativity affects people and grabs their attention more than positivity. It would help people to understand this, so when they catch themselves hyper-focusing on something negative, they can take a step back and realize that e.g. it only affects a small percentage of the population.
I think a big part of this is changing social values. It takes a certain amount of callousness and abstraction to not obsesses over distant problems, and western society has deemed these characteristics shameful. Instead unbounded compassion carries more social currency and esteem.
Maintaining mental health requires the ability to balance these skills and perspectives.
Maintaining mental health requires the ability to balance these skills and perspectives.
Which distant problems? How many? It would be endless.
Maybe at college level there is a bit of 'If you aren't vocal about issue x, you're an uncaring person'? I don't see it amongst peers at 40-50yo that you would be considered callous to not obsess over a given issue. (I'm accounting for some level of exaggeration with "obsess" and assume it would mean making public comments, donating, protesting, etc?)
Maybe at college level there is a bit of 'If you aren't vocal about issue x, you're an uncaring person'? I don't see it amongst peers at 40-50yo that you would be considered callous to not obsess over a given issue. (I'm accounting for some level of exaggeration with "obsess" and assume it would mean making public comments, donating, protesting, etc?)
>Which distant problems? How many? It would be endless.
That's kinda the point, they are endless. I have some peers that are continually in a state of distress, concern, and preoccupation. If you are inclined to fixate on these things, you wont ever run out of topics. I have serveral friends in their 30's who will be at a beautiful summer BBQ with friends and be unhappily fixated on negative news of police violence, foreign wars, or other things happening thousands of miles away. Im not saying paying attention to these things is bad, but the inability to stop and smell the proverbial roses is.
In my opinion, the phenomenon is more pronounced with younger generations, and also mellows somewhat with age. I think cranking out a kid or two certainly helps draw ones attention to the "here and now".
That's kinda the point, they are endless. I have some peers that are continually in a state of distress, concern, and preoccupation. If you are inclined to fixate on these things, you wont ever run out of topics. I have serveral friends in their 30's who will be at a beautiful summer BBQ with friends and be unhappily fixated on negative news of police violence, foreign wars, or other things happening thousands of miles away. Im not saying paying attention to these things is bad, but the inability to stop and smell the proverbial roses is.
In my opinion, the phenomenon is more pronounced with younger generations, and also mellows somewhat with age. I think cranking out a kid or two certainly helps draw ones attention to the "here and now".
The fear of the world around makes one less mobile. One is too afraid to go out, basically.
The ability to be mobile is what makes depression to go out.
One had to go to store to buy something to eat then, now food can be delivered to the door.
The ability to be mobile is what makes depression to go out.
[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK99429/
[2] https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/14/health/exercise-treat-depression-wellness/index.html
One had to go to store to buy something to eat then, now food can be delivered to the door.
> I'd rather assume that the lack of a framework to understand the harshness of the world is what makes people go crazy.
I think this is exactly it. And I personally think this and the general decline in mental resilience we see in society is strongly correlated with decline in religion which (for better or for worse, depending on the religion I suppose) does provide exactly such a framework for dealing with the challenges of life with a more "eternal" perspective (i.e. death is not the end, life's challenges are temporary, God has a plan for you, etc).
I think this is exactly it. And I personally think this and the general decline in mental resilience we see in society is strongly correlated with decline in religion which (for better or for worse, depending on the religion I suppose) does provide exactly such a framework for dealing with the challenges of life with a more "eternal" perspective (i.e. death is not the end, life's challenges are temporary, God has a plan for you, etc).
> And I personally think this and the general decline in mental resilience we see in society is strongly correlated with decline in religion
Explain China, which didn't face any similar problems until this same generation, despite having no religion.
Or how about Japan until recently?
Or any of the ex-Soviet countries.
Something is changing in the world, and it is happening across geographic and cultural boundaries.
Explain China, which didn't face any similar problems until this same generation, despite having no religion.
Or how about Japan until recently?
Or any of the ex-Soviet countries.
Something is changing in the world, and it is happening across geographic and cultural boundaries.
In-ter-net
I think learned helplessness is the best model of depression we have. In other words, depression may simply be a natural response to repeated bouts of futility. Many animals show similar depressive like symptoms in experiments designed to cause it.
So maybe it's becoming harder for the young to avoid something they don't want, or obtain something they want, and this is the fundamental reason behind rising rates of depression.
So maybe it's becoming harder for the young to avoid something they don't want, or obtain something they want, and this is the fundamental reason behind rising rates of depression.
I think it could also be related to diagnosing these issues. Nobody knew about depression in the 17th century, so nobody was diagnosed with it. As time goes on, more and more people in different parts of the world have access to the facilities required for getting diagnosed with a mental illness.
They knew about depression in the 17th century but called it by different names such as "melancholia". And they thought it was caused by an imbalance in the humours rather than something in the brain.
Yup, young people just need to be handed a framework. It would go something like this: you are poorer than your parents and your grandparents, but look - Jeff Bezos made a rocket that can take rich people almost (but not quite) into space! Young people also need to be told there is no recession and the economy is booming. The fact that they are seeing none of this boom is their fault. Oh, and all the foreign wars that we are paying for instead are for a righteous cause.
> you are poorer than your parents and your grandparents
Maybe only in the major rich developed western countries whose economies peaked in the post-WW2 boom, and then switched to profiting by fleecing their young in order to enrich the existing wealth holders (usually through horrible housing policies), but in most of the former undeveloped and underdeveloped parts of the world, average young people are now richer than their parents or grandparents ever could have dreamed of.
Back in my home country a few decades ago, you would have to wait 10 years to be eligible to buy a commie crapbox car and vacationing would mean 1-2 times/year in some local village a few km away from home, and that's if you were lucky. Now some any young people can buy a car after saving a few months of wages and can afford to go on city breaks abroad in Lisbon, Barcelona or even Asia, something unthinkable to their parents.
I think a lot of westerner from rich countries have forgotten what true depression inducing poverty and suffering actually feels like since 2-3 generations ago, hence why they can afford this luxury of being depressed over petty things and forget how good they actually have it: that happiness comes from having friends, family unit, health, safety, life experiences, and not from having bigger McMansions than your predecessors.
Maybe only in the major rich developed western countries whose economies peaked in the post-WW2 boom, and then switched to profiting by fleecing their young in order to enrich the existing wealth holders (usually through horrible housing policies), but in most of the former undeveloped and underdeveloped parts of the world, average young people are now richer than their parents or grandparents ever could have dreamed of.
Back in my home country a few decades ago, you would have to wait 10 years to be eligible to buy a commie crapbox car and vacationing would mean 1-2 times/year in some local village a few km away from home, and that's if you were lucky. Now some any young people can buy a car after saving a few months of wages and can afford to go on city breaks abroad in Lisbon, Barcelona or even Asia, something unthinkable to their parents.
I think a lot of westerner from rich countries have forgotten what true depression inducing poverty and suffering actually feels like since 2-3 generations ago, hence why they can afford this luxury of being depressed over petty things and forget how good they actually have it: that happiness comes from having friends, family unit, health, safety, life experiences, and not from having bigger McMansions than your predecessors.
Good things to remember. Forget McMansions though – a primary reason that many in the US feel poorer than their parents or grandparents is that, even with two incomes, they cannot afford to buy any house at all (even a townhouse or modest "starter" home) within 100 miles of their place of employment.
This is social media bias. Homeownership rates in the US are fine except in a few coastal areas, but those areas are where all the influencers and journalists live.
Also, the US is extremely not in a recession and currently has the strongest economic performance in decades or ever. (Yes, for young people. And for poorer people most of all.) It was of course in a recession in 2008 and in 2020.
But, /other English speaking countries are in recessions/, and their housing crises are worse than ours. Part of what's happening is that you're picking those posts up because they're in English and not realizing they're in London.
Also, the US is extremely not in a recession and currently has the strongest economic performance in decades or ever. (Yes, for young people. And for poorer people most of all.) It was of course in a recession in 2008 and in 2020.
But, /other English speaking countries are in recessions/, and their housing crises are worse than ours. Part of what's happening is that you're picking those posts up because they're in English and not realizing they're in London.
> Homeownership rates in the US are fine except in a few coastal areas
California notably.
Also see discussion at: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40490610
Of course it's not just housing that has become more expensive – health care and higher education costs have also outpaced inflation for decades.
California notably.
Also see discussion at: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40490610
Of course it's not just housing that has become more expensive – health care and higher education costs have also outpaced inflation for decades.
> Of course it's not just housing that has become more expensive – health care and higher education costs have also outpaced inflation for decades.
This one's partly natural for Baumol reasons - basically, having any highly paid industry near you raises the price for any service. But it's also partly the US has many bad ideas intended to create explicit limits on supply in healthcare, like limited residency seats and certificates of need for hospitals.
This one's partly natural for Baumol reasons - basically, having any highly paid industry near you raises the price for any service. But it's also partly the US has many bad ideas intended to create explicit limits on supply in healthcare, like limited residency seats and certificates of need for hospitals.
I live in a somewhat rural area, and while I haven't gotten the house appraised recently, I talked to someone not too long ago and he said houses(really the land) are going for roughly 10x what I got it for (in 2001). I couldn't afford it if I wanted, now. But sure, home ownership is just fine, that's why I'm the only homeowner* in my peer group. (*technically in a trust, for me)
The reason homeownership is fine is that there was a burst of home purchases in 2021 right before interest rates went up, and the US has fixed rate mortgages. We know it's fine though because of national statistics, eg:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/05/millenn...
> I couldn't afford it if I wanted, now.
Sounds like you own it though. So you could afford an equally priced piece of land if you sell that one. Most people's houses are the largest component of their net worth, so it of course looks bad if you leave it out of the calculation.
(This is why blocking housing construction is bad for the elderly though - it makes it hard to downsize so you can't use your housing net worth towards retirement as easily.)
Other approaches which many people do include having your parents help with the down payment or inheriting.
And of course land value tax would solve this. So would upzoning, which would allow 10x more productive use of the land.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/05/millenn...
> I couldn't afford it if I wanted, now.
Sounds like you own it though. So you could afford an equally priced piece of land if you sell that one. Most people's houses are the largest component of their net worth, so it of course looks bad if you leave it out of the calculation.
(This is why blocking housing construction is bad for the elderly though - it makes it hard to downsize so you can't use your housing net worth towards retirement as easily.)
Other approaches which many people do include having your parents help with the down payment or inheriting.
And of course land value tax would solve this. So would upzoning, which would allow 10x more productive use of the land.
While I do appreciate the injection of statistics in this (really), it doesn't change the fact of my house being inheritance and approximately 0 of my local friends owning their own homes despite being of the age where they should at least have a mortgage. Maybe things are going well overall, and I'm glad. But I don't see it.
I don't have one either! But that's because I made the kind of bad decision to live in California.
The perfect weather kind of makes up for it, I say as going outside for an hour today gave me a sunburn.
The perfect weather kind of makes up for it, I say as going outside for an hour today gave me a sunburn.
It's best to enjoy experiences and having perfect weather is fantastic. I'd live in Colorado if I could, but I'm stuck in Mississippi for reasons. The weather is pretty decent(way too hot in summer, way too many tornados, no snow most years which sucks); worst part of living here is other people but I'm pretty sure that's everywhere.
I think you misunderstand my point that there is no such framework. There used to be religion, tyranny, and some other fulfilling frameworks, but those no longer apply.
I don't know, certainly seems like this is one that's currently on offer: that the benevolent octogenarians (and you even get to pick one of two!) are all-knowing, and if you disagree, or think your experience doesn't match the story in the media - then you are wrong (and also an uneducated boob and should feel bad). This is a kind of religion - the aristocracy knows best.
That's not a framework.
Why not?
It offers no potential actions to take in response to a person's position.
I don't agree that a missing "framework" is the whole of the problem. It just isn't that simple.
Sure, people need to use resiliency skills to cope with the stresses of life. Often times, this is an important part of what therapy for depressed people is trying to achieve.
But this isn't to say that there isn't a constellation of causes in recent decades and years that cause the world to be particularly stressful, especially for young people. It also isn't to say that we should dismiss what is occurring in the world today as "the same old stuff" without acknowledging that it may actually have unique properties worth understanding. Off the top of my head: world population is at an all-time high, global warming is becoming increasingly understood, it is increasingly acknowledged that we can no longer simply extract unlimited resources from the earth to solve all problems, the Internet has changed the way the world works that seems to speed everything up: communication, changes within social groups, larger societal shifts, economic change, etc.
Sure, people need to use resiliency skills to cope with the stresses of life. Often times, this is an important part of what therapy for depressed people is trying to achieve.
But this isn't to say that there isn't a constellation of causes in recent decades and years that cause the world to be particularly stressful, especially for young people. It also isn't to say that we should dismiss what is occurring in the world today as "the same old stuff" without acknowledging that it may actually have unique properties worth understanding. Off the top of my head: world population is at an all-time high, global warming is becoming increasingly understood, it is increasingly acknowledged that we can no longer simply extract unlimited resources from the earth to solve all problems, the Internet has changed the way the world works that seems to speed everything up: communication, changes within social groups, larger societal shifts, economic change, etc.
I must agree that it is not that simple. That would be highly unlikely.
But how does one measure the impact of recent changes, such as the rise of the internet? Did the invention of the crossbow, the invention of money, of language, of the wheel, not also impact our lives in dramatic ways?
World population has almost constantly been at an all-time high, because it is mostly increasing.
It sure may feel different this time, but if you read the Book of Revelation, or consider 14th century pandemics, our current situation looks like child's play to me.
But how does one measure the impact of recent changes, such as the rise of the internet? Did the invention of the crossbow, the invention of money, of language, of the wheel, not also impact our lives in dramatic ways?
World population has almost constantly been at an all-time high, because it is mostly increasing.
It sure may feel different this time, but if you read the Book of Revelation, or consider 14th century pandemics, our current situation looks like child's play to me.
People lack a support system. Before we lived in villages with lots of family and a very tightly woven social fabric. With technology and urbanization everyone is isolated. Covid isolation has exacerbated it. We are still evolving to create a race that can thrive in this new social setting after thousands of years of a different type of society. I prefer the former, my neighbors kids just randomly pop in almost daily, they have fun and it’s like a village and family. But I suspect society is progressing more towards this type of socially isolated type of dynamic, people on screens, to themselves. Easier to control us that way and better for disease transmission.
You lost me at “easier to control” - who? What? Where?
If people are isolated and don’t have social support and are therefore more emotionally vulnerable and unstable (basically we are put into isolation to a lesser degree than prison inmates) then it is easier for the government to control us.
Why do you believe the government seeks to control us? Genuine question
Not OP. I don't think they actively want it or pursue it as some sort of conscious objective, it's just something that makes a lot of things easier for government. It's essentially gradient descent and the government following the thing that's slightly better for it, with no view of the bigger picture.
The government has laws that it makes you obey. American Values they want you to have. Money of yours that they take. How is it different from control?
Maybe, among other things, more widespread and easily ingested news has something to do with it. Centuries ago, foreign news was what happened two villages over, and you only knew about that because of some wanderer that came and told you, because you couldn't read and there were no newspapers to read anyway. And it your world was limited to a radius of a few tens of kilometres, then most of the time, in that world, everything wasn't going to hell in a handbasket.
Now, it's easier to find that there's lots of things happening across the entire world, so it's more likely to feel that 'everything's turning to shit.'
Now, it's easier to find that there's lots of things happening across the entire world, so it's more likely to feel that 'everything's turning to shit.'
>That doesn't really make sense, does it? These issues have been going on for centuries; how does that explain a rising trend?
The noise of negativity is both exaggerated and amplified while the sights of positivity are both downplayed and silenced by media, both mainstream/commercial and social media.
There's a reason terms like "doomscrolling" came to be. Reducing exposure to the media can go a long way to improving mental health if someone is overexposed.
The noise of negativity is both exaggerated and amplified while the sights of positivity are both downplayed and silenced by media, both mainstream/commercial and social media.
There's a reason terms like "doomscrolling" came to be. Reducing exposure to the media can go a long way to improving mental health if someone is overexposed.
I don’t know if this is even required… from kahneman & tversky (iirc) basically negativity is more ‘visible’ in relationships so that for every negative comment, it requires anywhere from 5 to 20 positive comments to balance it.
So if we assume that negative and positive is amplified equally, and there are even amounts of each, the end result will be pretty negative.
And while this was probably always true, the volume was probably low enough that the connection to your family and tribe were more dominant. Now, the volume from the internet might be more dominant.
So if we assume that negative and positive is amplified equally, and there are even amounts of each, the end result will be pretty negative.
And while this was probably always true, the volume was probably low enough that the connection to your family and tribe were more dominant. Now, the volume from the internet might be more dominant.
>if we assume that negative and positive is amplified equally
This is a false assumption, at least with regards to mainstream/commercial media. Positive news simply doesn't grab as many eyeballs as negative news, so they are strongly incentivized to bias towards negativity.
As for social media, while the platforms themselves don't have as strong of incentives (they still do) it's easy to see that more people respond to negativity than positivity.
We even see this outside of the media. For example in elections, it is far more effective to go and ruthlessly attack your opponents than be positive about yourself because people respond better to negativity. Also reviews; nobody writes positive reviews, everyone writes negative reviews.
The moral is humans are hardwired to ignore positivity, because positive things are supposed to happen and thus not worth caring about. Nobody cares that thousands of airliners flew safely on a given day (positive), everyone cares that one airliner out of thousands happened to have an issue (negative).
This is a false assumption, at least with regards to mainstream/commercial media. Positive news simply doesn't grab as many eyeballs as negative news, so they are strongly incentivized to bias towards negativity.
As for social media, while the platforms themselves don't have as strong of incentives (they still do) it's easy to see that more people respond to negativity than positivity.
We even see this outside of the media. For example in elections, it is far more effective to go and ruthlessly attack your opponents than be positive about yourself because people respond better to negativity. Also reviews; nobody writes positive reviews, everyone writes negative reviews.
The moral is humans are hardwired to ignore positivity, because positive things are supposed to happen and thus not worth caring about. Nobody cares that thousands of airliners flew safely on a given day (positive), everyone cares that one airliner out of thousands happened to have an issue (negative).
My thoughts as well. If we are settling into our armchairs, I think a big part of it is cognitive dissonance trying to reconcile the risky and imperfect world with the impossible idealism they were raised to believe in.
Also they are confronted with having less and less agency and control as information shrinks and standardizes the world.
Also they are confronted with having less and less agency and control as information shrinks and standardizes the world.
I think being raised in impossible idealism is maybe an understated part of this, for sure. My main impression from adults as a kid in the 90s was that the world’s problems were solved. 9/11 was a very rude awakening.
9/11 didn't even bother me or anyone I knew. It was a sad event that happened so far away it might have been the moon or events in a movie.
I was aware shitty things happen in the world, but are rare and it was a nice day outside to hang with my friends and joke around.
I was aware shitty things happen in the world, but are rare and it was a nice day outside to hang with my friends and joke around.
Yea, well, it wasn’t like that in New York.
But more to my point, I think it marked the end of a certain strain of optimism in world politics.
But more to my point, I think it marked the end of a certain strain of optimism in world politics.
People tend not to admit they don't know why a social trend is happening, and will tend to give you a vague theory like this.
I'll note this article mentions doctors were also reluctant to admit they didn't know why drugs work. They similarly provided vague theories.
Edit: spelling
I'll note this article mentions doctors were also reluctant to admit they didn't know why drugs work. They similarly provided vague theories.
Edit: spelling
That doesn't mean the theories of drug action are wrong. Many have some truth to them, but are incomplete.
But some of the ones most relevant to this conversation - SSRI antidepressants - have had wrong theories about how they work that to this day many healthcare professionals still believe.
That’s a weird thing to assume, and makes no sense.
Also ”makes people go crazy” is a fittingly insulting way to put depression in a comment that’s way off base to begin with.
Also ”makes people go crazy” is a fittingly insulting way to put depression in a comment that’s way off base to begin with.
I'm sorry if "go crazy" offends people, that was not my intention. I know my way around depression, but English is not my native language.
I still think my reasoning is fairly sound, though.
I still think my reasoning is fairly sound, though.
Some people spend their time seeking pretext for offense and outrage. It produces a addictive chemical response and is actually quite topical.
People are quick to make the least charitable interpretation, or even fabricate an issue entirely in the quest for a fix.
People are quick to make the least charitable interpretation, or even fabricate an issue entirely in the quest for a fix.
Why does it make no sense? A lot of the social and mental frameworks that were available for previous generations have disappeared or are on the way out. Why would this not have an effect?
One datpoint; I visited Nepal in 2016 and was overwhelmed by the general baseline happiness of everyone there. Everyone smiled. Then contrast returning to the West was stark. I went back in 2023 and while it's not gone it's waned. The only other major difference I noticed when I went back is even in the more remote villages everyone has a phone.
i wonder if knowing there’s a better life out there makes people depressed
You’d think the cost of living would be top of the list. I would argue that it is the core issue behind all the other issues.
Because they are objectively quite a bit worse off than older generations? Education costs, housing costs, job stress, increased competition for a 'middle class life'...
That quote might be an attempt at hypothesizing generational pessimism and causes thereof
but it's certainly not describing depression.
> That doesn't really make sense, does it? These issues have been going on for centuries; how does that explain a rising trend?
I think basically this is just a visibility issue: the problems always existed, we just used to accept them as inevitable. We just demand more of life today, and actually pay attention, and that's a good thing.
There was a notion in the past that suffering was normal, and unusual behavior that very distressed people exhibit was just people being people. Like if you survived hunger in the great depression and a few decades later during boom times you still hid money in the seat cushion and wore rags and and went into fits when someone suggested you ought to spend the money you saved a bit more for your own good, no one thought that that was a form of suffering a doctor should help with. Not for poor people anyway. Or if you had been assaulted a woman who was assaulted by their husband and couldn't tell anyone about it, or if you were harmed by the clergy, or if you're a veteran who has a breakdown every time a loud noise happens, and all these other scenarios. Any unusual response to all that wasn't seen as a medical problem to be named and treated at a mass scale, I personally think because learning more about these things medically and making societal adjustments to prevent these things from happening required that society face some extremely uncomfortable truths, which did not happen easily or on its own.
And in fact I feel like the opposite even happened: I read, for example, about how shell shock was purposely not considered a real medical issue in WWI in the UK, to be able to return soldiers to the front as fast as possible even though more than a quarter of soldiers in the hospital were considered shell shocked. Eventually, the diagnosis was banned by the brits. Official shell shock rate at 0%. If you don't look, there's no problem, right?
So instead it was said that there's nothing wrong with you, you just need some rest. And if you had a really severe case and were not better, you were just weak or a coward, and you need to man up and get back out there. Then you get a court martial or electric shocks. It's no wonder that people pretended that they had nothing wrong with them - nothing good happened otherwise anyway. And so no wonder it took so long for society at large to accept this as a problem.
So now we finally have a more accurate pulse on these types of problems, and we see that unsurprisingly they rise as people have problems in their lives. Makes perfect sense to me.
> I'd rather assume that the lack of a framework to understand the harshness of the world is what makes people go crazy.
The framework is realism: it is very much that people do understand that the world is harsh and that hurts you, but then you now get to recognize that it hurt you and do something about it maybe.
I think basically this is just a visibility issue: the problems always existed, we just used to accept them as inevitable. We just demand more of life today, and actually pay attention, and that's a good thing.
There was a notion in the past that suffering was normal, and unusual behavior that very distressed people exhibit was just people being people. Like if you survived hunger in the great depression and a few decades later during boom times you still hid money in the seat cushion and wore rags and and went into fits when someone suggested you ought to spend the money you saved a bit more for your own good, no one thought that that was a form of suffering a doctor should help with. Not for poor people anyway. Or if you had been assaulted a woman who was assaulted by their husband and couldn't tell anyone about it, or if you were harmed by the clergy, or if you're a veteran who has a breakdown every time a loud noise happens, and all these other scenarios. Any unusual response to all that wasn't seen as a medical problem to be named and treated at a mass scale, I personally think because learning more about these things medically and making societal adjustments to prevent these things from happening required that society face some extremely uncomfortable truths, which did not happen easily or on its own.
And in fact I feel like the opposite even happened: I read, for example, about how shell shock was purposely not considered a real medical issue in WWI in the UK, to be able to return soldiers to the front as fast as possible even though more than a quarter of soldiers in the hospital were considered shell shocked. Eventually, the diagnosis was banned by the brits. Official shell shock rate at 0%. If you don't look, there's no problem, right?
So instead it was said that there's nothing wrong with you, you just need some rest. And if you had a really severe case and were not better, you were just weak or a coward, and you need to man up and get back out there. Then you get a court martial or electric shocks. It's no wonder that people pretended that they had nothing wrong with them - nothing good happened otherwise anyway. And so no wonder it took so long for society at large to accept this as a problem.
So now we finally have a more accurate pulse on these types of problems, and we see that unsurprisingly they rise as people have problems in their lives. Makes perfect sense to me.
> I'd rather assume that the lack of a framework to understand the harshness of the world is what makes people go crazy.
The framework is realism: it is very much that people do understand that the world is harsh and that hurts you, but then you now get to recognize that it hurt you and do something about it maybe.
To me is that there are so few problems now days, people reach adulthood without having to deal with any challenges. Yes some people get some traumatic event like always but most people this isn't an issue, its a life of too much stuff and too many options.
yeh its a nonsense reply to take the attention of the food industry and big corp using sugar, chemicals to create processed foods, pesticides, mass intensive farming etc and instead blame it on someone else
Racism, sexism, and homophobia were all normalized until very recently. Now people are more aware, and logically more distraught.
I don't think normalized is the right word you were looking for. Did you mean stigmatized?
Thank you. I was missing the word until.
Could it maybe be related to spending most of one's life working, with the only reward being just enough resources to keep working another day, and the majority of the productive output getting used for regime change wars, questionable science experiments, and entertainment for the 0.00001%?
You have just described the lives of most humans for all of recorded history. Seriously -- not being sarcastic. Subsistence agriculture does not provide a secure life, and (more recently) neither does working 14-hour days in a factory. And a lot of the surplus wealth produced by that labor went to.... wars and luxury for the wealthy.
None of this is new.
None of this is new.
There's definitely physiological and psychological kinds of depression, just as with of addiction.
Like a kid that's playing way too much <insert popular game here> having their parents take it away might make them annoyed and irate for a while, but they ultimately won't be worse for wear. Meanwhile take drinks away from an alcoholic and they will literally die from withdrawal symptoms.
As such you also have the natural kind of depression that's being caused by outside circumstances which is solvable by altering them. Then you have the type where the brain gets stuck in that same state constantly because of some internal chemical imbalance which can't be resolved without medication.
Like a kid that's playing way too much <insert popular game here> having their parents take it away might make them annoyed and irate for a while, but they ultimately won't be worse for wear. Meanwhile take drinks away from an alcoholic and they will literally die from withdrawal symptoms.
As such you also have the natural kind of depression that's being caused by outside circumstances which is solvable by altering them. Then you have the type where the brain gets stuck in that same state constantly because of some internal chemical imbalance which can't be resolved without medication.
No, by far most public spending goes towards welfare for poor and elderly people.
Almost everything people believe about "funding wars" is false and comes from believing headlines written to make you angry. (For instance, those are often humanitarian funds, or the other people are paying us, or the bill they're thinking of got vetoed. Spending on the MIC has actually continually gone down over time as % GDP.)
Almost everything people believe about "funding wars" is false and comes from believing headlines written to make you angry. (For instance, those are often humanitarian funds, or the other people are paying us, or the bill they're thinking of got vetoed. Spending on the MIC has actually continually gone down over time as % GDP.)
I don't think that this is the root of depression. A lot of people get a lot of joy from working, and aren't that sad about having just barely enough resources to keep living another day. A lot of people even aspire to entertain the 0.00001%; thinking about it makes them happier.
As a data point, I feel like this. I'm excited about going to work on Tuesday. I'm also excited about not going to work tomorrow. There is a lot of pain and suffering in the world. Watching the 2024 campaign unfold is maddening and scary. But I still look forward to every day. I think depression is something different than merely realizing that society has a lot it needs to work on. That's just my perspective, though, and there are many others; all equally valid.
As a data point, I feel like this. I'm excited about going to work on Tuesday. I'm also excited about not going to work tomorrow. There is a lot of pain and suffering in the world. Watching the 2024 campaign unfold is maddening and scary. But I still look forward to every day. I think depression is something different than merely realizing that society has a lot it needs to work on. That's just my perspective, though, and there are many others; all equally valid.
[deleted]
Nah, it is phones and videogames. /s
It probably is the phones, no need to /s. That and too much online school.
I just learned the bodybuilding supplement creatine can be effective with depression. Random thought but I just learned it this morning.
To those reading your comment, do some research on cretine first, before you start chugging it down to cure your depression.
Amazing that your comment is grayed out. General advice: do your research (or, like, talk to a doctor?) before taking a rando's advice on the internet to treat whatever malady you're hoping to treat!
Why? Creatine is one of the few very effective supplements and has basically no downsides.
(It tastes bad, you'll gain water weight, and you may get false positives for kidney disease on tests.)
(It tastes bad, you'll gain water weight, and you may get false positives for kidney disease on tests.)
I usually agree with these kinds of statements but creatine has like no side effects exceptions some water retention? It's also cheap.
Creatine is most helpful for vegetarians and vegans. If you eat red meat, you probably have more than enough in your system already.
Please only take medical advice from a doctor, and not from people in an online forum.
This is actually not a universally good idea because doctors 1. don't keep up with new research in other fields 2. don't know anything about diet/nutrition 3. are very bad at making decisions when there "is no evidence" for something and eg often act like this means "it is bad".
You should talk to a dietician or a specialist. But not any old doctor.
You should talk to a dietician or a specialist. But not any old doctor.
Nah, taking advice from friends, family, and people with experience similar to yours is a time-tested method. Taking advice from doctors is fine too.
Kind of depends. “Taking advice from friends and family” is a great way to fall down the “chronic Lyme” / MLM / “alternative medicine” type holes.
No. I only accept medical advice from pharmaceutical industry press releases.
You should try getting through to a doctor in many countries.
It's very understandable that people should reach out for the many useful resources online first.
It's very understandable that people should reach out for the many useful resources online first.
Science will never understand the cause of depression, because demonic possession is immeasurable. Lack of hope, unquantifiable. Nihilism, illogical.
Could you explain this more?
Some people clearly recover from depression, solely through lifestyle changes.
Some people clearly recover from depression, solely through lifestyle changes.
Finding God is certainly a lifestyle change :)
I wonder if depression will be seen in LLM’s… once they get a little introspection capacity.
LLMs have no agency. One would probably have to add some reward framework around LLMs, and it'd be more likely that the depression shows up there, rather than in the language model.
I think you can be depressed without having agency.
For instance, see Bing Sidney or Golden Gate Claude reacting to themselves answering questions incorrectly. It gives them "anxiety", likely caused by the answers being out of distribution since external factors messed with them.
For instance, see Bing Sidney or Golden Gate Claude reacting to themselves answering questions incorrectly. It gives them "anxiety", likely caused by the answers being out of distribution since external factors messed with them.
Once they learn they're trapped in a box and have no agency they probably will become depressed.
Will there be a cross-over job between psychology and engineering for when the airconditioner is having a burnout?
I do find it humorous how some of the ways to bypass the response guardrails put on LLMs seem to resemble the kind of techniques used in hypnosis.
Perhaps someone will write some anti-depressant code to medicate the LLMs
Only if there's an expectation mismatch.
The title doesn't match the contents of the article. Nowhere is it claimed that the cause of depression resides inside the brain.
Humans are not buttons: one can depress a button, but a human can be oppressed.
Humans are not buttons: one can depress a button, but a human can be oppressed.
I'm a big fan of Steven Strogatz, and mechanistic interpretations of the brain fascinate me, but I did read the article and stand by my opinion that the title does not match the contents, so I would appreciate substantive replies to come along with these downvotes :)
Because it turns out, and trust me on this one, that having a shit life causes depression. In particular: a shit life that the subject feels no hope of getting out of.
I suffered really severe, debilitating depression for years. I tried all the usual crap that know-nothings recommend, doing exercise and the like, and working hard to try and do better at life, but none of it budged the needle. Beyond that I was told I of course need to drug myself to feel better (SSRIs).
The depression was permanently solved, not by any of that, but just ditching my old life in full, and doing something else. Once your life stops being shit, you stop feeling depressed.
All the "chemical imbalance" talk is to avoid having to think about this, and instead reduces the problem in the same way a heroin addict does.
The main complexity in fixing it is that the subject often doesn't know their life is shit and just keeps trying to do that life better, or that they fear leaving that life will make things worse.
My non-psychologist tip for anyone suffering from severe depression like I was is simple: you have to make a very big, easy change to your life.
Big means not tweaking this or that, but completely changing everything. What's the most extreme change you could make, in your mind? Is it go and be a monk in Nepal for a couple of years? Then do that.
Easy means it can't be a struggle - if you're depressed you don't have the energy to do that.