#difference reduction method

[bigeyedchangelingchild]

Tagging @fierceawakening because it's thoughts regarding mostly the prison abolition argument I've been reading on your page, but not about any specific thread that feels reasonable to reply to.

So personally, I don't really think about this too much because in practice I'd much rather focus on specific achievable harm reductions I can currently fight for, however, I have another complication with prison abolition.

I agree that involuntary confinement is problematic, but I've also seen it work? Like my grandfather went to prison, and he says it saved his life and I believe him. I don't think he should've gone to prison in a just system, what he was convicted on was absurd and not reasonable evidence, and it was a non-violent drug crime, which pretty much everyone in the reform to abolition spectrum agree is bad.

At the same time, my grandfather is likely an undiagnosed autistic man, who struggled intensely with adulthood and prison gave him a structured space to learn how to manage himself.

He was lucky enough to be imprisoned in a place where he was given access to education and life skills, similar to what my dad got when his parents paid for a private rehab facility, which was also a form of involuntary confinement. Both of these men in my life returned from these experiences far better able to handle themselves in the world, they both learned important life skills for caring for themselves, and improved their ability to function in employment.

I don't think prisons currently look like this, I know they don't, and I'm pro-reform because of this. I also think that if a fair system were in place it's likely my grandfather should not have been involuntarily commited. (My father had proved a danger to me so he would be comitted in systems advocated by people more on the reform end of the spectrum.) However, it's hard for me to reconcile the idea that all involuntary confinement is inherently bad and that it's only going to make the individuals life worse no matter what. Because the two people in my life who were involuntarily commited (though both very lucky in what services were offered to them in these institutions) both improved their lives significantly because of it.

[tanadrin]

@grimogretricks

For people saying that airport security is wholly theatre and that it doesn't do any good- certainly it seems they've gone overboard on certain things, but what is your explanation as to why hijackings and terrorist attacks involving planes are MUCH less common than they used to be?

Sorry that this is mostly off the dome, and has less references than I would like. We argued this stuff to death in the aughts, though ultimately the political incentives in favor of security theater were just too great. Everyone is terrified of the potential backlash of not being seen to do enough in advance of the next big terrorist attack, I guess. And to be clear, we are talking mostly about post-9/11 airport security measures as being security theater. Some degree of airport security has been necessary since people started getting on airplanes with guns and informing the pilot that, hey, guess what, we're going to Cuba instead of Miami today.

But the big reduction in airplane hijackings came with the institution of metal detectors to keep guns off airplanes after a couple high-profile hijackings in the 1970s. But remember that these incidents were of a very different character than what we now think of as the risk to airplanes: they were certainly a problem, but the modus operandi of hijackers in this era was to force the plane to fly to a non-extradition country and land safely. 9/11-style hijackings, that used the plane as a bomb and killed everyone aboard, were on nobody's radar--when the goal was blowing up the plane and killing passengers, bombers generally used bombs planted in checked baggage, which requires different security measures from passenger screening.

Two security changes occurred after 9/11 that made future such hijackings basically impossible: one, probably most importantly, was that passengers understood they no longer could count on hijackers having an interest in surviving the hijacking. This change in passenger behavior was immediate: later that same year when a guy tried to bomb an airplane (using a really ineffective device hidden in his shoe) passengers immediately acted to restrain him. The second important change was reinforcing cockpit doors and keeping them locked: this makes hijacking airplanes with knives (the only major modality left to most would-be hijackers) functionally impossible.

All the other intense passenger screening and security measures implemented after 9/11 has been repeatedly shown by security researchers to be pretty ineffective, not even very reliable at stuff like keeping knives off airplanes. For years after 9/11 there were endless news stories about law enforcement running drills at airports and weapons making their way through security. A lot of later security measures, like liquid limits in carry-on baggage, came from terrorist plots that didn't even make it off the drawing board (and are unlikely to have ever worked anyway), and seem mostly to be overzealous ass-covering by transportation security officials.

And, finally, we should note that the real security threats to airplanes in the post-9/11 era seem to have come come from two sources that are basically impossible to protect against using traditional security methods, and for which passenger-based security screening is useless: anti-aircraft missiles and suicidal pilots (plus an honorable mention to aircraft companies trying to skirt certain regulatory requirements).

Despite what decades of American media would have you believe, elaborate plots targeting transportation infrastructure and involving like a dozen people are actually not at the top of the list of terrorist methodologies--why time and money training members of your organization to fly planes into buildings, when you can just use social media to convince a guy to drive a car into a crowd of bystanders, or stab somebody on the street? It's much cheaper, and much, much harder to guard against. Random lone-wolf terrorism is, unlike the kind of elaborate plots portrayed on TV, and one-off real-life examples like 9/11, basically impossible for security services to guard against in advance. But in order to justify the war on terror, and large budgets for security services on anti-terrorism grounds, it was necessary to play up the threat of such plots, even if by its very nature 9/11 was impossible to repeat. For similar reasons, the post-9/11 era also played up the threat of Islamic extremism and large overseas terrorist networks, even though far-right extremists acting in small groups also have managed to kill huge numbers of people in spectacular ways.

So for all these reasons, and those noted at the top, the political incentives around transportation security means that passenger screening measures in airports are almost guaranteed to be a one-way ratchet, even if they don't work. It's a bit like the fabled anti-tiger amulet--it's easy to say the lack of tigers is proof it's working! Even if the real reason there are no tigers about is that you live in Ohio. The media environment post-War on Terror helped create a public appetite for and approval of such anti-tiger amulets, too, of course. This was not by any means a purely top-down phenomenon.

[reasonsforhope]

"Scientists have developed a way to dramatically reduce the cost of recycling certain electronic waste by using whey protein.

Their method allows for the easy recovery of gold from circuit boards at a cost of energy and materials amounting to 50 times less than the price of the gold they recover—these are the numbers that big business likes to see.

Indeed, the potential for scalability depends on this sort of cost savings, something traditional e-waste recycling methods just can’t achieve.

Professor Raffaele Mezzenga from ETH Zurich has found that whey protein, a byproduct of dairy manufacturing, can be used to make sponges that attract trace amounts of ionized gold.

Electronic waste contains a variety of valuable metals, including copper, cobalt, and gold. Despite gold’s public persona as being either money or jewelry, thousands of ounces of gold are used in electronics every year for its exceptional conductive properties.

Mezzenga’s colleague Mohammad Peydayesh first “denatured whey proteins under acidic conditions and high temperatures, so that they aggregated into protein nanofibrils in a gel,” writes the ETH Zurich press. “The scientists then dried the gel, creating a sponge out of these protein fibrils.”

The next step was extracting the gold: done by tossing 20 salvaged motherboards into an acid bath until the metals had dissolved into ionized compounds that the sponge began attracting.

Removing the sponge, a heat treatment caused the gold ions to aggregate into 22-carat gold flakes which could be easily removed.

“The fact I love the most is that we’re using a food industry byproduct to obtain gold from electronic waste,” Mezzenga says. In a very real sense, he observes, the method transforms two waste products into gold. “You can’t get much more sustainable than that!” ...

However the real dollar value comes from the bottom line—which was 50 times more than the cost of energy and source materials. Because of this, the scientists have every intention of bringing the technology to the market as quickly as possible while also desiring to see if the protein fibril sponge can be made of other food waste byproducts.

E-waste is a quickly growing burden in global landfills, and recycling it requires extremely energy-intensive machinery that many recycling facilities do not possess.

The environmental value of the minerals contained within most e-waste comes not only from preventing the hundreds of years it takes for them to break down in the soil, but also from the reduction in demand from new mining operations which can, though not always, significantly degrade the environments they are located in.

[Note: Absolutely massive understatement, mining is incredibly destructive to ecosystems. Mining is also incredibly toxic to human health and a major cause of conflict, displacement, and slavery globally.]

Other countries are trying to incentivize the recycling of e-waste, and are using gold to do so. In 2022, GNN reported that the British Royal Mint launched an electronically traded fund (ETF) with each share representing the value of gold recovered from e-waste as a way for investors to diversify into gold in a way that doesn’t support environmentally damaging mining.

The breakthrough is reminiscent of that old fairy tale of Rumpelstiltskin who can spin straw into gold. All that these modern-day, real-life alchemists are doing differently is using dairy and circuit boards rather than straw."

-via Good News Network, July 19, 2024

[wealthwellnessguru]

Enhance Your Sleep Routine with Renpho Eye Massagers

In the quest for better sleep, many turn to conventional methods like herbal teas or white noise machines. However, there's a hidden gem that's gaining traction: the Eye Massager. This innovative device not only relaxes tired eyes but also enhances your overall sleep routine.

When it comes to selecting the Best Eye Massager, look no further than Renpho. Renpho has carved a niche for itself in the wellness industry, known for its quality and innovation. Their eye massagers stand out as a top choice for those seeking relaxation and rejuvenation.

But how exactly can an Eye Massager elevate your sleep routine? Let's delve into the benefits:

Stress Reduction and Relaxation

The daily grind often leaves us with tired, strained eyes. The gentle massage action of an eye massager helps alleviate this tension, promoting relaxation and reducing stress levels. This relaxation response is crucial for preparing the body and mind for a restful night's sleep.

Improved Circulation and Eye Health

Using an eye massager stimulates blood flow to the eye area, reducing puffiness and dark circles. Improved circulation not only enhances the appearance of the eyes but also contributes to overall eye health. This can be particularly beneficial for individuals who spend long hours in front of screens.

Serotonin and Melatonin Production

The soothing massage provided by an eye massager triggers the release of neurotransmitters like serotonin and melatonin. These hormones play a crucial role in regulating sleep-wake cycles, helping you fall asleep faster and enjoy deeper, more restorative sleep.

Power Nap Like a Pro

Eye massagers aren't just for bedtime – they're also perfect for power naps. A quick massage session with your Best Eye Massager can rejuvenate tired eyes and help you recharge during the day. Pair it with a short meditation or breathing exercise for maximum relaxation.

Now that you're aware of the benefits, here are some tips for incorporating an Eye Massager into your sleep routine:

Establish a Relaxing Ritual

Make using your eye massager a part of your nightly wind-down routine. Set aside a few minutes before bed to indulge in a massage session, allowing your body and mind to unwind and prepare for sleep.

Create a Tranquil Environment

Dim the lights, play some calming music, and create a peaceful atmosphere in your bedroom. This signals to your body that it's time to relax and helps facilitate a smooth transition into sleep.

Experiment with Different Techniques

Combine your eye massager with other sleep-promoting techniques, such as aromatherapy or guided meditation. Experiment with different combinations until you find what works best for you.

Stay Consistent

Consistency is key when it comes to improving your sleep routine. Make using your eye massager a regular habit to reap the full benefits and promote long-term sleep health.

In conclusion, incorporating an Eye Massager into your sleep routine can make a world of difference in your overall well-being. With its ability to reduce stress, improve circulation, and promote relaxation, it's no wonder that eye massagers are becoming a popular choice for those seeking better sleep. Visit Renpho.eu today to explore the Best Massage Product for your sleep needs and take your sleep routine to the next level.

[reticentvampyr]

'the newsreader' season 3 and bpd rep

note: major spoilers ahead. trigger warning for mentions of self-harm, suicide, and substance abuse.

you don't see a lot of fictional characters with canonical bpd diagnoses in media. the illness is usually ascribed to one-off villains in crime dramas, or in the case of movies like girl, interrupted (1999), largely romanticized. a recent exception was rebecca bunch from the tv series crazy ex-girlfriend (2015-2019), who embarks on a profound journey from diagnosis through treatment and healing amidst the show's musical backdrop.

when i started watching the newsreader last year, i picked up on a lot of borderline traits in helen norville. i related to her mood swings, her protective measures to prevent abandonment, and her difficulty identifying, describing, or regulating her feelings. from there i sort of decided in my head that she had bpd, without the canon confirmation. this is nothing new for me--as someone with the disorder, i'm always quick to catch these traits and run with them, since i rarely see canonical representation of the illness. over the years, i've "headcanoned" fictional characters like david rose, ed teach, and bojack horseman with bpd, among others.

-

when helen starts seeing a therapist in the first half of the newsreader's final season, the therapist, marcia, recommends that helen take in her surroundings and employ breath work during times of stress. i clocked this right away as a mindfulness DBT (dialectical behavioral therapy) skill, but figured given the show's 1989 setting, they probably wouldn't "go there."

but sure enough, i watched helen go to the library, look up her therapist's treatment methods. i saw her burst into marcia's office talking about how the disease is incurable: "it's for manipulative, vindictive, narcissistic, promiscuous, hysterical people. and apparently there's no fսcking treatment for it" (3x03). but DBT is an experimental new treatment, marcia says, and it's been met with much success thus far. finally, she says aloud what i'd been thinking: helen meets the criteria for bpd.

helen storms out of the room, tries to escape her reality with alcohol and valium. she's sent out of the newsroom and isolates herself at home. i watched all this unfold onscreen in disbelief, an uneasy lump settling somewhere deep in my stomach because as surprised as i was to see the words--borderline personality disorder--utttered onscreen, i understood, painfully, what helen was going through.

i was diagnosed with borderline in 2018. by that time, i had been exhibiting self-harm behaviors on-and-off since about 2014. i went through periods of extreme, bone-crushing sadness followed by numbness. i oscillated between flippant communications and desperate pleas for validation with those close to me. several textbook characteristics for borderline.

my therapist told me, "don't look it up online," but of course i did, ducking into the office restroom after our session for an immediate google search. i was inundated with exactly the material helen must've seen, if in a different format: bpd is the hardest mental health disorder to treat; many therapists won't even treat folks with bpd; people with bpd are statistically more likely to attempt suicide. there were online listings for a book frustratingly, reductively called i hate you, don't leave me, the only major popularized work on the illness.

these are all things i read on a first-page search many years after the setting of the newsreader. fortunately, a quick search in 2025 looks different, featuring many landing pages on psychiatry websites focused on debunking myths about the illness.

but in 2018, at the age of twenty-five, i thought: this is it for me. it's all fallen into place. i'm broken, i'm broken, i can't be fixed.

-

when helen's former-lover-always-best-friend dale jennings comes to check on helen later on in the episode, what plays out is one of the most beautiful, raw, and validating scenes for someone with the illness to witness.

we watch helen go through the intense back-and-forth of processing her feelings in real time:

i've been seeing this woman, this, um, this therapist, dale, and she's been really good. she's been really good. she's given me, like, all of these kind of, um, ways to...to handle, um, stuff. and then today she said, um, that i... that... that i just am fսckеd. [...] and it's not like, um...like a, um...it's not like i'm sick. it's just my personality. [sobs]

... blaming dale ...

she said it's a personality disorder, and it's...and it's true, you know? it's just true. and...and, i mean, you must have seen it. [...] why wouldn't you say? you're the only person who's ever told me the truth, why wouldn't you tell me? why wouldn't you tell me?

... and then blaming herself.

i could have done something about it. i could have fixed it. i could have done something about it. and now there's no one! [...] i even fucked up with you, my fucking family, and now my fucking job.

i can't overstate the sheer vulnerability displayed by anna torv in this scene. it's a highly realistic portrayal of an initial reaction to getting this diagnosis. there's the instinct to prescribe yourself with inherent wrongness, to cast a cloud of villainy over your whole life to this point.

it's dale's response that seals the deal for me in terms of marking this an effective, empathetic portrayal of bpd onscreen.

"it's called borderline personality disorder, apparently," helen says, "did you see that?" in other words: did you see that in me? and if so, why are you still here?

dale just looks at her and says, "all i see is you."

to hear a character say that to a person with a confirmed bpd diagnosis is frankly revolutionary for television, even in media's generally progressive view of mental illness today. dale sees helen for all she is and still loves her. with the stigma that still exists around bpd, i don’t think it’s an exaggeration to say that many folks with bpd would give anything to hear those words.

"all i see is you," dale says, "and i don't think it makes a difference. do you feel different?"

and what a question. this brings things into perspective for helen, and perhaps even for the viewer. this diagnosis doesn't change anything about what came before, or who helen is as a person--namely an inspiring, hardworking journalist and a loyal partner and friend. now she just has a name for the strong emotions that color her world. and with that name comes the power to learn, to grasp, to move forward and heal.

in the months following my diagnosis, as i started working on DBT individually and in a group setting, i slowly began to accept this part of myself. i called it by name, and i told it to the world. it reframes a lot of my behavior, past and present. it's helped me put terms to my emotions and how to handle them. and yet it's not all of me.

so, after the diagnosis, do you feel different? helen's answer is mine, too:

"no," she replies after a bout of surprised laughter, "i fucking don't."

-

after her diagnosis, it's clear helen doesn't take to therapy or DBT right away. she's suspicious, stubborn, and in denial about her path forward.

in 3x04, helen challenges marcia in any way she can, saying her fast-paced career doesn't allow for skill work, and summing up the study of DBT skills as "infantile checklists." marcia stands her professional ground, though: "if there were a pill that treated borderline, you would have it, but there isn't. this therapy requires your full engagement. you know what the alternative is." by the end of the scene, helen reluctantly begins trying again to work with her therapist, ranking different DBT skills and their effectiveness in her day to day.

again, i'm struck by the realism in this portrayal. the show references actual DBT skills with care and detail, despite the newness of the method in 1989. there are four major modules--mindfulness, emotion regulation, distress tolerance, and interpersonal effectiveness--and within them myriad terms and exercises pioneered by psychologist marsha m. linehan. several are referenced throughout the season.

helen's resistance is palpable--DBT makes up a whole book, and i can't say i was thrilled embarking on the journey myself. at first, a lot of it did seem trite--splashing my face with cold water, or practicing box breathing in a room full of people.

but what i had to realize for myself--and what helen does, too--is that these skills are an ongoing practice.

later in the episode, helen calls her therapist in distress after an encounter that brings her face-to-face with the uncomfortable reality of racism in australia and her innate privilege. "this therapy is not about denying your feelings," marcia reminds her, "it's about bringing you to a frame of mind where you can better navigate the situation. and right now, you need a distress tolerance skill, so pick one."

sure enough, we see helen doing laps up and down the stairs--employing the TIPP skill to bring her back to baseline. this is one of the many things i love about the newsreader's handling of bpd: it shows the borderline character doing the work. you don't "graduate" from DBT. i've gone through two group rounds myself, and have worked since my diagnosis with various therapists on individual practice. and still, over 6 years later, oftentimes the skills i need the most aren't readily at hand in high-stress moments. i'll never be done doing this, and that's kind of the point.

-

helen's story arc comes to a head in 3x05, when the press reveals details of her stay at a mental institution as a young woman. helen not-normal, the headline says. helen spirals--this could be the end of her career. she panics, begging for it to be retracted. this loops back to the denial of her condition, her emotions, her very self that plagued her for two seasons (and presumably far before). but this time, her therapy work grounds her:

marcia: helen, what can you control? what can you always control? helen: my reactions. marcia: you control what you do next. and what you do next tells everyone who you are.

so helen uses her journalistic platform to talk about mental health. she goes live on her show public eye with a social worker and former psychiatric nurse, who was institutionalized herself and thus became passionate about revamping the mental health industry: "if community were more accepting of people with mental illness, that would make the biggest difference." facing the camera, helen responds:

having experienced anxiety and depression myself, i do believe that...that it is the shame and the isolation that makes it so unbearable. and perhaps if we could change the way that we view and discuss mental health issues, it might seem less impossible to overcome.

this is just the start of helen's self-acceptance journey--and audiences receive it overwhelmingly positively. public eye is inundated with calls after the show. helen even reconciles with her sister, after years of little contact.

helen's choice to be authentically herself, live on air--marrying her public persona with the very real person behind it--is so important for folks with bpd to see onscreen.

-

the sixth episode and series finale, "the fall," positions helen further getting a handle on emotion regulation. in an explosive confrontation between her and her co-executive producer, bill, helen takes a deep breath in response to his slew of insults. she responds to him calmly, setting a boundary:

i don't want to do this with you anymore. i really tried to protect your feelings. i mean, i blamed myself. i blamed your marriage. i blamed our working relationship. but i'm not going to be punished because I didn't want to fսck you.

later, in front of a group of largely male network executives, she sets her terms for the show going forward, delivering an ultimatum. the network pushes back on her terms, saying, "you do not get to control this." but, oh, she does. in establishing understanding and control of her emotions and her reactions, helen is able to fully harness her power as the queen of australian news.

in the end, helen ends up running public eye alongside her trusted co-producer, noelene, with dale serving as the show's international reporter. she's become herself, owned herself and her illness, and is still a wildly successful newsreader and journalist--not despite her bpd and the work she's doing to manage it, but partly because of all that too. because she knows herself, and unabashedly, she lets the world know this part of her, too--if not in name, then in her continuing to move forward with the candor around her experience with depression and anxiety.

i chatted with my therapist about helen's season 3 storyline. i'm still processing what i watched, and i wanted to reflect aloud about why that was. i had a really visceral reaction to helen's story that i'm still moving through, and one i wasn't expecting. and i think it's because this sensitive, realistic, honest portrayal of bpd and treatment and recovery resonated with my journey. seven years out from my diagnosis, sometimes the behaviors and cries for help i exhibited in my early to mid-twenties feel far away. is that really the "person" i was? was the diagnosis accurate? i realized it had to have been, for this season to have pulled at me so strongly.

and i remembered this is just one facet of who i am, and i've worked hard to learn how to manage it. my symptoms may look different now, less severe--but it doesn't change what happened to me, what i've been through, what i did at my borderline "height"--and the work i've done and continue to do. there's no "cure"--but there is recovery (not linear--no healing ever is). it's so clear in the show's final moments that helen is on her way there, too.

having the opportunity to see what i've experienced mirrored back at me through a beloved fictional character, as well as to reflect on how far i've come, is something i've not really experienced until now. i'm impressed with how the writers handled this aspect of the season, and i want to continue moving through how it resonated for me, and i'm sure for so many others.

helen, thank you.

i am so proud of you. (and i'm proud of me too.)

[fairuzfan]

I’m a genocide historian and I do think comparisons between the Holocaust and the genocide in Palestine are unproductive because A) the Holocaust is pretty distinct from Palestinian genocide not in its exceptionalism but in its method - the “shipping” of victims from 20+ countries by international rail to a handful of centralized killing sites; 15000 people being gassed in Auschwitz daily (a single gas chamber had standing capacity for 2,000 people) and their stolen hair sold in bales for use as maritime rope and cushion stuffing - and forcing Holocaust parallels obfuscates the terrible and very unique methods of genocide being used by Israel against Palestinians. B) People often invoke the Holocaust as an emotional appeal regarding the moral culpability of all Jews (“how could you do what was done to your ancestors!”) when the same responsibility to end the genocide in Palestine exists regardless of one’s background or religion.

What Israel is doing in Palestine is 100% a genocide. Whether or not it is similar to the Holocaust (or any previous atrocity) does not make this any more or less true.

The thing that doesn't make sense to me with this point is that no one is saying that the Holocaust and Palestinian genocide are a 1:1 comparison. Like most people acknowledge the terrible genocide that occurred in the Holocaust against all its victims. But when they're talking about comparing genocides, there are tell tale signs that repeat throughout history that are precursers to larger events. Like when people compare the Warsaw ghetto to Gaza. I'd say those are quite similar in practice and intention. When we "compare" genocides (not a 1:1 but more of a drawing parellels by disecting the inteion and reasoning behind certain events that werent necessarily actively violent but passively violent) its to show "hey this is going to get really bad really soon because something like this happened before." Masha Gessen has an article about this that I reblogged.

People should care about fighting injustice everywhere I agree. But that doesn't change the fact that parallel drawing is an act separate from emotional invocation. When genocide scholars and survivors talk about "Hey this was like xyz that happened to me/in history" it's to show that there is precedent for this thinking and a terrible methodology happening when genocides occur. They dont just get really bad out of nowhere, you need to examine the precursors to prevent the large event from happening. How that large event happens differs from place to place, I agree. But to say that because things happen differently against different people means you can't examine the underlying reasons behind those actions is kind of reductive. By this definition you can never compare any genocide ever and all the terrible things that happen just happen naturally without any political or social influence.

Arnesa talks about how the Bosnian genocide precursors mirror the Palestinian genocide. She also talks about how Lula specifically should have mentioned other genocides (like Rwanda, Bosnia, etc) in his statement because there are parallels there too. I'd argue that's the real intention behind genocide studies, in that you notice trends and patterns to analyze how certain events might turn out.

I do want to mention because this is where im coming from a little bit, it is a pretty big zionist talking point (by especially American dems) saying you can't compare the holocaust to what's happening to Palestinians because it's antisemitic, which is not a real talking point and actually kind of rude in that it assumes that Palestinians can't call out parallels between their treatment and the treatment of those in the Holocaust because they're fundamentally doing it from a point of antisemitism and not a plea for recognition that the events are mirroring each other.

[trans-axolotl]

Image description: [ a photo of the Psych Survivor zine in a bush of ivy. The cover is a collage made out of medical records, vintage flower drawings, and magazine letters spelling “psych survivor zine".]

Hello everyone! I am so thrilled to announce the launch of the psych survivor zine, now available to download on www.psychsurvivorarchive.com.

A little bit about this project:

The Psych Survivor Archive is an abolitionist organization deeply invested in mad liberation and cross-movement organizing.

We host two projects: the Psych Survivor Zine and the Digital Story Archive. The Psych Survivor Zine celebrates Mad art in volumes released twice a year, with thematic prompts for each edition. The Digital Story Archive is a more informal forum for psych survivors to write about our lives and share as much as we want, when we want, how we want. 

Through this archive, I hope to create a platform where psych survivors are believed and the psych system is held accountable for the ways it has harmed us. Our pain, resistance, knowledge, and grief are worth listening to, and I offer up this archive as a communal method of bearing witness. 

This space is for the imperfect crazy person, the noncompliant patient, those of us who trash our rooms in the psych ward and yell to ourselves on the street. This space is for our comrades still incarcerated in all kinds of institutions and prisons. This space is for anyone who has been harmed by the psychiatric system and wants to rage about it–and this space is for anyone who doesn’t have the words to talk about it. 

This space is for you.

You can download a pdf and an image described pdf for free on the website, or order a physical copy! This zine is incredible-featuring artwork by 13 different Mad artists, the 55 page zine includes collages, poems, harm reduction toolkits, and more!!

Artists include @kihnindewa, @bioethicists, @gothhabiba and @librarycards, among many more!

This project has been really vulnerable and cathartic with me, and I am so excited to share it with you. Feel free to explore the website, submit your story, and check out our resource guide.

[charlesoberonn]

just saw your cult post and i wanna add something a bit controversial? (probably not for this website tho but yk)

im from a religious country in the middle east, and until i was like 16 i hadnt heard the word "cult" and i had no idea what it was.

when i looked into it and read about it tho, i realized that islam (the religion of my country) IS a cult. and then i went around online asking my other ex-religious friends about what they think and some also told me that they think their religion was a cult too. and no im not talking about like obviously culty religions (mormons, evangelists, etc), im talking about whats considered the norm for a religion to be practiced. whether it be islam, christianity, or any other one.

i started wondering why not ALL religions count as cults when they literally fit the bill to a tea, and tbh the best explanation i found was that, they ARE cults but they are so old, have so many members, and are so entangled with our cultures that people just accept them.

i told this to someone who was an atheist herself and even she got defensive and said that its not okay to call peoples religions cults "if its not hurting anyone" so i dont say it to anyone because i dont want to be an asshole and i accept everyone no matter what religion yk?

but that all being said, i still wholeheartedly believe that ALL religions are cults (im talking about organized religions tho btw. like native people having their religions is a completely different thing that i cant comment on because i dont have enough information about those)

i think that if you are in any religion then you are in a cult and you should leave, i know its controversial, but it is what i think yk?

I see where you're coming from but I think this is dangerously reductive.

The problem is that you're thinking in terms of a 'cult-not cult' binary that doesn't work to describe the nuance of real life groups.

What makes a cult are the methods of control they use on their members. A cult, or high-control group, will use extreme and predatory methods to try to control their members as much as possible.

The difference between a religious cult (for there are non-religious cults) and religion is the level of control and the harmfulness of the methods the group utilizes.

I don't know about what religion is like in your country, but not all religious groups are high-control groups. Many of them don't try to control or exploit their members.

By equating all religions to cults you're not only making accusations of harm against groups that don't deserve it, you're also muddying the distinctions for people, allowing actually harmful groups to pass themselves off as harmless.

[doshmanziari]

Something that I've been anticipating lately is a renewed appreciation for FromSoftware's post-King's Field "medievalist" releases which de-emphasize speed and spectacle; that is, Demon's Souls, Dark Souls, and Dark Souls 2.

I'm a little surprised that there hasn't been much commentary on the gradually diverging artistic shift we can track from Demon's Souls to Elden Ring. Mostly, the discursive possibilities have been limited to remarking upon whether or not Elden Ring is "too hard" relative to some earlier title. This focus on design has tended to occlude observations on the aesthetic consequences of a divergence.

In a variety of ways, Elden Ring is not only (in an abstract, although probably very often also in an actual, sense) a much harder game than Demon's Souls; it also represents something of the upper limit of a type of grandiosity of combative expression, whether that has to do with a boss' design or the capabilities of our avatar. Were we to be dismissive, and maybe a little culturally reductive, we could use the term "anime" for critical shorthand when describing how one of Shadow of the Erdtree's bosses has a magical sword attack that encompasses the entire space of a fairly large arena.

On the one hand, Elden Ring represents a sensible evolutionary point of a mechanical foundation established by Demon's Souls. On the other hand, Rellana's courtyard-sweeping attack, and other things, like very nearly anything to do with the second phase of the DLC's final boss, are the sort of stuff I joked about as an inevitability after finishing Dark Souls 3's DLC. Pretty much any major opponent from Dark Souls and its sequel seems like a quaint, jerky windup toy when compared to Elden Ring's bosses.

I wonder, though, if that relative restrictiveness won't come to be newly valued for the differentiation it represents internally to these games -- perhaps most visibly with Dark Souls 2, which not too soon after its release, and ever since, has tended to be spoken of as an outcast in need of either a dunking or a defense, or has confused people obsessed with ranking their media diet. It's highly unusual that Dark Souls 2's development team would decide to make a game which is more slow and methodical than its two forebears. This is a very uncommon progression -- so uncommon that a lot of people would, I am sure, consider it to be a regression. But, perhaps, we now have an opportunity to see this slowness with different eyes.

In a previous post, I wrote, of Shadow of the Erdtree:

There’s a lot of good level design to be found here among the dungeons, castles, and forts, yet the abundance and enormity of it all seems to have deprived the game of significant contrasts, and those special spatial moments, which I found much easier to locate and reflect upon with, say, Dark Souls or Bloodborne. Sure, the sky-piercing spiral of Enir-Ilim is a sight to behold; but soon enough the sequences of grand staircase upon grand staircase, great bridge upon great bridge, creates a perpetual climatic grandiosity that diminishes the very effect of a climax.

This "climax fatigue" is similarly applicable to Elden Ring's weapons, a good number of which have some dramatic, slick, or acrobatically superhuman secondary function. Whereas Dark Souls has almost no obviously "cool" weapons, most being within a range of utilitarian swords, maces, clubs, and spears, Elden Ring has so many superlative offensive items and skills that, after a while, these flourishes become lost among a fantastical morass of melodramatic aesthetics. And whereas Demon's Souls is undeniably much simpler when compared to Elden Ring, there is something satisfying about the older, "inelegant" design where you can feel the proximity to the dungeon crawler sensibility: blunt, rough, and chunky.

The recently unveiled Nightreign would appear to represent one kind of developmental compartmentalization at FromSoftware between more frequently released offshoots and principle works with longer developmental cycles. I'm curious if it might not also represent a forthcoming differentiation between the faster, more spectacular type of gameplay and a slower, less flashy type of gameplay which may be calling back to Miyazaki after years of an intensifying emphasis on the big and bold "anime" side of things.

[reasonsforhope]

"A first-of-its-kind report has discovered that altering the ingredients list or manufacturing methods of widely used medication can really cut back on carbon emissions.

They found a reduction of 26 million tons, enough to cancel out the whole carbon footprint of the city of Geneva for a decade. Best of all, it’s already happening, and in fact, is almost done—those emissions were already saved.

The lifesaving HIV treatment dolutegravir (DTG) is used by 24 million people worldwide.

Today, over 110 low and middle-income countries have adopted DTG as the preferred treatment option. Rapid voluntary licensing of the medicine, including its pediatric version, to over a dozen generic manufacturers, significantly drove down prices, and it’s estimated that 1.1 million lives will be saved from HIV/AIDS-related deaths by 2027.

Its predecessor, efavirenz, contained 1200 milligrams of active ingredient across the three active compounds present, while DTG contains 650 milligrams of just one compound. This small difference—literally measurable in single digits of paper clips by weight—was enough to change the carbon emissions footprint of the medication by a factor of 2.6.

The incredible discovery was made in a recent report by Unitaid, a global public-private partnership that invests in new health products and solutions for low and middle-income countries, called Milligrams to Megatons, and is the first published research to compare carbon footprints between commonly used medications.

“This magnitude of carbon footprint reduction surpasses many hard-won achievements of climate mitigation in health and other sectors,” the authors of the report write.

At the rate at which DTG is produced, since it entered into production and treatment regime in 2017, 2.6 million fewer tons of CO2 have entered the atmosphere every year than if efavirenz was still the standard treatment option.

Health Policy Watch reports that the global medical sector’s carbon emissions stand at roughly 5% of the global carbon emissions and are larger than the emissions of many big countries, and 2.5 times as much as aviation.

“This report demonstrates that we can achieve significant health improvements while also making strides in reducing carbon emissions. By adopting innovative practices and prioritizing sustainability, we can ensure that medicines like DTG are not only effective but also environmentally responsible,” Vincent Bretin, Director of Unitaid’s Results and Climate Team told Health Policy Watch."

-via Good News Network, July 17, 2024

[fandom-geek]

albrecht entrati has the most arse-backwards methods of harm reduction i swear to god

...anyway. as ppl may have guessed, i wrote this post before i did the new year's eve do-over. i'm still deeply suspicious of how he knows about the operator and the drifter both existing in the same timeline or why albrecht is interested in tau, but hey, he can't eat all the blame for that - yonta admits to disabling the reliquary drive's safeties before the jump [1]. the zariman wasn't meant to reach tau in one massive jump.

but first! the kalymos sequence. "protect the vessels. repair. rebuild." the thing that leads albrecht to declaring it complete? the drifter befriending and growing close to the hex, and using that trust to save their lives.

i have questions about whether albrecht was in duviri at the same time as the drifter and knowingly left them behind, or if duviri's void nature means it always existed once the drifter created it and albrecht arrived before them. but either way, the "repair" and "rebuild" of the kalymos sequence seems to mean... fixing the drifter's isolation and rebuilding their support network? absolutely insane, i love it.

like he theoretically could've gone about it a ton of different ways, but instead forced the drifter's hand by telling them to let a city blow up and then shooting them and amir for good measure.

this man is literally the most normal orokin we know of.

and what does this mean for my thoughts on his involvement with the zariman? well, he realises in his trip to duviri that euleria created the tales to teach children how to protect themselves from the void, and the tales went on to be a foundational part of the entrati's involvement in the zariman.

you've also got the lanthorns (aka lanterns), which map voidspace onto realspace. this is presumably to make navigating the void safer. there's the exolizers, which are decorated with entrati obols, which reduce void contamination and prevent void cascades. and then there is, as melica frequently reminds us, albrecht's own archives which were used to form the curriculum. you've got the safeties on the reliquary drive - a drive which is still actually free of void corruption, even as it creeps as close as it can get.

albrecht was an outsider in orokin society. he'd been humiliated for who knows how long during his failed void experiments. drusus thought him a madman "fit for the asylum". parvos granum boasted of stealing from him without consequence in a society obsessed with ensuring the orokin were treated appropriately. once he learned of the zariman, would albrecht have had the power to stop it, even knowing what danger they faced?

then there's his line about "the unholy zariman parade". that could be a man who regrets his involvement and what his "all for the greater good" methodology did to those onboard (especially when you consider the zariman wasn't meant to do the trip in a single jump). or it could be a man who knew that zariman was fucked and worked with his daughter to do everything they could to save those onboard from the void?

and he still failed them, to the point that a child had to make a deal with the thing that he unleashed to escape and one version of them got trapped in the "execution circus" for centuries. that another child consigned themselves to oblivion to protect the origin system against that monster. that countless more were forced to become comatose child soldiers, who eventually turned on their abusers and murdered them all. no wonder he talks about repentance and absolution, huh?

[1] i footnoted this entirely because yonta is insane and i love her. [Angel rank] Yonta: "I'd figured it out! How the Zariman could jump all the way to Tau in one big bold leap, disabling the safeties in sequence. If I had it to do again, we could make it."

[gatheringbones]

[“As the first step in establishing a base and fanning the fires of revolution, the Party began agitation of farmers to seek their own interests — the right of owning land or reduction of land rent. This struggle, however, remained sporadic and weak and did not constitute a mass movement.

To better meet the enemy, which remained strong in the village, the Party began the elimination of influence of the village notables and local security agents. However, it failed to follow this with the development of a mass base. The cadres thought that efforts to end the authority of the village leaders alone would be enough. The enemy succeeded in maintaining the village administration. In the face of such a situation the Party called for a meeting:

We explained to the villagers the evil caused by village notables and security agents. We awoke the people to the fact that if the American-Diem clique succeeded in permanently maintaining the organization of village notables and security, soon Mister H, the cruel landlord, and others would return to the village to seize land and collect back rent. For that reason, we said, the farmers must eliminate the influence of the village notables and sweep away the security agents. At the same time we sought to win the sympathy of the families of the village notables (while we were urging the masses to rise up and eliminate the influence of the notables). It was a good method. After a while certain notables refused to work for the enemy and took the side of the people. Thus, when our enemies tried to begin projects in the village no one would work for them. The US-Diem clique tried to win back the people by distributing drugs in the village. The offer was flatly rejected. Some of the people even debated openly and strongly with the enemy agents. Finally the Diem clique had to abandon the village, no village council could be maintained there.

— Extract from “Experiences in Turning XB Village in Kien Phong Province into a Combatant Village”; a People’s Revolutionary Party document.

To any American reading such a document it would seem that the Front cadre — if he were telling the truth — had left something out. How, after all, could mere propaganda have any effect on these (rightly) cynical and suspicious peasants? As much strangers to the village as the government agents, the cadres had come along and asked the villagers to join them in the desperate task of evicting those people who had always dominated the village, thereby exposing themselves to retaliation by the GVN. Why should the villagers have trusted them any more than they trusted the government officials?

When asked such questions, the villagers throughout South Vietnam tended to give one answer with great consistency: “The Liberation cadres (or, for the benefit of the Americans, “the Viet Cong”) were nice to us… they behaved politely and nicely to the people… they talk to us in a friendly manner… they do not thunder at the people like the Government soldiers. The thing that the people don’t like about the Government officials is their behavior… the Viet Cong treat us well.”

To the “hardheaded” American analysts of insurgency tactics, the fact that the NLF cadres were “nicer” than the government officials and soldiers hardly seemed an adequate explanation for the success of the NLF. Surely the peasants did not join the guerrillas because the guerrillas were polite.

While most analysts agreed that the ARVN could help the war effort by refraining from rape, theft, and pillage, they could not quite see how good manners might translate into the hardware of “population control” and military recruitment figures.

Q. Have you any problems or reasons to be dissatisfied with your life… with the GVN cadres?

A. There was nothing for me to be dissatisfied with. Because of VC propaganda I joined the Front.

Q. What did you think were the differences between the Front and the GVN and their policies?

A. This was beyond my understanding.

From such remarks as these the analysts could only conclude that the recruit was concealing something. While it is impossible to ascertain the truth about any young man, it is highly probable that many were telling the whole truth, that the explanation for their desire to join the Front lay squarely within such testimony.

Even in the 1960’s many South Vietnamese went through half a lifetime without having any personal contact with a government official. The fact that the NLF cadres had sought them out and spent time talking to them made an impression on them such as Americans must find it difficult to imagine. To such young Vietnamese the NLF cadres were powerful people. They had weapons at their disposal, they brought the exciting air of the outside world with them — and yet they talked to the people of the village as if they cared for them and needed their support. Those young men who had met the GVN officials usually had not had at all the same experience with them. On the contrary, the GVN officials were often “haughty” and “arrogant”: they made no effort to establish personal relationships or to show their concern for the people. As one former NLF propaganda cadre, who had covered seven provinces of the Delta, analyzed the GVN propaganda in 1965,

The substance is good but the propaganda cadres don’t have an appropriate attitude in dealing with people. They aren’t dressed the way the people are; the GVN armed propaganda cadres come to the village and swear and don’t know how to gain people’s sympathy. Their way of living and their behavior are different from those of the people. They work not as cadres but as officials.

The Americans, who were by then organizing the propaganda campaigns of the GVN, believed in the “substance” of the propaganda. The villagers, by contrast, believed in what they saw with their own eyes: the GVN officials did not care for them. The GVN wanted not to win them over, but merely to rule them. “]

frances fitzgerald, from fire in the lake: the vietnamese and the americans in vietnam, 1972

[neobastard]

neopets posted a very lengthy update to the portal site, the new format replacing the monthly AMAs.

the full post can be found here: https://portal.neopets.com/news/may22-neopets-updates

but i'll summarize the community questions and other updates beneath the cut:

community QnA:

Q: is neopets planning a "rugpull"?

A: no, the team working on the site has doubled over the past two years and everyone is working hard to revive not just the brand but the site itself. these teams' commitment to both neopets,com and spinoff projects and merchandise for brand relevance is described as "unwavering"

Q: why are they making money with nc releases but not improving the site?

A: there are different teams working on engineering, improvements, and nc releases simultaneously. the engineering and improvement team is much larger than the team working on nc, it's just less visible to players than new items because it's "wizard behind the curtain" changes (they described it as fixing issues on an older tech stack). every dollar they make goes back into neopets in some form, including events, collaborations, and further development. the company is still at a loss but it's not as dire as it used to be two years ago (which is a great improvement, NC discourse aside).

as for major updates:

revamped NC mall - the nc mall will get a new converted layout around late Q2 to Q3 this year, and a tutorial along with the changes.

easier to find on-site wishlist

one click purchasing (alongside the cart)

fixed pet preview!!

reorganized shop directory

new shopkeeper NPCs

here's the new mockup:

website loading speed improvements - there's been a 35% improvement in loading speed since january as a result of specific optimizations, such as backend enhancements, optimizing database queries, cleaning up records, and upgrading servers (a bunch of tech talk essentially)

anti botting progress - neopets has seen a 15% reduction in bot traffic by blocking it at the network level (which likely improved the performance of the site in and of itself). they intend to further tighten defenses, through methods that remain unstated but will likely hit these paid bots and the people who benefit from them hard.

wearable NP and NC item bug fixes - 37 items have been fixed since april, with 21 items on the chopping block for later this month.

and what's on the horizon:

altador cup: they grey year

enhancements to jhudora and illusen's quests, including new battledome item returns (and a $7 club perk that grants extra time)

more progress on converting NP and NC items

expansion of the avatar high score table

adding invisible pets to the customization spotlight

updates to the trading post, including a page conversion

and of course, the void within: episode 2

i'm glad that this new format allows for more transparency, a lot of people thought the video/stream format was too "corporate" and so these big updates to the portal allows them to cover a lot more. i'm excited for what's to come, and i'm honestly glad they ripped the bandaid off and just outright said "yeah we're working on the site behind the scenes y'all just don't see that part cause it's nerd shit".

a lot has improved over the last two years in this site, and i'm appreciative of the team's hard work regardless of my numerous complaints about things like neocash items and the $7 club. they clearly care about feedback and making neopets for the players before all else including any kind of profit.

[actual-changeling]

Aziraphale Does NOT Have Depression

or: Please Have a Look at the ICD

or: This Word Does Not Mean What You Think It Does

I cannot believe I even have to make this post, but here we are. Hi. Hello guys. Maybe I should start a series called "Alex fact-checks meta posts" because I have seen things that should have never been written.

A small excursion before we start: The way things usually work in academic circles is that the person making the claim needs to provide proof for said claim, which is then peer-reviewed by unrelated academic parties. That involves not only making sure that the results they are basing their claim on are replicable—meaning that if someone else were to do the same work, they would receive the same result—but also that their methods were ethical and functional.

If it turns out that their methods or any other part of the process are not replicable, functional, or otherwise waterproof, then the paper is marked as not being correct and that it should be disregarded.

While this is far from academic circles, these rules still apply to any kind of conversation or discussion, especially that last part:

If you make a claim, back it up, or it should be disregarded.

With that, welcome to the peer-review of "Aziraphale has depression" claims. Obligatory note that this is not about fanfiction or headcanons but people claiming that Aziraphale canonically has depression.

You may sit in front of your screen and think Alex, why do you think you can write this post? To which I happily respond that not only am I professionally diagnosed with both Dysthymia and Recurrent Depressive Disorder, I have also a) done my research offline with psychiatrists and psychologists and b) know how to read academic literature because my degree very much requires me to be able to do so.

If you want to go and fact-check what I am about to present—which you are explicitly invited to do in case you want to publicly disagree with me—you can find the entirety of the ICD 11 right here.

No paywall, completely free access.

For those who have never heard of it, ICD stands for "International Classification of Diseases", which is by now on its 11th version and written and maintained by the WHO/World Health Organization. It contains all kinds of relevant information, like diagnostic criteria, about all diseases. As you can see, this includes mental disorders and illnesses:

Let's get into it!

First things first, there is no such thing as "depression", that term is a colloquial reduction of a number of different disorders categorized under Mood Disorders -> Depressive Disorders. Said category also contains any and all diagnoses related to Bipolar Disorders.

"Depression" is nondescript, loose, and can mean a long list of things, and social media has diluted and romanticized its meaning. For the purpose of this post, we will have a look at the criteria for three diagnoses:

Dysthymic disorder (shortened here to dysthymia)

Single episode depressive disorder, mild ( // to single episode)

Recurrent depressive disorder, current episode mild ( // recurrent)

I assume people mean a crude mix of these when they say "depression". Both recurrent and single episode can be diagnosed with dysthymia, but they cannot be diagnosed with each other. Recurrent automatically excludes single episode as a diagnosis, which I think is obvious if you think about it.

Before we look at the symptoms themselves, here is something very important to keep in mind about diagnoses: There are two requirements that pretty much every listed disorder and illness in the ICD has.

The first is that the symptoms are not related to something else—whether that's another mental disorder, a physical illness, or simply a cultural influence. It needs to be clear that they are due to something outside of what is already known and not circumstantial.

The second one is that the present symptoms are causing significant distress and impair a person's functioning in at least two different areas of life.

Or, to put it bluntly, a disorder needs to be disordering or it isn't one.

Additionally, the severity of the displayed symptoms needs to be taken into account. If several of them are not causing any negative impact on someone's life, they are not symptoms and cannot be counted.

Now, I will very much reduce the information the ICD provides us with or we will be here forever, but it is all correct and not partial in its meaning. To keep everything neat and tidy, I created a nice, colour-coded table:

If you disagree with what I marked for Aziraphale, great, please provide me with textual evidence of where exactly he exhibits each criteria, that it is not related to periodical stress or something else, and cannot be attributed to exceptional circumstances (like the end of the world).

The ONLY symptom we ever see Aziraphale consistently show throughout all six thousand thousand years is the one marked in yellow: low self-worth or excessive or inappropriate guilt.

However, if you paid attention to what I explained above, you will notice why this is in no way indicative of a depressive disorder.

Not only is it one symptom out of several required ones, it can also be explained by something else, which is the emotional neglect and abuse heaven subjected and subjects every (former) angel to. The same can be said for any anxious symptoms he exhibits sometimes, emphasis on sometimes.

In conclusion, Aziraphale does not have depression, and I think making a case that he does will be almost entirely built on assumptions and subjective interpretations, not anything that is in any shape or form supported by text or subtext.

Does that mean all of his struggles are somehow invalid? No, of course not. They are simply not due to a disorder but something else, that's literally all this post proves. It makes no moral judgement.

[butts-bouncing-on-the-beltway]

Um hi sorry for asking but I saw a reblog where you said ADHD is dysautonomia? I thought those were different things that just happen to be comorbid sometimes? I'm so confused, please help 😭😭

Yes and no!

There are dysautonomia diagnoses (such as the one I carry since childhood for Orthostatic Hypotension), but there are also diagnoses that may cause dysautonomia as a secondary symptom/condition (e.g. diagnoses that may impact the autonomic nervous system such as ADHD, PTSD, diabetes, etc.)

Dysautonomia isn't a diagnosis in itself exactly, it's a class of diagnoses. And while some are treatable/resolvable medically, many require what are called "lifestyle" treatment plans that focus on actions taken or not taken, exposures/symptom triggers restricted, etc to stabilize and enhance quality of life and to perform harm reduction for some of the more dangerous outcomes of dysautonomia symptoms

PTSD and ADHD share certain similarities in how they interact with the autonomic nervous system, especially the parasympathetic nervous system specifically, and one major risk area for folks with either diagnosis is the way that development of dysautonomia secondary to their ADHD/PTSD symptoms can seriously impact their ability to safely experience intense emotion. The "emotional dysregulation" component of ADHD specifically often comes from some combination of "hyperactivity of the autonomic nervous system in the sympathetic portion" or from "hypoactovity of the autonomic nervous system in the parasympathetic portion", which is basically a fancy clinical way of saying "the part of the ANS that activates a threat response is overactive and throws that switch more often or more intensely than is reasonable/appropriate for the person's environment and/or the part of the ANS that soothes threat responses is less likely to kick in when needed, while being less effective when it does".

Now. I'm not a neuroscientist, so I couldn't tell you WHY we believe this to he happening in ADHD. But I can tell you as a healthcare provider who treats several forms of secondary dysautonomia and provides collaborative care for several primary dysautonomias, as well as someone who experiences both personally, it IS happening. All the literature we have demonstrates that mitigating this secondary dysautonomia is one of the most important aspects of treatment for ANY condition which causes it, as dysautonomia, whether primary or secondary, is extremely high risk in the long term when un-/under-managed and is associated with substantial worsening prognoses pretty much across the board.

This is complicated stuff! And I do sort of get why the medical community takes the easy way out and doesn't explain well WHY these things matter. What they're doing to the body. But I have seen the difference it makes, to my care, to the care my clients receive, when they know this medical background.

I really do need to circle back to this topic because I keep meaning to but ironically I've been in and out of the hospital for going on 18 months now due to high-risk interactions between my primary and secondary dysautonomia presentations. So I really just haven't had the time and energy lol. Anyway, I know this is complicated stuff, and often I have an easier time answering people's questions about it ratjer than trying to frame out an entire educational guide from scratch, so until I finally get around to updating my current guide with the last few years of research, if folks want to just ask me whatever, I'm happy to give what answers I can. And definitely let me know if anything I've said here needs clarifying or further info!

[cherryblossomforest]

Also, why do people assume I’m uneducated? That's what I want to know.

I’m not even trying to be big-headed, but just because I don’t say much and I listen more than I speak doesn’t mean I’m uneducated. It’s wild to act like I haven’t spent years learning how healing actually works; the only reason there’s been a pause in my career is because I became physically disabled. I’ve devoted years of my life to studying treatment models, trauma theory, neuropsychology, attachment styles, research methods, dissociation and more. I’ve examined how the brain processes trauma, how systems of care are structured and the limitations those systems often carry, especially for those of us who are the minority.

Was I not working directly with mental health MDTs, both inpatient and outpatient? I was advocating for patient rights and arguing for appropriate treatment methods, because some consultants and doctors were giving the worst care plans to people they only knew from a computer screen. Do you know how much knowledge and confidence you need to challenge medical professionals and win? As if I wasn’t working on PICU (Psychiatric Intensive Care Unit) wards with some of the most unwell people in crisis for a good portion of my career. Did I not have a caseload of over 15+ service users at any one time, personally responsible for treatment, assessments, home visits, risk evaluations, care plans and formulations? All while ensuring everything remained person-centred and their support systems were involved, which meant liaising with multiple people and organisations for each person in my caseload.

I shadowed consultants, psychologists, psychiatrists, counsellors, and mental health nurses; I also had associate staff shadowing me. I did that while attending study days and learning about things that were triggering the hell out of me because I was actively still going through trauma and abuse, but I still showed up! Because people deserved the best care I could give. I did that! I did that while actively being abused and splitting, and still showing up in mental health services and trying to make as much of a difference as I could.

To imply that healing is only valid if it’s facilitated by a professional undermines the reality that many of us have no choice but to become the expert on our own systems.

I hate when people act educated because they know a few buzzwords. Get tf out of here. I’ve done the actual work - academically, clinically and personally - and I’m still furthering my knowledge through ongoing studies even now because although I have a good knowledge, I still understand there's still so much more to learn.

To dismiss my healing because I’m not currently in therapy is reductive and, frankly, ignorant.