Is depression real?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Aleksion, Mar 8, 2017.

  1. Aleksion

    Aleksion They killed me

    Never suggested it's easy.

    It's true if you don't get enough protein and fat (saturated fat included) bad things stars happening in your body. However if this was the case why don't they just prescribe depressed patients with protein shakes? While I'm not saying malnutrition can't happen in a modern world, it's extremely rare.

    But is saying no to that juicy chocolate doughnut worth better quality of life? Anyone can enjoy a pack of cigarettes a day, but don't complain how unfair the world is when you get lung cancer. Besides by getting fatter you don't burn much more calories, so not gaining fat for a 150lb person is not much harder than to 350lb of pure lard to not get any fatter, especially if we take into account fatty's lack of physical activity at such weight.

    If people can successful cure themselves without the use of medicine, doesn't that mean depression has no physical cause and it's just all in your head? I mean if you have a brain tumor, you can't get better without removing it first.
  2. Crimson_Steel17

    Crimson_Steel17 The night is my solace; the day is my prime

    @quoting_mungo I say it again: this man is beyond reason. Can we PLEASE send him off so we can have an infinitely more informed discussion?
  3. Aleksion

    Aleksion They killed me

    You could add something valuable to the discussion instead
  4. Crimson_Steel17

    Crimson_Steel17 The night is my solace; the day is my prime

    I have tried... you are immune to logic and reason. For this reason, we must resort to C-4 and AP Rounds- you must be eliminated from the discussion to get anywhere logical
  5. Andromedahl

    Andromedahl Unlicensed UFO Pilot

    Honestly when you find yourself feeling miffed at a thread the best thing to do is to just sit back and admire from a distance.
  6. quoting_mungo

    quoting_mungo Administrator Staff Member

    You're demonstrating a remarkable lack of insight, here. Not everyone that is overweight subsists on junk food and pastries, nor is every person's metabolism created equally, even short of actual metabolic disorders. I've known stick-thin people who could pile away food without gaining a pound. Hell, research is pretty clear that moderately active overweight people are actually healthier in many ways than completely sedentary people whose body weight falls within the "normal" range.

    By your logic, the common cold, UTIs, and Type II diabetes are all just in your head, as well. Because all of them CAN get better without the use of medicine (and indeed, there's fuck-all medicine available to cure colds). Not all illnesses, not even all chronic illnesses, require surgical or chemical intervention in all cases, but that doesn't mean that some sufferers may not benefit from that intervention.

    Being ignorant is not against the rules, just unfortunate. You're welcome to have an informed discussion with other people in the thread. If his responses bother you, just ignore them, and read the responses you find worthwhile.
    Reyna Malone and Crimson_Steel17 like this.
  7. Crimson_Steel17

    Crimson_Steel17 The night is my solace; the day is my prime

    Okay... I still wish there was a way to ensure that at least some threads were more informed than others- but that'll do for now.
  8. Rykhoteth


    It doesn't take even a fraction of that, eg averaging an extra 100 calories a day will do it. That's two Oreos. It doesn't take a lot, those two oreos would be around 10 lbs per year. Assuming a person doesn't moderate the shit out of their diet as soon as they turned 21 and/or stop growing, they'd be overweight before finishing their degree. If you eat pre-packed, it's going to be a lot of empty calories, and if you pack your own lunch it's easy to eat more than you need especially if you're on something like steroids. A donut a day or a 20 oz soda a day is more the guy who's lost control of his life fast enough to get stretch marks. Conversely, 100 calories a day under for a year also works, and gradual weight loss is easier to keep IIRC most studies. But most people don't get fat overnight short of severe psychological issues with binge eating. Daily stress though is enough to make most people overlook said two Oreos.

    Health consequences of cigarettes these days aren't as good of a comparison with e-cigs being more or less the standard now. The psychological and physiological addiction is there though.

    But, no, it's a slow gradual quicksand of sorts for most I think. The hard part I remember reading is that you can lose weight faster than the brain gets used to a lower caloric intake, which IIRC plays into gradual weightloss being much more successful. I want to say it takes upwards of a year or something like that.

    Funny you should mention tumors. "Cancer" is this big catchall in that despite having similar symptoms, we'll probably never have a blanket single cure for all cancers due to the huge variety in causes. "Depression" is also bloody huge in terms of types and causes.

    IIRC again, it's much more subtle than you're implying in regards to differences between personal metabolisms. I guarantee you those bottomless pit individuals never sit still, assuming they don't exercise outright, or are much taller (the difference between ~average height and 6'0+ foot for the same weight is >100 calories per day). Just googled this to double check since I hardly believe it despite remembering this, but yes, fidgeting nonstop can burn a couple hundred extra calories per day as well. Their dayjob as well can make a huge difference too. Anyway, same point I just made, it's generally a more gradual thing than the few times you hang out and see him eat a whole pizza.
    Reyna Malone likes this.
  9. Aleksion

    Aleksion They killed me

    Cold, utis and all sorts of illnesses are caused by foreign organisms which immune system underestimated and thus they got out of control. The mechanism in which they work is very different from mental illness. Type 2 diabetes is more alike, which is basically insensitivity or failure of production of insulin. Primary cause is unhealthy lifestyle. However diabetes is measurable and symptoms can be instantly reversed by giving insulin if there is not enough of it. Of course maybe we just don't understand depression, so we don't know how to cure it.

    To be honest it sounds like someone's failed dieting attempt. Slow, fast metabolism is a myth. The energy has to go somewhere, thin people either move a lot or eat less and as Rykhoteth already pointed out it can be only by a few oreos a day. No one gets obese overnight, it's a long process of eating just slightly too much than you need. Over years those calories add up.
  10. quoting_mungo

    quoting_mungo Administrator Staff Member

    Sure, habits can add up, and I'm not contesting that. The primary individual I have in mind was to the best of my recollection fairly active, but not absurdly so, and she was, well... borderline bony. She was friends with my "sister" (living with a family abroad), and consistently, every time I saw her eat, she'd pile away at least as much as my "sister" did, often more. To the best of my knowledge the two of them had very similar activity levels, and my "sister" was not nearly as thin as she was. While not as extreme, her mother was also quite thin. How readily people's bodies pile on the pounds definitely has a genetic factor. (You'll note that article is quite extensively sourced.)

    You're missing the point - you said that something being manageable without drugs was evidence of it not being a legitimate medical problem. I'm merely illustrating how ridiculous that conclusion is. There are plenty of conditions, regardless of their cause, that in some individuals may be manageable without traditional medical intervention, while others do need meds to cope for whatever reason. As well, there's what Rykhoteth said, depression is not a single monolith, so just like cancer, a single one-size-fits-all cure is unlikely.
    Reyna Malone likes this.
  11. Rykhoteth


    Some paywalls, unfortunately. The big thing I've never been convinced of, is that any switch for feed efficiency is significant compared to increased intake. The abstract I'm looking at states genetics aren't a primary cause, "predisposition" and "association" and such. "Although genetic ... may predispose to common obesity" is actually a pretty short article linked. I'm not seeing a regulator in that which isn't also associated with decreased satiation and/or decreased activity, probably because from what I'm reading here and elsewhere, the entire fat-storage and receptor feedback systems are interconnected. To say, genetics' role in fucking with your choices is much more significant than it's role in actual biochemical efficiency, is still my general belief. So I would again argue it's what they ate and did away from the table, rather than at.

    I'm really never going to be convinced otherwise until I see a study with huge results regarding the raw feed efficiency of humans having significant differences between similar individuals. It took many centuries of selective breeding, much more potent than evolution, to get the farm animals we have and there's a multi-billion dollar industry focused on squeezing a few more percentage points out of cattle. These are pretty well documented, trying to maximize gains without increasing feed costs. Humans were never selectively bred for this, yet somehow a bit over half of Americans are overweight and a third are outright obese. I have always considered magic efficiency for no reason to be highly unlikely, for obvious reasons.

    Edit: actually skimming BMR studies to pull numbers. Lets see.

    The biggest factors being age, body composition, and gender. Looking at males from age 20-29 the 95% CI was about .965 to 1.025 for base calories per bodymass per hour resting metabolic rates. +/- 0.03, for a 95% CI, for a sample size of 49 men, means the Std Dev was about 0.11 meaning 68% are within +/- that. So, not accounting for body composition and assuming perfectly equal "resting", about 16% of people burn >10% less calories resting.

    Yeah, I'm not very convinced metabolic efficiency accounts the considerably high obesity rate.

    It also would not explain the obesity rate nearly tripling from ~1980-2000 either, unless there was some genetic mutagen virus going around. Heavily correlated with the fat-free bullshit, I'm probably never going to be convinced otherwise it's not a result of empty calories getting added to everything.
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2017
  12. Kezi Avdiivka

    Kezi Avdiivka Active Member

    Like I said, trying to rebuild braincells is a bitch. The protienstuff only replaces what is used up in the storage vesicles of a neurotransmitter and is very critical in treatment, but doctors are mostly pill pushers nowadays. Basically anti-depressants are a krutch for someone until they begin learning how to live life again via therapy and via better diet. You can also force the body to rebuild new dopamine/serotonin receptors by utilizing serotonin and dopamine antagonists. They reduce the output of chemicals by deactivating the receptors, in response the body grows more receptors.
  13. Kezi Avdiivka

    Kezi Avdiivka Active Member

    Yeah, when you constantly burn off neurotransmitters and you don't replace them via diet, yer gonna become depressed real quick.
  14. Aleksion

    Aleksion They killed me

    I think that's really oversimplifying things
  15. Anferney

    Anferney New Member

    This is coming from someone who says that burning something alive is a mercy killing. Holy f'ing shit.
    Sogreth and Saiko like this.
  16. Anferney

    Anferney New Member

    I mean, seriously. Did anyone read the OPs post in that Facebook cruelty thread (which was locked for some reason)?

    And this guy's asking if depression is real???
    Sogreth likes this.
  17. Aleksion

    Aleksion They killed me

    Small creatures heat up really fast and the rats brain was toasted within seconds. He could held the torch even closer, but obviously he wanted to get a good shot instead. I'm not sure what does it have to do with this thread though
  18. quoting_mungo

    quoting_mungo Administrator Staff Member

    Yeah, we are not discussing that thread here (or anywhere else) - it was closed for a reason.
  19. Kezi Avdiivka

    Kezi Avdiivka Active Member

    It really....really...really...reallyreallyreally is im fucking serious.

    You burn off your fuel? Brains gonna salvage dopamine/serotonin/norepinephrine neurons and send the chemicals to other more neurons to keep them going. It's a survival mechanism, just like how your body will begin eating it's fat stores when you don't have anything to eat.
  20. Mandragoras

    Mandragoras Inept Abecedarian

    The mechanics of starvation and how it ultimately kills you are viscerally horrifying in ways I find difficult to properly articulate; my mom told me about them when I was fairly young, as she is a recovering anorexic and nearly died from it as a teenager, and it stuck with me. I'm not surprised that the brain does similar things, but ye gods, that's an unsettling concept.

Share This Page