Slashdot Mirror
Depression: The Secret Struggle Startup Founders Won't Talk About
mattydread23 writes: In May, Cambrian Genomics CEO Austen Heinz committed suicide. The news stunned friends and family, and sparked a conversation about the growing problem of depression among startup founders. Some estimates say 30% of startup founders suffer from depression, but many are reluctant to talk about their struggle for fear of alienating investors and employees. This feature by Business Insider includes conversations with a friend of Heinz, plus many investors and other startup founders who are starting to talk about the problem and figure out how to make things better.
Why talk about it? We're busy being optimistic. One must be very optimistic to be a startup (any business pretty much) or a farmer. The rest get 9-to-5 jobs.
Secret struggle...
Thanks a hell of a lot. Now it's no longer a secret!
The majority of startups will fail. You have to know that going in, that the odds are very much against you.
I just can’t BELIEVE the things that have gotten funding. Who “invests” $5M in a luxury watch site? I thought there were just a lot of bad ideas out there, but I think there are a lot of unsophisticated investors too.
Does anyone ever ask any serious questions? What happens if the government classifies Uber’s drivers as employeess, and not contractors? What happens if advertising on Twitter doesn’t generate enough revenue? What happens to revenue at Google and Facebook if advertising rates plummet?
I think the key to avoiding depression is to have a good idea from the start, not something that relies on advertising to make money. eBay. Netflix. Amazon. Of course, the last two come with other problems.
Cambrian Genomics
...was he depressed that making dinosaurs was harder than he'd been lead to believe?
Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
"Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
The culture of Silicon Valley and California in general is to sound positive all the time and avoid the negative -- people would much rather say nothing or offer platitudes than say "no". This forms part of the problem leading to depression -- everyone is "fake" and say things for political reasons, constantly on social networking talking up their accomplishments and that of their company. Of course, most of it is smoke and mirrors. Also the tech scene can be very pretentious and it takes a lot to "keep up with the Joneses" and stay in the social circles they prize. It becomes too much for many and they become depressed and fade away, replaced at their companies by the VC board. And some willing 20-something then comes and tries to fill their shoes and the cycle repeats.
No one wants to hire a depressed person. No one wants to go on dates with a depressed person (well, at least not many people -- negative/depressed dating site profiles don't get many replies). So, they conceal it until they break with full knowledge that when they break, they'll simply be replaced or their company will simply fail.
>Financially.
Correct. Clinical depression does not give a crap about how much money you have in the bank, though not having to worry about being homeless is a plus.
Seriously, if you have enough cash and connections to even think about starting a company, or even doing one of these new-fangled "startups", then you're better off than 95% of the country and better of than 99% of the world.
So what? You still have a problem to deal with. Doesn't matter if you're fortunate or driven or whatever to be in the position with the skill-set to drive a startup.
In serious circles (C-level employees, attorneys, doctors, academic faculty, anyone with a security clearance) psychological treatment is still heavily stigmatized. That's dumb. Psychological treatment should just be a fact of life--someone's getting treatment, that should be fine. If it's not, you encourage them not to seek treatment, in which case you have people with *untreated* psychological problems in positions of power.
If you have any pull in your org, you should be advocating for making these things okay. Not as a top priority, but as a significant one.
Depression? Who has time for that?! I've got customers out the door, tax forms to do, end of month accounting, interviews. You'll have to schedule depression with my secretary. Mornings are kinda tight for me though.
Oh bull. Therapy is a throw away thing today. The stigmata evaporated along about the '80s.
http://www.med.navy.mil/sites/nmcsd/nccosc/healthProfessionalsV2/reports/Documents/Stigma%20White%20Paper.pdf from the Navy says seeking mental health treatment is still heavily stigmatized in the military / clearance world and the American Psychological Association agrees with them http://www.apa.org/monitor/2009/06/stigma-war.aspx
There are people without the cash but which do a startup anyway. The trouble is that some people think start ups are mainstream, the thing you're supposed to do. There's an absurd mythology around the entrepreneur and that if you're not one of them then you're just a loser. So they mortgage their homes and take a chance that has worse odds than any Vegas gambling table. Or if they don't do that they may be in a startup later in life and learn that their retirement options are vanishing because they decided to be paid in worthless options rather than cash. And as the article puts it, their life style becomes horrific; long hours, constant stress, no family life. At a real job you can take time off, you can even change jobs to get away from the stress. But if you're part of a startup core team then you can feel that you're stuck there. More work, less pay, fewer options for change, but some people stick with it because they believe in the myth.
Also 7% being depressed in general population is definitely an underestimate. Till Obamacare came along some 40 million Americans had no access to healthcare. (Now that number is believed to be 25 million). Among the rest mental health screening is not covered for most of the lower end plans. Further given the taboo associated with mental illness even those with access do not get checked for depression. It is possible I myself would be diagnosed with depression, if I give the shrinks half a chance. Tech founders typically have enough resources to make it to college. They would get tested more than general population.
I think depression is more prevalent than assumed. And logically there are lots of reasons why most people, young ones more than others, should be depressed.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
You only know about the small percentage of startups that succeed. Most fail within a year. The failure rate is 80% within 18 months, by some estimates. Privileged? Those that succeed may have better backing, or just a better idea, and those founders usually go on to do well for themselves. But let's not forget the risks and pitfalls they had to navigate to get there.
It isn't just depression. Burnout is a serious problem, too!
For example, today I read this awful description of burnout. In that case we have a programmer writing stuff like
I'm currently in a state where I litterally just can't write code. At all. I get dizzy, headaches, I've even cried a few times just at the sight of my text editor.
and
A little over a month ago, only 3 years into the project, I blew up. One day I woke up, sat in front of my computer and broke up in tears. Called the boss to tell him I couldn't work for a few days. To this day I still can't code. I'm not even sure I will ever be able to code again either. For now I'm looking at applying for Walmart for an undetermined amount of time.
That type of story makes me very sad. You know things are bad when an adult man is brought to tears, and is potentially never able to code again. This is a serious problem, but it goes completely unrecognized or unacknowledged so often!
What percentage of people who begin startups have a history of depression?
I know that some years ago a doctor quizzed me about depression.
Me "Well... yes, sometimes" "Isn't that normal?"
GP "It's not healthy" "Do you ever feel sad about events outside of your control?"
Me "For instance?"
GP. "Do events in other countries ever make you feel sad?"
Me "Yes" "Seems normal to me that knowing other people are suffering doesn't make me happy"
The GP then tried to prescribe me Xanax - which just made me feel depressed (no - I never took Xanax). So I have a history of depression (there's more than that incident - I do have "black days" where I want to stay in bed and avoid the world). Whether that's serious or normal doesn't change the fact that I've started a number of successful new businesses, and as part of the process I've often neglected my diet, been extremely stressed, and suffered from extreme lack of sleep. Others with similar business history report the same thing - periods of optimism, energy and the feeling that the brain (and the mouth) are at their optimum, followed by periods when I get words wrong, struggle to get out of bed, feel mentally sluggish, and have difficulty believing things will "go well".
Clearly I haven't committed suicide, but was it the startups that caused the "depression" - or the "side-effects" of "depression" ("extreme" optimism and "energy") that "impelled" the desire to startup a new business venture?
My "suspicion" is that starting any new business involves mixed emotions. Losses loom larger than gains - and despite initial optimism there will always be periods of doubt. It kind of balances out, no ups without downs.
Anything new involves risks - and to many the risks appear larger as the involvement shifts from dipping your toes to taking a plunge. Terms like "bi-polar" and "manic" get bandied about when describing people who are successful at taking risks but I've seen little to show that's a result of starting a new/novel venture. Perhaps I'm too depressed to look in the right places?
Note: after the first couple of experiences the process is much easier to deal with as you can look back on previous occasions when it felt like the sun would never shine again - and know that good things, while often hard to imagine - are just as likely outcomes as the bad things that are much easier to imagine. That seems normal to me.
Would you say a financially comfortable american with terminal cancer is 'better off' than 99% of the world? - Of course not. Same thing with depression, depression is not self pity, it is a mental illness that has fuck all to do with the size of your wallet. As Robin Williams demonstrated, sufferers are unable to endure living even when swimming in money.
I'm not having a go at you personally, most people who don't understand depression have your dismissive attitude. I suggest you try educating yourself on the subject because odds are you will encounter a loved one with depression at some point in your life and it's handy to know what to do after telling them to "cheer up" doesn't work.
As for TFA, I don't find it surprising that "start up" people have a high proportion of manic-depressives, the manic phase of the illness is characterized by extreme optimism.
Shameless plug for a good cause
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
It's a sad fact of our society that more money is equated with more "happiness" or well being.
When I don't have enough people time, I get depressed. And by people time, I mean close authentic relationships in person. Our society's demand that we work all the time is making us more miserable. Try to scale back? can't because employers demand more and more of our time. So it's the nose to the grindstone or unemployment. We can't have a balanced life anymore.
We as a society are consuming more booze and drugs and it's a symptom of our shallow all work and no play fill up the hole with stuff society.
Sermon over.
This isn't just about startups, this is across U.S. society—there is zero work-life balance.
Sure, every other company proclaims how great they are WRT work-life balance, but it's pure bullshit.
During hiring (for employees) and/or funding (for startups), if you give any evidence that you will ever put anything before the company (family, health, whatever, it doesn't matter) in ANY way, or ever draw a line in the sand about hours/commitment at ANY number, you are totally noncompetitive/nonfundable (they won't use these words) and won't be hired/be funded. If there is any evidence in your CV, online persona, or history that you have ever done any of these things, you won't be hired/funded.
Even after employment/funding, you have to keep this up. Sure, you may be asked (or even pressed) to "slow down," but it's superficial. The moment you do, positive evaluations/promotions/funding dries up; there is a perception that you're "not serious," "not committed," "not a good risk," or simply "not as capable/investment-worthy" as those *other* supermen/women that work 100+ hours a week (at least) and always put work first.
Yes, they want you to take a break, take care of yourself, and balance your life. But hey, if someone else delivers more value or growth more quickly... Well, they'd be nuts not to go with them instead, and hope you stay healthy in the meantime, all the best.
So, in the interest of your self/family/relationships you try to build a career that precisely demands that in order to keep it, you destroy your self/family/relationships. Depression is easy to fall into when your life will fall apart no matter what you do.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
lots of startups are started by privileged Asians and some are even started by women.
People don't off themselves because they're bored. You have to be a colossal asshole to have no empathy for someone willing to go that far. Your first instinct is survival, breaking that requires serious pain and hardships.
Privilege white people committing suicide? I'm playing my smallest violin in sympathy
1. Not all startup founders are 'white people' and not all of them are 'privileged' either
2. Most of the startup founders do not commit suicide
3. Stress level for startup founders - no matter what kind of startup - is high, but this is natural, as the journey of starting up a new company (in any industry) is a rocky road filled with a mix of excitement / trepidation / frustration
As for the percentage of the excitement versus that of trepidation versus that of frustration largely depends on
A. The regional / global industrial environment in which the startup is involved with
B. The structure of the startup
C. The corporate culture of the startup, ie, the attitude of the close-knit of people working in the startup
D. The personality type of the founder himself or herself
I personally have involved in quite a number of startups and every single one has their own perculiar 'pain of labor' - and for each of the 'pain of labor', if the founder sees it as a 'challenge' it would be tackled with zeal. However, if the same 'pain of labor' is seen as 'trouble' then the thing could become a protracted problem for the company
The above is based on my own experience
YMMV
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
I have experience since 2002 with 4 different Fortune 150 or less businesses, and not once seen anything like this.
I *have* seen people saying "I'm too busy" and working exactly 40 hours, but you can't justify hiring more people when you are getting 90% of the work done in 40 hours. Maybe if you have more than 10 people to cover a single role, but even large companies tend towards smaller teams, perhaps with more managers than are necessary. So you generally don't have enough work to justify a new hire.
I also know people who worked at other Fortune 500 or less companies, at least 10 with enough detail to be sure that they have not seen anything like what you describe.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but I do think you're in the wrong job market if you think this is bullshit.
Someone else delivers more value or growth, that's a problem with either your skill set or their desire to burn out. And I would not want to hire someone who looks like they will be a burnout in 5 years.
Go job hunting now, and get out of whatever network you are in, because you sound trapped by your own ignorance.
This is why depression is so misunderstood.
Commonsense would tell you than that the level of responsibility, risk, work-load and obsession assumed by a real entrepreneur would incline them to exhaustion, likely insomnia, and depression. But that's in retrospect. Initially there is the excitement and, when things seem to be accelerating, there can be a real buzz factor. But it sort of makes sense that the downside of the upside can be - and likely usually IS - as extreme as the buzz when things go well. In general, I think the average employee has approximately zero comprehension of the scope and sheer load and risk being borne by a typical entrepreneur under money and other pressures. And, of course, as "the leader" you can't exactly talk openly about the doubts, fears, and personal problems - many which can scarcely be articulated - going through your mind as you contemplate what happens if things don't turn out or if YOU, personally, don't find an answer to a particular challenge...while the clock ticks, the legal and presumed ethical responsibility goes higher, and the bank balance goes lower.
One has to do more than your average bear to build a business from the ground up, how is that a surprise in any way? If it were easy, everybody would be doing it and it wouldn't be discussed here right now. I started up my own businesses but always self funded / got a client for the product. To do that I put 10 years of savings and years of work on the line, that is not an easy thing to do. But if I were unwilling to do it myself, how could I ever expect somebody else to do it on my behalf?
MY OTHER COMMENTS
I have Bipolar and it really ruined my life. I'm alive, but what kind of life is it? I guess on the up side I'm better off than many people in third world countries.
http://alamar.webege.com
I wouldn't be surprised if 30% of the general population is depressed.
You only know about the small percentage of startups that succeed. Most fail within a year. The failure rate is 80% within 18 months, by some estimates.
That's over twice as good as restaurants. Let's not forget that anyone running a startup with their own money has already failed. You need at minimum three people for any startup: the techie, the schmooze, and the lawyer.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Of course, you do have to worry about becoming homeless...
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
I disagree. Depression is not a monolithic thing, and while there can sometimes be clear-cut medical causes, other times there are rather clear-cut external causes. Perceptions of the outside world, in other words, affect brain chemistry. Money won't always give you the perceptions you need to be happy, but it's foolish and (I must say) slightly insulting to imply that it can't be a major factor, or even a primary factor.
I'm dealing with fairly severe dysphoric atypical depression at the moment (which is more common than typical depression. Which is typical of the hackneyed insanity that is modern psychiatry, but I digress) and while I'm sure there are a number of factors in my personality and my brain chemistry, I fucking promise you that it is nothing a large infusion of cash could not solve. My depression stems largely from my persistent inability to solve the problems around me (which of course becomes self-reenforcing as the bullshit piles up and the depression saps my energy), but 95% of those problems would be trivially solved if I could throw buckets of money at them. It would still take time and effort, but believe me I would be tremendously happy while heaving those buckets of money around and waiting. Indeed, during those periods in my life where it looked like my career was going places and I mistakenly believed I would soon have, if not bucketloads, then at least a reasonable amount of money, my depression was at an all time low.
Depression isn't monolithic in its causes or its effects. The DSM V doesn't even begin to scratch the surface, and it should be noted that psychiatry in general is tailored towards people who visit psychiatrists, i.e. people who at least have enough money to afford transportation and health insurance. That excludes me, and it excludes the majority of humanity who are living in the third world right now. So, instead of relying on the DSM or whatever pop psychology definition is trendy these days, let's consider how they define depression in animal models: giving up, not seeking out food, not trying to avoid an unpleasant stimulus... apparently because they have lost the will or belief that they can improve their situation. Translated to human terms in modern society, this positively screams "money." And anyone who disagrees has almost certainly never been poor.
Seriously, if you have enough cash and connections to even think about starting a company, or even doing one of these new-fangled "startups", then you're better off than 95% of the country and better of than 99% of the world.
Robin Williams was in the upper 99.99999% of individuals in terms of financial well-being. He still got depressed.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
30% is just about the average in the Western world - nothing special about this particular group in this regard. It's a severely under appreciated problem when you consider the immense cost in DALY or YLD.
World Health Organization (WHO) states that depression is the leading cause of disability as measured by Years Lived with Disability (YLDs) and the fourth leading contributor to the global burden of disease.
.: Semper Absurda
Why is this moderated troll? Depression is not the same as just being depressed. It very often doesn't have a rational trigger.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Stress. Could just be that 30% of people faced with high levels of stress react by sinking into depression. I know it happens to me.
It sucks, but it's common enough that I don't feel stigmatized. Although it could just be that my Wellbutrin is doing the trick (so did Paxil, but the sexual side effects were intolerable. Ruined a relationship or two, which was depressing). That sense of being stigmatized could just be another way your depression is expressing itself.
Depression does seem to correlate with creativity though.
Of course you wouldn't. They obviously don't work hard enough. You want the folks that you can work into the ground in 6 months or so, then fire them for having human reactions to extreme overwork and burnout, and replace them with someone else who makes less money. Lather rinse repeat. Take a bath in all the money that you've made off of others' hard work and sacrifice. It's the American way.
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
Getting fired isn't your depression manifesting itself. Go ahead, tell me with a straight face that a majority of employers out there wouldn't fire your ass if they found out you were in treatment for depression. They may not even have a choice in the matter; their liability insurer could require it.
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
Are you sure? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...
Are you sure? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...
Yes. From your link - " he had spent much of his life battling alcoholism, drug abuse and depression". So, yeah, he may have been depressed and poor when he died, but he was battling depression all along even when he was worth 75 million pounds. There were many times in his life when he was both rich and depressed.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
From TFA:
A recent study by Dr. Michael Freeman, a clinical professor at UCSF and an entrepreneur as well, was one of the first of its kind to link higher rates of mental health issues to entrepreneurship.
Of the 242 entrepreneurs surveyed, 49% reported having a mental-health condition. Depression was the No. 1 reported condition among them and was present in 30% of all entrepreneurs, followed by ADHD (29%) and anxiety problems (27%). That's a much higher percentage than the US population at large, where only about 7% identify as depressed.
More surprising was the incidence of mental health in the families of entrepreneurs: 72% said they either had mental-health problems themselves or in their immediate family.
A founder who has no history of mental illness from a family with no history either "is the exception, not the rule," Freeman said.
Also, from the study mentioned:
http://www.michaelafreemanmd.c...
Little is known about mental health conditions among the families of entrepreneurs. Of some relevance, though, is the fact that previous research has shown that first and second-degree family members of bipolar probands are high achievers across several domains that are important for entrepreneurship. Higier and her colleagues found that when compared to bipolar probands and normal controls, the unaffected identical twins of people with bipolar disorder demonstrate superior cognitive and interpersonal traits that would seem highly important for entrepreneurship, including enhanced social ease, confidence, assertiveness, intelligence, verbal learning, verbal fluency, extraversion, sociability, optimism, and resilience [89].
Coryell et al. found that the first-degree relatives of bipolar probands, including relatives with bipolar spectrum conditions, had significantly higher educational and occupational achievement than the close family members of people with other mental health conditions [72]. Other studies conducted over the last 100 years have reached similar conclusions [73, 74, 76, 90-92].
Creativity and innovativeness are foundational aptitudes of entrepreneurs. The close family members of bipolar probands have been shown to have high levels of creativity [23, 68]. First-degree relatives of people with bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, anorexia nervosa, and autism have been shown to be overrepresented in the scientific and artistic occupations [66]. Male relatives of people with schizophrenia were shown to be overrepresented in a listing of prominent people [93].
Also, ALSO, from the study:
Reviewed in conjunction with the results displayed Figure 1, 72% of the entrepreneurs in this sample either reported a personal mental health history (49%) or were asymptomatic yet reported a family mental health history (23%). By contrast, 48% of the comparison participants in this sample reported a personal mental health history (32%) or were asymptomatic yet reported a family mental health history (16%).
There IS also a PRETTY BIG issue with it being a self-reporting study and with the composition and the design of the control group.
Control was created by surveying "76 MBA student and faculty pool participants, and 149 psychology students", then mixing those participants with self-reported "entrepreneurs".
Then, out of the total sum of 335 participants (meaning that 110 were actually pooled from "actual entrepreneurs") - 93 participants were declared as control because they answered "no" to the following question: "Have you ever been self-employed, a business founder, or a business co-founder (including non-profit businesses)?"
There are more psych and MBA students (132) among the "entrepreneurs" then "actual entrepreneurs" (110).
So all those mental health numbers may be coming from self-diagnosing psych students.
Which would kinda explain the fact that HALF OF THE CONTROL HAS A HISTORY OF MENTAL ISSUES AS WELL.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Well, it's been 0% of mine and I don't keep it a secret, so... Yes, I can say that with a straight face. Though a flash of disdain may briefly cross as I process the inanity.
Getting fired for being in treatment is inane?
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
Depression is so misunderstood because people with depression insist that they have an invisible disease they can't magically get over, and drug companies pander to this by hooking people on Xanax and Zoloft. In developed countries--outside of third-world United States--we routinely treat anxiety and depression with great success: drugs might handle the most serious symptoms up-front, but cognitive therapies provide the long-term changes. Essentially, a licensed psychiatrist talks to you a bunch, and trains you to GET OVER IT.
More specifically, a great deal of mood-driven and mind-driven mental disorders are caused or controllable by mental behaviors. You can improve on ADHD by training your executive functioning system to employ better self-monitoring, initiation, and inhibition, which gives you firm control over your attention system (this also makes normal people smarter); on the other hand, developing a habit of procrastination and distraction by immersing yourself in TV, video games, and Facebook will create ADHD-like behavior, which you can train out in the same way. Anxiety and depression, similarly, require training your self-monitoring and initiation systems to recognize negative thought behaviors (neurosis) and adjust them by limiting mood decay; we have also observed individuals falling into depression from high-stress, leading to anxiety, leading to depression. These major mental disorders can stem from internal issues or external pressures; in either case, the patient can only manage them by self-driven mental behavior management.
Small-business owners of course face a lot of stress. It's no surprise they become depressed and suicidal.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
This response is precisely why people who suffer from depression do not talk about it or seek help. There are too many people who think "depression" is "being sad," and they should "just get over it."
... then what business do you have getting cancer? Suck it up."
Saying, "I'm depressed," and suffering from depression are not remotely the same thing. There are sad people who do not have depression, and there are people who have depression who are not sad. Depression can keep you from feeling sadness as easily as it can keep you from feeling joy. It is not rational. It can be triggered by life circumstances, but it is not a response to them. Being better off or worse off has nothing to do with it.
It's like saying, "Seriously, if you have enough cash and connections
No, but suggesting that a majority of employers would do so certainly is. Even if it wouldn't expose them to costly lawsuits.
Seriously, if you have enough cash and connections to even think about starting a company, or even doing one of these new-fangled "startups", then you're better off than 95% of the country and better of than 99% of the world.
By your comment I take it that you care about nothing but money?
I stole this Sig
My theory: Sometimes early in life a person starts to experience anxiety, and this person is also gifted at analytical thought. The deeper they go into analytical thought, the more they escape the anxiety. "Geekness" becomes part of the person's identity. They become very skilled at some things. Some go on to create a company where work long hours, and not only abuse, but take pleasure in abusing those who work for them. Since our capitalist system rewards profit at any cost, these people are held up as heros, when overall they are a net cancer on society.
Yup, that's usually what people who don't suffer from clinical depression usually say...."GET OVER IT". It's just purely academic isn't it? Because in the real world we can all just "retrain" our thought processes and mentally force our bodies to produce the normal chemical cocktail that will make us happy. You think you have knowledge and it seems so logical to you. "It works for me so why not them?"
But you are correct in some things you said. You can absolutely train your body and mind to correct day to day anxiety and depression. But for most people with clinical depression it's a constant battle. Training the brain and drugs only temporarily correct these problems and so it's a constant struggle to maintain a level of happiness that most people feel day to day.
So please stop talking like you have the answers. You clearly only understand the problem on a superficial level and spreading your poor understanding off as informed opinion only makes it worse for those of us who can't just follow your simple solutions.
Yup, that's usually what people who don't suffer from clinical depression usually say...."GET OVER IT".
I'm in the 9% of people who can use SAM-e to move from a depressive state to a hypomanic state. I spent 25 years not realizing I was depressed because I never hit baseline; alcohol actually shuts off the depression hard, putting me in a normalized state. Very small quantities of alcohol.
I eventually learned, through introspection, that the trigger was simple: any small problem causing an emotional slip had a limited finite range. Once below the shallow floor, I would fall continuously: a minor negative emotion would make me feel slightly down, while a slightly-less-minor negative emotion became an infinitely major negative emotion. It ran down, down, down the rabbit hole, propelled by its own means, outside my own action and violently opposed to my own grip of enforcement. A small shot of alcohol arrested this process for days: one ounce of rum and such negative feelings produced only a finite-bound feeling of negativity, at least for the next few days.
When I realized what was happening, when I framed it as such, I put a stop to it. For a while, I would recognize when the negative emotions started rolling away on their own, when they had hit the tipping point and gone into the descent to madness; I refused to allow them to do so, swallowing a knot of vomit-inducing depression and demanding my mind function on a rational basis, being quite capable of understanding where the emotions should have stopped even when I had no control over them. The very act stalled the collapse, failing to stop it but not letting it fall so fast toward infinity, and perhaps not so far.
These days I don't have such anxieties. Constant vigilance has reprogrammed my own internal understanding of emotional events. The mechanisms moderating my emotions now eschew the amplification behavior entirely; likewise, I have trained myself to have quite advanced deep-set anxiety management, and so am resistant to general anxiety on a subconscious level. In that respect, at least, I stand head-and-shoulders above most individuals, among an elite group of persons throughout history who have trained themselves to respond well when faced with anxiety; a mere side-effect of correcting the mechanism causing my clinical neurosis.
I am now trying to re-train my executive functions, because I never functioned well at baseline. Extreme depression somehow provided a better mental working environment; hypomania was also good. Without anxiety, I feel lethargic--no drive. There was a price to pay, but I will install new habits. My pattern of procrastination is both my own fault and a matter of physical brain chemistry, and the cure to my clinical laziness is simply to get over it and force myself to build new, corrected habits; whining that I have some internal issue with my brain won't get anything done, although I recognize the root cause of non-anxiety pathological procrastination--laziness--as a similar pathology to depression.
Humans enjoy making themselves helpless. It is an ancient trick: become an invalid to make yourself feel important, so that others will sympathize with you, and so that you can criticize those who do not sympathize with you. I have always hated the attentions of others; I respond poorly to praise and sympathy, and have tended to show others how simple all things are, and to hide my own pains and upsets to draw less attention. Perhaps this made it easier for me; my peers, however, have escaped their long troubles of anxiety in much the same way, and those who have not prefer to simply ignore all their previously-depressed friends in the same way alcoholics ignore their former drinking buddies, consistently doing no more than complain that they have problems none of us can understand--claiming that, obviously, we don't have the same problems, because we got better, and they have not. They simply desire their pathos.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
I state up front that I work on my own terms. I have talent to offer and can solve problems that others often can't, but I place a premium on flexibility and on my own health and family. I am incredibly productive, more than many other employees, but I do not offer *maximum productivity*, i.e. "as much as I am humanly able to produce." Even if it seems that I have more to offer (i.e. I leave at 6:30 when everyone else is still working and Skyping me at 11:30 pm, I travel a only couple of times per year and decline to travel 20 times per year, etc.), I am not willing to give this "more" to the organization—it is for my family and my own personal growth.
And both of the phrases I used are things I've been told—"We have doubts about your how serious you are; we're interested in someone that's more serious about their career" and "We don't doubt that you're highly skilled and productive, your resume and recommendations are stellar, but we're in a competitive industry and we need highly competitive people, and we're not sure you've got that competitive fire in your belly—that you're really going to be one hundred percent invested in the company and its growth."
I have two friends that have been on the serial startup carousel as founders. Both burned out and moved in other directions because they felt it was impossible to actually have a life, be a human being, and get growth and operating capital support from investors. Each startup became their entire lives each time until positive exit, and at some point each said, "I'm not doing this again, I'm losing my own sense of identity and my family."
And if you take that kind of statement out into the public sphere, I'd bet that what others would say is, "Well, they weren't really made to be enterpreneurs, then; they were destined to burn out because it's not the lifestyle for them."
Which is precisely my point—and it sounds like you've seen it, too—there's a prevailing "wisdom" that "real" career builders or "real" enterpreneurs are a particular "type"—the type that gives every . last . drop . of . blood to the company. The rest? They're just not "cut out for it"—they should "do something else."
Of course, if you're not "cut out" for the job market or for enterpreneurship, it's not quite clear what "else" you ought to be doing to earn a living. There are only so many jobs at nonprofits and in government agencies.
It would be better if society were to take a step back and assume the opposite—that everyone is basically loyal, driven, and productive, but in general, a healthy person cannot exist without healthy hours, life balance, and relationships, and if someone is the "type" to be working from 4:00 am until midnight every day of the week, and double that on holidays to pick up the slack, the are probably in need of counseling or personal development, rather than a raise and a promotion. But I suppose that's not how the market works.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Ugh, then you are the worst kind of clinical depression sufferer. You found an out and you still don't have empathy for the others who haven't. Well bully for you. Do you think you're the only one who busts his/her ass to overcome this? Do you think everyone else is just wallowing in self-pity? I for one have been fighting my whole life. Sometimes I win a battle, sometimes it wins a battle. But the war is perpetual and it sounds just as perpetual for you. We all suffer from the same symptoms but we all react differently to treatment because each and every brain is unique. That's what makes mental disorders so difficult to treat.
"Humans enjoy making themselves helpless."
Bullshit. Some do, others detest feeling helpless. I think this is a mantra you tell yourself to enhance your own self worth. Your long as hell response detailing your triumph over your depression just reinforces this thought. But again, you lack empathy which greatly takes away the laudable accomplishment of escaping depression. They mean nothing because instead of saying "Hey this is the way folks, anyone can do it", you denigrate those who can't muscle their way out of depression like you did. Thus you enhance your own self worth by comparison.
Ugh, then you are the worst kind of clinical depression sufferer. You found an out and you still don't have empathy for the others who haven't.
I found a pattern, I found others following the same pattern, and I found international research showing that the pattern is known to science. I've also found that the scientific understanding of depression and its treatments are in the same class as the scientific understanding of global warming: while science has less than perfect understanding of either, it is those with a vested interest in denial who wholesale deny such things could possibly be real, in the face of all evidence and scientific consensus. They look outside and say, "See, it is cold! Climate change is not real!" and they say, "See, I feel bad! You must simply not understand how I feel!"
Bullshit. Some do, others detest feeling helpless. I think this is a mantra you tell yourself to enhance your own self worth.
It is a piece of scientifically-well-known psychiatric behavior. You will find respected medical literature at the heart of what has been called "Psychic illness in the need for attention and love"--how outdated a term, "Psychic"--to what is now explained as "Psychosomatic illness as a subconscious behavior to fill the need of self-importance". All humans require a feeling of self-worth to survive; all humans will become clinically depressed without a defining feeling of importance.
The mind can manifest physical illness, just as electromagnetic transmission antennas cause certain people to develop rashes, digestive problems, respiratory diseases, headaches, and other independently-observable symptoms of real, tangible nature, even though the transmitter is an unpowered hunk of metal producing no electromagnetic radiation. We have long studied this as a manifestation of the human need for attention, and refined that, eventually, into a need for an individual sense of importance; yet it becomes an opaque leap of logic to say a person may feel bad due to anxiety over a need for attention, a need to feel important.
It seems more logical to assume that a person may develop mental illnesses in response to a great injury of the psyche, damaging their sense of self-importance. Psychiatric literature has notated many defects in the operating brain when dealing with insanity; yet still observes that a great bulk of the insane show no physical trauma--that their mental state is wholly self-inflicted, a concoction of the mind causing changes in the brain's production of neurotransmitters purely by function of the brain, not by damage. The greatest proportion of the patently insane have developed delusions to comfort themselves in the face of extreme emotional trauma. What nonsense, then, is it to claim that such emotional issues would not cause lesser mental defects?
A human who suffers anxiety must come to terms with that anxiety. Persons with depression lash out at those around them for claiming it's all in their heads, fighting against the very idea that it may be their own fault; and why not? If it were their own fault, they would have to feel bad about it. They may not want to look helpless in the eyes of their peers, but they certainly want to feel that they've not brought this terrible suffering upon themselves by concocting an imaginative fantasy within the bosoms of their minds. They want to feel the weight of a terrible burden that was placed upon them, not of their own actions which they may remediate at any time.
you denigrate those who can't muscle their way out of depression like you did
It is simple technique, not brute force. You draw a stylized illustration in which a person's powerful brain--my great, super-genius-level intellect--hammers its way through the blockages and stands victorious upon the rubble of those things which thought laughably to impede it. The truth is the difficulties are an annoyance and nothing more: a person must first install a self-monitoring
Support my political activism on Patreon.
tl;dr
I'm glad you found something that works for you. But regardless of all your babbel, you offer no room for sympathy and thus I offer no room for you or your ideas.
I'm glad you found something that works for you.
This is a good meta-study, diving into guesswork and hypothesis on mechanisms of depression. Here's some science. TL;DR: pills, long-term (24 month), have over a 3/4 relapse rate; cognitive therapy, discontinued after 4 months, show just over 50% relapse in total after 24 months. Initially, PILLS ARE EXACTLY AS EFFECTIVE, IN EXACTLY THE SAME WAY, AS COGNITIVE THERAPY. Exactly as effective. You can do absolutely no worse without drug therapy than you can by just talking to depressed people to make them feel better, and you do far better by talking to them and telling them how to get over it.
In a more recent CT -ADM placebo-controlled comparison, 240 severely depressed patients were randomized to ADM (n=120), CT (n=60) or a (pill) placebo control (n=60) treatment.
Big, randomized trial of people with ungodly hell depression (monopolar).
At the end of the 16-week treatment phase of the study, there were no differences in outcome between ADM and CT, with 58% of patients in both treatment groups meeting the criteria for ‘response’. Curiously, there was no indication that the two treatments affected different symptom clusters of depression: patients treated with either ADM or CT showed comparable rates of change of both cognitive and vegetative symptoms of depression.
Cognitive therapy (therapist nicely telling you how to get over it) is about exactly as effective in exactly the same way as taking pills. YOU WON'T BELIEVE WHAT HAPPENED NEXT!
In the continuation phase of the recent CT versus ADM study, patients who responded to 16 weeks of ADM were randomly assigned to either continue the treatment or change to a (pill) placebo condition. Patients who responded to 16 weeks of CT were withdrawn from treatment and allowed no more than three booster sessions (never more than one per month) during the first year of the follow-up period.
We took their meds away, and kicked all the therapy people out of therapy. Kept half the pill-heads on pills as a control, switched the other half to sugar pills, and didn't tell anyone.
As shown in FIG. 2, 76% of the ADM responders relapsed following medication withdrawal, compared with only 31% of the patients who had been treated with CT. Patients who continued ADM also fared better than patients who were assigned to the placebo treatment, with a relapse rate of 47% (which did not differ significantly from the 31% relapse rate in the CT group). After the continuation phase had ended, the patients who had not relapsed while on ADM were withdrawn from medication. Of these patients, 54% experienced a recurrence (the onset of a new depressive episode), compared with only 17% of the patients who had previously been given CT.
Like 3/4 of the pill-heads became severely depressed once we took the pills away; about 1/3 of the CT people had the same trouble. Half the people who stayed on pills relapsed, although in this study that's roughly equivalent (i.e. assume 47% == 31%): STAYING ON PILLS IS THE SAME AS QUITTING YOUR THERAPY AFTER 4 MONTHS. Of the pill users who didn't relapse, half of them relapsed after we took their meds away
Overall, just a hair under 50% of the patients who had CT for 4 months and then quit were, at 24 months, still cured. Just under 25% of patients who had drugs for 12 months came out of the 24 month period without having another depressive episode. Just under 10% of sugar pill patients were doing fine, no drugs and no therapy.
Drugs are facilitating: they provide you a baseline of feeling, which can help retrain your brain to behave in this new way by restricting its undesirable behavior. That can help; in the most extreme cases, drugs are *required*, because you simply can't pull yourself up by your bootstraps if your h
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Wait, an apartment is over $4,150/mo in Silicon Valley now if you want a 2 bedroom? As an average?
I do not want to point out the obvious but, well, that is pretty friggen absurd. No, it is completely retarded. I realize it's THE MARKET® and all that but, seriously? Screw that. Get a camper van and shower at the YMCA. Save that amount of money and buy a better car, an alarm clock, and a house out in the suburbs.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Actually the average rent for a 2 bedroom within 10 miles of SF (not even within SF) is $4,385 a month! SF has laws restricting campers now because so many people tried that -- most places good to park a camper have signs that say "No vehicles over 8" tall or 20" long." I owned a converted shuttle bus. :)
Restaurants have a failure of 160% at 9 months? I never knew. I knew they were bad prospects and I would never invest in them but they are doomed to a 100+% failure rate it seems.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Most people who "attempt suicide" are not attempting anything of the sort. If they wanted to suicide they would not have attempted it, they would have done it. There are many ways to kill yourself that leave little chance of failure. This is a good thing - it is unfortunate when someone commits suicide like they do. (I am a fan of PAS - physician assisted suicide.)
It has to really such to fail a legitimate suicide attempt. They are often physically screwed for life and still depressed. This is not a good state of mind or a good state of being. Hurl yourself off of a tall bridge if you must but do it at night when nobody can see you and save you. That whole cutting one's wrist or taking a fistful of drugs? That is not attempting suicide. That is trying to get help but being unable or unwilling to just ask for it - and maybe not being taken seriously (which is another issue). You are unlikely to kill yourself by cutting your wrists. If you do then you go up the street and not across the street. If you tell me that you attempted suicide then I expect your liver to not function, the side of your head to be a metal plate, or you to be paralyzed from a jump from a high place (or similar). I do not accept a few faded scars on your wrist. That's bullshit and detracts from those who actually do try to kill themselves.
You want to kill yourself? Get a giant rig and cram a bundle of heroin in there and bang it in a single shot. Do it far away from where anyone will find you. Screw the pathetic attempts with a bottle of over-the-counter sleeping medications and a six pack of beer. You certainly have problems, legitimate problems even, but you can not really say you tried to kill yourself. You tried to make it look like you killed yourself so that you got the attention you felt you needed. You want to kill yourself? Choke on a 12ga slug. If that fails to work you are either really shitty at killing yourself, a coward, or just damned lucky.
Again, this does not mean you do not need or deserve help. It just means you did not attempt suicide. You attempted to get attention. If you want to kill yourself then you will do it. Fear and commonsense stop you. If you overcome those then you will suicide just fine. Until then? Stop attention whoring after the fact and just admit you cried out for help in a manner that suited your needs at the time. Next time just use a phone.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Our way of life, particularly in SV, simply does violence to human biology. Sitting around, thinking too much, worrying, business, meetings. Little or no mindfulness.
I recently got a smartphone, 3 weeks ago. I can already feel how different my attention is changing, feel an alienating disconnect and craving for attention and stimulation constantly.
Our culture is violent. So is our means of making a living (and I don't mean physical violence).
-
Restaurants have a failure of 160% at 9 months?
No, they have a failure rate over 90% at 12 months, actually.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
That is patently asinine. Also, I think you mean 8' and 20' as the ' is for feet and " is for inches. I retired and, for a while, I had an apartment while my house was being built and I kept that apartment even after that as it was a nice place to stay in town and I was a heavy drinker then. It was not a run-down apartment, just a single bedroom, and it was above average condition for the area. I paid 1/10 of that... This is, of course, Maine. I paid ~750/mo for a small house in Torrance actually but that was more like 25 years ago. Still, that is an insane amount for rent. I need to pay more attention. The rent is too damned high, indeed.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
I am not sure that counts as twice as bad but, and this is the important part, I would have included the /s tag if I thought it was not obvious. It seems it was not. I would not, ever, invest in a restaurant - not even for a friend or a loved one.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
The Silicon Vally ethos is for entrepreneurs to "fail fast, and fail often". Your number of failures is supposed to be a badge of honor on the way to finally hitting it big.
But the truth is that entrepreneurs have to get personally involved in every startup or they will never succeed. It's no surprise that living on the edge like this takes its toll.
Correct. Clinical depression does not give a crap about how much money you have in the bank, though not having to worry about being homeless is a plus.
Except for when the money runs out and you are covering payroll out-of-pocket and taking on debt until the money is far beyond spent because you are responsible, and it just may come together next week or next month.. again.. and again. Then add depression.
THE MARKET® should be building massive housing projects in order to fill a need for inexpensive housing. Why is that not the case? Maybe because the people who run the show like sitting on a very valuable resource (buildings), so they elect officials who put plenty of restrictions in place, such as height restrictions, "open spaces" or historical districts, in order to keep their resource scarce and expensive.
Not saying that in a true free market landlords might attempt to sabotage new entrants with other methods, but at some point someone would be able to break the cartel.
"Well, good luck finding a judge that doesn't run a bestiality site."
Honestly, I had not put much further thought into it but it seems you are likely correct. Perhaps someone should be looking into the planning board and the approvals committee? I wonder if there is a conflict of interest, taxation reasons, or if there is a straight up bribery system in place...
There could, I suppose, be actual laws that are in place that are not motivated by greed but prevent new housing (or renovations) projects from being started. I do not know and it is not my area of expertise.
There could be regulations about health, safety, or environmental impacts that may be a consideration but, honestly, it is probably grift and graft. Another could be some sort of zoning laws that made sense at the time. Stereotypical California would be prime for any one of these considerations.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
This might be helpful. A lot of it is anti-gentrification, rent control, NIMBY-ism, and other things that legally block people from building more. I don't think the landlords are really responsible for this.
Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
That was a long read but interesting. It gives a nice, and different, view. That is, frankly, a dilemma that I am not sure how to solve. The people that live there should have the right to determine the growth and if that means a poor business growth climate then that is their choice. That is all I can come up with. I suppose you could say that people have a right to live and do business where they want but I do not feel that they should do those at the expense of those who already live there.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
I think people should be able to direct the growth of their neighborhood, but only so much; in a city like SF, with property values skyrocketing, landlords do have to raise rents by a lot, and while it sucks for the people who have to move, it's also partly their fault. It isn't an easy problem to solve, but it would help if people at least knew what's going on and accepted that if you block new construction, prices will go up.
Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.