See e.g.:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18979198/
https://www.quantamagazine.org/mitochondria-may-hold-keys-to...
If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
This guy is giving out mental health advice based on not understanding what he is talking about. I think that is dangerous and isn't a place for being polite.
I get the guidelines for inconsequential topics, but pretending something is valid when engaging with something that could be harmful seems like its elevating its legitimacy. In this case there is plenty of reading to do on the topic of burnout causes.
I guess the simplest answer from you would be the answer to this question. If i posted something encouraging people to not take vaccines, how does that discussion get handled? Does every comment and thought really get treated equally with curious responses? I guess to me it seems fair to, be short direct and point out the misinformation even if it appears to be flaming
Anyway stuff like this https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/six_causes_of_...
is why suggesting taking supplements to cure burnout and dropping an irrelevant link to a study about mental illness is uninformed.
I'll hit report in the future then, thanks for the back and forth and explaining.
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/fFY2HeC9i2Tx8FEnK/luck-based...
The above advice is solid, but I would add number of others. CoQ10, C in multiple forms, ALCAR, D, Bromelain, concentrated fish oil, etc.
I am also convinced they do not work for me, because of the premises.
If you could fight deficiency with a mind, we would not have deficiency disesases.
> If you could fight deficiency with a mind, we would not have deficiency disesases.
That is so true. The thing is, a lot of diseases get treated as a deficiency disease.
Science is important. In accute phase response deficiency is the norm, as one example.
And/or nasty interactions with prescription drugs when you do it incorrectly.