Source? I doubt many making north of 300k per year are living paycheck to paycheck. It's hard to not save money (like at least 10%) at that income imo.
I'm surprised it's that low to be honest. By their definition of any mental illness, it can be anything from severe schizophrenia to mild autism. The subset that would consider suicide is a small slice of that.
Would be more meaningful to look at the % of people with suicidal ideation.
> By their definition of any mental illness, it can be anything from severe schizophrenia to mild autism.
Depression, schizophrenia, and mild autism (which by their accounting probably also includes ADHD) should NOT be thrown together into the same bucket. These are wholly different things, with entirely different experiences, treatments, and management techniques.
At that level it in part depends on your point of view: There's a general requirement in the DSM for a disorder to be something that is causing distress to the patient or those around them, or an inability to function normally in society. So someone with the same symptoms could fall under those criteria or not depending on their outlook and life situation.
> Mild/high-functional autism, as far as I understand it, is not even an illness but a variant of normalcy. Just different.
As someone who actually has an ASD diagnosis, and also has kids with that diagnosis too, this kind of talk irritates me…
If someone has a clinical diagnosis of ASD, they have a psychiatric diagnosis per the DSM/ICD. If you meet the criteria of the “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders”, surely by that definition you have a “mental disorder”… if you meet the criteria of the “International Classification of Diseases”, surely by that definition you have a “disease”
Is that an “illness”? Well, I live in the state of NSW, Australia, and our jurisdiction has a legal definition of “mental illness” (Mental Health Act 2007 section 4):
"mental illness" means a condition that seriously impairs, either temporarily or permanently, the mental functioning of a person and is characterised by the presence in the person of any one or more of the following symptoms--
(a) delusions,
(b) hallucinations,
(c) serious disorder of thought form,
(d) a severe disturbance of mood,
(e) sustained or repeated irrational behaviour indicating the presence of any one or more of the symptoms referred to in paragraphs (a)-(d).
So by that definition most people with a mild or moderate “mental illness” don’t actually have a “mental illness” at all. But I guess this is my point-this isn’t a question of facts, just of how you choose to define words.
Your comment wasn’t wrong. Neither is the reply wrong to be frustrated about how the world understands this complex topic.
You’re talking about autism. The reply is about autism spectrum DISORDER.
Different things, exacerbated by the imprecise and evolving language we use to describe current understanding.
An individual can absolutely exhibit autistic traits, whilst also not meeting the diagnostic criteria for the disorder.
And autistic traits are absolutely a variant of normalcy. When you combine many together, and it affects you in a strongly negative way, now you meet ASD criteria.
I think a very useful term here is Broad Autism Phenotype (BAP) - subclinical ASD - you have significantly more of the traits than the average person does, but they are not strong enough or not disabling enough to merit a clinical diagnosis of ASD.
BAP is very common among (1) STEM professionals, (2) close blood relatives of people with clinical ASD (if you have a child or sibling with an ASD diagnosis, then if you yourself don’t have ASD, odds are high you have some degree of BAP), (3) people with other psychiatric diagnoses (especially those known to have a lot of overlap with ASD, e.g. ADHD, personality disorders, PTSD, OCD, eating disorders, the schizophrenia spectrum), (4) certain LGBT subgroups (especially transgender people) - all of whom have heightened odds not just of having BAP / subclinical ASD, but clinical ASD too
Like ASD, BAP skews male, but women can have it too. (The average man is a little bit more autistic than the average woman.) Also, autistic traits are positively correlated between romantic partners, so a woman in a relationship with a man with BAP or ASD is more likely to have some degree of BAP herself (as well as being more likely to have clinical ASD)
BAP itself is a matter of degree… autistic traits is a continuum and we are all somewhere on it (actually a one-dimensional continuum is a simplification, it is a multidimensional construct-but a useful simplification) - and clinicians draw a line at some point (they don’t all draw it at the same place, and its location varies across time and space and culture and even clinical subcultures) and if you are on one side of that line you have clinical ASD, if you are on the other you don’t-if you are on the non-clinical side of the line, but nearing it, you have BAP… but “nearing” it subdivides into people who are closer and people who are further away
It’s okay… sorry I wasn’t aiming at you personally. A lot of the common language on this topic irritates me, but people can’t be blamed for repeating what they hear others say… I think we call that phenomenon “culture”
The inequality on dating apps is very high. Their Gini coefficients vary from 0.4 to 0.6 on most popular dating apps. Even if 100% of people were using dating apps, only the top percentiles of men would be satisfied because they can get way more short-term partners than they could without the apps.
To the extent hookups lead to relationships, it's coming from people that are willing to settle
Fairness and difficulty are orthogonal to each other, no one said the game is unfair. But it is definitely very challenging, and that’s not marketing as far as I know - I have yet to see a trailer etc for the game that says anything about difficulty. Dark Souls did that a lot more with their "prepare to die edition" or the opening of DS2.
The concern would be that it normalizes expansionist rhetoric, which is very concerning for the countries on the borders of USA. Setting the information space up for future events is a serious thing in geopolitics. It is not just a distraction but can (when combined with many other things) have a real affect down the line.
Throwing out multiple crazy things per day to saturate the media and opposition so they have trouble resisting or reporting on everything was an explicitly stated plan by members of the administration, before the election. Sometimes you can’t come up with anything even hypothetically substantive, I guess, so you rename something that zero people wanted to be renamed.
Most of the IP to coarse location databases cost money and/or require backend work to setup. Totally reasonable to skip that money/effort for a fun project like this!
Maybe Trump's plan to make Canada part of the United States, just rename Canada to the "United States" in the GNIS database and they appear part of the same country (at least within the real "United States" borders, Google implements names based on a Geo fence for each country).
