Depression is increasing among Americans reaching middle age
economist.com
economist.com
We still build career expectations around this model, but it's mostly not true anymore. If you start in the mail room today, you'll retire from the mail room. Actually, you won't even retire, because mail handling is going to get outsourced.
You'll be repeatedly told how much more convenient this is for you.
Including purchasing your own uniform and tools (which you did at the "company store", often with "company money" (scrip), which you could only spend for products (food, drink, etc), there anyway.
I don't think that's the problem for most - that they didn't become managers. And I doubt that many blue collar / working class people become managers in the 50s to 80s anyway, much less "10 out of 10".
Having travelled around the US and talked with friends a bit, it's more destroyed rural communities, ex-industrial cities, etc. Blue collar jobs who offered work for life and let people buy a house quite easily in the 50s-80s, now are non existent, people have difficulty making ends up, are a health issue away from losing their whole savings (or house), or don't have even $2K in the bank.
And for an increased number of the population it's not very different in many parts of Europe nowadays either, even the supposedly "going strong" ones like Germany (and you've already seen the Yellow Vest protests in France of course).
Got any sources for that because while I don't have don't have data sources, I do have anecdotes from friends who work at Amazon and work for directors/VP's who started out as fulfilment workers despite everyone here loving to hate on Amazon fulfillment centers.
Ultimately, the instability drove me to set up my own business, and while it was tough initially, I'm so glad I did.
Back in the day, the stodgy "legacy" SV companies like HP recruited for all positions internally. The NYT had a story in 2017 about a custodial worker who worked her way up into a corporate role over 10+ years. That was only possible because she saw and spoke with office staff every day and the familiarity and mutual respect helped her get a foot in the door when non-custodial positions became available.
That would be impossible today because most firms use contract labour, that rotate across different employers. If I remember the article correctly, Google's policy even puts technical contractors and FT staff in separate canteens, so there's even less ability to share ideas and network with FT staff who might be able to recognize your work and recommend you to the internal HR team.
69% of the DSM-5 task force had ties to the pharmaceutical industry.
Diagnosis rates grow each year, and the number of ambiguously defined mental illnesses increases with every revision of the DSM. These data points are used as justification for further increases in funding, which in turn increases diagnosis rates.
This pressure increases the pressure to make it so more of the population is defined as being mentally ill so they can get medical treatment.
But yeah, it's not obvious that depression would spread e.g. within a class like a flu.
I tend to think that depression is both on the rise, and historically under-treated. In fact, it's most likely still under-treated. I'm neutral on the efficacy of treatment.
Many doctors still believe the "correcting neurotransmitter imbalance" theory of SSRI action which appears to be on its way to being disproved.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...
This meta analysis has John Ionaddis as one of the coauthors (if you don’t know why this is interesting look it up).
Also nothing is easily “disproved” in medicine (or most science) so even if “neurotransmitter imbalance” is false, you’re still wrong nothing is on the way to being disproved. Furthermore, current understanding of SSRI effectiveness is not based on “correcting neurotransmitter imbalance”.
I probably should have emphasized this portion of the statement. SSRI's definitely have lots of good studies on the indication of acute depression and MDD. However, many psychiatrists view SSRIs as a set-it-and-forget-it long-term solution to other chronic issues, which I find troubling.
Please do not spread such misinformation without anything other than opinion.
SSRIs can cause unpleasant and even dangerous withdrawal symptoms when discontinuing long-term use, so there are real benefits to minimizing overprescription.
"Kid's bored at school? Get them some ADHD drugs!".
(Not that there aren't legitimate cases, but there's also mass over-prescription).
Mental health problems are real. Overprescription due to capitalist reasons is real too. They both do harm.
Also, pardon my ignorance, but I am also curious what counts as being diagnosed with "anxiety" disorder? As in are there definitive definitions of these things?
Both although I'm very skeptical that diagnosing more people as mentally ill is the same as an improvement. The criteria to be diagnosed with a mental illness has loosened. Probably the most extreme example is the DSM-V declaring bereavement over 2 weeks to be a form of mental illness - depression. What has been considered normal human behavior for most of human history has been medicalized.
I've seen no evidence that increases in diagnosis in the last 2 decades have improved mental health in the developed world. Metrics like the suicide rate have gotten worse during that time. Self-reported anxiety and depression is on its way up.
This is not to say you cannot find individuals or groups helped. However the increase in labelling causes insecurity/stigma, while the field itself like all field does have some deadweight costs. The mental health field also, even if it effective are getting overwhelmed by broader societal issues.
Remember that being overweight is not the same as true "obesity" and that no individual finds their way to obesity without first being overweight for a time.
Knowing population distribution curves for what they are, if 30% are obese, how many more are simply overweight?
[1] https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject...
I originally thought it was an opposites-attract kind of show, but the same template is there in Family Guy, According to Jim, The Honeymooners, Two and a Half Men, etc....all highly successful shows that ran for many season and continue to rake in the cash on syndication. Conventionally unattractive, cartoonishly dumb middle-to-lower class white man with fashionable spouse with witty one-liners and putdowns.
Initially I thought these shows were simply lampooning the "working stiff", but as time went on, I think the "lampoon" bit was lost, and the audience actually began to see the show as symbolic of the reality they feel they should be experiencing.
I think I could have easily been on this path to misery, but then I formed a soccer team that plays once a week. We play and then go out for beers. The whole team has bonded. I cannot tell you how much a difference it has made in my life. The joy I get from playing together and then hanging out afterwards is immeasurable.
I have people in my close circle, even my significant other, who feels like they have limited social interactions. The rise of social media, lack of group activities, the rise of suicide, social isolation, blah blah blah, you can fill in the rest.
I am very scared for our collective future but I cannot emphasize enough how important this small social activity of playing a sport together with people I have come to really like has given me purpose and joy that made an enormous difference in my life.
This lack of face to face communication also hurts us in other ways too. I've an 11 year old cousin who's had a phone since he was 8. He can't understand tone and jokes, and unless it's obviously meant to be funny, he'll often come back with a really rude remark about something too. He just doesn't understand empathy or how to interpret jokes because he spends all his time watching YouTube...
Now, that's gone. You cna find infinite hours of whatever interests you on YouTube, and just spiral downhill forever. Coupled with the fact that there's nobody else their age who can have a conversation, and it's a self-fulfilling prophecy.
> But those I loved so much they underwent this change
> They're working fourty hours they got caught in the game
> But now I'm working just like everyone else
> But I'll get out
> I'll get out of here
- Operation Ivy: Junkie's Running Dry
I refer to myself as middle aged when talking to people (e.g., "I'm middle aged but single"). I have even mentioned getting getting screened for cancer now that I'm middle aged to my doctor and he didn't disagree or say anything.
Are you sure middle age starts at 45?
"Middle" is just the etymology, the intended meaning is "somewhere between young man 18 to 40-something and old person (60-65+)" (childhood being its own thing).
middle age, noun: the period after early adulthood and before old age, about 45 to 65.
middle age, noun: the period after early adulthood and before old age, about 45 to 65.
Said card: https://www.mexperience.com/inapam-mexicos-discount-card-for...
It's the same games played with unemployed, where people who have given up trying to find work for a few years, or had some temp gig, are magically discounted from the unemployed statistics.
Not to mention that middle aged people at this point are firmly in the generation that the media has literally been ignoring for a very long time. At the same time, that generation is taking care of the two generations that always do get all the attention (their kids and their parents).
In that case, an increase would not be surprising. Many people are simply falling through the cracks, or are a decade or two behind where prior generations were by the same age.
>25 year old
>Kinda given up on girls.
>Realized videogames is a waste of time watches YouTube instead
>Waits for societal collapse
>Does a lot of weed, knows he needs to stop. He doesn't.
History of the meme: started in 2018 September but the underlying cause is as old as time (depression and anxiety)
Also, remember that old millenials are pushing middle age (late 30's). Their mortgages have been used to fund a bunch of boomer retirements, they can't afford to see a doctor, they watch a lucky few (including many readers here) collect a huge chunk of the output of human labor, and they were left a dying world where the thought we might literally see the collapse of civilisation is not completely outlandish.
I mean, hell, I'm not diagnosed but I've had points where I'm pretty fucking depressed. I'm trying to check out of the system (cheap house, no commute, etc.) because it seems purpose-built to make other people happy. but I still worry my kid will need to learn to shoot, trap, grow, organize, and hide in order to get by in the world we're leaving her.
Maybe people feel depressed because the world is depressing?
Today the American Dream is impossible to attain for, I'd say, the majority of people.
Being steadily employed directly out of high-school makes it much easier to obtain a mortgage and find a home in a low CoL area.
It may be that it was just a complete anomaly - in human history, it was never possible to achieve this, barring a couple of decades in one country (USA). And after it, even in the US, things got back to normal. It may be that your parents' generation was the luckiest generation in history.
Hardly. The people who are not yet on the wrong end of it play nice with it in order to not end up on the wrong end of it, those on the wrong end of it would actually prefer to suffer less, have a decent life and all that. It's just that we're standing on their throats and don't have very good ears, so it can be hard to hear.
Instead, we let a housing cartel (boomers) forbid any new homes.
So those jobs exist, just not enough of them.
There's also an element to your original post of "why don't depressed people just snap out of it?" which is, as always, risible.
Your last sentence shows how readily that assumption leads to dismissive blame. That doesn't seem like a road to progress for anyone.
Learned helplessness can be unlearned but a burden alone
In the garden there aren't as many insects anymore. They're in decline worldwide.
The weather isn't how it used to be when you were growing up. It's hotter, colder, harsher.
We are inundated with articles about the collapse of nature- how half the animals that existed in 1970 are now gone, the coral reefs are dead, and there is no end in sight. We are adding yet more people every day.
It's very easy to fall into despair that regardless of what you do today the collapse we are careening towards will erase all of it and more.
You think you're going to be able to do permaculture on your plot? You'll be fine, until someone with more guns than you takes it from you.
This is why, as a bleeding-heart lefty greeny hippie who moved to Europe for largely philosophical reasons, I desperately want the EU to get its act together and build a credible military defence.
The demographic of boomers are to blame for the shift and the lack of response to said threats.
Forgive me if i'm not sympathetic to their depression.
We have to turn down air conditioners, then We have to stop buying air conditioners We have to stop buying new cars we have to stop buying new phones new tvs new computers We have to learn how to fix things We have to learn how to grow things We have to learn how to kill and eat things
We have to wind the clock back and go backwards in our lifestyles to a time when we didn't have cheap oil. We'll ride horses again. Take trains again.
That's what the future looks like -- the past.
Don't live in the middle of Arizona if you don't like heat. Eat less meat - you'll get used to it.
Honestly just living in a well-insulated flat a walk or bike ride from most amenities, eating little meat, and using renewably-sourced electricity would get us a long ways there.
Our entire society is _designed_ to trap you.
You either start life with no educational debt BUT no job prospects, OR you have the prospect of a decent job BUT massive student loans.
You are "free" to do what you like, unless you decide you don't want to be in debt for housing (or owe money to a landlord).
Homelessness is increasingly illegal and we let homeowners create a housing cartel, so you're forced to buy whether you want or not.
A huge part of the value people generate is captured by others, and living a life where you opt out of this is increasingly illegal.
Of course, this isn't new. One of the silver linings of the black plague was helping to end feudalism. It was pretty damn brutal though.
Those who want steak every day. Those who want fully automated houses. They are going to suffer more. Lots of them.
Also, you realize we can make more of these, right? It's not like the laws of physics decided it was impossible to build nice neighborhoods ca. 1950. The laws of boomers bitching about their parking welfare (aka free street parking) every time somebody wanted to put in apartments did.
To be honest, as someone that the world has decided is worthless, that thought is the most uplifting thought around.
Let it all burn.
The rich westerner who never had to struggle to survive wants chaos. I wonder what a person raised in chaos has to say about that..?
I've thought about this exact thing (teaching this as a prudent backup plan for my kids) not because I necessarily think things will be impossible for them, but if the wage vs cost of living trajectory continues in the same direction, living a more difficult life in nature might be preferable (more rewarding, all things considered) to living an easier life in our increasingly dystopian societies.
Life is better than it ever has been, and there’s an embarrassing amount of data backing up that claim.
We’re depressed because our brains didn’t evolve to live in this kind of society, but that doesn’t mean our civilization is falling apart.
If you're a descendant of an American factory worker, or one of the Gilets Jaunes who can't afford to have a normal life like your parents did, you really don't give a shit that many people in Asia have much better lives now, or that childhood immunizations are so much better. Worse, one ought to be suspicious of shrinking metrics collected by bureaucracies whose definition of success is shrinking metrics.