Hacker News Reader

Comment by mattdeboard | Hacker News Reader

This is a great explanation and very apt. I'm generally at a red on this scale. I don't call that PTSD, btw, though a lot of laymen might. I just think it comes from the understanding that bad stuff happens regardless of how prepared you are, but you can minimize the damage if you're ready to react.

View on HN

I don't know you and haven't seen anything like combat so sorry if this is presumptuous, but have you considered psychotherapy? A good therapist could teach you strategies to control your level of anxiety/stress/alertness whatever you want to call it. Doesn't mean you're crazy and there's no shame in it. thanks for our service.

Some cultures (US, in my personal experience) spend quite a bit of time convincing themselves that terrible things can't happen to them. For instance, I could be hit by a bus tomorrow in a freak accident and suffer a more painful end than a soldier in Iraq. That's not to say that Iraq isn't much more dangerous, but danger exists for everyone.

I feel for the soldier you're replying to because he is at odds with society in this regard. However, he's not at odds with reality because bad shit really does happen and I admire his not being so quick to label it some kind of illness.

Accepting that random dangers outside of our control exist is actually entirely different than the hypervigilance. Your bus example: Do you go into a panic at the sight of a bus? Do you check that every bus you see comes to a complete stop & doesn't have faulty brakes? Do you wait for buses to leave the area before you proceed?

With hypervigilance you are identifying threats that do not likely exist given the current context of the situation. Classic post-war examples are where someone needs to check their corners before exiting an aisle of a grocery store or fears slowing down at an intersection because it leaves them vulnerable, even though they are in their hometown. It can interfere greatly with someone's quality of life.

But you see what I'm saying? "quality of life" is an illusion because danger exists in those situations. my point is not hypervigilance, as you say. my point is... enjoy your life because it could be very, very short

The poster you were responding to sounded like he may be dealing with hypervigilance, which is why I brought it up. Hypervigilance is one facet of PTSD. PTSD should not be poo poo'd. People with PTSD cannot just say "oh life's short, I should enjoy it" & then get on with their lives.

The poster didn't sound like he's in such bad shape and doesn't deserve to be labeled as diseased. If he decides he needs that, sure, it should be taken dead seriously. He may not. Just let the man live his life and decide what he can or cannot say

There are bad things which can happen all the time. I don't think being "extra vigilant", as long as it doesn't cross over into clinical hypervigilance, is really that wrong. Driving, in particular, is incredibly dangerous, and treating really bad drivers like they might be VBIEDs seems to be consistent with safety.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com