This sounds a lot like numbing "bad" feelings to me; there's no way to selectively numb, it's all or nothing.
Impulsivity isn't all bad.
This sounds a lot like numbing "bad" feelings to me; there's no way to selectively numb, it's all or nothing.
Impulsivity isn't all bad.
But it's definitely done something to my non-food behaviour, albeit I'm not sure what exactly. It may well be that I was previously trying to satiate my constant desperate hunger for food with other forms of harmful addictive behaviour, and without the hunger, I just don't need that as much. The concept of satisfying one craving with another isn't new, after all.
The effects don't have to be dramatic to be harmful, subtle over time is arguably worse.
I just hope people keep their eyes open, that's all.
But is it worth giving up your impulses? I mean all of them.
I have no proof that's how it works long term, but I do feel the question should be asked before we dive in head first.
I can still get a wild idea at 9 pm and lose myself in code. I still see flowers and buy them form my wife without planning. I still have a bowl of ice cream before bed sometimes.
The best way to describe it is that you still have the impulse, but you are able to rationally consider it.
If that's where your most powerful impulses are, that's where you're going to notice the difference.
Of course, with the shortage of geriatricians, most seniors are unlikely to find this out.
Are we just a bunch of NPCs waiting for the orders? One day it's McDonald's selling you the disease the next it's Novo Nordisk selling you the cure, and you apparently have to clap at that "miracle"?