S/O Gender Identity Thread: Suicide. Why do some choose it but not others?

[TranquilMind]

As a society, we don't treat our children very well. Many spend much of their childhood stressed and that will change how the brain functions too.

This is true too.  Generally - exceptions exist - they have few outlets to get out their energy,   They sit in rooms all day in school, and in front of screens at night.  Not good. 

[TranquilMind]

Absolutely.

 

There is no *one right answer*. We've managed to muck up our existence in pretty much every way imaginable from how we started out. Busy-ness, diet, poor exercise, false rhythms (unnatural light, etc.), even what we sleep on. The list goes on.

True enough.

Then we wonder, when the chickens come home to roost...

[albeto.]

As a society, we don't treat our children very well. Many spend much of their childhood stressed and that will change how the brain functions too.

 

I agree with you. It seems to me our society values treating children accordingly to how convenient they are to us, and that puts lots of [unjustified, imo] pressure on them (and us).

[MBM]

Thank you for the substantive comment.  Interesting stuff. 

 

I still wonder why...does the thought process cause the lesser brain activity or does the lesser brain activity on that side inspire the thought process? 

 

Those are great questions. I don't want to try to sum up Davidson myself because I don't think I'll get it quite right. A number of things seems to play a role for better or for worse, but, yes, thoughts matter a great deal. Davidson's book explains this all better than I can.

 

 

 

 

[fraidycat]

I don't think it is considered controversial. There are ongoing trials that experiment on just this correlation - between the gut and the brain. So far, it seems to be a positive, verifiable correlation. Researchers are discovering just how it works out, what variables are at play here. I suspect we'll learn a lot in the next few decades about just how inconvenient all these conveniences really are. With the consistent increase in human population, a return to pre-industrial human society just isn't feasible, so we'll have to figure something else out.

Ha! You'd be surprised how quickly people will jump on you if you mention a gut-brain connection, inflammation, disease starting in the gut, or duh,duh,duh.... Gluten (as one example). :)

 

But, actually I was thinking more about what the possible answers could be as controversial.

 

For example: Wanna watch a dog pile? Start a Paleo/lchf vs. Vegetarian/vegan vs. Whole grains, low fat vs. Moderation/portion control diet thread. Throw in the fact that we haven't been farmers (eating grains/legumes) very long in the grand scheme of things and we've got evolution debate, too. All in all; a kerfluffle of epic proportions.

[albeto.]

Ha! You'd be surprised how quickly people will jump on you if you mention a gut-brain connection, inflammation, disease starting in the gut, or duh,duh,duh.... Gluten (as one example). :)

 

But, actually I was thinking more about what the possible answers could be as controversial.

 

For example: Wanna watch a dog pile? Start a Paleo/lchf vs. Vegetarian/vegan vs. Whole grains, low fat vs. Moderation/portion control diet thread. Throw in the fact that we haven't been farmers (eating grains/legumes) very long in the grand scheme of things and we've got evolution debate, too. All in all; a kerfluffle of epic proportions.

There's lots of pseudo-science surrounding this, and people tend to believe explanations that correspond to their experiences to be sure, but the correlation does exist. It's not controversial in research, I should maybe amend my comment to say.

[fraidycat]

There's lots of pseudo-science surrounding this, and people tend to believe explanations that correspond to their experiences to be sure, but the correlation does exist. It's not controversial in research, I should maybe amend my comment to say.

You're preaching to the choir. ;)

[Corraleno]

The methylation, neurotransmitter, and antioxidant connections between folate and depression.

Miller AL1.

Abstract

Depression is common - one-fourth of the U.S. population will have a depressive episode sometime in life. Folate deficiency is also relatively common in depressed people, with approximately one-third of depressed individuals having an outright deficiency. Folate is a water-soluble B-vitamin necessary for the proper biosynthesis of the monoamine neurotransmitters serotonin, epinephrine, and dopamine. The active metabolite of folate, 5-methyltetrahydrofolate (5-MTHF, L-methylfolate), participates in re-methylation of the amino acid metabolite homocysteine, creating methionine. S-adenosylmethionine (SAMe), the downstream metabolite of methionine, is involved in numerous biochemical methyl donation reactions, including reactions forming monoamine neurotransmitters. Without the participation of 5-MTHF in this process, SAMe and neurotransmitter levels decrease in the cerebrospinal fluid, contributing to the disease process of depression. SAMe supplementation was shown to improve depressive symptoms. 5-MTHF also appears to stabilize, enhance production of, or possibly act as a substitute for, tetrahydrobiopterin (BH4), an essential cofactor in monoamine neurotransmitter biosynthesis. There are few intervention studies of folic acid or 5-MTHF as a stand-alone treatment for depression related to folate deficiency; however, the studies that have been conducted are promising. Depressed individuals with low serum folate also tend to not respond well to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressant drugs. Correcting the insufficiency by dosing folate along with the SSRI results in a significantly better antidepressant response.

PMID:  18950248 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]    

 

 

There is similar research regarding the relationship between low Vit D levels and depression, and some really interesting research in Scandinavia that suggests the "inattentive" form of ADD may be more related to choline deficiency than the dopamine processing deficit that has been correlated with ADHD (and addiction).

 

Given the fact that so many neurotransmitters are created in, and used by, the gut (including 95% of the body's serotonin), the idea that many diseases that were previously thought to be "in the head" actually involve a complex combination of genetic mutations, biochemical malfunctions, and diet, becomes less controversial and more mainstream every year. To wit:

 

From "Think Twice: How the Gut's 'Second Brain' Influences Mood and Well-Being"

 

"U.C.L.A.'s [Emeran] Mayer is doing work on how the trillions of bacteria in the gut "communicate" with enteric nervous system cells (which they greatly outnumber). His work with the gut's nervous system has led him to think that in coming years psychiatry will need to expand to treat the second brain in addition to the one atop the shoulders."

 

 

[fraidycat]

Personally, I feel the idea that in some long ago time, no-one suffered from depression or killed themselves, is mistaken.

 

.

Who said this?

[TranquilMind]

Ha! You'd be surprised how quickly people will jump on you if you mention a gut-brain connection, inflammation, disease starting in the gut, or duh,duh,duh.... Gluten (as one example). :)

 

But, actually I was thinking more about what the possible answers could be as controversial.

 

For example: Wanna watch a dog pile? Start a Paleo/lchf vs. Vegetarian/vegan vs. Whole grains, low fat vs. Moderation/portion control diet thread. Throw in the fact that we haven't been farmers (eating grains/legumes) very long in the grand scheme of things and we've got evolution debate, too. All in all; a kerfluffle of epic proportions.

I am totally there with you on the gut-brain thing.  That is really true, at least in my case.  I was able to heal some pretty entrenched stuff by listening to someone outside the medical box. 

 

Anyway, people will only act with the information they currently have. 

[TranquilMind]

Sorry, I exaggerated. Of course nobody said this.

 

It's just one of my bug bears - that there was some mythical past when things were better. Even as far as children go - while I do believe there is a lot of harmful pressure on kids these days - children are, in general, doing far better than at other times in history. Generally, they are healthier, safer, better protected, more respected and understood.

 

And I don't think we can have evidence that demonstrates there has been a modern increase in pathology that is related to issues at this point in time.  Maybe we can have that in the future - idk. But we can't compare rates of depression now with rates of suffering-that-was-stigmatised-and-not-called-depression-and-not-recorded-as-such in the past, kwim ?

Well....and fatter than ever before, with very short attention spans (in general).  That is worrisome. 

 

I'm not sure that I agree with you that everyone was depressed but hiding it when times were tougher.  People had too much to worry about just to feed the family, during The Depression, for example. 

[fraidycat]

Ahh. Ok. I can definitely agree that our social progress is going in the right direction. Slowly.

 

I'm also not a "back in the good ol' days" gal.

 

But, we tend to forget that we are mammals sometimes, I think. Our big, thinking brains, have thought us right into some troublesome spots. Our wild counterparts who have not been "domesticated" by us still eat, sleep, behave in line with their evolution as much as possible.

 

We: don't. And neither do our indoor pets, or feedlot animals intended for our dinner plate. There is no way on Earth that we can measure all of the effects, positive or negative this has had on us.

[TranquilMind]

Because of cause and effect; yes and yes. A thought process can inspire certain brain activity. We know the effect exercise has on thinking, for example. And the brain activity does inspire thoughts in the way I shared above, as well as the example given above regarding seratonin and dopamine.

  Lots of things are true that haven't yet been verified by someone who passes your credential test. 

[Mrs Mungo]

Who said this?

Some have implied that depression and mental health issues are new. We know at least some have been around a long time. The fact that we now have drugs/treatments to help doesn't mean that they didn't exist before. Demon possession, witches, there were lots of "explanations" in the past.

 

I think one big thing to consider is life span. People didn't necessarily live long enough for some issues to manifest like they do now.

[I.Dup.]

Personally, I know this is not PC, but I do think weakness and strength has something to do with it in a sense. I have known people who are so stubborn, such fighters that I was sure they would make it through anything. They turn any negative into something to conquer and just see it as one more way to increase their strength.

 

I, OTOH, am nothing at all like that. I definitely consider myself weaker than these people and need to take safeguards in my life that they probably never will. I'm also sure these people see people like me as being weak, and that's okay. We are who we are.

[Caroline]

Well....and fatter than ever before, with very short attention spans (in general). That is worrisome.

 

I'm not sure that I agree with you that everyone was depressed but hiding it when times were tougher. People had too much to worry about just to feed the family, during The Depression, for example.

During the Great Depression, yearly suicide rates were 18-22 per 100,000. In 2012, the suicide rate was 12 per 100,000. There are more suicides today, but the rate was higher during The Great Depression. Studies show that suicide rates are tied to how the economy is doing.

[TranquilMind]

During the Great Depression, yearly suicide rates were 18-22 per 100,000. In 2012, the suicide rate was 12 per 100,000. There are more suicides today, but the rate was higher during The Great Depression. Studies show that suicide rates are tied to how the economy is doing.

Yeah, I suppose that part is true. Some of this even happened in the Great Recession of 2009-10. 

 

But I was thinking about depression more than actual suicide, as this had been discussed more recently.  

[maize]

Suicide rates are also higher for those living at higher altitudes, such as in the Rocky Mountain states. I am very interested to see what comes of current research on the underlying causes.

[Mrs Mungo]

Well....and fatter than ever before, with very short attention spans (in general). That is worrisome.

 

I'm not sure that I agree with you that everyone was depressed but hiding it when times were tougher. People had too much to worry about just to feed the family, during The Depression, for example.

And it depends upon how deeply ones delves into their family past. Most families (especially those who were pioneers in the early west) have pasts that involve divorce, bigamy, abuse, affairs, loveless marriages, suicide, even murder. None of it is new. It is all in The Bible nearly from the beginning. It can be seen in historical records.

 

If you have read about the Ingalls family, for example, you know that how the children's books present things and how they really were are two different things. Depression existed then for a certainty. Treatment did not. That is the main difference between then and now.

 

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2009/08/10/wilder-women

[TranquilMind]

And it depends upon how deeply ones delves into their family past. Most families (especially those who were pioneers in the early west) have pasts that involve divorce, bigamy, abuse, affairs, loveless marriages, suicide, even murder. None of it is new. It is all in The Bible nearly from the beginning. It can be seen in historical records. If you have read about the Ingalls family, for example, you know that how the children's books present things and how they really were are two different things. Depression existed then for a certainty. Treatment did not. That is the main difference between then and now.

Do you think the percentage of the population that was troubled and would be provided medication (if available then) was as high as it is today? 

[Dory]

Personally, I know this is not PC, but I do think weakness and strength has something to do with it in a sense. I have known people who are so stubborn, such fighters that I was sure they would make it through anything. They turn any negative into something to conquer and just see it as one more way to increase their strength.

 

I, OTOH, am nothing at all like that. I definitely consider myself weaker than these people and need to take safeguards in my life that they probably never will. I'm also sure these people see people like me as being weak, and that's okay. We are who we are.

 

I know people like that and they actually are less healthy then those that seem to know their limitations. They push themselves too far. And yes, they are still moving and still ok, but it's really, really, really hard on everyone around them. Because they see every challenge as something to be conquered, they over do it. I know I have limitations. I know I have a breaking point. I do everything in my power to ensure that it isn't reached. Not because I value me so much, but because I value those around me. Also, I find a lot of those 'weaker' people are much more gentle and soft. They tend to have a little more empathy for others. The ones that must conquer everything tend to look at those that struggle and give them the 'suck it up' routine. At least that's been my experience.

 

I'll take someone who fully recognizes their weaknesses any day over someone who doesn't.

[Mrs Mungo]

Do you think the percentage of the population that was troubled and would be provided medication (if available then) was as high as it is today?

Which time period? I do agree with others that current U.S. culture (from food to sleep to work hours to our general style of education) is partly responsible for the percentage of people who need mental health support. But, other time periods have had similar issues for different reasons.

[Dory]

Do you think the percentage of the population that was troubled and would be provided medication (if available then) was as high as it is today? 

 

If I look through my family tree and the stories and behaviours that have happened back to the beginning of the country, in my family, the percentage is about the same. It's just back then they were called eccentric, or fragile, or were ignored.

 

You read much for stories of famous people of the past and a lot of people were bordering on mentally unstable.

[Lawana]

I know people like that and they actually are less healthy then those that seem to know their limitations. They push themselves too far. And yes, they are still moving and still ok, but it's really, really, really hard on everyone around them. Because they see every challenge as something to be conquered, they over do it. I know I have limitations. I know I have a breaking point. I do everything in my power to ensure that it isn't reached. Not because I value me so much, but because I value those around me. Also, I find a lot of those 'weaker' people are much more gentle and soft. They tend to have a little more empathy for others. The ones that must conquer everything tend to look at those that struggle and give them the 'suck it up' routine. At least that's been my experience.

 

I'll take someone who fully recognizes their weaknesses any day over someone who doesn't.

QFT

[*Lulu*]

Which time period? I do agree with others that current U.S. culture (from food to sleep to work hours to our general style of education) is partly responsible for the percentage of people who need mental health support. But, other time periods have had similar issues for different reasons.

And there are situations that frequently result in depression that we now recognize and treat where in the past it was a pat on the back, suck it up buttercup, and soldier on.

[Dory]

QFT

 

I'm having a bit of a mental block here. I don't know what that means.

[*Lulu*]

I'm having a bit of a mental block here. I don't know what that means.

Quoted for truth

[fraidycat]

Which time period? I do agree with others that current U.S. culture (from food to sleep to work hours to our general style of education) is partly responsible for the percentage of people who need mental health support. But, other time periods have had similar issues for different reasons.

What about further back?

 

How about 2,000-3,000ish years ago? Those who heard the word of God? Were they in need of mental health support for hearing voices?

 

6,000 - 10,000 years ago when settling from nomads? Were they "tired, just giving up"? Would they have kept roaming with the right mental health support? Did they really intend to become farmers and build communities and fight over land, or was that just a happy accident?

 

Not directed just at you, Mrs. Mungo. Just using your "other time periods" as a jumping off point for my monkey mind.

 

ETA: I came back to clarify that I am not trying to denigrate the bible. This is actually a question I ask myself on an ongoing basis as a cradle Catholic, questioning, undecided spiritual - though agnostic leaning at this point in time person.

[Rosie_0801]

Some have implied that depression and mental health issues are new. We know at least some have been around a long time. The fact that we now have drugs/treatments to help doesn't mean that they didn't exist before. Demon possession, witches, there were lots of "explanations" in the past.

 

 

I was just about in tears reading the beginning of "Margery Kempe." That was some very, bloody nasty post partum psychosis, the poor woman!

[Rosie_0801]

Do you think the percentage of the population that was troubled and would be provided medication (if available then) was as high as it is today? 

 

People were taking Valium before Prozac was invented, so I'm inclined to think so.

 

 

Edit: I'm not so sure about kids and the pills they're on though. I think they are over proscribed due to life style, such as kids not having enough time, space and morale to run about.

[albeto.]

Lots of things are true that haven't yet been verified by someone who passes your credential test.

 

This is an awkward comment for me to understand. For starters, I always think of "truth" as belonging to a philosophical discussion, whereas with physiology, we can discuss what is factual. But anyway, that's probably just me. Moving on...

 

On the one hand, I think it should go without saying that there exists an uncountable number of things that are true that we haven't verified. Until we can be so familiar with the working of the natural world that we can say with confidence how things work, there will always be something left unverified. And really, do we expect there to be an "end-point" of learning? That doesn't even make sense to me. So it seems silly to state the obvious.

 

On the other hand, there are countless things that are not true but are erroneously believed to be true (ie, pseudo-science, superstitious beliefs, delusional beliefs). Until verification can be made, we may believe things that are wrong, and believing something to be true is no indication of its actually being true.

 

But are you referring to how the brain works? Are you suggesting many aspects about the mechanics of thought and behavior haven't yet been verified so they don't count? Or we can't trust conclusions made because there's more information yet to be verified? You are unfamiliar with neurology, so before making conclusions about what is true and what is not true, you might want to educate yourself about what is known. I found this to be a helpful source that breaks down the information into easy to understand sections. This section explains how the brain works in general. In any case, if you don't understand the mechanics of the scientific method, then things explained via the scientific method may naturally sound like just another mythology or superstitious belief to be accepted or dismissed based on the emotional appeal it may provide.

[Mrs Mungo]

 

Edit: I'm not so sure about kids and the pills they're on though. I think they are over proscribed due to life style, such as kids not having enough time, space and morale to run about.

I think it is also trying to fit humans into lifestyles that don't *really* fit well with being human. Not everyone is built for cubical life.

[fraidycat]

I think it is also trying to fit humans into lifestyles that don't *really* fit well with being human. Not everyone is built for cubical life.

I see your everyone and raise you to anyone.

 

Grammatically awkward as it may be.

 

Not anyone is built for cubical life. This is what I was trying to convey earlier.

[idnib]

.

[Mrs Mungo]

Catching up on this thread....

 

I think it can be scary/worrisome to religious people to confront how much behavior is chemical/biological. The understanding of this can really skew traditional thinking about sin and free will.

 

I think that's what's happening here.

 

:leaving:

Hm, maybe to certain brands of religion. I am religious, but I feel like I can reconcile the two.

[maize]

Catching up on this thread....

 

I think it can be scary/worrisome to religious people to confront how much behavior is chemical/biological. The understanding of this can really skew traditional thinking about sin and free will.

 

I think that's what's happening here.

 

:leaving:

 

Hmm, I am religious and don't see a conflict; I suppose this could depend to some extent on a person's  specific religious background. My belief is that an individual is accountable for their behavior only to the extent that they are capable of accountability. For any person at any given time only God truly knows the specific individual's background, circumstances and capabilities; this is why only God can judge a person.

 

I would expect that someone acting under the influence of serious depressive illness would have minimal accountability from a divine perspective.

[idnib]

. 

 

[idnib]

. 

 

[Mrs Mungo]

Me too. I think what can be more disconcerting to some are the more subtle aspects of brain chemistry that are not serious depressive illness.

 

I guess I should add when I made my statement I had in mind OP and her apparent inability to grok idea of depression as a disease. I was not making a general statement about all religious people in this thread. :)

I see what you mean. I guess I, personally, do not see a difference between a person facing schizophrenia or bipolar disease instead of cancer or any other disease. I have seen mental illness up close enough that I understand it isn't a character flaw, which I agree that some seem to be implying.

[MBM]

 

Jeffrey Schwartz, a psychiatrist and researcher in neuroplasticity who is known for his treatment of OCD, has written about free will and religion. Schwartz is deeply religious and has a good grasp of philosophy. If you want to read his views on free will, you might be able to find them online.

 

 

[TranquilMind]

Catching up on this thread....

 

I think it can be scary/worrisome to religious people to confront how much behavior is chemical/biological. The understanding of this can really skew traditional thinking about sin and free will.

 

I think that's what's happening here.

 

:leaving:

Actually, it could be really easy to embrace in the right mindset.

 

It removes all responsibility if it was just chemistry and you had no control.

[TranquilMind]

Jeffrey Schwartz, a psychiatrist and researcher in neuroplasticity who is known for his treatment of OCD, has written about free will and religion. Schwartz is deeply religious and has a good grasp of philosophy. If you want to read his views on free will, you might be able to find them online.

Thanks. Will check that out when I am not mobile and low on battery strength.

 

I'm stuck in a nearby city where they actually plow the roads, even though we pay high taxes in current city. I was complaining to my brother about the awful weather and the unplowed roads. His comment: Snow is a choice. ;).

[albeto.]

Actually, it could be really easy to embrace in the right mindset.

 

It removes all responsibility if it was just chemistry and you had no control.

 

Hardly.

 

A.) Chemistry explains the molecular structure that contributes to your body and your environment.

B.) People decide what responsibilities are appropriate, regardless of religious belief. Even atheists recognize morals and justice. We're not all baby-killers (only on the high atheist holy days, and Fridays when it's really sunny and pleasant, and when college buddies are in town, and a few other exceptions, but I digress).

C.) Being made of natural elements (atoms, quarks, guided by forces explained through physics) doesn't mean you have no control. I can control how high to set my BBQ, for example. And which BBQ sauce to use according to the size, gender, and race of the baby.

 

:closedeyes:

[Dory]

Actually, it could be really easy to embrace in the right mindset.

 

It removes all responsibility if it was just chemistry and you had no control.

 

Not really. One still has choice on whether to search for answers or not. One can still try and fix it. But it's like other health problems, if the person is trying, and fails, you can't really blame them because they did try. If the person doesn't try at all, well that is a choice they made. There are still choices, just like with any other problem that hits us in life that we didn't choose.

[TranquilMind]

Not really. One still has choice on whether to search for answers or not. One can still try and fix it. But it's like other health problems, if the person is trying, and fails, you can't really blame them because they did try. If the person doesn't try at all, well that is a choice they made. There are still choices, just like with any other problem that hits us in life that we didn't choose.

Right.  On that, we will agree. 

There are still choices. 

[TranquilMind]

Hmm, I am religious and don't see a conflict; I suppose this could depend to some extent on a person's  specific religious background. My belief is that an individual is accountable for their behavior only to the extent that they are capable of accountability. For any person at any given time only God truly knows the specific individual's background, circumstances and capabilities; this is why only God can judge a person.

 

I would expect that someone acting under the influence of serious depressive illness would have minimal accountability from a divine perspective.

I agree with this. 

[TranquilMind]

Jeffrey Schwartz, a psychiatrist and researcher in neuroplasticity who is known for his treatment of OCD, has written about free will and religion. Schwartz is deeply religious and has a good grasp of philosophy. If you want to read his views on free will, you might be able to find them online.

He has written a book that showed up on Amazon in this listings when I googled his name;  Brain Lock; Free Yourself from Obsessive-Compulsive Behavior.   Looks like interesting stuff. 

 

I like the idea that he thinks you can do something about it rather than passively wait for somebody to figure out how to fix you by changing medications.   Of course, like anyone outside the box, he has his detractors. 

 

http://www.amazon.com/Brain-Lock-Yourself-Obsessive-Compulsive-Behavior/dp/0060987111

[Laurie4b]

 

 

I like the idea that he thinks you can do something about it rather than passively wait for somebody to figure out how to fix you by changing medications.   Of course, like anyone outside the box, he has his detractors. 

 

http://www.amazon.com/Brain-Lock-Yourself-Obsessive-Compulsive-Behavior/dp/0060987111

 

If that's what you thought everyone was saying when we were talking about depression being chemical, no wonder we kept talking past each other. I will bet that the supermajority of people who have spoken of it that way  don't think that people who are depressed should passively sit around waiting for someone to figure out how to fix you by changing medications. For many people with depression, there are things that people can do. What people have been saying is that once it is at a certain point, one loses a great deal of choice due to distorted thinking produced by brain changes. For some people with untreatable depression, there may literally be nothing they can do.

 

One way I think about it is that some of us have more choice than others by virtue of our genes, upbringing, and other environmental factors. We all have more choice at some points in our lives than in other times. For instance, the teenaged brain is not as capable of rational choice as we think of it as a fully matured brain. (That's why there is a big "hump" in crime from the late teens through early 20s for instance. It drops off significantly after that.)

[TranquilMind]

If that's what you thought everyone was saying when we were talking about depression being chemical, no wonder we kept talking past each other. I will bet that the supermajority of people who have spoken of it that way  don't think that people who are depressed should passively sit around waiting for someone to figure out how to fix you by changing medications. For many people with depression, there are things that people can do. What people have been saying is that once it is at a certain point, one loses a great deal of choice due to distorted thinking produced by brain changes. For some people with untreatable depression, there may literally be nothing they can do.

 

One way I think about it is that some of us have more choice than others by virtue of our genes, upbringing, and other environmental factors. We all have more choice at some points in our lives than in other times. For instance, the teenaged brain is not as capable of rational choice as we think of it as a fully matured brain. (That's why there is a big "hump" in crime from the late teens through early 20s for instance. It drops off significantly after that.)

It wasn't. 

 

But I am all for proactive behavior in pretty much every area.  Sometimes I fall short though, which is why I still have a few pounds to lose.  Had I been more proactive, I would have done this when I was younger and had a higher metabolism. 

 

Better late than never. 

[Joanne]

It wasn't. 

 

But I am all for proactive behavior in pretty much every area.  Sometimes I fall short though, which is why I still have a few pounds to lose.  Had I been more proactive, I would have done this when I was younger and had a higher metabolism. 

 

Better late than never. 

 

 

OMG! Get my diary! I agree with TM!