In short, cortisol is secreted due to a real or _perceived_ threat, meaning that by framing everything around us as challenges we avoid activating the HPA (hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal) axis that normally works during danger. Rats put in stressful situations showed a propensity to gorge on sweet and fatty food (cookies), since they impacted the brain just as much as natural endorphins; the rats were trying to calm themselves down after stress. The literature is monumental, one study is here [PDF]:
There are no threats, only challenges.
Exercise helps, but again don't overdo it because you'll be causing more stress. Tai Chi (slow-motion kung fu) has been found to really help, take a look here:
In some patients after 12 weeks of Tai Chi the metabolic syndrome, the dreaded pot belly that occurs because there are abundant cortisol receptors in the abdomen, shrinks or disappears completely.
It is clearer than ever at this point that high stress causes employees to underperform, and develop chronic physical and mental illnesses.
These diseases will end getting paid by society under one form or another, either by paying unemployment to burned out employees, paying the treatment of chronic illnesses, mental health care, etc.
So nothing fairer that companies that chew people alive and spit them out to become more socially accountable for what they are doing.
Not to mention the huge impact that this has on the stressed employee kids and family, by having to deal with a chronically stressed parent.
These companies are sometimes killing people, literally. They should not be allowed to continue to get away with it like its 1980.
Don't do it folks, it's not worth it.
I tried hard to make it work and was stressed often. Not worth... I blame myself mostly for being obsessed about the project, but I wish I would not have been working alone, especially as a newcomer to the field.
Another thing is that the travel times to get to school is quite long in suburban/rural locations. I remember one job I had that had a long commute and I would see kids waiting for the school bus at 7 AM.
Contrast that with my high school, that was a 15 minute walk and didn't start till 8:15. Much less stressful.
Brutal! Taking this to the extreme - I saw kids in the extremely rural Copper Canyon, Mexico, catching the twice-daily bus at 5am to get to school every day. Though, to be fair they all passed out within minutes, despite the bumpy roads and regular breakdowns. I would be ruined within a week if I had to do it.
Coming from a family that has a few small businesses (construction, manufacturing, food), I can tell you that prolonged stress will age and exhaust you very quickly and the recovery doesn't always happen (PTSD has a long lasting affect). I remember reading Peter Thiel's book Zero to One (I think it was his book) where he mentioned being on the floor and dry heaving or where he was curled up in a ball crying/freaking out. I couldn't help but laugh because it's more common then you think.
Working for someone can be stressful but you can walk out if you need to.Running your own business and mortgaging your home and family is insanely stressful. Small business people typically have it the worst, it's not for the faint of heart.
In what way do companies have an economic interest to have healthier employees?
Heck, in the US they can even just fire them when they get sick.
Some companies self insure and only have the insurance company handle the billing. This provides arm's length from employee's confidential health care.
Well, they could, yes. But wouldn't company counsel advise them to just settle the inevitable lawsuit? (Serious question, BTW; not like this IANAL follows the case law.)
There are a couple problems with this:
1) It's only for fairly serious conditions. If it's just "I feel like crap all the time because I've been stressed out for years" then in most states they can fire you.
2) It's unclear to me (IANAL as well) if they are required to extend non-pay benefits to you in that time, but I think not. So if they do not extend health insurance to you in that time, then you might be able to come back, but you'll be bankrupt.
For example, software engineers at tech giants might typically leave because they're bored, whereas employees in the Amazon warehouse might leave because they're burnt out and overworked.
Measuring cortisol is extremely imprecise. Cortisol also has huge variability from one patient to another and depends heavily on time of day relative to a person's circadian rhythm, among other variables.
Cortisol measurements aren't even used clinically outside of conditions which cause extreme excesses or shortages of cortisol. For example, Cushing's syndrome or Addison's disease.
Consider that the reference range for morning plasma free cortisol has a lower limit of 5 ug/dL and an upper limit of 25 ug/dL. Obviously, you can't draw any conclusions about one's workplace stress if the morning reference range in normal, healthy volunteers already spans a 5X range.
Finally, the idea that cortisol == bad is just wrong. Cortisol is just one marker of a complex system. If you're in a stressful situation, you want your body to react with an appropriate amount of cortisol to help you deal with it. Cortisol only becomes problematic when stress is chronic day and night, or when your natural cortisol feedback mechanisms are degraded as might be the case in major depressive disorder.
Until I got blinded by stress! Excess stress hormone can even damage your eyes, its called central serous retinopathy... My central vision is gone and have hard time reading, I cant continue my career as programmer anymore.
Its surprising how damaging excess cortisol can be to a person
Since then, I've had jaw pain, constant pressure headaches, vision troubles, vertigo, depersonalization/derealization, and feel totally weak physically.
I've seen so many doctors this month, and they all told me the same thing: it's stress. It's crazy to see how one very stressfull week has totally fucked up my whole body, and that two months after I'm still not fully recovered from it, and I don't think I will every feel totally normal again.
Sorry you had a similar experience and got lasting damages from it, I wish you the best for the future.
It took me a lot of time to figure out this vicious circle. Your body might not work the same but I encourage you to look at the problem from every angle.
Those who have been on medication since the early stage of their depression or GAS do not have those damaged or not to the same extent.
So it’s very important to get treated, both via medication, because this is chemical problem, and therapy, because our understanding of this chemistry doesn’t go very far, and in the end you still want to function in your environment, even when you feel or know that it is making you sick.
* read The Body Keeps the Score
* get a massage at least once a month
* Start a regular yoga practice
* Start journalling with pen and paper
* Find ways to get outside in nature / around water
You can get the gist of it in this chapter from “The Feeling Good Handbook”, which was written by one of the pioneers in the field:
That, and getting plenty of sleep.
I also agree that sleeping is very important, and I've forced myself to sleep more in the past year, with good results (well except last month)
In my younger days - nothing bothered me. Then I had 'that job', like many in the comments have talked about. Stress to the max. It took me to some dark, dark places.
Eventually - I just said "this isn't worth my life" and quit. Just up and walked out. I vowed never again would I let a job have that affect on me.
I've lived from then on with that as my mantra, although lately - stress is creeping back in at my current place.
About 4 months I was beginning to see some spots in low illumination conditions but my doctor told me it was nothing to worry about. The spots stopped after 2 months. But last week I began to see the spots again, smaller, but still there.
When I read about central serous retinopathy several things made sense - both times I was under severe stress AND undergoing treatments with corticosteroids. Also, I have a very low threshold for stress.
I'll make a new appointment and specifically mention this and ask for tests.
Again, thank you!
That being said I believe CSR generally resolves on it's own except for more severe cases which it sounds like OP has...
Are you sure you haven't developed diabetes? I'm asking because it seems that a lot of people suffering from it are not diagnosed until it's too late.
I had never heard it can damage your eyes permanently. It is not very common, but can happen.
Biggest one has been chronic pain, for which doctors cannot do much. Another was the project at work, which was technologically "almost possible", but could never meet what the customer was expecting.
The most alarming part was the loss of vocabulary. I was an avid reader and couldn’t call to mind fairly simple multi-syllablic words.
It took 5 years of bumming around in the mountains to heal the damage.
My solution was to say sayonara to everybody and move to Tokyo, to attend a full time Japanese language school, with people generally 10–20 years my juniors. I'm doing good so far, I'm making tons of friends and the school is keeping my mind and my schedule full. (I just picked a random interest and a sufficiently far away place. It could have been cooking or hiking in the Andes, for what matters.)
It's too early to say whether I'm recovering. I hope so. I think I'm seeing some color returning to my hair, but it might just be the light.
For the first 3 years of doing almost nothing productive the progress was quite slow.
In retrospect, a couple of high dose psilocybin sessions may have sped up recovery by reprogramming some of my identity that was at the core of the stress.
If the impoverished are living cortisol-stress-filled lives epigenetics explains the offspring to suffer the same physiological conditions. However, there are folks who have individually bootstrapped out of these conditions of inherited poverty (the so-called self-mades), but these breeds are rare. The vast majority of the poor continue to produce offspring who aren't given a chance to grow up on a stress-free environment.
Edit: I think I may have been hasty with my reply. You were talking of the impact of stress on causing individuals to make poor financial decisions. My reply went into cycle of poverty.
Long to short, you don't cure poverty. You aim to cure the things that create, drive and perpetuate it. And you certainly don't blame those caught in the cycle.
To your point, if stress effects the relatively well off, imagine what happens to those are struggling to get by.
If you don't have food in the pantry, you're not worried about saving for retirement. And that's probably sensible.
Individuals can absolutely worry about more than one thing and different needs can change "ranks" daily depending on life circumstances.
Sure, we could say that well-off people stress is not as important and they just shouldn't stress about unimportant stuff. But stress is stress and people ability to stress out is relative, not absolute. Even today's poor people are much better off than average people from 200 or 2000 years ago. Yet average stress level seems to be getting higher and higher.
An important point is the occurrence of "Dominance Hierarchies" which has been persistent in animals/human since the dawn of time. In a small hamlet, it was 'easy' to become known as the best blacksmith, the fastest runner, the best storyteller. You physiology literally changes and you gain an increase in dopamine receptors.
With the rise of technology, we are exposed to Dominance Hierarchies of much grander scope. Kids (and adults) are evaluating themselves against Instagram models and NFL Stars. A 14 year old can win their local brazilian jiu-jitsu tournament and still feel inadequate.
But also, even today you can be good in your immediate social circle and in the past to be in environment of big competition.
On top of that, management jobs add stress of dealing with your subordinates. You're responsible for their mistakes as well as their wellbeing depends on you. One of the most stressful things in running small business is know that your employees' families depend on you.
Scum managers exist at all levels. Even if you at executive level, it's likely you'll have investors or owners above you. I suppose HN is aware how stressful dealing with VCs is.
I don't know, the thought that you're pushing a broom because of a laundry list of things (e.g., bad school system, unavailable parental support, etc.) you had no control over has to be demoralizing and stressful.
No one wakes up thinking, I want to be disadvantaged.
Certainly, you're not suggesting we need a study on whether poverty is stressful or not.
The arc of my original comment is: Some well say, "Well, poverty is a decision. Those in poverty need to make better decisions." Unfortunately, that's naive. It does not consider the fact that stress has a negative impact on the brain, on decision making.
You didn't ask us to imagine if "poverty is stressful"; you made a different claim entirely.
This is why if you're stressed ... you can develop diabetes, heart disease, obesity and who knows what else. Stress is an evolved tactic to escape short term dangers. But humans are not designed to be stressed all the time.
I have a close friend that developed diabetes following a period of high stress due to his small business going broke.
Take care of your health first. And sleep 8 hours per day.
Interesting. Since they're speculating a link between cortisol and alzheimer's and there's already established linkages between cortisol and herpes reactivation , herpes spreading to the brain in certain vulnerable populations , herpes activation in the brain and an amyloid response , and a potential mitigation for symptoms by arresting herpes activation , I wonder if the cortisol/alzheimer's link might evaporate of the herpes/alzheimer's hypothesis continues to prove out in drug trials?
Substantially reworked the comment given some of the confusion the initial comment seemed to generate. I'm pretty passionate about this angle, as past commentary of mine here might indicate. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17945738
Previously on HN:
- Alzheimer's is caused by dirty air. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18230932
- Alzheimer's is caused by lack of sleep. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18228627
- Alzheimer's is a form of diabetes. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4578267
- Alzheimer's is caused by herpes. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18265115
Also, brain damage is a result of Alzheimer's, not a cause.
Less sleep -> more beta amyloid link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16026655
Beta amyloyd -> herpes entanglement: https://www.cell.com/neuron/fulltext/S0896-6273(18)30526-9
None of this is definitive, mind you, but as each new bit of research comes out, a new piece of the puzzle appears to be put in place. Ultimately the question ends up being answered by a more comprehensive wide-scale experimental study tracking herpes mitigations of any sort and any possible reduction in alzheimer's occurrences, basically a larger version of this: https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/322463.php
Wikipedia might have good references as a starting point though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amyloid_beta
Most of the page is dedicated to the Alzheimer's connection. Even that quote came from Alzheimer's research.
Hiltunen M, van Groen T, Jolkkonen J (2009). "Functional roles of amyloid-beta protein precursor and amyloid-beta peptides: evidence from experimental studies". Journal of Alzheimer's Disease. 18 (2): 401–12. doi:10.3233/JAD-2009-1154. PMID 19584429.
Linked previously but I'll link again:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26836158 dated 22 Feb 2016
https://www.cell.com/neuron/fulltext/S0896-6273(18)30526-9 dated 11 Jul 2018
These seem to reference Alzheimer's only in passing or potentially in relation to the infectious theory, but they specifically speak to the action of Beta Amyloid.
In short, it's based on number of virus infections, which herpes greatly increases. So I agree that your hypothesis is sound.
This is because one of the effects of cortisol is to suppress immune response.
And, just a thought, there was news recently that the incidence of Alzheimer's was reduced in people on long-term anti-viral drugs. The hypothesis being that Alzheimer's is partially caused by a virus. High cortisol levels (or their related asthma treatment molecules) would reduce immune response and therefore we could predict today's result from the previous one. I've probably over simplified the situation.
Oh yeah, forgot monoclonal antibodies, the new, ungodly expensive series of IV drugs that have amazingly awful side-effects. Can't wait to see what those do to bodies 10-50 years down the line.
Everyone should strive to exercise every day.
They're mostly designed to be ordered by a healthcare professional, but you can get a few of them direct on Amazon, or through companies that order on your behalf (similar to healthlabs.com mentioned above).
It seems that it's important to get separate samples spaced evenly throughout the day, as it is not just a single reading at any time that matters, but the relative levels at different points during the day.
- deep breathing for a minute (should significantly reduce cortisol)
- take sauna (proper hot/cold cycles)
If true, this shows that there is a controllable mental component to stress. First step is recognizing when you are stressed. A mental technique I use is to pretend I'm outside my body watching my response. This helps me put things in perspective and calm down. A technology thing I use is my Apple Watch. It alerts me if my heart rate goes up without also moving like I would for exercise. It's a quick reminder to stop, relax. I rarely get alerts from the AW anymore, because I've become attuned to recognizing when stress is oncoming and I can take measures to calm down.
My final technique is exercise every single day. I tend to workout right when I wake up, but if life gets in the way I sometimes do not get to it until later. But, it is an exceptional day if I miss a workout.
Read this book: Spark: The Revolutionary New Science of Exercise and the Brain by John Ratey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ratey), the professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School.
I have posted on the effects of sprints several times over the years so rather than repost again, here's a link to the threads: https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&date...
Running sprints were key, but inflammation due to diet was part of it too (a latent issue not widely discussed, but a factor more common than you might think). I solved that by eliminating certain foods one by one that are known to cause inflammation. Peanuts were one, and eliminating aspartame (diet coke) had a noticeable effect within just a few days (I verified it wasn't the caffeine by adding back tea and coffee, and those had no noticeable effect).
Here's some links to the original Harvard and USG research findings on the issues with aspartame and artificial sweeteners/flavors in general, like why it's banned it baby food: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6703802
look at it this way:
you have so many input bandwidth. stress is the input. any input causes stress, but there is plenty of bandwidth generally to handle this. only when there is too many incomming bandwidth, it can lead to loss / DOS.
It's personal what packets you want to handle and which you'd like to drop. this is what you can only decide for yourself.
so there is no magic bullet some researcher will invent for you to feel relaxed again. you need to figure that out for yourself. someone can guide you along your way but not tell you the way you should go... if you let people choose for you, this will lead to MORE STRESS
The quicker solution to reducing cortisol may be to cut down on caffeine than to eat more cortisol inhibiting foods.
As much as that may be considered a personally offensive suggestion to a lot of people...
This study linked to below is about developing tolerance to caffeine, but the very first line says:
Caffeine increases cortisol secretion in people at rest or undergoing mental stress.
So keeping cortisol up through other means could possibly be beneficial.
From context, it seems like the intended meaning is that caffeine slows down the cortisol removal, but what was actually written was that it speeds up cortisol removal.
I quit caffeine entirely and my stress lowered. Decaf produced similar results as caffeinated. Only total cold turkey seemed to let my system kick it (took two weeks).
YMMV. If you're not having major symptoms or dependency issues, then "less" will generally be less severe than "more".
> As with other adaptogens, administration of Rhodiola rosea should coincide with stressful situations only – athletic or otherwise – and periodic intervals of non-use should be observed.
> Put it this way: once Rhodiola has enabled you to adapt to physical or environmental stress (training, dieting, work, etc.), you can't adapt any further. That's when you cycle off Rhodiola.
“””The cortisol effects described by Ghaly and Teplitz5 are particularly significant in the light of recent research showing that prolonged chronic stress results in glucocorticoid receptor resistance.”””
So again, what could grounding your body possibly have to do with it? And why would you need a mat plugged into your wall outlet to do this?
What does grounding have to do with it? Well my fellow human, we're still figuring this all out, in terms of embryology, we don't know how embyros fast-forward millions of years in evolution in a couple days of development, how the electric markers dictate  where eyes form in the foetus etc. furthermore the underlying bioelectric signals that regulate all chemical reactions in our huge soup we call a 'body' runs the best when we are connected (electric potential is close to 0) with the huge battery we call earth, the one we evolved upon connected, and only post WW2, had enough industrial power to put rubber shoes on everyone in modern world (all had leather shoes before which are conductive). yadda yadda i'm just regurgitating what i read in the book i mentioned in another comment. check it out if you think we don't know 100% about health, and western medicine hasn't figured it all out yet, esp at the bioelectric level.
It also means avoiding foods that feed the bad bacteria in your gut, which could lead to overgrowth of the bad and crowding out of the good bacteria. Refined sugar feeds bad bacteria.
In clinical terms, a healthy gut produces mucin, which is the lining or gut barrier, which promotes a healthy immune system (there are more immune cells in your gut than anywhere else in the body) and protects the rest of your body from endotoxin and inflammation.
There are lots of published studies and if you want to learn more, find a video online with Rhonda Patrick. She cites a bunch.
If you want to be healthy it's easy, just do the following: Eat fresh foods. Get aerobic exercise. Get resistance exercise. Get enough sleep. Abstain from drugs and alcohol, or at least partake temperately. Have good genes and a healthy developmental environment. Those last two are on one's parents, not oneself.
My GF is glued to her phone. The amount of circle jerking that happens with women and social media is utterly crazy. Bring this up as the article mentions it seems to be higher in women and when I looked around in day to day life I see more women glued to instagram than men (Don't have stats to back it up).
I wouldn't be surprised if they found a link between this and users who use social networks more as well.
Edit: Maybe "circle jerk" wasn't the right phrase to use...
Men have been describing women's social interaction in this way, varying only by the names of the popular media and mode of communication of the day, for about as long as we have documentary evidence of how men described anything (and presumably longer, though of course that cannot be documented.)
That men have a distinct gendered nature that makes them wrongly describe women this way?
Or that women have a distinct gendered nature that makes them engage in such social interaction styles - and men have been noticing it for a long time?
I'm also curious what historical comparisons you're talking about... it's not immediately clear what the 500 BC equivalent of IG social media addiction was.
If that social cohesion advantage transfers well to Instagram is an important question of course. I would not dismiss it out of hand.
This really sounds like a complete inversion of reality. Straightforward communication is good; manipulating information, denying information, etc are bad. Lots of girls (and some boys) even commit suicide because of gossip campaigns against them - and nowadays it's frequently mediated by social media.
I've been targeted by a female gossip campaign in my youth. The lies flowed freely and harmed me tremendously, always whispered behind my back so I couldn't correct the record. In contrast, when boys had a problem with me they threatened physically instead. Many have experienced this dichotomy.
It's hard to see how one could come to your conclusion from a purely fact-finding mindset. But I'd be interested in any observations that led you to this conclusion. At this point, I think there's a good chance that you feel you're morally compelled to believe this regardless of evidence, as part of a political/moralistic project to change the world according to some grand narrative.
Anyway it's testable. We can just consider: Do groups composed of all men have better or worse social cohesion than comparable groups composed of all women?
I've heard from people who worked in offices of different gender mixes that there is a difference... and it doesn't support your theory. But there must be some better evidence, somewhere.
The second aspect is of course the question of pure intentions, obviously often competition or spite causes people to gossip in malicious ways, and this might negatively affect social cohesion, or at least exclude individuals.
I don't think the effects are very testable in modern society, as a society consisting of only men or women can not persist for more than one generation.
I think your dichotomy of women using emotional manipulation, and men using physical manipulation to oppress/compete are analogous in their evolutionary role. Some people think that means the role is to exclude the weak, but I think that's just an unfortunate side effect, and the role is more to ensure the strong exist at all. Unfortunately often nature cruelly ignores that sort of collateral damage.
I believe in the end it stated the result / ability to do so was good for social interaction. (Arguably not for those outside the group?).
Anyway, I can not recall exactly so I am going to refrain from adding more to it.
There is certainly some evidence that women and men use social media differently; Pinterest is 81% women for example, and only 7% of posts are by men. Instagram is 68% women. I don't know of any social media that is male-dominated in the same extent. LinkedIn is 56% men, Twitter 57%.
In my experience most men are just unaware or uninterested in fashion, design, cooking, and all the things that Pinterest excels at. Personally I love it.... but again, would not consider it a social media platform in the least. Even when I build boards with people, we discuss on a separate place (phone, chat, etc)
it's probably hard to measure since one does not provide gender in a profile here, but it'd still be interesting to see. I for one have a heavy HN addiction, similar to what others describe their IG addiction to be like
Social networks need to have such tooling, that should automatically nudge people to take it easy when heavy usage is detected.
Reddit, most likely HN too.
That would be stretching my personal definition of social media, but yes Reddit does publish figures showing it's pretty much exactly as skewed towards men as Instagram is towards women, very interesting. I wonder about Strava, there seems to be no data available on that, maybe because it isn't ad-supported.
The reason I'm not so sure as neither Reddit nor HN are oriented around the personal profile in the same way as the others are. HN could (probably should) go completely "anonymous coward" and it would be no less useful.
Actually this https://www.techjunkie.com/demographics-reddit/ lists a few sources. The primary one appears to be Pew Research, the methodology is interesting http://www.journalism.org/2016/02/25/reddit-methodology/.
They random dialled, then surveyed 6000 people, ~4500 agreed to be surveyed further (with cash incentive), of those ~300 are Reddit users and the stats are taken from there. You can choose to do the survey by web or regular mail .. respondents who agree to be surveyed by mail actually take the survey at a level of 20%; if I read correctly they assume none of those sent the mail survey are net users.
The point of the survey was analysing political activity.
It seems likely to give only broad indications at best. Unfortunately this result from < 300 USAmericans seems to be repeated as "this is the global demographic of Reddit" in a few places.
There was evidence that was an exaggeration and it has likely improved, though I haven't seen a survey recently. But, yes, HN is very male dominated.
I privately kept data for a time. Some of that data was lost at some point. I very carefully published some of my data on a previous blog that I recently took offline.
This is from memory. This handle is less than a year old, but I've been here over 9 years. Back in the day, members sometimes posted surveys casually. I saw several of them over time.
It also has a blurb by me from several years ago:
According to previous polls, most people here are male and in their 20's or 30's.
So that's fresher testimony that corresponds to my current recollection.
That's the best I can do. I wish I could find the data I remember seeing. I can't. I've repeatedly tried, to no avail.
Perhaps I should just keep my mouth shut henceforth rather than commenting that "I've been here 9+ years. There have been polls in the past. This is what I remember."
Because it consistently feels like it gets me nothing but push back rather than being some kind of meaningful, useful contribution to the conversation indicating that someone who has paid an excess of attention to such data over the years to try to sort their own relationship to the site has concluded that, yea, verily, your impression that there sure are a lot of men here seems accurate to me.
When the thinking is do whatever it takes to scale, the unintended effects are too numerous for people to comprehend.
I have a tough time imagining you spending time with a friend where they just ignore you to spend time on IG. If they do, that’s likely a reflection of you.
Be wary of taking this statement too seriously.
0) It wouldn’t be a direct reflection of you in any case; It might directly reflect what someone thinks of you. But just because a person thinks you are boring (or creepy or lazy or crazy) does not in fact mean you are. Its just a data point.
1) Spinning in your head about whether someone thinks you are a boring person isn’t going to help you or them. Talk to a friend and ask them for direct feedback.
2) Sometimes people do have a habit of getting on their phones and then later regretting not be being present and social. I know I do and I need to make deliberate effort to avoid it (Freedom.app is useful here)
3) Sometimes people are tired.