Have you tried shortening your circadian rhythm with light therapy? Mine's about 26.5 hours and it's been quite helpful, though I have to sit in front of this light for a little over 2 hours every morning.
Or maybe it's that comments:
a) load fast
b) are always text
c) don't include ads or videos
d) are somewhat uniformly formatted and relatively easy to parse
e) often include enough of a summary to make a quick decision about a link
There are usually lots of valuable features contained in comments that are quick/easy to use.
Every link on this site is only here because others have submitted and upvoted them, so everyone here is being influenced. That's the whole point of the site - having a community choose what's worth reading.
The comments thread is physically easier to read (no ads, banners, interference with scroll, carousels, clickbait sidebar) and gets to the point much quicker. And if people are rehashing a tired argument in the comments then I can skip the topic entirely.
The linked article itself is also allowing others to influence your judgement and opinion, especially if it's a news article.
I think one could argue that the majority of the "articles" or "posts" on HN are merely the opinions of their authors anyway. There are a few based in fact, or purely fact, or real "News", but a lot of times, they are just asides, or general ramblings of another person on the net - then there are the comments here that add real value to the piece.
The point that I was trying to make is that it's much easier to be influenced by a swarm of commenters and to unknowingly align your opinions with them. You're more likely to disagree genuinely with ONE article than with 150 comments all echoing each other. Alas, downvote me, please.
Would you elaborate on how you think things should be taught? I fell off around the time of the US pre-calc curriculum, but later enjoyed learning basic calculus and basic abstract algebra, so I'm pretty curious.
It's within the capability of science to one day develop an anti-love potion. Want to fall out of love with someone? Drink the potion, or wear the headset.
Actually, I have semi-jokingly suggested that friends in unrequited love take a certain class of antidepressant for a while, since this is one of the side effects -- it has a pretty good chance of working. So it may be easier to accept, although this is just n=1. (On the other hand, nobody has actually taken this advice..)
I've been meaning to ask if you've read up on chronotherapeutics; when I read the book (that I cited above, in top-level) a few months ago it seemed to explain why the melatonin procedure that MetaMed gave you worked - a full biological basis. I didn't follow that up, though, since I was trying to fix my own DSPS.
Anyone with sleep problems owes it to themselves to read Chronotherapy by Terman and McMahan (2012).
Basically, for manipulating your circadian rhythm, light therapy is recommended as the first line of treatment (possibly supplemented with low-dose melatonin). The timing and intensity of light relative to when your internal clock thinks it is in the day determines the amount of slowing or lengthening of your cycle. So bright light during when your body thinks it is 'morning' will slow down the cycle, and bright light at 'night' will lengthen it. That's why many people use f.lux. But how much, how long?
Your cycle's natural free-running cycle length (without zeitgebers, or cues, to entrain it) appears to be determined by genetic factors. This is hard to measure without doing some tracking and, ideally, actually free-running. Pretty inconvenient.
This paper, which I look forward to reading in-depth, claims to have figured out optimal ways [took another look: general principles] of calculating the correct exposure and absence of light to allow for rapid recovery from jet lag. If true, it will probably make all light therapy much easier to do and calculate.
Light therapy is the main thing (seems daylight simulation and negative ions may also work, but this is less researched). The melatonin option is indicated at the level of micrograms, and as far as I know is quite safe. I'm mostly drawing from gwern's analysis and the opinions of several doctors, though, for the safety profile: http://www.gwern.net/Melatonin
Care to share some references? It would be useful to add to the page above.
There's a bunch of easily found stuff on animal experiments where it shrinks gonads and brains. It clearly turns off fertility in animals. It's well understood as the "winter hibernation" hormone. It's not the "good circadian rhythm night of deep sleep" hormone like people seem to think. It rises to adapt the body to the stress of darkness of winter, it doesn't rise to make you get better rest. It makes the retina more sensitive to light and lightens skin. It's high in seasonally depressed people. Taking a sunny vacation lowers it, and makes you feel better.
Nobody has a melatonin deficiency; you don't need melatonin levels to get restful sleep. If stress hormone levels are low you can fall asleep under bright lights with no melatonin.
I can't say taking 5mg every now and then would be harmful to humans, but when you understand melatonin's essential role as the winter hibernation hormone, and consider the animal experiments, I think you might want to prefer other means to get to sleep. Personally, I find diphenhydramine (benadryl) pretty good for occasional help nodding off. And that's very clearly safe for occasional use.
I couldn't find any statements backing up your claim that Melatonin shrinks brains; in fact, I found allegations to the opposite: Melatonin appears to have neuroprotective properties. I suggest you cite your sources, especially when making sweeping claims like "it's well understood as...", "easily found stuff", etc.