My mental health this year has been up and down. It is not particularly clear why I have struggled at times, given the sources of stress were not particularly bad. Thankfully, now I am the best I have been all year. This may be because I have been quite proactive in taking action. First, there are the basics: adequate sleep, downtime, exercise, and diet. At one point I also cut out all caffeine and alcohol. I also went to the psychologist several times, did more mindfulness exercises, and increased my medication, in consultation with my doctor.
This experience underscores some of the complexities and associated poor understanding of both mental illness and healing. There are biomedical, psychological, social, and spiritual dimensions. There is a high causal density, just like in public policy. Why did I get worse? Why did I get better? As a patient, I don't want to do a series of clinical trials on myself and just change one variable, one after the other. It is better to attack the problem by doing a lot of things that are generally believed to help.
Several people have brought to my attention a series of recent articles in Nature about the mental health of Ph.D. students. These include the following.
Nature’s survey of more than 6,000 graduate students reveals the turbulent nature of doctoral research.
This stimulated an Editorial,
The mental health of PhD researchers demands urgent attention
``Anxiety and depression in graduate students is worsening. The health of the next generation of researchers needs systemic change to research cultures.''
Both articles are worth reading, but depressing.
On the one hand, I think it is wonderful Nature is publicising the issue. On the other hand, to me, it is a case of corporate well-washing: where companies pass off responsibility for a problem they have helped create onto their employees or customers. Universities do similar things. If I was asked to name a for-profit company that has a negative influence on ``research culture'' over the past two decades it would be Nature Publishing Group, hands down!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A very effective Hamiltonian in nuclear physics
Atomic nuclei are complex quantum many-body systems. Effective theories have helped provide a better understanding of them. The best-known a...
-
Is it something to do with breakdown of the Born-Oppenheimer approximation? In molecular spectroscopy you occasionally hear this term thro...
-
If you look on the arXiv and in Nature journals there is a continuing stream of people claiming to observe superconductivity in some new mat...
-
I welcome discussion on this point. I don't think it is as sensitive or as important a topic as the author order on papers. With rega...
People know what they do; frequently they know why they do what they do; but what they don't know is what what they do does.
ReplyDeleteM Foucault.
This quote rephrase to Nature publishing group
Nature publishing group know what they do; frequently they know why they do what they do; but what they don't know is what what they do does.
Even Elsevier has some knuclehead editors
Just read this abstract.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912000840
Maths Prof Tim Gower on Elsevier
ReplyDeletehttps://gowers.wordpress.com/2012/01/21/elsevier-my-part-in-its-downfall/
Ross - thank you for being open about the challenges you face personally. I hope you have many days when you feel that you are feeling well.
ReplyDelete