Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Me an' Algernon – grappling with (temporary) cognitive decline

tidyfirst.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 79 posts

Re: Me an' Algernon – grappling with (temporary) cognitive decline

#61

Post by squigz »

tanewishly wrote: post #59
bluefirebrand wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, to clarify I do support it. I think reducing suffering is a noble goal and allowing people to choose not to suffer needlessly is overall a good thing But it definitely is not cut and dry and I can see why some people are extremely resistant to the idea

Where I currently live, terminally ill nearing their end often fall in a pattern of eating and drinking less and less, to the point of having nothing (not even water). This process of dying takes 1-2 weeks(!). Longer if some liquid is still imbibed. This is a common ending of a terminally ill process and apparently seen as humane. Though I think if anyone treated their dog like that, we'd report them for animal abuse…

> Where I currently live, terminally ill nearing their end often fall in a pattern of eating and drinking less and less, to the point of having nothing (not even water). This process of dying takes 1-2 weeks(!). Longer if some liquid is still imbibed.

Even just getting to this point is usually a brutal period of pain. Then you have to die like that? It's frankly barbaric.

Re: Me an' Algernon – grappling with (temporary) cognitive decline

#62

Post by tough »

squigz wrote: post #58
tough wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didnt link them but several similar cases around mental illness. IMHO a state shouldn't give individuals the right to off themselves. Nature and physics already do, providing laws and a framework around it perverses it to push that people that feels out of society to bad decisions some times Maybe its better to have them be able to do it -cleanly- and legally, but that also means more of them do? I don't see mental…

> IMHO a state shouldn't give individuals the right to off themselves. This is a really terrible way of putting it (another way of putting it might be "the right to end their suffering"), not to mention that a state needs a good reason to deny its citizens of rights, not the other way around. I don't see any good reason why we should deny people the right to end their suffering when they choose. > Maybe its better to…

I agree with you overall but i feel the legislation isn't as nuanced and enables second order effects we can't preconcieve.

But you're right it is not my right to decide for others either, and i abide to the laws and will respect others choosing to enact and follow this one, I just don't love the fact I guess

Re: Me an' Algernon – grappling with (temporary) cognitive decline

#63

Post by 1123581321 »

squigz wrote: post #42
1123581321 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will be mutually exclusive along some class line if we try to pursue both. Additionally, without the desire to preserve life and value of the advantages of aged minds, we will not make as much progress on the disease.

Well, we are not "trying to" pursue both - we actively are. Anyway, there certainly is much discussion to be had about class discrimination in medical care, but that seems out of scope for this thread - not least because of very simple things like some country's healthcare systems being radically different than others. > Additionally, without the desire to preserve life and value of the advantages of aged minds, we w…

I appreciate the response. I said “trying” because neither the disease research or the policy change has broadly succeeded yet, and I don’t think either are certain.

Re: Me an' Algernon – grappling with (temporary) cognitive decline

#64

Post by bryanrasmussen »

sinenomine wrote: post #44
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt you can cure these diseases, you can perhaps prevent them, but to cure would mean removing their effects, and if you could remove their effects and say, bring a seriously deteriorated Von Neumann back to his previous mental heights it seems like you should be able to make anyone the equal of Von Neumann - which I agree would be a great thing to be able to do but seems to be a much further along than the words…

With all due respect, you didn't even try at anything resembling full effort . There are 2, maybe 3 societies in the world, which have (or had) the capacity to try implementing a serious R&D effort to prevent the diseases of aging. The effort has been meager so far, and ultimately, compared to other major R&D directions (no, I'm not talking about AI, AI is fine), it's a testament to how much we value ourselves and ou…

>With all due respect, you didn't even try at anything resembling full effort. There are 2, maybe 3 societies in the world, which have (or had) the capacity to try implementing a serious R&D effort to prevent the diseases of aging.

exactly who do you think I am? It sounds like you think I am some sort of avatar of one of these societies, and for some reason I am here posting on HN.

>while implementing a simple scalable cryopreservation infrastructure for those who won't be there in time.

ok, well as long as its simple.

>In your small-mindedness you failed humanity.

okey-dokey, well I can definitely see you are going through something right now, hope you get better.

Re: Me an' Algernon – grappling with (temporary) cognitive decline

#65

Post by s5300 »

bluefirebrand wrote: post #57
zellyn wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think sleep is possibly the most important part. I also did a sleep study and started using a CPAP machine: might want to look into that if it’s a possibility…

I do have one already and it helps a great deal for getting good sleep when I can But it does not help me get to sleep in the first place unfortunately. Too much anxiety I appreciate the suggestion though and if anyone else struggles to sleep, wakes up randomly out of breath, I do strongly recommend a cpap. It is great for me when I actually can sleep

[dead]

Re: Me an' Algernon – grappling with (temporary) cognitive decline

#66

Post by bryanrasmussen »

cjbgkagh wrote: post #43
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

since these diseases destroy parts of the brain not just inhibit the functioning of the brain you would need to add an enhancement and not remove an inhibitor to bring back lost functionality.

Depends very much on the disease, for my specific type of brain fog from dysautonomia (via ME/CFS and hEDS) it may feel like a gradual and permanent degradation but it is largely completely reversible and when you know what you're doing it's actually pretty easy to do so. This is only known by a very small minority of doctors so the chance a specific patient meets such a doctor is incredibly low which is why most peo…

>Depends very much on the disease, for my specific type of brain fog from dysautonomia (via ME/CFS and hEDS)

sorry, I thought we were talking about Alzheimer's because Alzheimer's was what was mentioned in the post I responded to but now I see it is in fact every ailment that affects the brain, and not just Alzheimer's.

>It’s also likely that even if the degradation is permanent it is also likely multifaceted and one of those facets is likely to be treatable such that the impact of the degradation could be greatly reduced.

this might be what was meant here, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44277444 - when I said that the brain has a lot of redundancies and of course caught and stopped early enough then it wouldn't be such a big problem

but hey, what do I know, I didn't even know what we were talking about evidently, thanks for correcting me.

>It’s a ridiculous conflation to suggest that the inability to take a regular person and give them Von Neumann intelligence means that we can’t help Von Neumann stuffing an ailment even if a component of that ailment is clearly permanent.

OK well I guess I am taking a more stringent meaning of cure than you are, you are taking the relieve meaning, which is of course to help, but I am taking the revert meaning. I believe mine is a pretty common meaning, at least in the vernacular. I mean when they say we cure cancer they don't mean it will make the pain less intense and maybe you can live twice as long as otherwise.

Certainly I believe the pains and problems of a disease can be relieved, but in the case of Alzheimer's (sorry for going back to the disease I was discussing since you have informed me I was not discussing that but since I was, actually, discussing that I am just going to have to stick with it) it can not necessarily be reverted - it can potentially be reverted as I indicated earlier if not too much damage is done (because of redundancies), but if for example you have late stage Alzheimer's I don't believe you are going to get to cure (revert) all damages.

In such cases you can manage to stop it and rehabilitate the patient to a less damaged earlier state perhaps, but otherwise I would think there was too much damage to revert it, because if brain tissue is too damaged I suppose (perhaps again due to a naive model of how I suppose memories and knowledge are maintained in the brain) that the data that was held by these damaged sections is now unrecoverable.

on edit: removed some verbiage.

Re: Me an' Algernon – grappling with (temporary) cognitive decline

#67

Post by mickelsen »

squeegee_scream wrote: post #29

I've had cognitive decline over the past 6 years. I turn 41 this year. It's strongly (maybe solely) due to stress, anxiety, depression, migraines, and insomnia. This entire clusterfuck started 6 years ago because, while I had the skills to excel in school and career, I was sorely lacking in the skills to be a father, husband, and homeowner. When I got married and we began having children, my decline began. But it was…

Hey. I also fell through the cracks during the pandemic, laid off at the height of the hiring market, but unable and unwilling to go back, developed tinnitus (gone, phew!), had cognitive issues too that really took a lot of time to improve, and I'm only in my 30s.

But it got better, and I'm in a better place now. It felt like I'd never get there; always tiny improvements but not quite there. Last year I finally felt the burnout gone. I stopped being so cynical. My life was better already, but still my mind was not quite there yet.

Now just this year I've rekindled my curiosity, using my free time again for little projects, not leaving piles of unfinished stuff around the house, it's something that's even noticeable from the outside - the little things. So now, moving forward, I take it easy, forgive myself, try again and don't subject myself to unattainable benchmarks.

Re: Me an' Algernon – grappling with (temporary) cognitive decline

#68

Post by anthk »

cjbgkagh wrote: post #33

I used to get this pretty regularly, I thought I just keep burning out. I have an unusually high IQ and noticed that my symptoms were very similar to the string of condensed matter physicists that committed suicide. Their descriptions of their health issues before they killed themselves mirrored my own and I too used the Flowers from Algernon to describe my difficulties to others. I shared other weird stuff like extr…

Beware with Ozempic, it can cause eye issues.

Re: Me an' Algernon – grappling with (temporary) cognitive decline

#69

Post by bryanrasmussen »

tough wrote: post #54
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt you can cure these diseases, you can perhaps prevent them, but to cure would mean removing their effects, and if you could remove their effects and say, bring a seriously deteriorated Von Neumann back to his previous mental heights it seems like you should be able to make anyone the equal of Von Neumann - which I agree would be a great thing to be able to do but seems to be a much further along than the words…

Yeah tbh english isn't my first language, and I meant more into -finding the causes- and eradicating alzheimer, aka preventing it, much like we have done with polio, or whatever. Not really curing people already in advanced state of the maladie... anyways, they're not mutually exclusive, but enhanching life should preceed ending it in the order of priorities imho

Ok sorry about the mistake, I just made the observation as a small aside, thinking perhaps you did mean cure as in totally revert damage.

Re: Me an' Algernon – grappling with (temporary) cognitive decline

#70

Post by bryanrasmussen »

sinenomine wrote: post #47
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

since these diseases destroy parts of the brain not just inhibit the functioning of the brain you would need to add an enhancement and not remove an inhibitor to bring back lost functionality.

1. As other commenters point, many cases have intact memory and circuits for what would be considered "lost", which activate from time to time. So it's likely a question of SNR and tissue vitality (e.g. basic capillary function) for these cases. 2. You wouldn't believe what feats of neuroplasticity lie behind a few receptors properly pushed by molecular keys. We just don't have experience to describe it. Adult neurop…

OK maybe, although not having experience to describe it sounds somewhat worrisome for a scientific project.

where your point 1 is concerned, again, since the brain has many redundancies one can totally have brain tissue destroyed and with some slight therapy get back to normal functionality, but when Alzheimer's is too advanced I suppose you will not be able to fully revert, but maybe revert to some earlier stage - sure.

Post reply on HN