I've always been low IQ (scored slightly above 80 on an a comprehensive IQ test with a psychiatrist) and it bothered me a lot in the past, that I have difficulties understanding the simplest of things, however in regards to your question, I think it's mostly the other areas of cognition, which noticeably worsened over the years of social isolation, such as short-term memory, creativity and ability to express myself in writing. It's probably also true, that my IQ worsened with time, but I think the other things are more noticeable, I think. Being 17 hours a day for years at a machine, which can simply copy text pieces for me, instead of me having to remember said text for a few seconds, probably did great damage to my short-term memory. My active vocabulary (in my native language and English) has most likely worsened as well, because of me not talking to anyone ever, besides the usual chit-chat on the internet and the few hobby-related words, when discussing hobbies on imageboards for example. I notice the lack of my own creativity not only when doing explicitly creative things, but also with problem-solving (where probably a good point can be made for arguing, that this kind of problem-solving is rather intelligence-related, than with creativity in the usual sense).

It's also easy to fall into a trap of feeling like your cognitive abilities worsen each time you compare yourself to yourself a few months ago, which might be or not be true, but the feeling itself is something that can drive a person into insanity, depression or both. While I think it's true for me, that those things worsened as described above, it's maybe important to keep in mind, what capabilities one had to begin with at a certain point. If you were good at remember information short-term in the past (for example in the realm of a hobby) and now you struggle with it a lot, or you were a creative artist, who drew a bunch of stuff, and now you struggle with that, there might be a case to be made, but it should be measured on what your "output", so to say, is and not a gut feeling of just having becoming stupider than before.

It's true that isolation can easily lead to poverty of stimuli but it doesn't necessary need to be the case, and that is the main reason for "low IQ", not isolation itself.

But just to write my opinion since this is a discussion on an imageboard, I think pursuing IQ/intelligence is kind of a dead end for anyone, so we should better define what we are talking about. I knew plenty of intelligent people who lacked motivation, or some highly creative folks who couldn't even solve simple multiplication problems. In certain situations both of those people can end up with a very sorry execution of their plans. All I'm saying is that IQ is just one dimension of a person, despite the modern understanding that you can treat everything as a problem, so problem-solving must be the ultimate skill to have.

I think the main thing I've lost is energy. I always feel like if I had more of it I could get what I want done but I'm always exhausted and drained.

Another perspective: for many, it's isolation and rejection from the social ingroup that forces them to seek out novel ideas. You can see many people of "high IQ" people that nonetheless don't actually question what they're being told or experience, and thus never exercise those faculties of reasoning. They also can be sufficiently "distracted" by social chitchat so they never bother developing curiosity, never develop the skill of talking to themselves and analyzing things in detail.

As one example, the idea of "rubber duck debugging" in programming always seemed trivially stupid to me, because I couldn't imagine someone _not_ knowing how to think things through by themselves and needing to actually talk out loud to a physical object. Then later on I came to realize that indeed not everyone has this skill, some people (possibly overlapping with extroverts) quite literally cannot introspect and their main mode of deep thinking is external dialogue (with others) as opposed to internal dialogue (with yourself).

So I think it's a wash. Long term depression and isolation without sufficient interesting stimulus to keep you engaged is probably bad. Rejection from the social ingroup is probably beneficial since the skills to cope with loneliness are similar to the skills needed to introspect, which are good for reasoning.

>>30018
>slightly above 80
There's no way your IQ is that, you wouldn't have been able to send a post like the one you sent.

Retake the test elsewhere, your psychiatrist didn't know what they were doing

>>30020
Makes me wonder, you know how people claim to already feel old at 30?
How much of that is purely physiological and how much is psychosomatic (feeling chronically bored, underappreciated, abandoned, disappointed)?
My guess is that the ratio could be as high as 10-90

>>30021
>Long term depression and isolation without sufficient interesting stimulus to keep you engaged is probably bad. Rejection from the social ingroup is probably beneficial since the skills to cope with loneliness are similar to the skills needed to introspect, which are good for reasoning.
I guess, yeah.

But I wonder how many introverts have potentially bright minds that never get the chance to shine, just because they get zero or little appreciation from the rest of the world, which of course is terrible for morale.

Not to mention that sometimes you found out about a new interesting idea, approach or opportunity through your social network specifically. No social network means no fresh air is breathed into your life

>>30024
To me, most of the time claims of being old at 30 appear to be the result of a meme rather originating from an individual's own view, especially with how common and in waves such claims come and go, since the 2010s; I don't really remember that sentiment being quite so popular before.
Then again, this is what I can gleam from the Internet, maybe people do also say that in life, or maybe they don't. Culture can play part into it too - in some places one is still considered a spring chicken by 30.

>>30024
>>30025
Isn't that "mid-life crisis"? Now people are saying that it's not as common, but it used to be understood as an universal feeling among men.

>>30024
>No social network means no fresh air is breathed into your life
But we have the internet. Your ability to seek "fresh air" is now limited only by your willingness to search for new ideas. Unfortunately most of the internet has "rotted", but there are still pockets of good discussion and traditional forums left for all niches.

>>30026
>saying that it's not as common, but it used to be understood as an universal feeling among men.
I'd argue it's more common, in fact it's happening "continuously" once you reach adulthood rather than at a specific late age target. To me "midlife crisis" has always been a result of people hitting some expected "goal" and realizing that nothing has changed for them. They go through the motions that society sets up for them (marriage, working at a career) trying to chase some dream of "happiness" at the end, and after doing it they realize there's no reward, it's still the same tedium until they die. The newer trend of an entire generation "checked out" from society could be seen as a manifestation of that except much earlier. People no longer have any "dream" they're working toward, they just realize off the bat something's not quite right, that it's not a game worth playing. (But then they lack the capacity to introspect even further and realize such suffering is intrinsic to human life, so they instead blame the frameworks established by society like power, politics, race, etc.)

>>30024
I'm 29 if that helps you gauge that.

>>30027
>but there are still pockets of good discussion and traditional forums left for all niches
1. You never get to find them.
2. You're too depressed to participate.
3. The fact they normally gatekeep mentally unstable people will put you off further, even though you rationally understand you shouldn't be let in.
And yes searching anything useful at all over internet hasn't been a thing for at least 5 years now with google turning to shit and all. Ironically the escapism is the same as ever - books. Sometimes books take form of games and anime, but it's basically the same - living through stories and lives somebody else put down on paper/tape/whatever. Though I'm thankful there are imageboards, I wouldn't be able to face complete isolation.
>>30027
>suffering is intrinsic to human life
Even though it's torn out of context, seeing this bit said by someone else warmed my heart.

>>30029
>seeing this bit said by someone else warmed my heart.
If that statement resonates with you, you should look into philosophical pessimism (ligotti, zapffe, etc.). Although I've personally softened a bit on it, only from the perspective that the traditional experience of "human life" (embodied) is not necessarily the only mode of being. Things such as depersonalization show that all internal subjective experiences, even ones that seem directly tied to the external world like pain, have wiggle room. I guess that points towards something like eastern traditions (e.g. Buddhism in terms of offering some prescription to step out of the human condition by sufficient introspection to peel back the layers of the psyche, but it's certainly not easy to put into practice.

>>30026
The hell, I cannot have a midlife crisis if my life has yet to actually start (event-wise, not age-wise).

I rather suffer from "failure to launch"

>>30023
>>30018
Anon assuming you are same anon at >>29691 then I concur that 80 IQ does not seem right. Unless you have some huge discrepancy between verbal and quantitative IQ scores, your communication seems perfectly fine. It does seem to bother you quite a bit, so I would really suggest taking a proper IQ test that's administered by a qualified professional, one that properly breaks out verbal/non-verbal categories. Also depending on how long back you took the IQ test, you should retake it again instead of extrapolating from child/teen results.

Basically, I'd bet that there's something more here. You may well have some condition since I doubt a psych would administer an IQ test unless there's reason to suspect something's off, but whatever test you took either wasn't administered properly, was simply false negative, was affected by other issues (like ADHD, dyslexia, dyscalculia or whatever mental conditions can exist), or lacks the specificity to distinguish between verbal/spatial/etc. dimensions that go into g-factor

Post edited on 22nd Jan 2025, 7:37pm

You can have bad results in an IQ test simply by being sleep-deprived or having a bad day or being unprepared, causing thinking speed to be reduced significantly, or (foolishly!) trying to go for an answer outside-the-box, if the test is designed in a way that the examiner won't ask you a tenth grade question if you fail a ninth grade question(but that's only my impression). Later, I was told that having huge differences between the values(verbal, logical, math, thinking speed) is a sign of autism.

>>30034
>I was told that having huge differences between the values(verbal, logical, math, thinking speed) is a sign of autism.

I'm sure everyone would think as a logical/mathematical genius with shitty verbal skills as an autist, but what about the other way around?

Someone verbally gifted who is terrible at math would rather be called a simpleton than an autist, right?

>>30035
That's how most normalfags are (or at least think they are, since while they speak confidently they don't have much of value to say).

>>30035
Nope, he would be called rhetorician. Checkmates, tohno.

>>30035
I think any person who "talks weird" would very likely be called autistic. Excessive verbosity, too precise command of the language, maybe even perfect articulation. It is more about how inappropriate a person would be perceived in a social setting.

And a detailed knowledge in any specific area, with the capacity to express it, would certainly be called autistic as well.

Post edited on 23rd Jan 2025, 7:05am

>>30036
Speaking confidently is not the same as having a rich vocabulary and good writing skills.
Generally speaking, confidence and intelligence are wholly separate qualities

>>30038
>And a detailed knowledge in any specific area, with the capacity to express it, would certainly be called autistic as well.

Maybe if the subject in question is knowledgeable in one topic and one only.
Which would effectively mean they are not particularly smart: their brain simply likes to focus every single neuron on a single issue, thus achieving superior firepower in that specific sector and leaving everything else undefended

>>30027
Knowledge is like a well and the smallest drop of contaminants could be enough to poison the whole well. The internet has become so mainstream that the dissemination of that poison has run through all corners of it, even the safest place would not be impervious of its influence to a degree.

>>30040
>if the subject in question is knowledgeable in one topic and one only
But if he were able to articulate himself masterfully in this topic that would be indicative of high verbal skills as well.

>>30042
That would explain why I often hear self-proclaimed experts telling me "It's too hard to explain", "Google it" and "It's not my job to educate you", when I ask them about a topic they're allegedly good at.

They just kind of suck at outlining it thoroughly yet simply

>>30041
>Knowledge is like a well and the smallest drop of contaminants could be enough to poison the whole well

Care to give an example?

>>30044
I don't have a specific example but the gist of it is that given the interconnectivity of contemporary internet, when an idea takes root it creates a ripple through the web that is readily transmitted wholesale. In the past, you could say that the diffusion is more gradual with the "idea" being broken down into fragments before it reaches the corners of the internet, giving people more time to digest and form their own perspective of it. Hence the idea of "poison", the "poison" of mainstream media. Nowadays, even in the remotest corner of the internet, mainstream opinions are being echoed. There is no longer any "fresh air" since everything is just being parroted.

Somewhat related, I think loners are vulnerable to the beartrap of developing "internet brain", in that they are bound to dedicate a lot more attention to socialising on the internet than IRL, even when it's equally difficult to find like-minded folks on both levels.

This could be because "internet brain" makes you cherrypick the good memories you have had socialising online and the bad memories you have had socialising offline, thus creating the illusion that the internet is a more welcoming place, even when it's just as thorny and regulated as social life in the physical world.

Just the germ of a theory, though

>>30047
>even when it's equally difficult to find like-minded folks on both levels.
I have no clue how you came to that conclusion. The pool of people you can talk to on the internet, is orders of magnitude larger than in real life. People also wear their interests on their sleeve online, meaning you can use a computer to do most of the work. The issue of social anxiety is also largely absent.

>"internet brain" makes you cherrypick the good memories you have had socialising online and the bad memories you have had socialising offline
In real life, I'm simply incapable of maintaining relationships without circumstances forcing other people into my proximity. I have no magnetism. It's got nothing to do with positive or negative. Longevity is only possible for me online.

>>30047
I agree, while the internet might have a larger reach compared to real life, we largely choose bits and pieces of conversations that speaks to us and form a pastiche of an ideal individual through it. In a sense, we only see the "good" side of a "person" we want to see and misattribute it to the whole internet, when in reality these very persons might not be very much different to those in real life. Still, for some people, these "bits" and "pieces" might be enough to satisfy their social cravings. For others seeking a deeper connection, this may come as a disappointing truth however.

>>30048
>I have no clue how you came to that conclusion. The pool of people you can talk to on the internet, is orders of magnitude larger than in real life

Meaning, the internet:real life ratio is comparable to the big city:small town ratio.
Is it easier to make friends in a more crowded place?
You are certainly more likely to meet a greater number of people, but whether long-lasting relationships are going to emerge from that is a different matter altogether.

I have met a lot of people in college and at workplaces, almost none of them struck me as friendship material. Something it takes 10 seconds of looking at each other to figure out that you and the other person have nothing in common. It's a vibe check

>People also wear their interests on their sleeve online
Do you get along with everyone you share interests with?
I don't.
I may get to know them in the first place, but that doesn't mean there aren't going to be arguments.
Just like husband and wife can get into shouting contexts despite being, you know, literally married to each other.

>The issue of social anxiety is also largely absent.
This is a mixed blessing.
On the internet, people who are normally shy and inhibited tend to let loose and act in ways that they would clearly refrain from IRL (hence the "tough only on the internet" meme).
This means you can bounce from one excess to the other, in behavioural terms

>I have no magnetism
I have little magnetism as well (very rare for someone to message me spontaneously and ask me how I am doing, I always have to take the initiative), but for me there's no big difference between the internet and real life in this regard.

Yes, on the internet I can talk about junk I like, such as VNs, anime, non-mainstream vidya, Nip culture, etc. , all interests I would simply find weird to bring up IRL, but the focus is never on me, it's always on the topic, so why would people bond with me specifically?
They can always find someone else to discuss the topic with if I'm not around.

See what I mean?

>>30049
>In a sense, we only see the "good" side of a "person" we want to see
I mean, so long as said person is being polite and friendly towards me, I have no problem focusing on their good side. There's clearly something good about them if they are treating me nicely

>when in reality these very persons might not be very much different to those in real life

I really don't have a problem with internet personas, they are of course mental constructs, but that doesn't make them "fake" or "phony" to me, just something that doesn't exist IRL, which is not the same as not existing in any way whatsoever.

>For others seeking a deeper connection, this may come as a disappointing truth however.
It is very much possible, in my experience, to connect deeply when both parties are wearing a mask.
The idea that I can only connect if you know who I am IRL is a normalfag dogma.

My driving license may contain a lot of factual information about my life, but it's not Me with a capital M.

That being said, there are of course people who wear masks with ill intentions, but usually that doesn't last for very long.

Both IRL and online, the test of time is king, intimacy should be built gradually, although you are of course supposed to put some effort to break the ice at the very beginning

>>30055
>Meaning, the internet:real life ratio is comparable to the big city:small town ratio.
>Is it easier to make friends in a more crowded place?
The tc irc channel has 10-20 regular posters. They're from all over. Different US states, Canada, every part of Europe, and there's even a guy in China. It's a small club in terms of member #, but anyone with an internet connection can join. I imagine a lot of discord channels are similar. So your comparison to a crowded city is completely off.

>that doesn't mean there aren't going to be arguments
So? If you never learn what someone's interests are, you're not going form any kind of relationship based on those interests.

>it's always on the topic, so why would people bond with me specifically?
Socializing doesn't necessarily mean "bonding". My stance is that you can have a conversation with people who are like-minded enough way, way, way easier on the internet. I'm not making any claims about emotional intimacy.

>>30058
>The tc irc channel has 10-20 regular posters.
Well yes, people wouldn't come *here* specifically to meet lots of people. They would go to The Other Chan

>Socializing doesn't necessarily mean "bonding". My stance is that you can have a conversation with people who are like-minded enough way, way, way easier on the internet. I'm not making any claims about emotional intimacy.

Personally, I want to discuss stuff to get to know people and thus feel less lonely.
If all I wanted to do was get to know things, I would read TVTropes on my own without messaging anybody; and in fact I do this occasionally, but once I'm done, I don't feel any less lonely

>>30064
>Personally, I want to discuss stuff to get to know people and thus feel less lonely.
Same. Beware, though. In the last ~8 years on imageboards I only met 1 (one, une, eins, いち) person with whom an emotional connection was formed on basis of suffering more or less similar predicament. It didn't even last a few years. Now I don't feel like they care about being around anymore. I think I got myself in this (not a single soul) <-> I <-> friend <-> (friend's other friends) situation. I wish I could articulate it better, but I forgot the exact phrasing used to describe such situations.

I am not sure if it's the nature of imageboards, or my personal issue though. I've been lurking on the internet for something like 80% of my life (I am in my 20s) (I don't mean I spent 80% of my lifetime here, just that I've been checking out places time and again for that long) and in all this time I've met at best 3 (three, trois, drei, さん) persons (including that one above) with whom anything even remotely resembling connection was formed at all. The other two are now lost in time and I don't have their contacts anymore.

In real life, I've met only 1 (one, une, eins, いち) person worth calling a friend, but we got separated, I surmise forever.

So when I try to sum up my experiences something just doesn't add up. Either it's me, or internet, or bad luck, or life itself, I don't know. But my general conclusion is that there is not way to feel "less lonely". I come to internet sometimes to relieve boredom, much more often to relieve anxiety.

>>30065
>いち
>さん
Not a Japanese master or anything, but wouldn't ひとり and さんにん be more appropriate here when we're counting people?

>>30066
I have 0 (zero) idea.

The way I see it in order of best to worse: good people around you > no people at all > bad people around you

Having no people around you and being isolated is stressing, but for anyone who has spent a significant amount of time around bad people he may develop a view of isolation as a blessing. Finally, the torture is over he thinks to himself. Then years go by and he notices even amongst outcasts he struggles deeply to forge new connections, to let his guard down and let people in. He's still stressed and he cannot trust. At this point of a new normal, long after healing a bit from having the life sucked out of him by spiritual leeches, is when social isolation starts having an objective negative impact. So yes OP, if I didn't struggle with it I'm sure my IQ would be a bit higher, I wouldn't get heart palpitations or gasp for air randomly either.

>Because I'm fairly sure long-term depression / poverty of stimuli doesn't go easy on a loner's brain
You ever wonder how hermits did it? And I mean true hermits here. Or religious folks? I think that at certain point when the brain lacks the basic human contact it tries making up for it in some way or another. For hermits I like to think it's the faint memory of a distant long gone loved one, for religious people it's "God". But there must be in some form or another another person to keep you grounded in reality. Imagine if someone had been born all alone in a desert island but somehow managed to survive, without ever knowing what another person is like. I think the real tragedy of loneliness in the modern world comes not so much from being literally isolated but from being forced to interact with strangers ie. threats constantly.

Lately my brain dreams of people I barely interacted with like the stores cashier or some guy in a youtube vid I watched. That's how deprived of stimuli it is. Not yet hallucination levels thankfully.

It's not being a loner, it's being a neet who sits in front of his dear screen all day long for years. I can't quite explain it, but somehow lack of physical activity burns your brain to ashes.

>>30075
I am a physically active loner (walk a lot, hike here and there, go to the gym) and I definitely feel the impact of loneliness.

Never have someone to hug, don't know whom to ask for advice whenever I'm out of my lane, I get to have like 3 non-superficial offline conversations with someone per year... it sucks

>>30076
No, he is right. He is referring to feeling your IQ lowered. What you said makes perfect sense too. You are both saying the same thing, that physical activity lifts the brainrot and makes you feel loneliness more acutely if anything. Dunno if there is a name for this phenomenon but I've seen way too many loners report a similar experience after getting fit, that once the constant brainfog is gone you realize how alone you are. When I was a slob the last thing I felt was loneliness, the first thing was fatigue and anxiety seconded by a ridiculous hard time concentrating.

But I can kind of see why this topic causes so much confusion. You could try writing whole books trying to connect the dots and explain cause and effect and probably be wrong anyway.

>>30079
Maybe also lack of purpose. When you wake up as a neet there's nothing a head so you hardly care about getting out of bed. But if you instead woke up with something meaningful to do during the day, you'd be quite motivated, iirc.

>>30080
Absolutely.
Kids definitely don't hate getting out of the bed in the morning until they have had their first traumatic event at school.
From that point onwards, how good you are at waking up in the morning all depends on what you expect the new day to entail.
It's all about looking forward to something

>exercise
>look forward
And I must admit dissipating accumulated muscle energy through exercise isn't the hard part. It's not like I can't get over a few people watching me run/etc.

As if by jest of providence I felt very lively today, head clear almost entire day, which usually happens rare enough that I never remember when the last time had been. Feeling it all the way down it seems. Not a single soul that cares and nothing to do at all. Though I have my own suspicions about this suddenly good mood. It's a bit too directionless to be real. I hope I won't develop bipolar that'd be the end.

>>30083
Yeah, sometimes we're in a good mood for no apparent reason.
I think it may be due to our gut bacteria suddenly feeling very cosy or something

>>30086
It could be a conspiracy, you know. I believe that miserable people are such because certain Evil hunts them for its own purposes. I remember posting a proof, but I removed it. The gist of it is that if the world had no intention everyone would be left in the least disturbed state. It holds universally that if something is not pushed it maintains its state. Thus all deviations from tranquility must be masterminded by some higher will. Please don't tell anyone about it, they never believe.

Post edited on 31st Jan 2025, 1:07pm

Found out I have brain damage due to long term untreated sleep apnea. So I got that going for me, along with autism. Yay.

>>30089
I'm sorry for you. I hope you find treatment.

>>30089
>sleep apnea
My dad has this. I'm afraid I might have it too, how did you find out you had it? Recording yourself is a cheap but probably ineffective solution.

>>30089
Pardon my asking, but if you're ok answering do you have any of the usual risk factors for sleep apnea (read: being overweight, snoring)? And do you sleep on your back?

>>30090
They say the brain can heal to some extent if you start getting treatment, but the treatment doesn't fully help me sadly. I can definitely tell i have become dumber, I have little short term memory and im sleepy and low motivation all the time.

>>30091
I suspected it for a long time because I was always tired and would sometimes choke awake. I went to an ENT and he said I didn't have it, which was wrong, and wasted like 5 years believing that and not getting treatment. The proper way to diagnose it is a sleep study, which confirmed I had it.

>>30092
I had snoring, but not overweight. But I have a small jaw and thick neck, which are also risk factors. I try not to sleep on my back as it makes it considerably worse.

>>30093
Thank you for responding. Did you have any nightmares during those periods? I ask because I've often wondered myself if I have it since I notice that I usually get strong nightmares on my back and sometimes have nightmares of being strangled (lack of air?), although it could just be anxiety and such.

If anything I think I'd be dumber without the social isolation. I'm the type to overthink my problems and I'm naturally curious so I've had time to really pick myself and the things that happened to me apart. It's not really IQ in the way I understand it; that being IQ is more akin to your brain having the clockspeed to process a problem while knowledge is more akin to having read the docs to understand how the programming language works.

Either way it's not like it matters. Isolation has done more to harm my emotions. Very dismissive, anxious, stuck in my head. If my brain were in the upper percentile it wouldn't matter because I won't apply myself.

That said there's probably not many "true loners" even here. I mean you probably still enjoy various forms of media, youtube, etc that serve as a sort of simulated friendship. To truly go no contact would probably make you go nuts.

>>30021
You know COVID was something of an eye opener for me because of how many people had what seemed to be legitimate mental breakdowns.

My lifestyle literally didn't change because I already had the tools to handle it. In a rather sick way it made me feel proud of myself.

>>30024
Maybe it's cultural but there does seem to be some sort of biological clock that makes people seriously re-evaluate their life around that time. It happened to me. All these things I thought I needed to do to be respectable and happy but couldn't achieve. 30 hit, I threw all that in the trash and I've been regressing into the person I was as a teen. It also brought my anxiety back but overall it's an improvement.

I'm generally quite hesitant to attribute much of anything to IQ, assuming the score isn't extremely low—and yes, I'm aware of how much research and testing has gone into the g factor & such—but I'd say my score likely would be. Around a decade ago I had a psychological evaluation and my abstract reasoning scored far higher than my verbal intelligence was (nearly 30 points higher), which I'd largely attribute to a lifetime of not exercising my verbal skills alongside autism. I do notice I struggle to construct sentences when speaking in-person, which probably made my score nosedive since a sizeable portion of the test relied on verbal interaction with the psychologist ... naming synonyms & the like. I communicate far better when I'm able to type, and I'd assume that goes for many others here as well.

>>30096
>I'd assume that goes for many others here as well
Had pronunciation problems for my entire life, but after many years of not talking to anyone in person, it is improved. Now I am reluctant to say many words and am very careful with what I say and also try to speak quietly, so unless somebody gets me talkative (doesn't ever happen) I actually can mask as a normal person.

>>30094
The only true way to confirm it is with a sleep study. This will either completely rule out or in if you hvae sleep apnea and give you peace of mind. Its not too expensive. it was like $50 aud here.

>>30094
I feel the need to give my 2c here.
>usually get strong nightmares
There was a period in my life not long ago where I was pretty much dying every day, bleeding gums, bleeding nose, bleeding stools, loss of balance, nausea and more. During this time period I'd have nightmares almost every day, that was bad by itself but as if it wasn't bad enough I'd wake up with both tachy and brady cardia (measured just under 40bpm at my worst). But the worst thing of all was sleep paralysis, I swear to god it's one of the most frightening experiences you can have. Just conscious enough to feel terror, unconscious enough to either wake up or go back to sleep. This is something I only experienced for the first time in my late 20s, during this rough health period in my life, turns out sleep paralysis is linked to sleep apnea unsurprisingly.

>could just be anxiety and such.
The reason I'm making this post because anytime I see someone chalk it up to "anxiety" it really grinds my gears. I spent years being gaslit by medics being told I needed therapy and that those nightmares and general sense of non-wellbeing was in my head. It 100% wasn't. Nor is it normal. And it almost surely can be relatively fixed, or at least greatly ameliorated. I'm not a doctor though and each body is different but I can tell you with confidence, after suffering from chronic insomnia for years and those awful nightmares and after trying almost every remedy under the sun (tea for example would sometimes have the opposite effect on me) that there is one thing that almost always helps and improves sleep onset and quality (with almost NO side effects). That thing is called Zinc, ideally from freshly cooked oysters but canned is good too. Supplementing can be dangerous if not done properly but for some reason the body is really good at managing this when they come from real food. Even then I started taking Zinc from supplements and the difference was immediate. So yeah, please eat an oyster asap, friend. Don't believe me tho, look up the wealth of studies linking these two.

>>30114
>Supplementing can be dangerous if not done properly
Can you elaborate more on the dangers?

For what it's worth I do have a relatively low-dose zinc supplement (~30% of RDA) that I sometimes take on and off (mainly just for the supposed immune boosting benefits). To be honest I haven't noticed too much of a difference on days with/without it, so either the supplement isn't strong enough or for me it doesn't do much. (I've also tried both magnesium and vitamin D, which again either don't really do much, or requires much higher doses than I'm comfortable taking). At least in my case, I do entertain the possibility that it is anxieties or repressed traumas or whatever, since there are relatively consistent themes I've observed. But I suspect there are other causal factors as well, since some days are far worse than others. I just haven't been able to pin down any pattern. The one thing I know for sure is that sleeping on my back makes it worse, and that I'm very sensitive to temperature changes when sleeping.

I'll figure it out one day maybe... it doesn't seem to be affecting my waking life so I suppose it's not too bad compared to yours or other anons' situations.

>>30115
The biggest danger is that excess Zinc can cause issues with Copper absorption and depletion because they have an antagonistic relationship. That's pretty much it. How fast you'd get there would depend on your current levels of both, but I did read a few cautionary tales from Reddit warning about taking too much for as little as 2 weeks. Oysters contain both zinc and copper in roughly equal amounts, so the risk from overdosing on either would be pretty low despite being like 5 to 10 times the RDA each (there is a weird genetic defect that makes some peoples body "hoard" more copper than they should, don't think such a thing exists for zinc though). ~30% of the RDA would be like 3-4mg of elemental Zinc, pretty low indeed, the supplement I started with was about 40mg total elemental, took it for a week straight until I improved my sleep and a bit of nausea crept in. Then only 3-4 times per week.

>I do entertain the possibility that it is anxieties or repressed traumas or whatever, since there are relatively consistent themes I've observed. But I suspect there are other causal factors as well, since some days are far worse than others. I just haven't been able to pin down any pattern.
Maybe it's just me but I think trauma and anxieties these days are inevitable and sometimes even a good thing, a sign we're not yet fully lobotomized and unfeeling to the cruelties us and those around us are subjected to. What isn't normal nor acceptable in my opinion is suddenly becoming vulnerable to the effects of these. I know I was a bit fucked in the head before those horrible days came, but I also know I was pretty damn funcional and stable health wise, if anything I'm more fucked in the head now than ever, but therapy or directly trying to address those traumas and anxieties wasn't what saved me (I don't think you should accept it either, "thoughts" causing physical distress, but that's just my opinion). Although hard PTSD has been observed to cause some very real and measurable physiological changes. Not to be a reductionist but the degree your brain is able to adapt and learn new strategies to move forward is undeniably linked to your physical wellbeing, I really, reallyyyyyyy hate that doctors and therapists completely miss this, whatever plan of action or intention to heal a person has should ideally be backed by a strong body.

>I'll figure it out one day maybe... it doesn't seem to be affecting my waking life so I suppose it's not too bad compared to yours or other anons' situations.
Yeah no reason to freak out yet, so many old people live with this until really old age albeit with an arguably low quality of life. I hope you find a way to improve and have comfy dreams soon, anon.

>>30120
>can cause issues with Copper absorption
Ah yeah I remember reading about that. It's one of the many reasons why I shy away "supplementing" with isolated compounds. Even beyond the known issues, there's too much unknown about our metabolism, even as to how each individual achieves homeostasis. (Another reason is of course that you can't trust the purity of this stuff since it's all technically unregulated, so I always mentally use an order-of-magnitude safety factor).

For anyone else following this discussion, ConsumerLabs (which is basically the only source that ever actually tests anything) says
>The established Tolerable Upper Intake Levels (ULs) for daily zinc intake (amounts that should be safe when taken long term by almost anyone who is in good health) for zinc are: 7 mg for children ages 1 to 3, 12 mg for those 4 to 8, 23 mg for those 9 to 13, 34 mg for those 14 to 18, and 40 mg for individuals 19 years and older.
>copper deficiency has been reported in individuals taking less than 100 mg daily, and some experts suggest not exceeding 20 mg per day to avoid this risk

Good suggestion on the oysters though, I don't usually eat seafood but I'll look into it.

>whatever plan of action or intention to heal a person has should ideally be backed by a strong body
That's true, but I think taken as a blanket statement it falls into the same trap that western healthcare has of placing a dichotomy between mind and body. Yes some things (like broken bones, cancer, etc.) are obviously "of the body", but I think when it comes to other things (e.g. autoimmune disorders) things are a bit more blurred. That's not say you can "meditate your way into good health" if your diet is lacking, but conversely I have seen sufficient evidence that both psychological issues and poor diet can manifest as immune dysregulation, e.g. eczema. I.e. usually healthcare is split into "disorders of the mind" (for which therapy is the only hammer that they have) or "disorders of the body" (for which the only thing they can practically do to diagnose is run a bunch of tests), and there's little overlap between the two, and things such as diet/metabolism are usually left out of the picture entirely.

If you don't mind sharing, if you ever visited doctors for your condition (bleeding gums, etc.), did they ever do the usual blood tests for mineral levels, etc.? I'd imagine that might have revealed something seeing as you seemed to be deficient in zinc. (Then again with the quality of doctors these days it's possible they wouldn't even bother running any tests. It's unfortunate that Theranos basically poisoned the entire research space of at-home blood tests since the ability to diagnose in this fashion is the only reason to ever go to a doctor.)

>>30121
>(Another reason is of course that you can't trust the purity of this stuff since it's all technically unregulated, so I always mentally use an order-of-magnitude safety factor)
This one is very true, I've seen many reports of this happening with Vitamin D3 being as popular as it is. But really I was just desperate to get a good night of sleep so I was trying things randomly, and that worked best.

>(amounts that should be safe when taken long term by almost anyone who is in good health)
I think the important part here is
>in good health
That's the difference. I'm not claiming losers or outcasts are not in good health, but it's very likely a lifetime of isolation slowly damages your body. NAC is a popular supplement that seems to help with a lot of mental issues for example, and it's basically just an antioxidant.

>(e.g. autoimmune disorders) things are a bit more blurred. That's not say you can "meditate your way into good health" if your diet is lacking, but conversely I have seen sufficient evidence that both psychological issues and poor diet can manifest as immune dysregulation, e.g. eczema.
Funny you mention that because in my family many relatives on my mothers side have some sort of autoimmune problem. Grandpa got Guillain Barre after some infection that his coworkers got over without major issues, grandma had some autoimmune thing in her joints, my brother has diagnosed IBS. And they're all pretty fucking mental for as long as I can remember, I think a more accurate word is resentful.

>resentment
>noun
>bitter indignation at having been treated unfairly.
>"his resentment at being demoted"
They are the kind of subhumans who hold a grudge forever and will bring up you accidentally breaking their toy or some dumb shit that happened 50 years ago at New Years Eve like it happened yesterday. My simplistic reasoning here is that the bitterness made them sick which in turn prevented them from properly moving forward in life and letting go naturally as more important events and tasks took priority.

I'm interested, what kind of specific evidence have you seen? It is my understanding that in simple terms, the most likely way psychological issues (assuming good diet) could translate into autoimmune issues would be because such a person would have a hard time putting his body into rest AND digest mode. Research now says that the gut is the second brain and modulator of the immune response (diarrhea is a frequent complication and generally means poor prognosis with many viral and bacterial infections, during covid a lot of trials were made where generally speaking, trying to "keep the gut happy" lead to improved survival odds). So to me the relationship is not that blurry: less efficient digestion -> poorer nutrient absorption and consequent gut dysbiosis -> eventual autoimmune issues. As to the diet/metabolism part, why some people cope better with those factors than others (like why the fuck my grandpa got GB while his coworkers didn't, died young and fucked up my moms family), I wouldn't know. I'm afraid it's just "genetics". Once I read an entry in one of those medicine journals, really complete and informative, that talked about that ie. why some peoples metabolism slows down in response to stressful conditions (and creates a negative reinforcing loop not unlike the story of many outcasts ie. gets bullied -> becomes meek -> gets bullied harder -> drops out -> gets bullied by own family -> becomes anxious ->you get the idea), while others ramp up mechanisms that allow them to overcome and thrive. This was from the angle of mental illness and life success in general, it was a good read but I've been searching it for hours without luck so I can't link it. Sorry.

>If you don't mind sharing, if you ever visited doctors for your condition (bleeding gums, etc.), did they ever do the usual blood tests for mineral levels, etc.? I'd imagine that might have revealed something seeing as you seemed to be deficient in zinc.
Back then I got a basic blood panel done (didn't include zinc or selenium or basically any B-Vitamin status which I later learned would've been so much more useful) and was in good health according to that. So my bleeding concerns were dismissed as anxiety. That was about 3 years ago, I signed up for blood donation a month ago and they did basic tests, my blood is eligible but I'm in visibly worse shape today. It's like I aged 10x faster, but I'm still just barely within healthy ranges. Knowing my family history of poor immune function I thought better safe than sorry so I keep taking that because it also always help me sleep.

>Theranos basically poisoned the entire research space of at-home blood tests since the ability to diagnose in this fashion is the only reason to ever go to a doctor.)
As much as I hate con artists like that woman I don't think she harmed medicine that much because I learned most people have blind faith in doctors and will readily scoff at someone like myself talking and trying to understand health and medicine. There'd be no market for that because most would still trust their doctors first. I believe it's also because everyones first priority is covering their asses, that's why doctors are like that, some are incompetent but many are going with the most sensible medico-legal route to minimize liabilities and this gives the patient a false sense of security ("oh it didn't cure me but at least I didn't die")

The only problem with understanding medicine is that it takes years of learning and years of practice, otherwise you're just another delusional guy who think he outsmarted doctors. Well I don't doubt you outsmarted half of them just by being diligent, but that means very little usually.

>>30126
> happening with Vitamin D3
I haven't read about adulteration of D3 since from what I understand it's simple enough to synthesize from lanolin. For zinc and other mineral supplements the concern is heavy metal such as lead though.

>what kind of specific evidence have you seen
Well it's nothing that would convince some hardcore dualistic skeptic, just more "vibes". And like anything intersecting psychology, there's no way to get rigorous proof of anything besides just observations and noting down curious correlations. You can look at things like the work of John Sarno in showing that back pain (barring any anatomical issues) is almost always psychological, and just more generally the fact that placebos work in the first place. From there you could probably posit some sort of feedback mechanism, where "so long as you feel pain" then the body/mind remains in "attack mode" which over time throws normal immune regulation off balance. It's also shouldn't be too hard to accept the other direction that immune disorders and inflammation would affect the state of mind, so that there's some 2-way binding between these two.

In terms of actual biological mechanism for this linkage, I think the limbic system, digestion, parasympathetic system all probably would play a role, but as far as I know since this hypothesis isn't even accepted by the mainstream there isn't much actual research on isolating causal factors.

>is that the bitterness made them sick which in turn prevented them from properly moving forward in life
Yeah, it sounds very "superstition-y" when phrased in that specific way, but there does seem to be some psychological/psychosomatic component to post-viral illnesses (of which "long covid" is the most notable example), and perhaps also "chronic fatigue" syndrome. Unfortunately psychosomatic illness are treated as if they're "imagined", when in fact under this working model they are very real, it's just that the root cause of the metabolic issues isn't something biological but rather something "emotional" (maybe handwavily in the same way stress can make you "sick", so too can "subconscious" issues affect your metabolism). Actually this 2-way binding is sort of the core of Traditional Chinese Medicine from what I understand (e.g. they've catalogued patterns in which certain mental archetypes tend to somatize issues, like anger issues affecting the liver), but I haven't seen good work trying to extract a high quality signal from the morasses of data.

> a hard time putting his body into rest AND digest mode
Right, that's my own personal hypothesis at the moment, linking to the parasympathetic system and metabolism. For the same reason that meditation is said to be calming, if you're preoccupied with something (whether consciously or subconsciously) then it's maybe not a stretch to believe that your body won't be able to properly "relax" and enter the lowered metabolic states needed for recovery. (I do remember there was this once experiment the Wim Hof guy did where they measured immune activity in response to an injected pathogen while he was doing his ice-meditation thing and when he wasn't.)

>Back then I got a basic blood panel done
Hm same experience here, the one time I did decide to go the doctors they tested for random things that clearly aren't the issue (like testing for STDs or for diabetes) while not testing for something I'd have considered essential like mineral/vitamin levels. I think I even asked why something like vitamin d wasn't tested, and got some arrogant response that most people are low anyway so it's not worth testing for. Which is absolutely absurd, I think the real reason was that every test needs to be "justified" by insurance or whatever using some ancient rulebook so they can't just order tests without "probably cause".

>There'd be no market for that
Maybe, I'm sure that there'd be a lot of FUD raised from the doctor cartel. But basically the second order effect is that now there's unlikely to be startup interest (which is the only way that such a product would ever be launched) in this field for the next ~20 years or so. It's absurd that I can sequence DNA at home (nanopore sequencing) but not do something "simple" like test concentration of zinc in blood.

>>30127
>takes years of learning and years of practice
This is not the case, it's a myth perpetuated by doctors to protect their profession. Yes someone going on "webmd" and thinking they've got cancer is probably delusional, but if one knows enough find and read research papers, they are ahead of 99% of doctors. The fact is that most doctors are lazy, and the only job security they have is that they're legally the only ones who can order tests or prescribe pills. Besides that, they don't have any unique insights or experience. Most of medical school is memorization of facts that are mostly obsolete anyway. And doctors are probably more tribal than economists in ignoring anything that's not the officially sanctioned school of thought.

>>30093
>I can definitely tell i have become dumber, I have little short term memory and im sleepy and low motivation all the time.

Have you tried radical lifestyle changes?
Also, what exactly is causing the apnoea?
Do you have something like a permanent cold?