As to the effect, I now think it may be real in the sense that it prevents suicide on impulse. People who are suicidal all the time will probably find another place or method to do so, but people who just feel miserable and have suicidal impulses may be prevented from jumping.
And of course, that may change once people have grown up in cities that are illuminated sky-blue throughout the night.
Yes, and similarly when car exhausts became cleaner.
But if you look at other changes (eg limiting the sizes of paracetamol packets sold over the counter) we see a shift from paracetamol to opiates or tri-cyclics or anti-psychotics.
that could be, that if want to kill yourself using tablets then you have to plan and go out and buy them in advance, whereas if you want to kill yourself using the gas oven then its simple to turn it on and put your head in.
those who formulate a plan and carry it out are more likely to formulate an alternative plan if the one they initially had in mind wasn't going to be possible
those who act on impulse find that if they have to think about it, the impulse has gone
> limiting the sizes of paracetamol packets sold over the counter
I hope people aren't trying to kill themselves with paracetamol!
That's one of the nastiest ways to die. It takes about five days between OD and death, and it's exceedingly painful. Doctors can't do anything to save you, you're stuck explaining to your family that you're dying by your own hand, and you almost always change your mind during that time but it's too late. Did I mention the extreme pain?
As far as ways to die go, paracetamol-induced liver failure is one of the most nightmarish. If people are choosing to kill themselves by ODing on heroin instead of on paracetamol, well, at least their death will be less excruciating.
> As to the effect, I now think it may be real in the sense that it prevents suicide on impulse. People who are suicidal all the time will probably find another place or method to do so, but people who just feel miserable and have suicidal impulses may be prevented from jumping.
This wouldn't be a new finding. Several years ago, I read that putting railings on bridges dropped the overall suicide rate for similar reasons.
As both the article and another commenter note, British suicide rates dropped as the most popular method of suicide (sticking your head in the oven) was made more difficult by the reduction of coal-gas ovens.
Another interesting addendum is the impulsively suicidal generally choose the most effective methods (jumping off a bridge, shooting oneself, etc) while the most determinedly suicidal choose the least effective methods (overdosing, cutting, etc.) It's perversely the opposite of what you might expect.
One question I have, that can be hard to ask without sounding insensitive, is if all suicide attempts are equal in their intent. Overdosing allows for far more options to be saved than a shotgun does; could the choice of one over the other be due to a subconscious or conscious desire to not actually die?
TL;DR: Lots of suicide, though it's on the decline. "Suicide is a bigger threat to Tokyo's citizens than natural disasters and traffic fatalities combined." Research in 2013 "found that there was an 84 percent decrease in suicides at stations with the blue lights" but the reason is unknown.
Funny, they didn't know the blue lights would have that effect when installed initially (the initial reason seems to be aesthetic); it was only after they were in use for a while, that an analysis revealed the decrease in rate.
The retina contains a blue light sensitive photo pigment called melanopsin, in specialized retinal ganglion cells. These melanopsin RGCs help integrate environmental light into multiple systems including those that control mood. Blue light this has beneficial effects in many neuropsychiatric disorders such as seasonal affective disorder.
Actually, this has been implemented already on the previous 3 stations on the red line (2008), and on the tram extension to Barrandov (2004). The band was originally supposed to have been red (as in "danger, train approaching, do not cross"), but was changed early in the process: red is already in use for train signalling and the designers have seen this as potentially confusing to train drivers (the lights tend to reflect into the tunnels somewhat, and "red light" in the underground signalling code means "EMERGENCY, STOP THE TRAIN BY ANY MEANS POSSIBLE") - so they have chosen a color which is unused (green and orange/yellow are also assigned meanings for signalling - "clear to proceed" and "next block occupied"). Source: local transport grapevine.
(On second thought, most Prague underground stations are lit with light that's closer to the "daylight" range than to "incadescent", but that might be an artifact of the lighting systems rather than a deliberate choice)
It's comments like yours, which make HN interesting. Even if the upcoming questions are of rather idiosyncratic nature.
I assume that the C line stations equipped with those bands are the ones up north (thanks for the addition). I have to admit that I never made it that far.
As a side note. The general design of the Prague metro stations are pretty awesome (well, most of them anyway). The "bubble" design of the older A metro stations is almost iconic.
Yep, that's them; there's nothing to see in the desolate northern wastes anyway ;) Except perhaps the Strizkov "White Whale" metro station, a Schrödingerish case of good/bad design: you'll love and/or hate it.
When I hear a number like 84% drop I cannot cannot help but think of how in NYC cops are taught/encouraged to reduce crime statistics by reporting them differently.
However it is kind of hard to fudge suicide reports I guess.
Makes me sad to hear suicide is so high in Japan, especially with free/low-cost mental and physical health care. Has to be a cultural thing where it is accepted and then one person sees/reads about another doing it so it plants the idea in their head that it is okay.
The title of this article seems to indicate the article will be all about the blue lights, but the article only dedicates one paragraph of eleven to describing them. This was an interesting article nonetheless.
I didn't realize the suicide rate in Japan was so high. It's sad. Combine that with Japan's phenonmena of "moss viewing girls" [1] and "herbivore men" [2] and it really seems like the Japanese are destined for extinction.
I read an article one about murder in the sumo community in Japan. It suggested many murders were considered suicides by the police, and thus not investigated.
This would keep the murder rate artificially low and the suicide rate artificially high.
I also heard that due to the nature of elderly benefit receival in Japan, its status as having some of the longest living people might also be in doubt...
Nothing substantial I can give you, but I'll just mention this :-)
You mention the elderly; can't find the link now but I read a very sad story about a man who cleans up houses in Japan after a person has died in them. Many suicides and many more elderly who just died alone out of neglect.
Also, on the suicide rate, seems like Japan is a ways down the list at 9th place with a rate of 28.2 per 100,000 (for years 1985 - 2015) [1].
It's not relevant. I should have marked it off topic. I've just been noticing trends in Japan that are leading to a steady population decline, the suicide rate yet another. But maybe this blue light effect will mitigate it.
What's wrong with moss viewing? First I've heard of it, but it makes me wanna get out my micro lens and try it. The girl seems like she is just passionate about it. Much like stamp collectors or beetle enthusiasts, etc. Probably not as intense as some videogame players.
How does this drive them to extinction? Nothing stops people with hobbies from having plenty of children.
I'm not sure where you were going with this comment, but the suicide rate in Japan is about 0.02% of their population/year. Quite large but absolutely irrelevant for population.
Even for South Korea this is only approaching 0.03%
"Photos of the teenager's corpse show a deep cut on his right arm, horrific bruising on his neck and chest. His face is swollen and covered with cuts. A silhouette of violence runs from the corner of his left eye over the cheekbone to his jaw, and his legs are pocked with small burns the size of a lighted cigarette.
But police in Japan's Aichi prefecture saw something else when they looked at the body of Takashi Saito, a 17-year-old sumo wrestler who arrived at a hospital in June. The cause of death was "heart disease," police declared.
As is common in Japan, Aichi police reached their verdict on how Saito died without an autopsy. No need for a coroner, they said. No crime involved. Only 6.3% of the unnatural deaths in Aichi are investigated by a medical examiner, a minuscule rate even by nationwide standards in Japan, where an autopsy is performed in 11.2% of cases."
"A research paper published in the Journal of Affective Disorder in 2013 (four years after the first lights were installed) found that there was an 84 percent decrease in suicides at stations with the blue lights. The exact reason why the lights are effective isn’t known, but some researchers theorize that it’s related to the apparent positive effect of light on mood. A recent study led by Hiroshi Kadotani, from Shiga University of Medical Science found there was an “increased proportion of railway suicide attempts after several days without sunlight,” based on 971 suicides or attempted suicides in Tokyo between 2002 and 2006."
So they don't know how blue lights do anything. The title of the article is totally misleading.
I have a http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00M3SGD4Y/ blue light in my office to use around noon in wintertime it has a powerful effect. Using it too early in the morning can throw your circadian rhythm so maybe lunch is the best time.
> If all this were generally true of blue light, then a television monitor tuned to an all-blue channel would be just as effective.
If it hits the same frequencies.
The frequency of the light is important here, because our body/eyes pick up on and react differently to, well, different frequencies. Just because we perceive two lights as producing the same color does not mean that we will get the same reaction, physiologically, from both of them.
An "all-blue" channel is an artifact of your television. Modern televisions put up a solid color rather than snow when they fail to detect a carrier wave on the chosen channel.
Ok, but the "all-blue channel" is just the TV turning all the lights blue when it can't find a signal. Why bring a TV into it if you can just put up blue lights?
Light therapy is a common treatment for seasonal affective disorder and depression. Just speculating, but this sounds like a public health version of that, something like adding iodine to salt or fluoride to drinking water.
> We searched databases up to August 2015 for studies on light therapy to prevent winter depression. Among 2986 records, we found one randomised controlled study including 46 people who received light therapy or no treatment. All individuals in these studies had a history of winter depression.
> What does the evidence from the review reveal?
> The quality of evidence for all outcomes was very low, so we can draw no conclusions about whether light therapy is effective in preventing winter depression. The included study provided no information on side effects of light therapy.
[...]
> Authors' conclusions:
> Evidence on light therapy as preventive treatment for patients with a history of SAD is limited. Methodological limitations and the small sample size of the only available study have precluded review author conclusions on effects of light therapy for SAD. Given that comparative evidence for light therapy versus other preventive options is limited, the decision for or against initiating preventive treatment of SAD and the treatment selected should be strongly based on patient preferences.
It has a plausible mechanism of action, and (so long as other treatment approaches aren't ignored) it's unlikely to do any harm.
There are numerous studies showing a benefit from light therapy.
It is true that the the quality of the evidence could be improved. That's a political/financial issue, not a reflection of the efficacy (or lack thereof) of light therapy. The available evidence supports the treatment.
I read that to mean there was only one study that was randomized & controlled.
Basically when you say "there are studies that show X" you aren't saying anything because "studies" are cheap unless your methodology is rigorous and sound, which isn't the case a lot of the time.
Apparently, 91 papers passed Nussbaumer et al's assessment of the abstract (and were presumably randomized, controlled trials):
We assessed 91 full-text papers for inclusion in the review, but only one study providing data from 46 people met our eligibility criteria.
Those eligibility criteria were:
For efficacy, we included randomised controlled trials on adults with a history of winter-type SAD who were free of symptoms at the beginning of the study.
I think it may have been the focus on prevention (rather than treatment of symptomatic depression) that excluded all the other papers.
I just skimmed the paper the paper the first time and didn't notice that the authors were searching for studies of a very specific question: prevention (excluding treatment) of seasonal affective disorder (excluding any other form of depression).
> Along with the shift in meaning of "literally," another major shift in language is occurring w/r/t to the use of "How."
> Often these days, you can substitute "How" with "That."
Not really; the uses of "how" -- which aren't really substitutes for "that" -- that don't address a mechanism by which an effect is achieved but either the manner in which it manifests or the degree to which it manifests (the latter being essentially the same as phrase "how much", though the "much" is often left out) are both centuries old and in continuous, common use.
The article is not about merely "That the lights reduce suicide" but "How [much] the lights reduce suicide". Which is a long-established, not novel, use of "How", despite being distinct from another potential meaning of "how", "By what mechanism did the lights reduce suicide."
It appears that they also don't know whether the blue lights prevent suicides, or merely relocate them to somewhere besides train stations.
Regardless, reducing the number of suicides in train stations is not a bad goal ...
> Part of the reason the city concentrates its efforts here is because such “human accidents” are costly and can disrupt tens of thousands of passengers for up to an hour, weekly or even daily.
... but it is not really a goal that is motivated by concern for the people who might kill themselves.
Anecdotally I saw blue led lighting to prevent at a train station for a London Airport (I think Gatwick). The platform guard didn't seem to think it made any difference, and that it was bought at the end of a budget period.
Japan has a severe depression problem among young male population due to all the social experimenting done by American institutions in the theory of eulogy and Malthusian economy. I will quote Wikipedia:
"Seventy-one percent of suicides in Japan were male,[2] and it is the leading cause of death in men aged 20–44.[5][6]"
Basically young males of working age. Japan has a severe problem of Hikikomoris who are almost always male. Unfortunately most Japanese men don't have any social way to express themselves, contrary to all the theories and movies about powerful patriarchy etc., and so are silently labeled by the academics instead of owning the identity as being MGTOW. And the government has confused suicide problem with suicide bombing apparently, and is all about prevention rather than cure.
The social experiments I am referring to originated because people worried about increasing population that became hard to control to people in power. The fear of Malthusian crisis originated from England and spread through every western educated person, which for non-western countries like Japan literally meant aristocratic nobles. This coupled with industrialization and militarization of Japanese society required use of female work force and so policies were put in place to take them out of the house and freedom to divorce/remarriage was given as carrot. Here is an article from 1930 discussing this same issue:
"The old idea that the marriage of young people should be made by the gods with the assistance of their parents seems to be well-nigh completely discarded... While the young men's ideal of what their wives should be still seems to be a pretty woman with a classical face, backed with rich parents, the young women's fancies are more rational and more practical... 'as illustrated in most modern Japanese novels, which are generally brought about by the worthless character of parent-chosen husbands.' The young women seem to think that all the men who count at all are self made men."
(NOTE: Nowadays women want men who think marriages are made in heaven while they enjoy full freedom to break it as they please with monetary incentives. :D)
As "Mother's Educational Level Influences Birth Rate"[2], and since males are two times more likely to cause their own deaths after a divorce than females are[3], drop in population and increase in male suicide ratio can be very well be predicted, if anyone ever cared. Unfortunately men are generally more prone to suffer from hypertension and depression than women so that contributes even more in male death. [5]
To be very very on-topic, "blue lights" might save more men in USA than Japan as per following study:
"The gender ratio of suicide rates was higher in the United States (3.9) and Australia (3.3), where gender differences in suicide methods were more prominent, than in Korea (1.8) and Japan (2.7)."[4] Here gender ratio refers to people who are effected by gender differences in suicide methods.
Further more, the lowest gender ratio in suicide in Japan was back in 1990[6], "when men accounted for “just” 61.6% of suicides." After that divorce rate skyrocketed.[7][8]
This might look like a conspiracy theory to people who have never read a single thing about it, but to corraborate one of these links notices that while most divorces before WWII were initiated by men, it is now women who lead the numbers. And to people who use double quotes around men's rights and think it is some sort of American cult of misogynists - two things: 1. I don't pity you, but I will when one day you will need it. In my experience Feminist men get f*cked the most. 2. Here is a men's right organization in Japan working under the banner of conservatism to survive in a place which is under tremendous pressure from UN to reform alimony laws so more money is put in the hands of women. "Japan's 'Chauvinistic Husbands' save marriages"[9]
I suppose I haven't actually talked about the experiments. In my defence, all the research leads to cause of female suicide and the book I was going to quote is lost in my emails (I had it scanned). I will update here when I find it. What I wanted to refer to was the systematic implementation of eugenics from "Oriental Studies department" of so many universities in Europe (Sweden practiced it as late as 1984 AFAIR, with 80% of victims of forced sterilization being female.), importation of western laws following one after the other fad, systematic discouragement of study on male condition etc.
1. Divorce in Japan - Yasu Iwasaki - American Journal of Sociology - Vol. 36, No. 3 (Nov., 1930), pp. 435-446
I don't have time to comment on most of this, but [9]:
Perhaps this is a men's rights group, and their name suggests it (Chauvinistic Husbands), but the things they're having the men do to save their marriages is to become better partners. This is the exact opposite of what many MRA folks write about. The men in that group are doing more at home. They're actively engaging with their wives and children in a way more typically espoused and encouraged by feminist movements. Again, perhaps the movement's intention is to help men, but it's really helping all members of the marriage by giving the same sort of advice and asking the same sort of questions typical of good marriage counseling (couples counseling and group counseling).
> social experimenting done by American institutions in
> the theory of eulogy and Malthusian economy.
Can you give some examples of the experiments and the relevant American institutions responsible for the experiments? I really have no idea what you are talking about. I am not sure if I am missing something obvious or if I am witnessing terrible auto-correct accident.
Until GP responds, the best I can come up with, which is not really an "experiment" as there was no control, is the post-WWII demilitarization and, effective, subjugation of Japan. The nation and people's wills were controlled for a time primarily by outsiders, or severely restricted if not directly controlled.
I could see GP referencing this and its consequences as the experimenting. But, again, it wasn't an experiment. Japan lost a war they instigated. The conquering nations (primarily the US) established severe restrictions on them after their defeat. This is not unusual. I suppose what is unusual is the degree and duration of the demilitarization, and its unusual effectiveness. Primarily, I imagine, due to modern communication technology allowing for the coordination and maintenance of this state after the war, something that would have been impossible 50 or 100 years earlier on the same scale.
> Until GP responds, the best I can come up with, which is not really an "experiment" as there was no control, is the post-WWII demilitarization and, effective, subjugation of Japan. The nation and people's wills were controlled for a time primarily by outsiders, or severely restricted if not directly controlled.
One of the reasons this is bunk is that east Asian cultures have had higher prevalences of suicide well before WWII.
Japan does not need American "men's rights activists" to lecture it on how it's being oppressed by feminism and women are evil succubuses and must be avoided to punish them.
It needs less stressful working conditions and a more open attitude to mental health.
That would be because it's not a word used by the general public. It's a men's rights movement offshoot. If you see someone use it seriously, it's a dead giveaway of where they're coming from.
Well, reading about it has been a bit surreal. They have a different take than the normal men's rights stuff I've read.
I get taking time off from relationships. I get feeling hurt. But to conclude from that that all women should be shunned, and you should never have any more relationships, is a bit extreme.
I guess I'll have to file this away with other delusional movements of the modern era.
Yes, but. They seem to be taking it to a greater extreme or encouraging people to, where they remove even female friendships and social contact from the table.
No. But it is extreme, and in the modern era in western countries (where these groups seem to be) really, really hard to pull off.
I've been to Catholic monasteries in the US, plenty of women around most of them. Either working in the gift shops, volunteering with tasks needed around the monastery (often, the monks are aging and needing more help these days than in earlier eras). A totally cloistered existence is possible, but you're making a major sacrifice. Without a religious motivation I'm having a hard time imagining anyone making that commitment.
> Without a religious motivation I'm having a hard time imagining anyone making that commitment.
As I understand, even the religious groups (including Catholic cloistered religious, which as you note most orders are not) that take isolation to more extreme levels -- of both genders -- tend to do a lot of work to filter out people whose motivations are not religious, so I don't think that a religious motivation is all that essential to choosing such a lifestyle (the typical non-religious motivations may turn out to usually be insufficient to staying with that choice, though...)
Not really. This is more organized misogyny than voluntary celibacy. If you take a look at their forums, they are more concerned with criticism of women and feminism than celibacy.
> This is more organized misogyny than voluntary celibacy.
Voluntarily celibacy and, especially, voluntary complete isolation from women have often been sold by organized groups with justifications that incorporate misogyny, so "organized misogyny" and "voluntary celibacy", while distinct, aren't completely independent.
So, I don't think MGOTW is, even to the extent that it combines these things, particularly novel.
You're right, I don't think that it's particularly novel. Just that it seems the misogyny aspect of "MGOTW" is more important than the celibacy aspect.
You'd think so, but then some MGTOWs will start talking about how they're finished associating with American women but will still consider dating Asian women because they want a "submissive" and "traditional" wife.
It's creepy as fuck.
(also, it's seriously racist: I've had Asian female friends my entire life, and none of them are "submissive" or "traditional"... I can't imagine any of them putting up with that shit)
All the ascetics have historically shunned sex, except Osho who... went in a whole different direction.
If you are reading about MGTOW then most probably you are reading a very slanted view of them by people who don't like to here that men are suffering. MGTOWs don't hate women nor they consider feminists as enemies. It is very much a political movement and hence gets shitted upon by political feminism. Not a surprise there. But to listen to ignorant people talking as an expert because they read something written by equally ignorant people with malicious intent is mostly funny, until you realist the very high number of male suicides. As I said earlier, if gender were reversed we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Ok, give us a reading list. And explain what the theory of eulogy is and what social experiments we (Americans) conducted in Japan that has lead to this suicide epidemic.
Where exactly I have mentioned that theory of Eugenics is American? I think you have misread my whole comment due to lack of control. 'USA' has been mentioned by people who think MGTOW is an American think, and I have denied it. Eulogy is obviously a misspelling of Eugenics. Forgive me, I am not a native English speaker.
You wrote theory of eulogy. Since you meant eugenics then your post makes a lot more sense because that's some useful context. I appreciate that it was a mistake, but it was not a leap I (or others, apparently) could easily make from the misspelling to the intended word.
> But to conclude from that that all women should be shunned, and you should never have any more relationships, is a bit extreme.
I think its something that it is very common for people to go through as a phase (and, also, the gender-reversed mirror image is common as this), particularly in young adulthood, and its also a thing that historically very common to have groups advocate as a lifestyle (usually incorporating a very negative image of women as part of its justification) -- but to the extent a gender-reversed form is pushed by powerful groups as a lifestyle advocated to women, it is also, if it incorporates a negative view of one gender, with a negative view of women.
Nah. Eunuch's were either forced into it or chose it for the political/economic potential of the roles they could fulfill as eunuchs. Also, one reason for their castration (in some cultures) was to allow them access to women, because they could be trusted with them (compared to non-castrated male guards).
It appears that that's the intent of using an obscure acronym like that; people can drop it casually in conversation, and then people search for it, and then someone edits the Wikipedia article to crow about how many people are searching for it.
Worked with the Tokyo office for a major US bank one time. Poor guys. Constant reference to "not making mistakes" and the consequences that would result. It's a wonder they get anything done.
You live in fantasy world if you think men's rights activists are an American thing. They are biggest in 3rd world countries, you just don't hear about them.
> it's being oppressed by feminism and women are evil succubuses and must be avoided to punish them.
Ughhh... no that is not what MRAs talk about. And can we just look at some data about when suicide rates rocketed? And as a feminist I was under the impression that women were the ones going through more stressful working conditions?
That is the problem here. If the gender ratio was reversed no one would have to suffer through "sarcasm in quotes".
> You live in fantasy world if you think men's rights activists are an American thing. They are biggest in 3rd world countries, you just don't hear about them.
Strange, then, that the movement seems to revolve around spoilt white men.
There is some evidence that exposing people to light from blue LEDs has some element of mad science. Non-blue light mixed with blue light has been shown to reduce the effect of the blue light. So exposing someone to just blue light can cause a very strong reaction, possibly larger than encountered in nature.
> During rush hour, those 67 minutes may be spent on a train crowded with four times as many passengers as it’s designed to carry.
This article gives me the impression that all they're really trying to do, realizing it or not, is make it possible for that anti-pattern, and all the anti-patterns surrounding it, to continue to exist. "Be strong, go to work!"
Also, if you have to travel 67 minutes to and from work in a cattle car, and you're part of the "salary man" cohort with legendary working hours, how can you have any time at all to take advantage of the "free" mental health services mentioned elsewhere in this thread.
I've been on software "death marches" of a few weeks or months. The stereotype that I see in my at a distance news reading from Japan looks like a lifelong death march.
We are not "meant," or evolved, depending on your point of view, to work and stress all our waking hours. We are not meant to live in Tokyo and similar environments.
There was a TED talk about "changing one little thing". It was not specifically about suicide prevention, but a whole bunch of cases where all you had to do was change something small to bring about different behavior. Can anyone remind me what that was?
102 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 111 ms ] threadhttp://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2008/12/13/can-blue-co... gives some more reasonable account (part of the change may be that people do not commit suicide _there_) and references the paper in question (http://phys.org/news/2008-12-blue-streetlights-crime-suicide...) which is titled (emphasis added): "Blue streetlights may prevent crime, suicide".
Unfortunately, I cannot find the text.
As to the effect, I now think it may be real in the sense that it prevents suicide on impulse. People who are suicidal all the time will probably find another place or method to do so, but people who just feel miserable and have suicidal impulses may be prevented from jumping.
And of course, that may change once people have grown up in cities that are illuminated sky-blue throughout the night.
As the population changes younger people find new methods, so it's not enough by itself.
But if you look at other changes (eg limiting the sizes of paracetamol packets sold over the counter) we see a shift from paracetamol to opiates or tri-cyclics or anti-psychotics.
those who formulate a plan and carry it out are more likely to formulate an alternative plan if the one they initially had in mind wasn't going to be possible
those who act on impulse find that if they have to think about it, the impulse has gone
could be
I hope people aren't trying to kill themselves with paracetamol!
That's one of the nastiest ways to die. It takes about five days between OD and death, and it's exceedingly painful. Doctors can't do anything to save you, you're stuck explaining to your family that you're dying by your own hand, and you almost always change your mind during that time but it's too late. Did I mention the extreme pain?
As far as ways to die go, paracetamol-induced liver failure is one of the most nightmarish. If people are choosing to kill themselves by ODing on heroin instead of on paracetamol, well, at least their death will be less excruciating.
This wouldn't be a new finding. Several years ago, I read that putting railings on bridges dropped the overall suicide rate for similar reasons.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/magazine/06suicide-t.html?...
As both the article and another commenter note, British suicide rates dropped as the most popular method of suicide (sticking your head in the oven) was made more difficult by the reduction of coal-gas ovens.
Another interesting addendum is the impulsively suicidal generally choose the most effective methods (jumping off a bridge, shooting oneself, etc) while the most determinedly suicidal choose the least effective methods (overdosing, cutting, etc.) It's perversely the opposite of what you might expect.
F.lux: https://justgetflux.com/
Redshift: http://jonls.dk/redshift/
The four new Prague metro stations are equipped with a blue band at the edge of the platform, which starts to blink when a train approaches.
I wonder if this is coincidental.
(On second thought, most Prague underground stations are lit with light that's closer to the "daylight" range than to "incadescent", but that might be an artifact of the lighting systems rather than a deliberate choice)
TL;DR: Just a UX coincidence.
It's comments like yours, which make HN interesting. Even if the upcoming questions are of rather idiosyncratic nature.
I assume that the C line stations equipped with those bands are the ones up north (thanks for the addition). I have to admit that I never made it that far.
As a side note. The general design of the Prague metro stations are pretty awesome (well, most of them anyway). The "bubble" design of the older A metro stations is almost iconic.
Really a testament to Czech design in my view.
Thanks again for the insight.
Yep, that's them; there's nothing to see in the desolate northern wastes anyway ;) Except perhaps the Strizkov "White Whale" metro station, a Schrödingerish case of good/bad design: you'll love and/or hate it.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/26127084
FTFY.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/29/nyregion/new-york-police-d...
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-crime-newyork-statistics-i...
However it is kind of hard to fudge suicide reports I guess.
Makes me sad to hear suicide is so high in Japan, especially with free/low-cost mental and physical health care. Has to be a cultural thing where it is accepted and then one person sees/reads about another doing it so it plants the idea in their head that it is okay.
[1] http://ignition.co/398 [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbivore_men
This would keep the murder rate artificially low and the suicide rate artificially high.
I also heard that due to the nature of elderly benefit receival in Japan, its status as having some of the longest living people might also be in doubt...
Nothing substantial I can give you, but I'll just mention this :-)
Also, on the suicide rate, seems like Japan is a ways down the list at 9th place with a rate of 28.2 per 100,000 (for years 1985 - 2015) [1].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_r...
How does this drive them to extinction? Nothing stops people with hobbies from having plenty of children.
Even for South Korea this is only approaching 0.03%
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/02/03/national/media-n...
What's the error rate in other countries?
http://articles.latimes.com/2007/nov/09/world/fg-autopsy9
"Photos of the teenager's corpse show a deep cut on his right arm, horrific bruising on his neck and chest. His face is swollen and covered with cuts. A silhouette of violence runs from the corner of his left eye over the cheekbone to his jaw, and his legs are pocked with small burns the size of a lighted cigarette.
But police in Japan's Aichi prefecture saw something else when they looked at the body of Takashi Saito, a 17-year-old sumo wrestler who arrived at a hospital in June. The cause of death was "heart disease," police declared.
As is common in Japan, Aichi police reached their verdict on how Saito died without an autopsy. No need for a coroner, they said. No crime involved. Only 6.3% of the unnatural deaths in Aichi are investigated by a medical examiner, a minuscule rate even by nationwide standards in Japan, where an autopsy is performed in 11.2% of cases."
So they don't know how blue lights do anything. The title of the article is totally misleading.
If it hits the same frequencies.
The frequency of the light is important here, because our body/eyes pick up on and react differently to, well, different frequencies. Just because we perceive two lights as producing the same color does not mean that we will get the same reaction, physiologically, from both of them.
Light therapy is a common treatment for seasonal affective disorder and depression. Just speculating, but this sounds like a public health version of that, something like adding iodine to salt or fluoride to drinking water.
http://www.cochrane.org/CD011269/DEPRESSN_light-therapy-prev...
> Which studies were included in the review?
> We searched databases up to August 2015 for studies on light therapy to prevent winter depression. Among 2986 records, we found one randomised controlled study including 46 people who received light therapy or no treatment. All individuals in these studies had a history of winter depression.
> What does the evidence from the review reveal?
> The quality of evidence for all outcomes was very low, so we can draw no conclusions about whether light therapy is effective in preventing winter depression. The included study provided no information on side effects of light therapy.
[...]
> Authors' conclusions:
> Evidence on light therapy as preventive treatment for patients with a history of SAD is limited. Methodological limitations and the small sample size of the only available study have precluded review author conclusions on effects of light therapy for SAD. Given that comparative evidence for light therapy versus other preventive options is limited, the decision for or against initiating preventive treatment of SAD and the treatment selected should be strongly based on patient preferences. It has a plausible mechanism of action, and (so long as other treatment approaches aren't ignored) it's unlikely to do any harm.
> the small sample size of the only available study
The only study?
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=light+therapy+depressio...
There are numerous studies showing a benefit from light therapy.
It is true that the the quality of the evidence could be improved. That's a political/financial issue, not a reflection of the efficacy (or lack thereof) of light therapy. The available evidence supports the treatment.
Basically when you say "there are studies that show X" you aren't saying anything because "studies" are cheap unless your methodology is rigorous and sound, which isn't the case a lot of the time.
http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=20429...
http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/ajp.2006.16...
http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=20433...
Apparently, 91 papers passed Nussbaumer et al's assessment of the abstract (and were presumably randomized, controlled trials):
We assessed 91 full-text papers for inclusion in the review, but only one study providing data from 46 people met our eligibility criteria.
Those eligibility criteria were:
For efficacy, we included randomised controlled trials on adults with a history of winter-type SAD who were free of symptoms at the beginning of the study.
I think it may have been the focus on prevention (rather than treatment of symptomatic depression) that excluded all the other papers.
I just skimmed the paper the paper the first time and didn't notice that the authors were searching for studies of a very specific question: prevention (excluding treatment) of seasonal affective disorder (excluding any other form of depression).
From Article: "84 percent decrease in suicides at stations with the blue lights."
Along with the shift in meaning of "literally," another major shift in language is occurring w/r/t to the use of "How."
Often these days, you can substitute "How" with "That."
For example, in this article, it's not about "How the lights helped people." It's more like "That the lights helped people."
I'm not trying to say you're wrong or that I like this practice. All I'm saying is it's part of a bigger trend.
> Often these days, you can substitute "How" with "That."
Not really; the uses of "how" -- which aren't really substitutes for "that" -- that don't address a mechanism by which an effect is achieved but either the manner in which it manifests or the degree to which it manifests (the latter being essentially the same as phrase "how much", though the "much" is often left out) are both centuries old and in continuous, common use.
The article is not about merely "That the lights reduce suicide" but "How [much] the lights reduce suicide". Which is a long-established, not novel, use of "How", despite being distinct from another potential meaning of "how", "By what mechanism did the lights reduce suicide."
It appears that they also don't know whether the blue lights prevent suicides, or merely relocate them to somewhere besides train stations.
Regardless, reducing the number of suicides in train stations is not a bad goal ...
> Part of the reason the city concentrates its efforts here is because such “human accidents” are costly and can disrupt tens of thousands of passengers for up to an hour, weekly or even daily.
... but it is not really a goal that is motivated by concern for the people who might kill themselves.
"Seventy-one percent of suicides in Japan were male,[2] and it is the leading cause of death in men aged 20–44.[5][6]"
Basically young males of working age. Japan has a severe problem of Hikikomoris who are almost always male. Unfortunately most Japanese men don't have any social way to express themselves, contrary to all the theories and movies about powerful patriarchy etc., and so are silently labeled by the academics instead of owning the identity as being MGTOW. And the government has confused suicide problem with suicide bombing apparently, and is all about prevention rather than cure.
"The old idea that the marriage of young people should be made by the gods with the assistance of their parents seems to be well-nigh completely discarded... While the young men's ideal of what their wives should be still seems to be a pretty woman with a classical face, backed with rich parents, the young women's fancies are more rational and more practical... 'as illustrated in most modern Japanese novels, which are generally brought about by the worthless character of parent-chosen husbands.' The young women seem to think that all the men who count at all are self made men."
(NOTE: Nowadays women want men who think marriages are made in heaven while they enjoy full freedom to break it as they please with monetary incentives. :D)
As "Mother's Educational Level Influences Birth Rate"[2], and since males are two times more likely to cause their own deaths after a divorce than females are[3], drop in population and increase in male suicide ratio can be very well be predicted, if anyone ever cared. Unfortunately men are generally more prone to suffer from hypertension and depression than women so that contributes even more in male death. [5]
To be very very on-topic, "blue lights" might save more men in USA than Japan as per following study:
"The gender ratio of suicide rates was higher in the United States (3.9) and Australia (3.3), where gender differences in suicide methods were more prominent, than in Korea (1.8) and Japan (2.7)."[4] Here gender ratio refers to people who are effected by gender differences in suicide methods.
Further more, the lowest gender ratio in suicide in Japan was back in 1990[6], "when men accounted for “just” 61.6% of suicides." After that divorce rate skyrocketed.[7][8]
This might look like a conspiracy theory to people who have never read a single thing about it, but to corraborate one of these links notices that while most divorces before WWII were initiated by men, it is now women who lead the numbers. And to people who use double quotes around men's rights and think it is some sort of American cult of misogynists - two things: 1. I don't pity you, but I will when one day you will need it. In my experience Feminist men get f*cked the most. 2. Here is a men's right organization in Japan working under the banner of conservatism to survive in a place which is under tremendous pressure from UN to reform alimony laws so more money is put in the hands of women. "Japan's 'Chauvinistic Husbands' save marriages"[9]
I suppose I haven't actually talked about the experiments. In my defence, all the research leads to cause of female suicide and the book I was going to quote is lost in my emails (I had it scanned). I will update here when I find it. What I wanted to refer to was the systematic implementation of eugenics from "Oriental Studies department" of so many universities in Europe (Sweden practiced it as late as 1984 AFAIR, with 80% of victims of forced sterilization being female.), importation of western laws following one after the other fad, systematic discouragement of study on male condition etc.
1. Divorce in Japan - Yasu Iwasaki - American Journal of Sociology - Vol. 36, No. 3 (Nov., 1930), pp. 435-446
2. ...
Perhaps this is a men's rights group, and their name suggests it (Chauvinistic Husbands), but the things they're having the men do to save their marriages is to become better partners. This is the exact opposite of what many MRA folks write about. The men in that group are doing more at home. They're actively engaging with their wives and children in a way more typically espoused and encouraged by feminist movements. Again, perhaps the movement's intention is to help men, but it's really helping all members of the marriage by giving the same sort of advice and asking the same sort of questions typical of good marriage counseling (couples counseling and group counseling).
PS: I am shadow banned. Won't post again.
I could see GP referencing this and its consequences as the experimenting. But, again, it wasn't an experiment. Japan lost a war they instigated. The conquering nations (primarily the US) established severe restrictions on them after their defeat. This is not unusual. I suppose what is unusual is the degree and duration of the demilitarization, and its unusual effectiveness. Primarily, I imagine, due to modern communication technology allowing for the coordination and maintenance of this state after the war, something that would have been impossible 50 or 100 years earlier on the same scale.
One of the reasons this is bunk is that east Asian cultures have had higher prevalences of suicide well before WWII.
Japan does not need American "men's rights activists" to lecture it on how it's being oppressed by feminism and women are evil succubuses and must be avoided to punish them.
It needs less stressful working conditions and a more open attitude to mental health.
Men going their own way
Had to google it, that's a very non-obvious abbreviation.
I get taking time off from relationships. I get feeling hurt. But to conclude from that that all women should be shunned, and you should never have any more relationships, is a bit extreme.
I guess I'll have to file this away with other delusional movements of the modern era.
I've been to Catholic monasteries in the US, plenty of women around most of them. Either working in the gift shops, volunteering with tasks needed around the monastery (often, the monks are aging and needing more help these days than in earlier eras). A totally cloistered existence is possible, but you're making a major sacrifice. Without a religious motivation I'm having a hard time imagining anyone making that commitment.
As I understand, even the religious groups (including Catholic cloistered religious, which as you note most orders are not) that take isolation to more extreme levels -- of both genders -- tend to do a lot of work to filter out people whose motivations are not religious, so I don't think that a religious motivation is all that essential to choosing such a lifestyle (the typical non-religious motivations may turn out to usually be insufficient to staying with that choice, though...)
Voluntarily celibacy and, especially, voluntary complete isolation from women have often been sold by organized groups with justifications that incorporate misogyny, so "organized misogyny" and "voluntary celibacy", while distinct, aren't completely independent.
So, I don't think MGOTW is, even to the extent that it combines these things, particularly novel.
It's creepy as fuck.
(also, it's seriously racist: I've had Asian female friends my entire life, and none of them are "submissive" or "traditional"... I can't imagine any of them putting up with that shit)
If you are reading about MGTOW then most probably you are reading a very slanted view of them by people who don't like to here that men are suffering. MGTOWs don't hate women nor they consider feminists as enemies. It is very much a political movement and hence gets shitted upon by political feminism. Not a surprise there. But to listen to ignorant people talking as an expert because they read something written by equally ignorant people with malicious intent is mostly funny, until you realist the very high number of male suicides. As I said earlier, if gender were reversed we wouldn't be having this conversation.
...a very good question, given that all the links on google for the phrase "theory of eulogy" lead back to this comment thread.
I think its something that it is very common for people to go through as a phase (and, also, the gender-reversed mirror image is common as this), particularly in young adulthood, and its also a thing that historically very common to have groups advocate as a lifestyle (usually incorporating a very negative image of women as part of its justification) -- but to the extent a gender-reversed form is pushed by powerful groups as a lifestyle advocated to women, it is also, if it incorporates a negative view of one gender, with a negative view of women.
Isn't this why we have the term: Eunuch
> it's being oppressed by feminism and women are evil succubuses and must be avoided to punish them.
Ughhh... no that is not what MRAs talk about. And can we just look at some data about when suicide rates rocketed? And as a feminist I was under the impression that women were the ones going through more stressful working conditions?
That is the problem here. If the gender ratio was reversed no one would have to suffer through "sarcasm in quotes".
Strange, then, that the movement seems to revolve around spoilt white men.
I'll save you the click: They don't really know why the blue lights reduce people's urge to commit suicide, they just do.
You can buy "SAD lamps" which emit a fairly bright cold color temperature light which in theory helps you generally feel better.
This article gives me the impression that all they're really trying to do, realizing it or not, is make it possible for that anti-pattern, and all the anti-patterns surrounding it, to continue to exist. "Be strong, go to work!"
Also, if you have to travel 67 minutes to and from work in a cattle car, and you're part of the "salary man" cohort with legendary working hours, how can you have any time at all to take advantage of the "free" mental health services mentioned elsewhere in this thread.
I've been on software "death marches" of a few weeks or months. The stereotype that I see in my at a distance news reading from Japan looks like a lifelong death march.
We are not "meant," or evolved, depending on your point of view, to work and stress all our waking hours. We are not meant to live in Tokyo and similar environments.
http://www.kmart.com/en_us/dap/blue-light-specials.html