Allyson Box

A bank in Los Angeles called the police because they had a problem with an elderly resident. When the officer arrived, he found a 92-year-old man upset because the bank wouldn't give him money. His identity card had expired, and the bank could not pay him without valid documents. The old man, however, did not understand what the problem was. Instead of escorting him out of the bank, the policeman took the old man by the arm and drove him to the police station, where he was immediately issued a new ID. The policeman then drove him back to the bank, where he was handed the money a few minutes before the counter closed.

Growing up Gen X: If you said, That's not fair. Your parents said, Life's not fair. And that was that. #GenX

@bryan_johnson Please operationally define "on time".

How to avoid tons of life problems: go to bed on time.

@ompsychiatrist @hanna_pssd What are your suggestions for treatment?

@hanna_pssd You suggest interventions please

Suicidality is medical emergency. I repeat... Suicidality is medical emergency. Treat it.

@ompsychiatrist You can be wrong with those fancy letters behind your name and all the education and experience.

@elonmusk You're not helping, Elon.

This is so unjust

@Ravenismeee "what happened to you is not ok".

You meet your 18 year old self, you’re allowed 3 words. What do you say?

My biggest concern with AI is its assumptions regarding our present, accessible knowledge. It treats information as true, including "peer-reviewed" scientific articles without understanding the system of The Academy.

@CarlosRivasMD If the meaning behind the message is the same - be skeptical and take responsibility for your health - then we're all on the same team conveying the same message widely. There's an understandable broken trust between the American people and, in this case, medicine.

If you won’t listen when I say it then listen when a comedian says it. Such is the world we live in today. The comedians tell the truth and the doctors lie.

@b_willo @ajphilopulos @elonmusk No. A person who wants to work is a person I'd hire. We have a desire to work problem. Perhaps you don't see what I see or perhaps you've slipped into pessimism leaning toward hopelessness. It seems your mind is already controlled by the mass narrative.

@allyson_box @ajphilopulos @elonmusk If they’d hire you as long as you can patch drywall and swap out light fixtures, doesn’t it make you wonder how quickly ‘job requirements’ turn into ‘I’ll teach you, just show up and don’t break anything’?

SpaceX is actively hiring world-class engineers/physicists for SpaceXAI, even if you have zero prior experience in AI. Smart humans figure it out fast. Please send an email with ~3 bullet points demonstrating evidence of exceptional ability to ai_eng@spacex.com.

@b_willo @milan_obrtlik @elonmusk No, I don't waste my time considering how insane people are twisting words. I just make a mental note "that one is insane too" and move forward. My question here is whether or not I want to work with Elon because of his relationship with the government.

@allyson_box @milan_obrtlik @elonmusk If you’re wondering whether it lines up with the government’s definition, doesn’t it make you wonder how often official language ends up twisting a simple idea into something almost unrecognizable?

@milan_obrtlik @elonmusk Just curious if it aligns with the government's operational definition.

@allyson_box @elonmusk Why?

You know what we should be teaching young kids? How to feel uncomfortable and move through it without doing something to distract or anesthetize themselves. We are being conditioned that if we feel sad, anxious or uncomfortable to get rid of those feelings, like a hot potato instead of sitting with them to see what comes up and either taking an action or letting them move through us. This is how people lose agency, become addicts or start taking psychiatric drugs—all because they abhor feeling uncomfortable. People really need to learn the practice of being comfortable with feeling uncomfortable.

@astro_greek Every good magician needs a beautiful distraction.

Elon Musk out here balancing spoons like it’s rocket science 🤣🥄

Always mind your assumptions

@ajphilopulos @elonmusk I'd hire you. Can you also patch drywall, lay flooring, and replace light fixtures? I can teach you, but it'd be a plus if you could already do it.

@elonmusk Y'all hiring janitorial positions? I can engineer anything with duck tape and caulk. The best I can apply practical physics is mopping the floor.

@elonmusk Please operationally define, "reasonable sanity".

I will be reviewing all emails that pass reasonable sanity checks personally

@KevinRo90321458 Science doesn't seek to prove. It seeks to disprove. Based on data acquired, your theoretical and technical knowledge, and interpretation of the data, you can support an hypothesis/idea or you can disprove one.

Evidence SSRI Induce Anxiety In Rodents. (click for formatting) In the past week I posted I think 4 studies proving SSRI are destroying synapses and weakening the brain. Now I want to write a few posts proving SSRI induce a mental health disorder rather than treat one. This study I'm referencing focuses on physical behaviour of mice regarding before, after and restarting the SSRI. Using the same kind of clinical observational mastery to diagnose humans to determine if the mice need medication or not. The results are interesting. Light/Dark Box (translating the study into English) 10 mice at day 35 of life were given Prozac for 2 weeks. The SSRI was stopped then 3 weeks later they were put in a box that had light and dark areas. 10 more non-drugged mice were given the same task and preference of each group of mice was recorded. Do they prefer the brighter or darker areas of the box? Results was the mice that spent less time in the brighter area is recorded as having more anxiety. Unfortunately there is no recording in simple time in minutes, so I have to translate this science junk for you. "(t(18) = 2.55, p < 0.05)." It'll make sense shortly. - 0.05 means there is a 5% chance their test results are wrong. - 2.55 means there is a 2.55x difference in average time spent in the light side between the two groups - t(18) is a freedom metric. Explaining this will only add confusion so we'll leave it alone. What does this mean? If you take these metrics and put both groups of 10 mice (control vs drugged) into the light/dark box for 5 minutes and counted how long each of the mice spent time in the brighter areas of the box. The SSRI drugged mice in withdrawal spent significantly less in the brighter area's of the box versus healthy mice. The drugged mice favoured darker areas in withdrawal. This is seen as SSRI drugged mice in withdrawal as having increased anxiety. Therefore SSRI is giving mice anxiety because the non-drugged mice don't have this negative behaviour. If they were never drugged, they would of never developed the anxiety disorder. The SSRI created this effect. When the researchers reinstated their SSRI. Partial recovery from anxiety was achieved. Figure 3 in the attached image records this clearly. VEH = control. FLX = SSRI. A) Mice in withdrawal spend less time in the light B) Mice in withdrawal walked into the light quicker versus controls. C) SSRI reinstatement shows improvement in time spent in light but still weaker versus non drugged mice D) SSRI reinstatement reverses B. The mice now take longer versus none drugged to enter the light. If you read (D to C) reinstating the SSRI. The drugged mice were slower to move into the light and spent less time in the light versus healthy mice. Also if you read (B to A). Mice in SSRI withdrawal were a little quicker to move into the light and are significantly quicker to leave the light versus healthy mice. In conclusion by all metrics, giving a SSRI and taking it away induces an anxiety disorder that didn't exist prior to drugging the mice. As the control mice don't have any problems enjoying the light side of the box. Reinstatement of the SSRI lowers the mice anxiety but still makes the mice delayed in leaving the dark areas for the light. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC80…

IT NEVER CEASES TO AMAZE ME how quickly people recognize psychological trauma in almost every setting except healthcare. A soldier comes home hypervigilant, we understand. Someone leaves an abusive relationship and rehearses every word before speaking, we understand. Someone gets bitten by a dog and becomes fearful around dogs, we understand. But a chronic pain patient walks into an exam room with rehearsed explanations, symptom logs, medication histories, anxiety, and the instinct to downplay their suffering, and somehow we’re supposed to pretend that appeared out of nowhere. Many of us learned to scan faces before speaking. We learned to measure our words. Not too emotional. Not too calm. Not too detailed. Not too vague. We learned to shrink our pain into something socially acceptable. Because after enough interrogations, enough suspicion, enough humiliation, enough being treated like a problem to manage instead of a person to help, your nervous system adapts. And then people call it anxiety. No. Anxiety is what they see. Conditioning is what happened. Then society asks why chronic pain patients hesitate to seek care, like asking someone why they flinch when they’ve spent years being told, “this won’t hurt,” right before it did.

Making a digital note of this while predicting the future of Harvard. The irony.