I agree with the premise: be proactive about mental health. However, this should be read with some skepticism. The author relies on their own authority as som

I agree with the premise: be proactive about mental health. However, this should be read with some skepticism. The author relies on their own authority as someone who "has been thinking about mental health for 19 years." I was intentional about not googling whoever this is, perhaps they're a medical professional or something. But if that were the case, I would hope they would cite better sources than describing themself as "someone that has paid close attention to this cross-lattice work of interweaving disciplines for a while now". Skimming over buzzwords like "detoxification, and anti-inflammation" is a red flag. The article's first side bar goes on to talk about how "the first medical professionals were surgeons saving a soldier’s life". This is line is particularly disconcerting, but the entire "sidebar" sounds like conjecture. The whole article sounds like conjecture, which should NOT be sold as a source of authority on a topic like health. That is how we get essential-oil anti-vaxxers.